Phi for All

The gun business feeds the police business, which feeds the legislative business, which feeds the prison business, which feeds the crime business that needs more guns. I'm beginning to think economists are behind it all, thinking that if they take guns out of the Jenga Tower of Death, the whole US economy will come crashing down. So nobody does anything about guns, because they're afraid. Huh.

Apatosaurus seems to be denser in bone structure in the legs, becoming lighter in the mid-skeleton, and eventually ending with vertebrae from tail to neck that have air sacs in them to make them lighter. So it looks more like a combination of denser and lighter bones is closer to an answer. We use techniques like this to make materials and objects stronger, more flexible, and able to withstand more pressure. This seems like an attempt at skepticism that got stopped at incredulity.

Or... OR... they art easily manipulated by those who doth love profit above life itself. I'm betting gun sales in the US are at an all-time high, based on the number of background checks performed by the FBI and ATF.

Maybe people who don't take advantage of physics, and feel like cleaning extra silverware. I add the milk/cream first, then let the thermal and kinetic energies of pouring do the mixing for me.

! Moderator Note Yeah, the thing is, we like rational discussions here, preferably scientific ones, even in Religion. You make no sense with this talk of an unknown "entity". And you're clearly suggesting situations where you'd be breaking the law, which is against our rules. Please try harder to write an opening post that allows the membership to follow along with what you want to discuss. If you're trying to blog at us, this isn't the place for that. We discuss things here. Intelligently, rationally, and most important, civilly. This thread just won't do.

I just wanted to point out this conflict, per the OP. Do you know zip about evolution, or do you have the gist of it? Since it can't be both, I would suggest that you only think you know what evolution is basically about, what you refer to as the gist, and from that you're trying to reconcile your beliefs. I would further suggest your "gist" is wrong in many aspects, and this lack of knowledge of the subject has warped your interest in learning more. Ignorance is an easily curable disease, but it's often paired with a stubborn willfulness that makes people reject the medicine that could help.

Out of all the other most-dangerous professions you mentioned, I think only taxi driver can really be compared with being a police officer. In both professions, in addition to being more at risk because of driving, civilians with guns are a big factor. And that has to be the real issue here. If there weren't so damn many guns out there, the police wouldn't have to train in ways that tend towards overcompensation, applying more force than necessary to ensure the police officer goes home safe at night, and the bad guys never get the upper hand. Personally, I think we've reached a point where allowing so many guns in our society has forced a situation where the police can't do their jobs of protecting the public AND maintain their top priority of going home safe at the end of the day. Their training includes reinforcement of quick-thinking, fast-acting, ever-vigilant techniques designed to prevent the officer from being tricked by scumbags. They watch dashcam footage culled from thousands of encounters that shows graphically what happens to police officers who let their guard down. Throw in the crazy and the money from drugs and it's almost a wonder more people aren't shot. I think the top of the crazy pile is staked out by the citizens who openly carry long guns around in public. In a world where the police are supposed to read minds when it comes to armed intent, how the hell is anybody supposed to know you're the good guy when we see you with an AR-15 in the frozen food aisle at the Piggly Wiggly?

I googled copy/pasting your words, and got a hit from two years ago. But then "accidental shootings" seem to be in the eye of the beholder.

Police in the US train with officer safety foremost in mind. They're shown dashcam footage of every officer who wasn't in control of the situation, or hesitated and got shot, or had their gun stolen by some "low-life scumbag criminal" (also drilled into their heads). I think they learn to assume just about everybody has a gun, and since their number one duty is to go home at the end of the day in one piece, I think this training makes them obsessive about being fooled into complacency and put at risk for not being hardass enough. Another angle that would seem to be covered by the fewer-guns-in-questionable-hands solutions being proposed.

! Moderator Note This thread is every dentist's nightmare. And it's probably going to get stickied as an explanation on why we don't allow members to give medical advice. Please, if you're reading this, do NOT listen to any of this advice. If you have a dental problem, please consult a dentist.

! Moderator Note This is not the right place to ask for anything that might be considered medical advice. For that, you should consult a physician. Discussion here should be more abstract and generic. Nothing about you, or what affliction or condition you might have. IOW, you can discuss condition X, asking questions and gathering information. But don't tell us you have condition X and ask what you should do. The answer to that will be "consult a physician". Thread closed.

