foodchain

I am confused as to the acceleration, being if its constant does that not sort of state some absolute frame of reference?

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html

I would just pick up video games from say a pawn shop that are technically fossils, or happen to be produced by say companies that don’t exist anymore. It will just be lass trouble if you get into any. Plus my advice is just on the note you want to have fun and not cause any damages. From personal experience with such, getting into hexadecimal and all kinds of weird voodoo, then of course some games will fire or attempt to shoot fatal errors into your computer, then when you get it back online everything’s in some blood red color, in short its a lot of fun.

Maybe its just a product of using very abstract and even somewhat obscure wording. Its like flipping a coin, I am not going to know with certainty what side is going to come up until the coin finishes the flip action, so for what its worth I don’t see a great deal of difference with that or any of the other wording. I do find the uncertainty principal and the probability cloud as terms probably a product of limited technology, as in 100 years I don’t know how uncertain probability clouds will be due to technological advance. I think its the same think with dark matter, its a mysterious term really that does not denote a whole lot of information about such, then again the word matter is somewhat ambiguous but there is an existing library of information on matter compare to the mysterious dark matter:eyebrow: Maybe one last part of its simply the somewhat dependent relationship physics shares with math spilling across. The level of math and constant use of such by the people that brought you the uncertainty principal I know surely is much higher then anything I am capable of, and I am sure having to converse in such or think in such terms at a constant probably leads to the evolution of such things, or even ways of talking about reality. Lastly, I don’t think people warp reality via thought, if that were true I think reality would be drastically different from what it is. Giving the idea of a subconscious and the reality that other organisms also "think" I just don’t see any proof for it anywhere past basically speculation on the behalf of humans of course. I mean for a second just think about placing four people in a dark room with an object on the table they are to imagine, the object should then experience that if such were true, unless they have to view it, but I don’t know of any place on the world where its been recorded for peoples thoughts to influence matter on any level. If by viewing it we can only see so much, well that’s all it says, I can look at a mountain, but I cant know for sure what’s on the other side.

This is already being studied in relation to the application of CPR. IN that a huge cause of cells sometimes just automatically signaling to for death can come about in the process of reviving or CPR. I don’t have the link anymore, but such information is out on the web, I think such was actually put forward on this site at one point also. Some drugs produced for medicine have varied side effects also, such as some people will see some colors as a different color, so who knows I guess is what I am getting at.

After reading your the link to your web page or blog, however you title it I am not sure, it does help me actually understand what you are talking about a bit more. A while back I thought of a sci-fi story I wanted to write in which a person creates a virus called genesis that basically attacks the human organism and life besides it to alter the course of evolution into that persons model utopia, I would of course make the story in the end fail on the part of the persons dreams in that ignorance is no utopia nor did the person understand what they were doing. I am an avid fan of genetics, being the human like most anything else in reality is composed of the elements per say, and that such in an engineering sense is beyond anything we can currently create, and the understanding of such is drastically complex in comparison to our current understanding of such. I do fear though what fully understanding such could lead to in what people might want to do with is, I mean if per say people came to a point in which they could program a plant to make tennis racquets as an odd example. TO the human brain, people making information processors out of such, what would be the reality to any incident consciousness along the way, or simply persists in such? TO the concept of slaves even, I mean giving human history when it comes to technology people have created a better life to the ability to end all life, or more to the point its a sort of super state, the future that is and as much as genetics could be the fountain of youth, another take on it is someone using it to produce a severely deadly virus. I would suppose though that what you are talking about is probably the next generation of medicine, in which you could be healed in a fashion that did not involve a large variety of side effects or even having a person basically cut you open in order to help you.

Radiation(can,Type? do you know?) breaks the nucleotide polymer, but they rejoin, when this occurs its typically out of sequence, thus a majority of the time its bad, at least that’s the way radiation works in regards to getting hit by such indirectly from say an atomic bomb at any rate. I think what paralith is trying to point out is the complexity of the environment in total in regards to simply saying improving something. Now taking into consideration that nothing in life is truly free to cut things short, what would greatly enhancing energy consumption by our species lead to? Not to say we should not come first, but destruction of the ecology will probably only bury us as a species really. I think in current terms the best terms of improvements are at the hands of conservation coupled with research and understanding really.

