Phi for All

! Moderator Note montekristo, we simply don't let new members advertise their blogs or other websites through the use of discussion threads. It was clearly stated in the rules you agreed to when you joined. You are allowed to put a link to your site in your signature if you like. Please feel free to post your ideas here, and if they're speculative in nature or disagree with accepted science, please start your threads in the Speculations section. We encourage discussion and prefer that it stays here. Thanks for understanding and welcome to SFN.

I don't think the danger involved in bringing them out of orbit is worth any kind of prolonged project. The more you do it the more chances for disaster, especially when there will be plenty of need for precious metals in offworld applications.

! Moderator Note The personal attacks need to stop NOW, please. Attack the ideas, NOT the person who has them.

I don't share your concern. There are plenty of projected plans for asteroid mining that would bring the resources to offworld destinations. From the Planetary Resources website: AFAICT, bringing almost anything back to Earth would make it so expensive it would be worthless, even if it was a truck-sized chunk of platinum.

! Moderator Note Nobrainer, proselytizing is against our "no preaching" rule. Making assertive statements with no supportive evidence to back them up is also against our rules. Bringing religion into a speculative science thread is, you guessed it, against our rules. You agreed to follow these rules when you joined. Please review them here before any further posting. If you have any objections to this note, please report this post or PM a staff member about it. Do NOT further derail this thread by voicing objections here.

! Moderator Note Moved to Homework Help.

What's the valid explanation for heterosexual existence? If it's procreation, modern science does make it possible for homosexuals to have children. I've seen bloggers and religious leaders make that conjecture, but not a scientist. Do you have a link to any studies? Your logic sounds expensive in a biological context. It would cost more in evolutionary terms to stifle sexual desire than it would to redirect or broaden it. In a strict evolutionary, pass-your-genes-along kind of way, homosexual reproduction is limited. But the drive to raise children with a partner of your choosing is no less strong among same gender couples.

An arbitrary beginning to a scientific investigation and a sound basis for that investigation are NOT mutually exclusive. Please note that nobody suggested the entire methodology is arbitrarily handled, just that the beginning can be arbitrarily chosen. To use words that hopefully won't be misunderstood, it simply doesn't matter in most cases where you start your investigation, as long as the methodology used throughout is sound. And to be clear, arbitration is NOT related to arbitrariness, it's related to arbiter: one who settles a dispute.

Take your elephant to the edge of a 15' cliff, along with a mouse instead of an amoeba. They both scare each other and fall off the cliff. The mouse not only survives the fall but scampers off practically immediately. The elephant is broken and crippled, if not dead outright, because he is larger. And that's a more realistic natural occurrence than being beaten by a hammer.

Science thrives best when it can be shared among peers. You can study many resources alone, but you should always have a way to communicate and share with others studying the same things.

! Moderator Note Concept outside of mainstream science, thread moved to Speculations. Please take some time to read the special rules for that section.

Is this writing assignment for a science class or a writing/language arts class?

Define vision, please.

Are you purposely misunderstanding what's being written? That's the second time you've rewritten what someone else wrote. Bignose wrote, "Again, to me the starting point [of a scientific investigation] is rather arbitrary". HE DIDN'T SAY PREDICTION IS ARBITRARY. Perhaps your signature should read, "ask the question, get the answer, and then tailor your response to that answer by strawmanning it, and then claim you're correct because you refuted the wrong answer."

Oh well then, you had me completely fooled. I thought you took them seriously enough to join a science forum to ask for some advice. Do you mean "melt" or was that a parapraxis?

Having lived most of my life here in Colorado, it looks anything BUT alien to me. We have a great range of different terrain here, and I could probably drive to a place that looks similar in about an hour and a half . But you're right, the complete lack of vegetation is eerie, and anyplace I could find near home would have SOME scrub grasses in an area of that size. I'm struck almost speechless thinking that, ten years ago, I wouldn't have thought I'd soon be sitting at my computer zooming in on some rocks that were not only from Mars, but that were still on Mars. It just blows my mind and I feel very grateful that the society I live in felt this was important enough to invest in. Thanks to everyone who had anything to do with supporting this endeavor.

One of the bad aspects of strong emotions is that they tend to make us filter people's actions. People we love too much can do no wrong, and people we hate can't do anything right. You didn't start out hating your brother-in-law, and you didn't instantly start hating him. Something started it, and when you found out he wanted his sister to break up with you it just added to the way you felt about him. At a certain point, you stopped seeing what everyone else sees in him and just started counting the things he did wrong. Now it's so bad you jump on him for not saying Happy Birthday to his mom (which really isn't your business at all), and you've even started anticipating his bad actions and threatening violence for something he hasn't done yet! Check out this link to Confirmation Bias. Then, as others have suggested, you might want to go see a professional about your feelings. If not for you, do it for your son. The worst thing would be to let your feelings for someone else affect your relationship with your boy.

There are multiple ways to conduct valid experiments that produce data that can lead you to conclusions about your hypothesis. The methodology must be sound and that's why it's discussed among peers and tested by those peers using similar sound methodology. Where you start is arbitrary, but that doesn't mean the methodology used is. And "facts" are not as important to scientific methodology as evidence that supports or refutes. Btw, arbitration ≠ an act of arbitrariness.

This is the part that stops any kind of real speculation. As Mellinia said, you can't redefine the meaning of terms that are accepted by everyone else without making it extremely difficult to follow what you're talking about. If I was trying to tell you about my new ideas on weather patterns, but I used different terms for tornadoes and clouds and temperature, we're going to spend a ridiculous amount of time with me explaining what I mean, and you're probably going to lose interest. It's incumbent on me to learn the accepted terminology so I'm not making you learn something that's only going to help you when you talk to me about my ideas. Does that make sense? Definitions are important because they put everyone on the same page.

Try slamming a revolving door.

It's really not. If you haven't tested it yet, it's still just an idea, maybe an hypothesis. Theory needs lots of tests with lots of supporting evidence and lots of other people testing your idea. Theory is the best you can achieve in science.

That makes sense. I guess assuming he was making fun of you is a bad hypothesis.

Why did you sign this post with someone else's username? That's fairly rude.

Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, donate your old clothing to the thrift store (get thee a receipt), and you will have stock options in heaven. Then come, follow me to the club." Matthew 19:21 Neoconservative Translation

When you see hundreds of thousands of amputee's prayers go unanswered, and not a single limb is miraculously regrown, then it doesn't take a Christian Scientist to figure out that God isn't healing anybody.