JaKiri

Why? They acted as to the antithesis of our supposed moral code.

Answering a question like this shows an understanding of the processes involved and thus helps you to do 'something much more useful'. Perhaps not. Personally, I just like to answer them, and I know I work better fulfilled than bored.

Get a degree first.

For all intents and purposes it's the same object though; it's like spending time arguing that, say, my copy of The Way of the Weasel wasn't ACTUALLY the one written by Scott Adams.

I'm a lapsed student.

Empirically it's the same; UNLESS! there is something that isn't dependent on the cells.

ork f?

Me then me three seconds later are still two seperate objects.

There's no difference between replicating and transferring.

I heard that doing anything that required intellect was a waste of time

Sod off, I don't want him!

You can calculate how inaccurate the experiment is, so there's not much faith there either.

You're replaced every night by an exact replica.

How are they different? For things to be different, they have to, you know, differ. ie. be NOT THE SAME.

Why do you consider it a waste?

The 1st must be odd, the 2nd even, and so on, to allow the even numbers to divide your result. Similarly, the 5th must be 5, and it doesn't matter what the 9th is, as any combination of those numbers will be divisable by 9. Find a 7 digit number divisable by 7 of this form, and backtrack.

Science is not based on faith. I believe not in the physics itself but in the process that leads to its discovery. You speak on 'proof'; yet you obviously don't understand the nature of empiricism. I know very well that science will never have the rigour of mathematics, but that is inherent to the method, inherent to the problem.

2nd law of thermodynamics. How about a candle in a lift, that goes into freefall?

I prefer the question of 'You have a fridge in a perfectly isolated room (powered from outside the room). You open the door. What change happens to a thermomiter in the room?'

He admits this himself; his statement are more about working from a disinterested position, if memory serves, when they're not specifically talking about experimental procedure. (Shades of meaning, shades of meaning)

It depends if consciousness rests in the cells.

Bald at 15 are we?

This thread is small, those ones are far away?

Depth perception is what I was talking about