I am sure if the card was traveling around 4000mph it could do some serious damage, but that’s besides the point and I don’t even know if the card would hold up to such speeds or stress. I have played around with throwing cards and such, and going from the concept of a paper cut, which is not to difficult to obtain if you do it just right the card might be able to cut on throwing strength of an "average" person, but giving the sort of blunted edges on most cards this probably makes such that more difficult.

I was out today and a person coming out of a turn on the road was halfway into each lane, and I could not when thinking about it come to a term in math that would describe such a postion, as it was occupying both lanes at the same time. In math is there a term for something like that?

I think the idea of a perfect ecosystem also kind of violates the "blind watchmaker" metaphor to a certain degree. As a person I know personally that I cannot go out everyday and make life perfect to how I see fit, I mean even if it was possible what I am getting it is I don’t even have the slightest clue how to go about it, and I doubt life in general possess such. I mean looking at more "simple" forms of life, such as bacteria, it almost operates as something of a force really, devoid of any decision making process overall. The higher up you go this seems to change in the presence of animals and what not that posses a brain for instance. I think though that not all the variables of an organisms environment are present for manipulation by that organism or for that matter known to them, I think it would be more in favor of the organism attempting to basically survive the environment but that would highlight little more then natural selection overall. I mean humans without opposable thumbs, what would life be like, or fear for that matter. Locusts for the most part happen to be if memory serves nothing more then a reaction to extinction mechanism really. In that they come about as a result of population exceeding the ability or resources of the environment, a sort of catch up maybe, though I have not put a great deal of thought into locusts overall so I am most likely wrong on that. The point I think again is just that the specie or organism reacted or adapted to survive the best it could, it does not reflect perfection per say, but in order to achieve that I doubt really for something humans collectively at this point to be able to obtain, or even come close to overall.

I don’t really have a beef with space-time I simply just don’t understand it as well as others. TO me I have heard various descriptions of it on this board that seem to be in confliction overall. Such as time, I mean it takes me time to write this write, so what exactly is the definition of it then, and does this definition allow me to poke it with a stick? Secondly, then you have space right, as far as I know if you don’t have matter/mass/energy then you really have nothing, but the idea behind gravity would seem to negate this, going on bending space-time, which leads me back to definitions and wanting to poke it with a stick. Also as far as I know, you don’t have gravity in the absence of mass/matter/energy or what not, though that does not prove anything, I just think most physical phenomena is a product of something physical, but yet I cant poke something that gets bent with a stick, it just annoys me because its probably something simple I am sure that I just cant think of that would allow it to make sense to me. I just hope QM gets more questions solved, along with the standard model soon, I think we need to learn more on the really tiny level to tackle issues on the larger level is all. Such as the cat in the box idea put forward by the people behind QM. I don’t know about being in a state of super states, but all I know is I am scared of a human putting a box over there head, simply put I don’t want to exist in a super state, it sounds painful and I sure predatory square roots live there feeding on decimals or what not>

There’s only so much one person can really do all in all. I mean they do all kinds of training for all kinds of circumstances but you cant ever train a person or a group of them for any possible scenario. I have heard of groups of two people, of course trained by the U.S government that basically get paid to attempt to break security at nuclear facilities in the U.S. It was a PBS special and I don’t remember the count but using very primitive technology, such as a rope and a hook for instance they managed to steal radioactive material for instance, it was funny watching them run away with simulated stuff in a wheelbarrow. We have stuff technology wise that can detect electricity, small to large scale and so on, stuff for weapons with munitions that have microprocessors in them, for foot soldier stuff. IF it were for one person that can do a lot of damage though, I would have to say a sniper really. Then again the ambush when used properly can continue a species persistence like the crocodile for a rather long period of time, so perhaps its really just that strategy and versions of such. Special operations groups are not really trained with the idea in mind for them to go an be Rambo also, I mean you hear stories about that stuff, but in reality those groups are basically trained to do things you typically don’t want to make a massive footprint for, such as a hostage rescue scenario, or an assassination type scenario. The amount of training such people have to pass is rather extreme, and most all of its detailed to high extreme. Imagine having to be a medic in a special forces unit, a real field surgeon, as they would say it requires a person to be rather high speed and on the ball. Lastly its a team oreintated type of situation also, in that if you were getting trained to do security by say special forces, you wont really see any rambo stuff going on, its more or less highly organized team based stuff, not some guy taking an army in the open with his bow and grenade tipped arrows:D

