chadn

Stomata would be needed, or some other equivalent to them.The CO2 produced from respiration is not in a form used in photosynthesis and the bloood works to get rid of CO2, not supply it. So you still have the problem of a carbon supply.

Doubtful, considering that photosynthetic pigments mostly absorb visible light, especially light in the red portion of the spectrum. Unless Im mistaken, melanine doesnt do much against visible light. But you could lower the amount of food you needed because a portion would be satisfied by photosynthesis, as long as you spent sufficient time exposed to light in some form. Of course theres the problem of clothing. If our bodies photosynthesized it would be to our advantage to all become nudists. Of course the biggest obstacle that I see is an adequate source of CO2. We would either need to obtain it from cellular respiration or genetically engineer stomata into our skin.

Your words, not mine, hence the reason why I put quotation marks around the word dissolve. You said that your book says CO2 "dissolves" into a layer of water. Dissolve is not at all the correct word to use.

That is only one theory. There are several others. This site gives a good description of various aging theories: http://prolongyouth.com/theories.html#wearandtear I dont know what works been done in ant-aging, but its doubtful that we even come close to success until we know actually what it is that causes aging.

Money gives the rich the ability to hire mercenaries and guards. No need for government protection. With my own fighting force I could force the poor into slave labor or whatever. Who has benefited the most from government? The poor.

Thats rediculus, how well would nayone do if they lived alone on an island? Hmmm? Send a welfare bum to an island and send someone used to working, like say Bill Gates. I wonder which will do better?

How exactly do they benefit the most? I'd say the poor benefit the most from society. When was the last time the rich recieved welfare checks?

The only way I can think of to solve this is to take into consideration the Big Bang. The Big Bang and the expansion of the universe results in all matter and energy being sepperated, right? So say you have two bodies, the big bang spreads out all the matter in the universe, which is equivalent to me lifting a rock, Im sepperating the rock from the earth, thus increasing its potential energy. But this all is a total guess on my part.

What then if you dont return? Or say you return to F1 or F102? Or is this impossible? Are you only capable of returning to your starting point at an equal amount of time that you spent in the past? I know that last sentence is confusing, its hard to express such things in words.

Amen!

Hmmm, very interesting, perhaps this problem is solved by E=mc2? Perhaps by sending someone back in time the energy in the past is reduced because of an increase in matter. But I have no idea, physics is not something I've delved in to to much.

Ahh, I see Mokele is on this site, should have guessed.

Crap, this site doesnt have any edit options, that 1st sentence should be: The CO2 is "dissolved" into water via the PCR ..........

They do are "dissolved" into water via the PCR or photsynthetic carbon reduction cycle. Its also known as the C3 cycle. Maybe you've heard of C3 and C4 plants? The C3 or PCR cycle occurs in all higher plants, the C4 cycle simply has some additional steps that make it more efficient. The gist of the PCR cycle is that CO2 enter through the stomata where it reacts with a 5-carbon molecule known as ribulose biphosphate (RuBP for short). This forms two 3-carbon acids called 3-phosphoglycerate (3-PGA for short), which are now part of the solution with water. 3-PGA is then converted to triose phosphate and used in other reactions throughout the cell.

Aardvark: Damion's definition of anarchy is correct. Think of anarchy as anti-government communists. You're think more along the lines of Libertarianism.