Phi for All

Ah, a man after my own heart. No sword is more awe-inspiring than the simplicity and cleanness of form inherent in the Japanese katana. It is the height of the swordmaker's art. yourdadonapogos, I would seriously call your local police and tell them you are considering the purchase of a sword for display at the local fair and are concerned about legally transporting it home on foot. Get the name of the person who tells you what to do so you can cite them if stopped. I'll bet they tell you to wrap it in something that covers it and don't take it out of the wrappings the whole way home.

Iirc, you're a big guy and PowerPoint looks to be pretty big. A bastard sword (also called hand-and-a-half swords) or a full two-hander (like the early Claymore Mel uses in Braveheart) would be a good historic blade for you. I have a big bastard with a wide blade (and 3 fullers) that's only about 4 lbs. Very sweet. I'm not very familiar with the fantasy stuff. They tend to be full of cool-looking details that just add weight to the blade. Authorized versions from fantasy movies (like LOTR) tend to have a heavy markup due to licensing costs and are usually made by United Cutlery out of 420 J2 stainless steel, which would hold up in a fight for about 3 minutes. They sure look good though. And the heft feels nice if all you're doing is taking them down and fantasizing every once in a while. That kind of weight would tire you pretty quickly in a real duel.

Take it through airport security. If they don't confiscate it, it's not considered dangerous enough to be a weapon.

Fairs can be pretty overpriced or have a lot of junk steel. But you should call the local police and ask them how you can transport the sword home from the fair on foot. I'm sure it's legal if you're just taking it home. Swords are all over the internet if you got a credit card, from cheap to grand, and they'll deliver. I recommend Museum Replicas down in Atlana if you want something authentic that could actually work. Stay away from the really flashy looking stuff that offers to take 10 easy payments, it's crap and overpriced for suburban warriors who have cash to burn. Stainless steel is nice-looking and maintenance free, but high-carbon steel is much better and more authentic, but you will need to either oil it occasionally or use a clear coat product to avoid rust (is the Indy/Shelbyville area very humid?). I always think it's best to buy one really nice $200 sword as opposed to ten $20 ones. I figure even if it's for display why put crap on your walls? Quality is better than quantity when it comes to something that's a point of pride for you. What kind of sword are you looking for, historic or fantasy type?

I collected museum replica swords for years. I have thousands of dollars worth invested. They are cool but highly impractical. All my swords are "working quality steel", none of the usual crap that looks good but creases if you bend it more than 10 degrees out of line. I even have a beautiful katana that has been differentially tempered, where the edge of the blade is harder than the spine so the blade is more flexible. It's not folded steel though, those run into the thousands of dollars just by themselves. I stopped collecting when I realized you can only display so many of them. I also wouldn't trust myself in a fight with anything longer than my 15th century Italian short sword. Unless you have professional training and practise for a few hours every day for years, you're more likely to hurt yourself than anyone else. Mokele's right, in most places in the US it's legal to "bear arms" in public, but scabbards and holsters, even if worn on the hip in plain sight, are considered concealment. And just try walking around with a bare bodkin in public and see how fast your right to bear arms evaporates. As Mokele said, a staff is much more practical and there are lots of stories where the greatest swordsmen are laid low by a simple farmer with a quarterstaff. Swords get all the attention because they're flashy but it was simple weapons like staves and spears that did most of the work on the battlefield.

Wasn't that something? I especially liked the "I'm 13 so I can't be bothered to use punctuation" defense. ppl plz!

Here, here. * much applause * When we profess, in any circles, that our way is right and all others wrong, dissention is almost automatic. When two volatile viewpoints like religion and politics take that stance, disaster looms. And when those stances are joined in a mixture of Church and State as a doctrine for a governing party, the consequences are unimaginably grievous to a country that is founded on unity.

Given that the universe has been expanding for billions of years, would the center necessarily be where it started out?

Your refusal to share your written ideas in a manner that aids in viewer comprehension makes the likelihood that people will bother to read them just that much less. We can't hear you talking, you know. We can't see your body language. Punctuation is your best bet to overcoming those obstacles. Your refusal to help us suggests your indolence supercedes our understanding of your ideas in its importance to you. This is a forum where you share your ideas. If no one understands them due to a lack of effort on your part, they will most likely be ignored.

I think you just made your way onto many, many Ignore Lists.

They're too chicken.

There were lot's of people claiming to be John Titor. I'm not sure if Samson's confession is any more real than the others. But like all good hoaxes, the mystery and our willingness to speculate is what keeps them going.

First of all, I'm moving this to Pseudoscience. Secondly, iirc, Titor predicted there would be a Waco-like incident in the US practically every day after the 2004 election. I believe some of his other predictions have gone down the tube as well. I think it was all an elaborate hoax, and I think the guy who did it had a pretty fair grasp of what our future within 5 years might look like. He was around in 1999-2000, right? Science-wise, he played it sly and claimed he just rode the time-machine, he didn't invent it. His search for an outdated IBM computer was compelling, but I believe someone debunked the idea pretty quickly. Here's a year-old thread on John Titor.

