Jiggerj

Googled info: Iron melts at 2800 °F Estimates put the temperature of the inner core of the earth at: 9800.6 ºF

Don't know of many 13-year-olds that are all fired up over reading, writing, and arithmetic. So, are they doomed, or can they still learn this stuff?

Hi, I've heard that the earth's iron core hasn't melted because of the immense pressure it's under. Doesn't immense pressure cause immense heat?

Can we actually think of food chains as 'making sense'? Plant life gets what it needs from water, minerals, and the sun. Given the right circumstances all life could've evolved in this way. We may know how and why the food chain came into existence, but it doesn't have to make sense. It's not a matter of right or wrong, it simply is what it is.

Wow! Then here: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dangerous+knowledge+part+1&oq=dangerous+knowledge&aq=1&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=1&gs_upl=7016l10766l0l13375l19l17l0l5l5l0l313l1985l0.3.5.1l9l0

But I don't want it! You buy it for only three easy payments of $79.99!

I don't personally know anyone aware of this, to the point where I've had to double-check to make sure we use 100%. When we have so many people claiming something that is incorrect it can put the truth in jeopardy. I would've guessed it to be one in 50,000 (ballpark). Even now I don't like talking about my shoulder injury because people will think I'm an idiot for calling it a torn rotator cuff (which is correct). Everyone I know calls it a rotator CUP. THAT should be a class in and of itself. Telling kids that 'Reading is fundamental' is fine, but it doesn't teach them how to absorb as much as they possibly can from what they're reading.

It's not my data.

Think about it? I can't even say it! lolololol For me, it's just a passing interest because I don't have the math skills to persue it deeper. However, I recently watched a documentary that validates your point. Men have literally driven themselves mad trying to define infinity through math. I'll see if I can find the link. Here if you want: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/dangerous-knowledge/ "In this one-off documentary, David Malone looks at four brilliant mathematicians – Georg Cantor, Ludwig Boltzmann, Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing – whose genius has profoundly affected us, but which tragically drove them insane and eventually led to them all committing suicide." P.S. Honest input that doesn't ridicule or insult is always welcome in my threads!

lol Well you're a lot smarter than I am! I am of the assumption that zero is the utter absence of value. ---------------------------------------------------------- Just googled 'What is zero' and got this: ze·ro/ˈzi(ə)rō/ No quantity or number Now, please remember that I know that 0+0=0, but for the sake of discussion can we say that there is no substance in the universe (be it matter or energy) that can be reduced to nothing? I mean, try as we might to pulverize something into non-existence, it just can't be done - something always remains, be it just one particle, one atom, one quark... So, in reverse, our starting point in creating anything must at least be 1 (one particle of something). What is the point in saying: "In order to cook a scrambled egg we need to start with Nothing plus One Egg?" Isn't this simply stating that we are going to start with One Egg? (Going for my second cup of coffee. God, I hope it helps. lol) Any number above zero is a stand-in for something: 1/2 an hour, 1 computer, 12 eggs... Zero, however, means nothing, points to nothing, implies nothing. Can anyone show me an equation with a zero in it where the zero can't simply be removed without changing the value of the equation? (Ick! Did that make any sense at all?) One more time: Show me an equation that would change as a direct result of erasing a zero. 1+0=1 (Now remove the zero.) 1=1

Okay, I just woke up and have had only one cup of coffee so far this morning, so I'm not quite awake yet. When I'm in this sleepy-time condition I tend to wander aimlessly through the internet. This morning I found myself looking at a youtube clip claiming that 0+0=1. And all of the comments on that page were having a grand old time bashing the poster of this clip. (I clicked out of youtube and now I can't find the clip again.) Anyway, while having my first smoke outside, my mind began to wonder how and why 0+0=1 could come even close to being a true statement. What I came up with is probably laughable, but could you kind people of a higher intelligence than mine (any IQ above 40 should do it) explain why or why not this couldn't be correct? When looking at 0+0=1 the zeroes don't mean anything. They have no value, so we can just erase them. Now the statement looks like this + =1. Since nothing is being added together, the math symbols can also be erased. That leaves just the number 1. Some would say (probably everyone on this planet), "NO! 0+0=0 !!!!" But that isn't even an equation. The zeroes are just place holders that can be erased, so what we're actually looking at is + = . So, can 0+0=1 possibly be true? P.S. I did a search here to make sure this idea hasn't been discussed before. It hasn't (probably for a good reason). So, don't go hatin' on me, I'm just looking for some easy chat this morning.

