questionposter

But couldn't what he's saying be considered an opinion if it really seems that way to him? Your notion for party segregation is still illogical. Both parties are comprised human beings, and human beings are human beings no matter what party they are in, so the same types of actions have to occur in both parties.

So if you don't agree with moon, what is the point your trying to make? Because he already seems kind of crazy, so I don't think your point is that he's not.

So if you can say that that guy is entitled to free speech and an opinion after all of that, why can't you say that about Limbaugh? Because he's not a Democrat?

It seemes as though all of those posts were based off of a guess that I was talking about the "amplitude" of a wave rather than the actual oscillation of a particle. If in the equation to describe how a particle oscillates over time includes that a critical component is "squared" as to always have a positive result, then it should be fine.

Ripping someone's heart out and playing with it like a football doesn't sound loony to you?

Well I don't see where it's already stated, but if its absolute value that solves it.

Too long

Morales are relative, what regard and disregard is your choice.

Just to be clear, I'm also Democratic, but I don't think being affiliated with any particular party automatically makes you better than any other person or automatically gives you some mystical right to to say whatever you want about someone. I know Republicans who watch Fox regularly and agree with some of them, but at the same time I know Republicans who agree with the Republican party on multiple-issues who say Fox is complete BS. I know Democrats who think woman's rights is a solved and I know Democrats that say people who do abortion are evil, right in Madison, which I guess still isn't enough to sway them to the Republican side.

a sine wave does not have different signs at different places?

So if it doesn't have physical significance, then does that mean when it's oscillating as to exist where it would be in negative probability, it doesn't physically exist?

I didn't mean superposition of energy states in superfluid, I meant superposition of general location, since the location of any particular atom can't be defined.

So they aren't technically entangled, but they exist in a sort of undefined superposition as to also instantaneously respond to various state changes like entanglement? I guess instead of the superposition being with energy, it's with...location?

I guess it's close, but oddly enough there's actually various philosophy teachers that agree on a single answer.

That's correct, he doesn't see himself traveling into the past, but he still saw himself.

I don't think he was necessarily born a virgin though either, it could be his mother had told him that because she didn't want to tell him the truth about his faterh, and even if he was it can happen naturally http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6681793.stm

We LITERALLY Looked at that video in my US government class to laugh at him specifically in that speech, because it was such a terrible speech, in fact we were looking at how speeches fail, and this was the second one, after that one guy who ran against Karry and made like a "yahoo" shout. I would definitely compare both Shultz and Limbaugh to that guy sometimes, and I grew up on Willy Street in Madison, Wisconsin, the most democratic street in the entire Northern US. Though, I will admit I think Limbaugh is still worse out of the two. Point is, after growing up in such a Democratic city, and even going to the Walker protests yet also traveling around the country and knowing Republican people, there still are some mis-understandings, and many Republicans I know only side with that party because of one single thing like with abortion. I've also noticed from the people I know that there are increasing numbers of people both democrat and republican who believe in man-made global warming as well. It's really only the extremist Republicans that are so bad, just as with any particular group. I can tell you right now Democratic/Liberal people have all their own messed up stuff. There's still old racist people who literally say things like "Don't walk behind me so much, what are you? Some kind of Chinese servant?" who are hard-core democrats.

Philosophy is also the reason why we questioned things like religion at all, because we speculated if that was actually true or if things actually work so simply.

(It's a paradox, which is why time travel doesn't exist,) but imagining time travel was true, he would see himself because that's where he was standing in the past at those 4-dimensional coordinates. But if that was the past, why doesn't he see the same exact thing happening again?

If you graph the actual oscillation of a sub-atomic particle, it oscillates between positive crests of probability and negative ones, but where is it oscillating into when at the present time it is oscillating at negative probability? Is it oscillating in some other dimension? Or do you use the absolute value?

Classical physics is any physics before quantum physics. All classical physics can be though of as very precise approximations with quantum physics. With the strong force, there isn't a good physical or "classical" way we can put it, it just is what it is, and it acts very weird. Gluons don't seem to be exactly our normal "positive and negative" since they have 8 different charges, and extra-dimensional physics is often used to describe their behavior. Another thing to keep in mind with particles this small is their "virtualness", or their tendency to use mathematical things like "i" to describe their physical location where they don't completely exist in the way we think as well as their wave nature which is responsible for much weirdness, which is what lead to some people extrapolating that there are 4 real dimensions and 4 imaginary dimensions. The gluons at the proximity they are at are also most likely entangled, like the quarks they bind.

We don't completely know what the fabric of spacetime is exactly, but there's mathematical predictions of things like string theory and calabi yao manifolds on what comprises it.

Well, not a whole lot of evidence for that, and Jesus wasn't the only person claiming to be born from a virgin in that time period. His ideals caught on mostly because they appealed to a diverse population of the poor, which was and still is a majority of the people. Not that he didn't have any good messages, but I would prefer to not glorify him in the god-like way, which is similar with Siddhartha, most Buddhist don't worship Siddhartha as any sort of god even though he founded a religion and was a very kind person.

Those are just primitive computer models of it's mathematics. In reality its more complex and more about how it get's stretched or bunched, and not how it penetrates itself into a tube shape.

So could you say super-fluid has properties "like" or "as" entanglement? Because it seems like if all the atoms are as one particle, couldn't you not determine that any individual atom is at the ground state?