Yes, but if it was falling, I think that would give something rather certain in regards to attributes about the universe then. What I mean is say you drop some water, out of a cup, and the drop length is about 100 feet, I think the water as its falling in regards to variables, such as the earths gravity, atmospheric composition, temperature, pressure and so on like you go on about would give the water some specific traits, besides wind and all that stuff. I guess you would have to put in that in connection with objects in the universe also having some impact, like if you put sand in the water per say. Have you looked at it from that angle. I mean I don’t know how you would say the universe is taking on those properties. Plus where is the universe falling, and to what, and what’s causing it to fall, is the falling a uniform force applied to objects in the universe. Lastly if I am in an elevator that is falling, falling rather fast relatively speaking, should I just be able to jump up and touch the ceiling for example, I mean I just don’t see it really when looking at what I understand of the cosmos is all.

Ok, a waterfall then for instance, with a piece of material at the bottom that will turn and make static electricity as the water moves the object. Such as waterwheel of boat paddles for instance, and in the center, it rubs a balloon on someone head. The paddles get turned by the water constantly hitting them, the water being pulled down, physically, by gravity. In my other example I figure the amount of energy gained via the water moving into the system would probably be equal at best to remove it, I don’t know if you would maneuver pressure by itself to pick up any work, conservation laws seem to dominate really.

Really I am but I think I found a way to really communicate what I am trying to say. Lets say for instance you could make a device, and put it at say the bottom of a pool. Now if this device had a simple turbine in it or other device that could generate electricity by being turned by running water for instance, purely conceptual here. Now you would have to have a vacuum of sorts of space around the turbine or something for the water to occupy and of course evacuate, which I am sure you would work out somehow, even if it meant using some energy. But the point like hydroelectric power in which I borrowed this from, gravity would bring the water into the vacuum, if it was large enough for instance, and as long as you keep that space open for the water to come into it would turn the turbine and generate some degree of power, but really all you would be using to power this device if I have things right is gravity. So if gravity is really just the product of place in space-time stuff or what not, and not a product of anything to do with QM, or mass/matter/energy period, then you could in complete hypothetical have perpetual energy then.

Sorry, I get confused on the magnitude of things I have read at times. "Electromagnetic (EM) waves cannot interact directly with light photons since photons have no charge. EM waves do not bend light, at least enough that we can measure. If radio waves, for example, bent light appreciably then a transmitting radio station would look blurry. But stations don’t go blurry. Actually, electromagnetic waves can bend light through an indirect, quantum effect—but to such a tiny degree that we cannot measure it. This quantum effect (called Delbrück scattering) "is a process where, for a short time, the photon disintegrates into an electron and positron pair," says Norbert Dragon, physicist at the Institute for Theoretical Physics in Hanover, Germany. The charged pair interacts with an EM wave and then recombines into the photon with a changed direction. Thus, the EM wave bends the light." http://www.wonderquest.com/extinctions-safetyglass-magnetslasers.htm

