JustinW

I may have missed something. What political agenda? Environmental, health, who's politics does this fit into? I'm not sure why this thread was moved either.

Again Phi, you show me the error of my ways. I was trying to corrolate environmental regulations to corporate employment, and visa versa. Regulation is not good for buisness. Regulation blocks and sometimes cuts growth of employment. That is the point that I was trying make, that conservatives argue for job growth over environmental regulation when there is no consensus for environmental outcome. But on the other hand some regs are necessary for environmental quality. But to base regulation off of opinions or findings that don't even hold consensus is to stunt job growth. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45752318/ns/us_news-environment/ case in point. Now don't get me wrong, I know there is a need to cut down on pollution for health reasons. But I can't shake a nagging feeling that if the emmisions from these plants weren't linked to medical problems, the EPA would've found another route, such as man made global warming, etc...

I beg to differ. Take a look at the Cassmir affect, vacume energy, vacuum state, etc... Okay, I agree that it is only a theory, but it is understandable to come up with an explanation for what is being seen. I myself am not sure at all that red shifts proved an expanding universe instead of just one that is in motion. Although I understand that in order for it to be a red shift instead of a blue shift, the object would have to be moving away from the observer. The theory of dark energy, from my limited understanding, was to provide a reasonable explanation for the observed expansion. What you said about gravity is true and the only way to escape gravity is for a potential energy to give you an escape velocity. Since the red shifts were interpreted to be an expansion, then you would also have to have a potential energy to provide that escape velocity. (dark energy) It's just a name for something unseen and undetected. If everything is contracting, why are we seeing red shifts instead of blue?

cosmicsearcher, From your OP it sounds like you are talking about being born twice. Once then and once now. As far as can be proved, or logically argued, your conciiousness only exists from birth to death. I think your basing your question off of the premiss of there being a possibility of being born in the past and being born again in the present, and asking if we were born at some point in the past why aren't we concious of it now? If that is the question, then I would have to say that the mind doesn't transfer from one body to the next through time, therefore your memories would inturn not transfer. If you believe in that sort of thing.

What evidence and falling where? Also falling implies direction(down). Is it falling/contracting, or just falling?

Still doesn't explain how that corrolates with a capitalistic government. You're talking about private buisness and workers not getting a marginal pay. If the worker recieved a marginal pay the company would have a heck of a time funding it's own growth. So with any dip in the market you would see companies fail in mass. My argument on this was the relation on government corruption between the different ideologies. I don't get your meaning here. This was the reason for my comment about private property. How much freedom are you willing to give for security? I also enjoy some of the benifits provided through taxation and believe in a taxation for certain services. But adopting a government based off of such would indeed, like you said about communism, let best intentions go awry. Maybe not provable, but it is the best model in my point of view to secure the freedom for the people that live under it. It's provides a means of making your own decisions , good or bad, that one must deal with. I would say that this is just as unprovable as what I said about capitalism. I would have to read a few examples and even then I believe it would be highly debatable. Successful to what end?

Your analogy seems spot on, but surely it doesn't just apply to capitalism. Communism and socialism are just as bad, so why the prejudice towards capitolism. Unless you enjoy authority dictating what you do with your own property.

Yes I get what you're saying. I was thinking about the role of the Roman senate. Although it could be argued that they still had a Cesear to answer to. Military decision was also based upon democracy for a length of time. Also good political analogy.

Yes that makes sense. But you would think, or this is just my simpllistic way of thinking, that to have any interaction at all, it would have to hold mass to some degree. And how does anyone explain light frequency if there is no mass oscillation to create one?

From a political view it works both ways. The conservative doesn't want industry regulated(jobs lost) based on speculation and an environmentalist wants to regulate on speculation no matter how many it puts out of work. Or, the environmentalist want the world saved, because no one will have a job if the earth is destroyed, and the conservative just uses that as propaganda to get the struggling worker on their side. You see...both ways. This is a matter of suggesting climate change is man made, or induced by man made emmisions, which I still don't know if I believe. I guess this would be the place to argue such since we are in earth sciences. I don't believe I agree with you Moontanman. You can go back through history and find democracy in many different forms. From government to military decisions. I don't think it is as recent as you suggest. I believe it would probably be based on the method that is used by scientists now to make decisions. Just take the best model you can come up with at the time and run with it. P.S. If you had a plane full of scientists, at least they would be able to calculate with what force they will hit the mountain as a last ditch effort at further knowledge. The polititions would float safely to the ground from being so full of hot air.

Thanks for the link. It made me remember a few questions I've had in the past. I find it weird, to say the least, that light slows down through a medium but once out of the medium continues at it's origional speed. Does anyone know why? I've found it a little hard to grasp and asked myself how it could be propelled back to the origional speed without some outside influence affecting its increase in velocity and frequency. Also, if a photon has no mass, why would a medium have any affect on it at all? I understand that a medium might have an affect on its frequency, but doesn't a frequency constitute having mass in the first place? Doesn't a frequency come from the oscillations of mass-having objects?

So in laymens terms, Energy is equal to a mass at rest relative to the speed of light squared? Not mass going the speed of light squared, or that if mass could go the speed of light squared and it would turn into energy. I've had some confusion in other threads about this, but I believe this thread has givin me the ahha moment by explaining in a way that is more understandable to me. Let me know if the ahha is justified.

Yes, I stand corrected. What I was trying to recall was about photons reacting with other material, not about speed in a vacuum. I don't know if creationalists had anything to do with it though, and I don't recall any mention of red shifts either.

Then how do you explain the vacuum of space. To my way of thinking the less mass you have in a space the greater the vacuum. I've been trying to find information on any changes in vacuum, but I haven't been able to get any farther than just normal fluctuation. It only makes sense that if there is already a vacuum then any expansion or contraction would adversely affect the measure of vacuum. Not to mention all that I've heard is that it is expanding or contracting. If it is expanding then what is it expanding away from and in what direction? I've only heard OUT. If it is expanding there ought to be a central point who's location can be calculated and identified. Same with a contraction and probably more so. And to just say we are falling is a little inadequate. Before you could say we are falling you would have to know which way is down in the universe.

Where are the facts that prove this. Speculation if you ask me. I thought the term GLOBAL WARMING was dropped and replaced by the term CLIMATE CHANGE since they couldn't prove that it wasn't a natural warming period. The largest green house gases, from what I hear, is water vapor. What do you plan to do about that. I say, take it as it comes. Whether it's man made or not, the cycle is already in motion. All we can really do is hope for the best and prepare for the worst. Sorry for the off topic commentary. I thought the second order was motion not necessarily acceleration. Or the state of going from static to acceleration. And the observer from the inside should still see a round ball. The outside world would turn elliptical to that observer. Is this a correct assumption or did I miss something?

Good question.

At first I thought the thread was about trolls as fictitious creatures and was going to comment about my mother in law. I haven't seen too much of that sort of behavior in this forum. Of course I've only been a member for a couple of months, but I believe the mods are reasonable and willing to put a stop to any nonsense. It was an interesting article from a behavioral standpoint.

Damn Tres, your kinda taking all the fun out of living aren't you? Generic basics with no room for luxury? Give me pig headed capitolism any day. If that is construde as greedy, then your just going to have to call me greedy. NTM, who will decide where people will apply there labor? And how long will it be before they start taking away freedoms under the ruse of being for the good of the people? I may be paranoid, but that is the way the road turns in my mind if you let someone dictate these sorts of things. Plus it would cut out competition which is detramental to quality. No one would have a personal regard for quality if there were no market to compete with or room for advancement because of that competition. Sorry for taking so long to respond Phi. Maybe in a perfect world. Once they recieve the funds, who's to say that is where the money will be spent? A new problem will always emerge that will take precidence over spending it on something that is yet to exist.

Are you saying that everyone is ultimately corruptable? Something to the effect of absolute power corrupts absolutely? Although it's kind of glass half emptyish, you may be correct. Everyone will always have their own personal agenda no matter how honest they are.

I just wonder if it's feasable with any mass.

Only if they join up with the short people. Then the tall and handicapped are doomed.

Ah, thank you for the correction. But I disagree about massive objects not being able to travel at the speed of light. Isn't the popular model of universe expansion directed towards expansion at similar speeds. And even though I was mixed up on c2, the question still remains. Does energy hold mass? And doesn't mass only exist because of energy? And if you were able to project mass to c2, would it then turn into some form of energy? physical process? And I know it can't be done, and there is probably no known answer to the question.

I wasn't aware there was global ecological crisis. It's like Dennis Miller said on his HBO special. It could be 75 degrees in New York in december and someone would surely be out playing golf. It just goes to show you that one man's global warming is another man's " Hey, it's a nice f***in day".

A question that keeps popping up lately. If Energy equals Mass at twice the SOL, then would any mass turn into a form of energy once it reaches twice the SOL?

We assume the rest of the universe is like the observable until we have observed otherwise. Anything else is just speculation. I f someone thinks that things happen differently past our cone of observation then they would have to have grounds to base their assumptions before it will be recognized by the masses. I still haven't heard any thoughts on this. I am curious to know what you all think. Whether it could be feesable or not.