EXACTLY! But, tell me again why I can't see the flashlight when it's in a different postion? It's still shining. The distance is still close enough so that the light always remains in my field of vision. "You never see that flashlight in more than one place at once" Right, but I do see it constantly moving across my field of vision. And if my friend moved fast enough, or if I took a picture using time-lapse photography, the light would streak. DUH! I get it now. The hubble took a picture of the galaxies. If the hubble took ANOTHER picture we would see the galaxies in a different position.

Honestly, the only thing I vaguely remember from my school science classes is when one teacher dissected a fish. Oh yeah, and catching my HS freshman science teacher sneaking a little alcoholic refreshment in the boy's room. I was smoking a cigarette in a stall. He looked at me and said, "I won't tell if you won't?" Of course I agreed.

What raised my eyebrows is the fact that it was never mentioned if any spikes (whatever they are) occurred when there was no catastrophe. From that link: The spikes are "synchronized parallel sequences of random numbers". In 65 computers around the world? Not saying it's wrong, just that it's hard to believe it.

AHHH, I'm not explaining this well enough! First off, the sound you're talking about is a matter of hearing something for seconds or minutes, because of it's close proximity. The galaxies are billions of light years away. I'll try this:

LOL Let me also add: mat·ter/ˈmatər/ Noun:Physical substance in general, as distinct from mind and spirit; (in physics) that which occupies space and possesses rest mass This is where the catholic bible limits the possibilities of what this god could be. Remember, this bible says that god made man in his image. So, this god would be humanoid in appearance, and that takes matter.

No, I never gave it any thought. The older I get, the less I know. It was just a few years ago, when I was about 54, that I learned that the moon doesn't orbit the earth in a single day. It's once every 28 days. Funny how we can miss things that we see almost every day. But, I agree that the tour guide should've know about the ankle. HA! Just googled emu's knee and found this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/74211461@N00/2232825936/ Someone (YOU, not me) should set the world straight on this.

Remember when HE precisely killed off just the firstborn sons in Egypt? Solid proof that HE's been practicing.

What am I missing here?

Okay, we are lookin up at just one galaxy as it was (say) three billions years ago. We know that the universe is expanding, and that the galaxies are moving in this expansion. So, the galaxy we are looking at is actually no longer there. Two Questions: Where did it go? And: How did it automatically go from the point we are looking at now, to POOF! out of sight?

What a silly question! Do you have ANY idea how long it would've taken Noah to build an ark big enough for ALL the animals??? LOLOLOLOL

Hi, just want to point out that a "substance not of this universe" is still matter. Also, can you define 'supernatural' in a way that doesn't involve energy? If there be ghosts, then even they would be made of some form of energy.

I don't know where to post this, so if there's a need to move it I'm okay with it. I've come across two documentaries that claim there are computers all over the world that are running random number generators. Supposedly, every one of these generators spikes when a catastrophe happens in the world. I'll post a link to one of the shows below, but I have no idea what a spike means in this context. Do all the computers start generating the same numbers? I have no clue. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/reality-extended-mind/

Ha! Thanks! But I went to other sites for a bit of research and that's where I got nailed with the mathematical language. I'm old and tired, so if it's not in inches, miles per hour, or ounces, I'm LOST.

I'm still not convinced that time is weaved into the fabric of the universe. Whenever I read of someone referring to time, what I see is actually a reference to energy being burned. If someone says it takes an hour to drive their car to another city, what I hear is that it takes a gallon and a half of fuel to get to another city (say, fifty-five miles). I've heard it said that the closer people get to travelling at the speed of light, their aging process slows; this is somehow proof that time is being maniulated. I don't see it. It is merely proof that the the process of decay slows the closer one gets to the speed of light. Then again, I don't see a PHD certificate hanginng on my wall either.