granpa

I mean 'normal' as in 'healthy' I also mean 'normal' as in 'not requiring any elaborate explanation'

morality doesnt require any explanation. its the normal state. the question is where does immorality come from. Why did immorality evolve? why did the black plaque evolve? Its simply a disease.

I'm sorry I thought we were discussing this:

I believe that I made myself perfectly clear

I once suggested to an atheist that theism isnt believing that some being exists any more than darwinism is believing that darwin exists. I suggested that theism was believing that you should do what an all loving all caring all giving being who wanted only what was best for you and asked nothing in return would have you do. They said that I just wanted to reduce theism to a trivial truism that couldnt possibly be wrong. Well I wonder if its such a trivial truism that cant possibly be wrong then why do so many people not do it? if the right way leads to life and the wrong way leads to death then why then do so many people choose not to do the right thing? doing what an all loving all caring all giving being who wanted only what was best for you and asked nothing in return would have you do = right = life doing what an all loving all caring all giving being who wanted only what was best for you and asked nothing in return would have you not do = wrong = death right & wrong = morality

the perplexing part is the relativity of simultaneity that is what makes it work

I suppose that the weakest possible force would be the gravitational fonce between 2 electrons at opposite ends of the unierse.

yes. and why do you do that? because you value them and can see things from their point of view and are therefore 'driven' to do so. its probably important to point out that one can love others just because it makes you 'feel' good or you can love others because its the 'right' thing to do. all 3 forms of love exist at these 2 different levels.

certainly love is related to our concept of 'self'. I dont recall saying otherwise. Like I said all the forms of love have in common the ability to see things from anothers perspective. The ability to put yourself in someone elses shoes. just as there are 3 main types of love so I believe there are 3 main concepts of 'self'. consciousness (freewill. it is, of course, entirely an illusion. its the self we 'think' or 'expect' exists) ego (I'm not real clear on this one. apparently I dont have a soul. I know it thinks its the center of the universe. its the self we inductively 'feel') spirit (for lack of a better word. its the true self. you might say its the sum of all things that have real value to us. the things that we are 'driven' to do or get or work for. its the self we deductively 'know') love is a good thing but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing.

yes if the 2 dimensional object is infinitely thin. if on the other hand it is quantized then it will squish to something very large but finite.

sodium is poisonous. cells pump it out and then pump in potassium to balance the charge. any ions forming a net charge within the cell should form a thin layer under the cell membrane and should be balanced by a thin layer of changes on the outside of the membrane. even with the sodium potassium pumps turned off the neuron can still fire hundreds of thousands of times.

love, like curiosity, is a drive. not an 'emotion' whatever that is.

the opposite of love is indifference. not hate.

besides 'eros' the 3 main types of love are 'curiosity', (maternal) 'empathy', and (brotherly) 'sympathy'. they all have in common the ability to see things from anothers perspective.

check this out: http://www.gmodules.com/ig/creator?synd=open&url=http%3A//colorchoosergadget.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/colorChooser.xml&pt=%26context%3Dd%26type%3Dgadgets%26synd%3Dig%26lang%3Den%26.lang%3Den%26country%3Dus%26.country%3Dus%26start%3D0%26num%3D1%26target%3Df7KG%26objs%3Dd%2Corj%2C8AI%2CYy%2Cjt0Q&sn=f7KG〈=en if that link doesnt work then try this: http://www.google.com/ig/directory?synd=open&q=Color+Chooser

if you are smart enough to make a tool then why not just make a tool-belt?

I suspect that hominids stood upright in order to use their hands for sign language. before sign language there was probably a crude form of mime.

the trouble with these plants and animals is that they continue to grow throughout their lives. if they were immortal then they would eventually become too big to survive

rna world?

I'd love to see how that compares to GRB numbers and luminosities.

thank you. great thread.

because 'directed thinking' (carl jung) is tiring. we have to rest it from time to time.

dont know about flight but the suit can probably be made quite fast by simply making the foot much longer and walking/running on its toes (like a cat).

if one accepts that a vtatement can be either true, false, unknown, or unknowable then paradoxes are simply 'unknowables'. the prisoner in the unexpected hanging paradox can never know which day is the last day that he can be hanged on. The unexpected hanging paradox asserts that, even though the prisoner knows that there exist certain days that he can be hanged on and he knows that there exists at least one day that he cant be hanged on, he cannot possibly know which day is the last day that he can be hanged on because if the he knows that day x is the last day that he can be hanged on then he knows that day x is not the last day that he can be hanged on. It is therefore unknowable (though it can probably be narrowed down to a few days) Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedHere is a couple of nice links on four value logic: http://www.orafaq.com/usenet/comp.databases.theory/2004/04/23/0957.htm http://www.dbdebunk.com/page/page/1543772.htm Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_valued_logic

the earth would probably get smaller if more mass was added. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I presume it would be spinning much faster.