Yes, but if genes were just needed by themselves it does not on its own account for biology as a whole. I am not trying to subtract that place of genes or importance of such, but bacteria on its own has a higher degree of survivability save for one the sun goes nova, but on that note does that really say anything that does not require giving some kind of intelligence to genes not bacteria? Maybe its just because life wanted to be able to eat pizza! Lastly how do you directly view the consequence of biology in a giving population on any level as to reduce to a high degree of confidence any possible fallacy or severe ignorance when making say a hypothesis and working towards theory. I mean basically from the most simple to the most complex biological systems on earth, I don’t think fully relationship in terms of phylogeny has been solved yet, let alone attempting to fully explain the impact such has on human behavior. Right now to act on evolution in terms of applied for psychological purposes rather then research is simply bound to fail like sociobiology eventually did. It cannot cover enough to a level of depth that is required. Now you can use evolution to tell people why they need to eat vitamin C, why they have some vestigial structures to produce such internally and not so much directly from diet, but to instruct a single person on say a behavior they hold? I just don’t see it yet really. Maybe at more large scale social issues, such as populations, but even then I don’t think it will get to discrete at this point. Its simply from the idea that evolution is rather vast, complex, and well requires so much time to make a good deal of progress. I mean there exist human professions in biology to study specific species even, and that has not fully reveled everything, and then what about mapping evolutionary relationships of such. I still keep my vote that humans do not posses enough understanding of everything considered to take evolutionary biology to applied psychology fully. Lastly on the topic of total understanding, well i think it depends on what you mean, such as the placement of every card instantly when a deck of cards is folded, or the ability to understand the role and function of a gene in a organism, or the effect a certain star has on a solar system.

I would suggest on reading about natural kinds and the entire ordeal if making science free from human fallacy. Not to say your idea put forward is fallacy, just more on the point to follow. For instance, why do you think people looked for the big bang, because something that started should have an ending or vice versa, or was it purely from an I wonder perspective. Its drastically difficult to cut away the human part of human thought you know, such is why math was invented, as an attempt basically to cut down on the ease in which human thought can corrupt if you will. Regardless of person, you have to view something from you perception, its not some scientific fact of an extreme nature as much as its not everyone has the same favorite sports team or team for that matter. Such as for me, I worry about the level of corruption that even math can offer. Geophysicists and related methods and technology labeled various boundaries when it came to the earths structure, when actually went to in the form of physically being there, sometimes there boundaries could be off by more then a thousand feet, so its not so much that the methods are wrong, but if it were just up to the math and no one went to see, well what else could that apply to. So yes, human corruption in the form of fallacy is a major issue, probably inevitable and only overcome by science of humans being social to a certain extent. How about nature just is a word that giving any specific person in its own right can be relative. If you spend any length of time trying to think about nature per say and our understanding of it in terms of anything purely philosophical, it quickly falls apart unless you favor things like logical gymnastics and other unholy acts. Science is about the only chance due to method, but as pointed out to me on this board already many times its an extremely slow process in regards to human lifetimes. Though I do love to debate philosophy at times, its always funny trying to use the subjective to gain some objective victory.

Perhaps is the reason a hawk is a hawk and an eagle is an eagle. Chemical species are natural kinds, in that they just are. Now looking at a great many rules per say in chemistry, there is always some exception somewhere. What I gather from that, and looking at the periodic table and the "evolution" if you will of chemical species, they have different behaviors. For instance, looking at isotopes, what difference does a missing neutron or two make when its simply electrons that denote in major chemical reactivity of an element? Well it does have an impact on reaction mechanisms, so what do you think now? Even if the difference is by one electron, its going to have an impact on the behavior of the element in regards to say boding or structure. Another thing to look at in regards to evolution of life, is that the primary elements that make up life, happen to be some of the most abundant elements in the universe for instance. I think a weirder idea is to imagine what evolution would be like if most of the crusts surface area on earth had the properties related to or happened to be composed of teflon:D You also have to look at physical properties, in that I don’t know how well cells would operate per say if they had steel for a cell wall, now not to say that such cant come about ever. I mean we do have some broad variance in biochemistry on earth, simple example being organisms that thrive in volcanic sea vents, or really in ecologies that previous to discovery were really not thought possible by a great many and when found managed to shock even more. The environments of sea vents are deadly to all other known life on earth, and to view such as a human requires a piece of engineering that’s rather sturdy to say the least.