A dimension isn't like another plane of existence. It's just representations of a coordinate system for locating an event in spacetime. With coordinates for x, y, z, and t, we can find a place and time when something happens. Perhaps you're talking about the atom disappearing from 3D space into one of the hypothetical higher dimensions of string theory? As an analogy, in a 2D Flatland world, if an object moved upwards from the 2D plane, into a space requiring the 3rd dimension, it would seem to disappear to an observer in Flatland. As for the spiritual aspect, I agree with ajb, it's not appropriate in the science sections, and there are more natural-based explanations if we entertain the existence of higher dimensions. I'd like to see a link to what you read. AFAIK, String Theory fell out of favor partly because their was no evidence for higher dimensions.

If I'd been pulled over 52 times in my whole life with only three actual violations, I'd be convinced the police were deliberately harassing me. This all happened to Castille "in recent years" from the stories I've seen, and resulted in thousands of dollars in fines as well.

! Moderator Note This approach, where you climb on a high horse to avoid the flood of requests for evidence, and hurl insults instead of meaningful discussion or supportive maths is not going to be appreciated here at all. I would suggest you reset your attitude for receptiveness and cooperation. This is a science discussion forum. There's no need for you to respond to this. This isn't a request, or something you get an opinion on. Start being civil and following the rules you agreed to when you joined. If you object to this note, please use the Report Post feature.

The problem isn't just that you're re-defining accepted scientific terms. The way you describe energy is incorrect. It isn't a "thing" that can follow a pathway. You can't isolate energy as a substance. Energy is a property of a thing. It can be transferred in different ways to other things, and changed into different forms, but you can't give me a bushel of energy.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to use the accepted definitions instead? If your definition is wrong, it shouldn't be used at all. I am assuming you came to a science discussion forum to evaluate your idea scientifically.

When anyone can believe a claim, isn't it more important to look for reality-based evidence to support or refute the claim?

"You need supportive evidence" is NOT "Oh, your great big intuitive imagination saved the day and made all the eggheads look bad". That's your imagination in overdrive, and some serious justification for falling asleep in physics.

Ihcisphysicist has been suspended for 3 days for repeatedly insisting on promoting a book, which violates our "no advertising" rule. The rule will still be in place Wednesday....

! Moderator Note Get your ideologies right. Fascists would have no problem promoting capitalist causes. We just don't like advertising. It's in the rules. ! Moderator Note As for being worthless swine, I'm assuming that means you find no worth here past promoting this book (which you aren't being allowed to do because we'd be flooded with book promotions if we allowed any), so take a bit of a vacation and maybe restructure your thinking on being a member here. If we have no other worth to you, are you just here for the bacon?

Coincidentally enough, as I read your thread this morning, I was on my third cup of French-pressed Carte Noire with milk (arrived yesterday). Even with just mixing in milk, a bit of a skin forms by heating the fats and proteins and then letting it sit untouched. I'll admit I haven't checked this formally yet, but a layer of solid fat at the top should act as an insulator, trapping heat inside the cup, keeping the drink warmer.

The title seems more comprehensive, but the OP suggests I shouldn't participate if I don't have a god. I can answer "What is god?" though. I think god is the ultimate end product of Imagining Things That Aren't There, something that serves humans well in protecting ourselves in a proactive instead of a reactive manner. It probably started by imagining tigers in the shadows, and developed into many unseen entities that influenced fragile early human existence. God is a wishful thought of comfort and stability, like orphans dreaming of parents who are unimaginably wonderful.

Until you can match the criteria that other ideas match in order to become "accepted" science, then your idea doesn't deserve the room. Nothing personal, but this is not rigorous methodology. Over the years I've tried to say this many ways, but if you're interested in "accepted science" then you should study it formally, not in dribs and drabs of popular science articles on the internet. That's a horrible way to study science. Those articles are supposed to be followed up by research into the basics you don't understand. Instead, too many people get lazy and fill in the gaps in their knowledge by just making up whatever they need to force an explanation to make sense to them.

But you're basing the explanation on a false premise, that the Big Bang was like an explosion with a center, and everything moving outwards from it. That's not the case. It was a rapid expansion of space everywhere, so there is no "center of the universe". You're also using unfamiliar terms like "mirror math function", then implying it's not a math function at all, but something physical that can rest at the "center of the universe", and "reflect" and "control". Also, space is empty by definition, so what about it could be vibrating? Do you have any evidence to support empty space "vibrating"?

Since you said cream, and not milk, I'm going to guess: