zapatos

As the earth approaches absolute zero, will that have any impact on radioactivity? Or does radioactivity remain constant regardless of temperature?

Do yourself a favor and try not to piss off people you are conversing with. I did not add words to your claim and insist they were yours. I added words to your claim and asked if you also believed that. It is a way gaining a further understanding of a person's position. If someone says they 'enjoyed the restaurant' it doesn't really give me a good understanding of their experience. It is perfectly reasonable of me to say 'did you enjoy the restaurant because the food was good?'. Or, 'did you enjoy the restaurant because of the atmosphere?'. Or 'did you enjoy the restaurant because your first date went very well?'. When people ask you questions you may want to take it as a sign that they are making an honest effort to understand your position. I'm here for conversation and debate, not a lecture.

No I don't know why but I'll take your word that it applies to the natural world. Are you saying that "the relativistic equations which explain the dynamical features of our universe" apply to the supernatural? If so, can you cite any evidence? When you say 'everything in nature abides by this rule', are you saying that God and his abilities are 'natural', and not 'supernatural'? If so, can you cite any evidence?

What rules of physics are applicable to whether the supernatural must be inside or outside the universe? What observation of God's ability led you to the conclusion that God was not capable of 'measuring' the actual individuality of particles from outside the universe?

Yes, I understand. You said IF God exists. I notice the IF. No, I am treating this as saying "IF God exists He would be subject to the laws of Quantum Mechanics". You should consider the possibility that perhaps people disagree with you not because they didn't read what you wrote, but because they think you are wrong. You do understand that you could be wrong, don't you? Your assertion has inspired me to make one of my own: God is not subject to the rules of quantum mechanics. If a God truly exists, he therefore must exist outside of the universe. If he did exist inside the universe it surely would cause a tremendous discharge of energy from each and every particle in the universe due to [math]\Delta E \Delta t[/math]. Since this has not happened, it is proof that IF he exists, he exists outside the universe.

Exactly what kind of response are you looking for?

Yeah, I'm a big fan of the blues and I know that's an acquired taste. I don't usually have a problem getting a seat when I want to watch my favorite bands. I really am a big fan of Canada though!

How would that work?

I love all things Canada. The people, their attitudes, their values, the land, the cities. Everything except for, um, that song. Happy 145th!!

I don't know how accurate this is but it is all I could find on the subject of triplets with three fathers. http://www.damninteresting.com/half-brothers-in-the-womb/ Huh. Now that you've got me looking, it seems as if there is another category of twin. Half identical twins occur when the egg splits prior to fertilization.

I agree. It started in the OP and has not stopped. As the supernatural is outside the realm of science, making scientific claims about the supernatural shows a fundamental lack of understanding about science. It is inviting trouble on a science forum. The problem is only compounded with the attitude he shows for those who don't agree.

I counted four that he pointed out. I counted five that have been neg repped.

I'm curious why you point out here (and in many threads) that you belong to "the other 95% of the world's population". Do you feel as if you are representative of the other 95%? Or that the way you look at a document like the Constitution varies by country? Are Americans generally viewed as unique, and the other 95% as a homogeneous group? I'm a bit unsure of the relevance of country of origin in this situation. I don't think that many people (in the US) would have been surprised if the law had been struck down. But yours is a rather simplistic view of the situation. The law covered much more than "providing for the poor", and if it had been struck down it would have been based on whether or not the law followed the rules set in the Constitution. Speaking for the 5%, no one here believed that "providing for the poor" might be unconstitutional.

That is not correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

Sounds like you are certain a God must abide by the rules of quantum mechanics.

I just checked when I sent the first PM this morning and it was at 09:03 AM, so yes it made me wait 10 minutes to send the second PM.

It is not very 'scientific' to make a claim without evidence.

Thanks, that makes sense. Yes, the PMs were sent within a couple of minutes of each other. Looks like it made me wait about 10 minutes or so to send the second.

As of six months ago the Coast Guard was not looking for active duty members, but would be happy to have you in the Reserves. Don't feel that you have to decide right now what to do. I graduated from college without knowing what kind of degree I really wanted or what I wanted to do with my life. You can make general moves in the direction you want until a direction becomes clear to you (which it still has not for me and I'm 53). If school is important to you, choose that even if you are unsure what to major in. If new friends are important to you then make moves to get new friends even if unsure that the next group of people will be right for you. But do not let life pass you by as you wait for just the right thing. Make a move even if unsure how it will work out. If it doesn't work out, make another and another until you are happy.

I tried to send a PM to two different people in a row. The second PM failed with the following message: "You cannot start another PM topic until 26 June 2012 - 09:13 AM" Any particular reason for this?

Do you find that this style of social interaction works well for you?

I am regularly surprised by explanations for things I thought I understood, or by new connections between events or concepts I was familiar with. It makes me feel a bit foolish when someone explains something to me and I realize if I had only given it some thought I would have figured it out myself. But these are typically small events and I consider this part of my lifetime of education. If someone examines their belief in God and comes to the conclusion that God exists I really don't feel that constitutes a fault on their part (for reasons we've kicked around enough). I do agree with you however that failure to examine something as significant as faith, or worse, ignoring it because you suspect you may be wrong, does indeed show a lack of maturity. I would certainly consider myself immature if instead of planning my financial future, I just accepted blindly that Social Security would be there for me, and take care of me when the time came. And that's only my temporal life.

To me, another important part of music's post was the lack of effort people put into whether or not their beliefs are rational. If someone makes no attempt to logically evaluate religion, we have data concerning their use of logic (where religion is concerned).

That would be MIT. See the following link which includes a video of primo ketchup pouring! http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-mit-prof-creates-major-ketchup-bottle-upgrade-20120524,0,2644692.story

Thanks, very helpful. I was unable to find what is believed to have happened to establish gravity. Is it because at the time of symmetry breaking the Higgs Boson came into being? Also, if I read it correctly it seems that if the universe were to start all over again, that because of symmetry breaking we might end up with very different laws of physics. Is that correct?