Maybe I can help. I speak punctnot. ru referring to the theory that parallel universes exist for every possible likelihood in every possible moment? since all possible universes would have been created by the big bang it wouldnt open wormholes between them maybe thats what the higher dimensions r 4 i also heard a hypothesis that gravity is weak because it moves thru all possible parallel universes and may be used to communicate between them but its just an idea

The Rack, available at your local BDSM store. I couldn't find an image of one without a naked body on it, but I'll keep searching.

I was 6' 5" in high school 30 years ago. I get most of my above-average height from the waist up (a friend who is 5' 10" wears the same size inseam in pants as I do). Thirty years later I am 6' 3.5". The backbone does compress as you age. Your leg bones do not.

Also moved to Homework Help.

Moved to Homework Help.

A big part of why he was clear-headed and rational here is because we are well-moderated and don't put up with crap. Please visit Sciforums and see what a different, disturbed individual he is. Over there he is condescending and downright rude. And in one thread he has mentioned his monumentally vast intellect 11 times as proof of his observations, so I don't think he's being sarcastic. After 2 days they are referring to him as "Jackass" and "Oh Great Advanced Intelligence". They are openly laughing at him and ridiculing him. Our Experts worked with him pretty patiently for 3 months. I feel sorry for the guy.

AND we have sources to back you up on that.

The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.--George Bernard Shaw Head-strong, viscious, authority trip, crock, these words have all been used inappropriately in this argument. The facts are that 3 Admins, 2 Mods and 4 Resident Experts deliberated over 2 months on Johnny5 and how to deal with him. I can't count the number of warnings he's gotten privately and in the threads about his agenda. He was given plenty of chances to prove his points. This was not a heated, ego-based reaction to a minor problem.

Then I apologise for my skepticism about you. Feel free to read the rest of his posts. We don't delete them just because he's been banned. Or as I pointed out, he is active over at Sciforums. Someone told me he already posted a record 5 pages disputing relativity. He always felt it was counterintuitive to his approach, and therefore had to be wrong. No one ever said Einstein was infallible. But Johnny5 never showed why he was, he just claimed it no matter what evidence was shown.

If his challenges had real merit that he was able to back up with real evidence, he would be taken as seriously as anyone else here. The fact that he invaded so many threads with his agenda hypotheses got his posts reported more than anyone in recent history. When that many people complain, I listen, always. You read the one thread then? Good science tries to look at all the evidence. Try reading all his other threads like Matt Grime and Tom Mattson and swansont have. It isn't a crime. Is that what you think? Is that what Johnny5 told you he was banned for? Believe me, it was a culmination of things, but the one that stood out most was that there were times Johnny5 could not be convinced that he was wrong, despite insurmountable evidence. That's not science, Thomas Kirby, that's religion. Johnny5 holds his beliefs sacred and that was his biggest mistake. Forgive me, since I don't really know you, but I find that unlikely. You joined a day after Johnny5 gets banned, you read one thread and are so primed to defend him? I hope you do stay so I can get to know you better. I hope you are someone who has watched our little community without joining, waiting quietly until you had something to say. I hope you can carry your convictions through in every post you make, because passion for what you are doing is important no matter what it is. Pointing out where you can find Johnny5 is hardly telling you to "love it or leave it."

Please trust us, we really have the best interests of the site and our membership at heart. Indiscriminate banning is almost as bad as letting every crackpot post thread after thread without moderation. Most people are here to learn. Some people join in order to preach an agenda which has been shot down by scholars everywhere else.

I don't feel particularly obligated to defend my actions as a Moderator here at SFN. I do feel our membership has a right to well-moderated threads which pursue scientific topics. Our purpose here is not to censor, but to make sure that the information posted at SFN is consistently worthwhile and doesn't waste our membership's valuable reading time. Some people join and we find out pretty quickly that they are inconsistent with that purpose. They are warned several times before banning takes place. That is something that is done privately for the most part. Some of the warnings are posted in the threads to highlight anti-policy behavior. I think it's great that Johnny5 has a friend like you, Thomas Kirby, who will defend him against all criticism. Johnny5 certainly had some good posts here. He was civil for the most part and that probably accounts for his longevity. He also showed some fairly disturbing tendencies as well. I know you'd like to think his ideas were all ground-breaking and earth-shattering. Here is an excerpt from his last communication with us: The majority of our membership are very level-headed and some of the smartest people I know. I like reading all their posts I can. Science is predicated on the basis that nothing is sacred and all of our Experts, Moderators and Admins are well aware that one of our own posters could well be the next Einstein. Why wouldn't we want to encourage that? But some parts of science have been proven to the point of near-positive certainty. It was some of those points that Johnny5 consistently refused to ackowledge, even after multiple people pointed them out. Thomas Kirby, you should know that I was just the Moderator on board at the time it was decided to finally put an end to Johnny5's account. It had been discussed by every Mod, Admin and Expert we have and the consensus was that Johnny5 was a crackpot who was always going to be a liability to the membership. If you are a disciple of his, he is currently posting over at Sciforums, where he has proclaimed himself the most brilliant physicist that ever lived. We wish him luck with that.