For what its worth I have only ever heard about people becoming schizoid on drugs like meth and cocaine. I also have never heard about people retaining severe symptoms permanently from drug use save for drugs like meth and cocaine/crack/heroine. Not to say that such does not occur, I just have never heard of that before. I also know that while on the drug meth for instance, your brainwaves are very similar to those of a person with schizophrenia, and such becomes more pronounced in time, and that meth does "eat" holes in your brain. The problem with drugs like those are the ease in which the addict the user and the magnitude of that addiction. I am pretty sure though that heavy use or not practicing moderation with anything, from racing your car to eating cheeseburgers is rather hazardous for health. Not to want to make people use drugs, but here is a nifty little snip. "Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth In Half, Study Shows Science Daily — The active ingredient in marijuana cuts tumor growth in common lung cancer in half and significantly reduces the ability of the cancer to spread, say researchers at Harvard University who tested the chemical in both lab and mouse studies." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm I have also read different studies from different psychologists that say yes or no to marijuana having any real impact, plus for what its worth studied from a medical perspective I think it supports a more positive impact then a negative one, but then again a generation of "potheads" probably will not get much done:D

I don’t understand what you mean. If you go to youtube for instance and query LSD you can get all kinds of strange videos, some ranging from the past. They gave a unit of British soldiers LSD and save for a couple of them most of them ended up laughing and being unable to continue on with work. Some of them had adverse reactions, though if that were per say purely biological or somewhere in-between it did not specify. I don’t think they did long term exposure though. If you mean towards more organic drugs, such as those found in mushrooms, there are more then say one compound in such that actually is active in a psychological role. One way you could study such is by looking at cultures that use such commonly, compared to say in America in which its easier to find drugs among the young for instance. Drugs like the kind you are referring to hold different profiles depending on the culture, so my best advice really is to look at it from that perspective. If you simply mean that via the drug you become depressed, I don’t know of or have heard of any particular drug that does that. One things that most drugs have in common though is basically morphing your dopamine receptors I think, which does change you as a person to a certain extent, but its not just drugs that elicit hallucinations from use, which BTW I have never heard of marijuana being able to do such, make a person hallucinate that is.

Its made by the same guy, I like it more then other sims, even sim city. Its a neat game, basically you have to guide or really you control the planet, geosphere, atmosphere, etc... also the biosphere. It uses real data and terms of course and you need to create suitable environments as understood at the time for the evolution of life and eventually cultures of people and so on. There are side missions you can play which deal with hostile environments, such as mars for example. I don’t think it will give you your project, but I do think it will help you understand the various pieces of it. Plus it is a fun game. Its a bump at first though when you start in the Cambrian, the world of water basically and a whole lot of menus and commands, plus you can practice global warming, and ps, in the end make your cultures hippy liberals and they wont nuke each other to death.

If you want a good run through of all that stuff and have some fun at that same time I would suggest finding and playing a game called sim earth.

Yes, but if every particle was to generate its own curvature, I then think two things. First the universe should be frozen in place, unless gravity and its relationship to the electromagnetic was to allow for that to be broken. Second, how would a planet ever form, or any body for that matter in space. If the curvature was to be so strong as to form bodies in space, then eventually what that should mean is everything goes back into a singularity at some point. I say this because mass or energy in the vacuum of space as you put it follows this curvature like circuitry , which means such should dictate to a certain and regular degree almost forensically the movement of anything from a photon to an atom. Another aspect then is such is probably in my opinion what lead to the concept of string theory in some regards huh? I mean those paths or curves really would be something akin to strings really. What happens though when two curves meat each other, I mean can they curves themselves be moved? I think the reason I have such a hard time with all of it, is because I don’t understand at what point someone can actually show the physical reality of it. I mean I know they say light bends due to gravity, but I don’t see exactly whey this has to be a product of space-time curvature as much as it could be light interacting with the electromagnetic spectrum. I mean they use magnets to move light in lasers after all, and I think giving the concept of N.M.R that most things with mass posses such right?

I have a hypothesis on black holes also. I think when a star goes nova, the mass/energy/matter or whatever you want to call it gets put in a certain configuration which reflects in the behavior of the object. My idea does not put a black hole as an extra dimensional gateway or anything so neat. Besides that if the gravity was so strong as to overcome anything I don’t see how anything could exist really in it or it itself for that matter. I also don’t really see how I could ever test this wild idea I have like a great many of them.