JaKiri

Bah, now I have to install acrobat again

This is pretty high up the list, although I'm not sure it's what you meant.

There will probably be a maximum stable size for a galaxy, I'll see if there's anyone I know left at the Uni Physics dept down the road, they're interested in this kind o'thang.

I don't see how 'Teleporting to alien worlds using alien technology' and 'Investigating a global conspiracy involving aliens and alien technology' could count as anything but science fiction.

Those Creationist arguments are the same ones they use EVERY TIME. Pick any such thread at random from here and you'll probably get replies to the queries.

Knowing NASA, an equally likely explanation is because they've set up a hideously interlinked and complicated system which demands the silicates and the governing body refuses to allow funding to change it.

I'm just making up the fact that the structure of DNA was discovered at the New Cavendish Physics Labs, University of Cambridge, then? Or don't you count X-Ray crystallography as 'physics'? Perhaps you're being a little over the top here, my lad. It is, at the moment, impossibly difficult to work things out from physical first principles (as it were), but that will not be the case forever. For instance, discovering chemicals (and the like) was, several hundred years ago, absolutely nothing to do with physical processes, because we didn't have the mathematics or the knowledge of the physics to link them. Economics and Sociology? Don't make me laugh. With respect to Biology, it depends how far you take it. Once you get down to the cellular level, it's physics all the way baby.

They all have slightly different tongue positions associated with them.

A slightly less bad irrevocable punishment is worse than a worse revocable one.

So because we currently can't 'see' them you're saying we should abandon attempts to improve detection technology (as mentioned by sayo) and instead make a rocket to take us to places that... oh I give up

Here's your biggest problem. I don't actually have to explain anything. We're dealing with something of which we have no evidence or knowledge, and it is not the way of science to mindlessly say 'x can't happen' when it is impossible to say anything about x, the mechanism, or anything else. The burden of proof is upon YOU to say why it is impossible for things that share the same space have to be nondistinct; hell, it's down to you to explain why there has to be a concept of distance. I gave examples of how things like this can take place, so I have done more than is required for my end of the discussion; if you think the example of the electrons was irrelevent, then you didn't get the point of it; I could explain again what I said before in this thread, but I'd just be repeating myself, and frankly I'd deem the effort it takes me wasted at best, because you appear to be of the mindset that actively doesn't want to read what I, or anyone else, says.

Tritium isn't on the periodic table, except as 'Hydrogen', so that's a singularly useless suggestion. The only 'cold fusion' thing that I know of is the abortive claim of Fleischmann and Pons. That was what we in the scientific community refer to as 'utterly utterly wrong'. Anyway, to pick out scientific flaws in spiderman is a bit pointless.

In what sense? And all those physical processes are just falling into our way of thinking, yes?

The problem is that pi is transcendental. No matter how big the circle, and no matter how big the square, you could never have a circle with integral radius and a square with integral side lengths with equal area. That's all there is to it, really. You could also ask how many squares it would take to make a circle (like in ), and then the answer would be 'infinite', as you can see by the picture.

Not quite; Zeno's paradox works on the assumption that a decreasing geometric series has an infinite sum; the 0.999 1 argument is merely about WHICH finite sum it is.

That is definitely not true! I've explained this so many times that if you don't start making sense on the next post I may actually go insane. [edit] Also, please explain what you wanted me to prove exactly.

It's doing it in opera, but not in Firefox. I'll check IE if you want me to.

However, Cartman would never say arse, because he's American.

God know, they seem fairly simple to me. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what we refer to as a pun.

Proof of WHAT?

By your continuing ability to completely misunderstand even the most stupid of English constructs.

You're still misunderstanding. I never said that universes occupied the same space because electrons can. I said that it isn't true that they definitely can't, because electrons can. This isn't very complicated.

They're not 'taking up the same space', because that requires a concept of space to be applicable, strictly speaking. Of course, there still could be a concept of distance and still have 2 things be distinct, see the electrons previously mentioned. It's called an example. It doesn't have to be a identical, because it's only showing how a given property (in this case distinctiveness whilst sharing the same space) can exist. I explained all this earlier, in my post about the dog and what have you.

M-theory is a variety of superstring theory technically, not string theory, and they are not equivilent. Try checking Greene's book again.

That doesn't really matter, and he was actually Human, not just humanoid.