Nouveau

Just a quick thought here, if you fancy an investment that is a bit on the wild side, adventerous and something you could have a little fun with. Then how about a vintage Aston Martin. Prices have skyrocketed over the last couple of years and now all pre-1989 models are starting to go up in price. With DB5's and DB6's now changing hands at over three quarters of a million dollars it shows there is still some real scope for some of the later V8's and DBS models, these models are still fairly easy to find, to head towards the quarter million mark over the next couple of years. This one might be a bit of a gamble, but surely a calculated risk based around current trends, and if nothing else you'll end up with something beautiful.

Ok then how about Rodentia Habitentia.

Hello, my suggestion would be Mammoth Mouse House Enclosures.

What you have here is a situation where advertisers are playing on the desire that most us have for aquiring that sense of achievement, that we have somehow done something productive that will improve our future. Whilst ever people are getting this sense of satisfaction from buying useless "stuff" then the advertisers will continue to exploit the situation. I think that if people are in search of the feelings offered from buying things then they really need a realistic alternative that can give them the satisfaction they are craving, a way of achieving it in a more positive and a more permanent way that will also encourage them to feel better about themselves. Simply buying things offers a rather hollow solution to the real desires that are often motivating such behaviour in the first place. It can also lead to compulsive shopping and adictive behavioural patterns. Genuine satisfaction and such feelings stem from acts of real achievement, effort or kindness and just arn't replicable no matter how much "retail therapy" is practiced.

Maybe by spending some of your spare time doing voluntary work. Working with those less fortunate can sometimes give you a greater appreciation for the things you actually already have. Seeing how others are coping and surviving with far less often helps to put things into perspective, by actually trying to help out and make their lives a little easier it can also help to improve your own sense of self worth. Lots of people get a real sense of fulfillment from helping others that goes way beyond the ordinary materialistic considerations of consumerism. Often the small sense of satisfaction gleaned from being able to "Keep up with the Jones" is transitory at best and is easy exceeded by the more deeper feelings of making others happy. Also perhaps a mental revaluation, to place a greater emphasis on the things that are really needed in life, as opposed to those merely desired, may help.

In the long term art, classic cars, antiques and even real estate regularly outperforms the stock exchange but it does require at least some knowledge or skill in choosing the right investments to achieve the very highest returns. You should remember that your ROI should always be proportional to the level of risk that your investments carry. For a low risk investment where you can be very confident in the long term safety of your money then a 10% annual return may be considered adequate. You have to make very sure that when you are checking the potential returns for differing investments that you are also taking note of and factoring in the level of risk for each so that you can then be confident in actually comparing like for like.

It was a big step for America to elect a black man as President it could possibly be an even bigger one to vote into office the first woman. Tackling wealth inequality may well appeal to a large part of the less well off Democratic base but she would still have to attract voters from the more affluent middle class who may not be so easily swayed. If she is to be successful against Republican candidates such as Paul Rand, Ted Cruz or especially Marco Rubio, depending upon who actually gets the GOP nomination, then she probably has to ensure that the election is decided by substance over style. Clearly she has the brains to win but if the campaign comes down to who will look best in global arena upon the world stage, a not inconsiderable prospect given the nature of this image conscious society in which we live in, then she may well be in big trouble.

How many people go out each week and buy a lottery ticket, virtually everyone of those people know it is vastly unlikely that they will win the lottery so why? They buy their tickets because the thought of winning makes them happy, they tell themselves that perhaps they could actually win. This isn't mental illness or being broken, it is simply wishful thinking, but it also shows us how people can choose to believe in a God. Each of us are capable of choosing to accept a picture of reality that makes us happy, even if it doesn't always fit with the evidence. We each of us ignore things on a daily basis that we know are perfectly possible, yet we simply choose to set them out our minds or replace them with a preferred thought. For example you go and buy a hot dog, now logically you can probarbly reason it's quite likely there will be things in that hot dog you'd actually rather not eat, yet you tell yourself oh it's fine perfectly healthy and wholesome, because you're hungry and you'd never eat it otherwise. If we had to face the stark reality of everything all the time without a little self delusion just how miserable would life really be, also we don't know for absolute certain when we die we arn't just going to awaken in some other strange place with a big neon sign some where saying "Level 2"!

That's certainly a possibility, it seems there are several researchers who seem to favour that particular hypothesis. Just out of interest on the subject there was an interesting article, from a few years ago now, that seems to run along similar lines you may be interested in. It contends that deja vu occurs due to a discrepancy in memory systems leading to the inappropriate generation of a detailed memory from a new sensory experience. http://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleID=101580&RelatedWidgetArticles=true

Confirmation bias does certainly seem to make us place greater importance on particular events if we thinking about them prior to there really taking place in the manner we may have felt most likely. If we equate it to making multiple predictions and then being amazed that some of them came true it highlights just how exaggerated such reactions are. We simply tend to ignore the negative results as if they had never occured and as such the possitive results can seem miraculous. Let's just consider for a moment what deja vu is, pretty much most of us will have experienced it at some stage. It feels like you can be in 2 minds at the same time, one where you have this sense of memory, yet not actually a memory, of having done something before. Whilst also the other mind is telling you haven't done this before. Certainly a strange feeling going on here, but perhaps that is the key to this particular experience. Perhaps it is all about feeling and little or nothing to do with memory or any form of precognition. Deja vu is always described in wooly terms, it's not an easy experience to clearly recall because it tends to be more of a sense of feeling without any real focus or sharpness of clarity. Could one explanation be that deja vu is simply a kind of emotional memory, a series of emotions that the mind has previously experienced in combination and remembered that particular state, then when this unique emotional state is once again encountered it triggers the memory. It would be logical to conclude that if this is the case then other external information about a situation is less relevant. This could certainly mean that anybody would be capable of achieving this type of emotional memory even in unfamiliar circumstances creating this strange kind of paradoxical state of a unique situation and yet still a sense of memory.

Fantastic what an adventure! thank you so much for sharing that This is really inspirational and will give me some real food for thought

"What is a "gluon strand"?" See Paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.3905.pdf However the overall idea seems far from convincing.

Does ageism exist? Yes it does, but what you have to remember is that it cuts both ways as sometimes companies may actually prefer older employees. The important thing to remember is that companies are always looking for the best possible employees, quite often they will be far less interested in a candidate's age than their abilities and achievements. You may well be older than your fellow students but you can think of this as a positive aspect because it sets you apart, you can use this as a platform to build upon. When it comes to the time of applying for positions you can already show potential employers that you stand out amongst the crowd, you can show that you arn't just a "one-trick pony", that you've already had one career but are dedicated & inteligent enough to train for and be successful in another. Being successful comes down to persistence and playing to your strengths, make the most of your good points and turn disadvantages to your favour and you will succeed. Anything to which you are truely passionate about you will enjoy and be naturally good at. It's never to late to learn but it's really never to late to be successful, follow your dream and enjoy doing it.

1. Not that I am aware of, false memories tend to be quite rare. 2. Memory tends to relate to conscious interpretation, for example if you see an attractive woman you may well be able to recall her in far more detail than another woman that you didn't think of as particularly attractive. This is because your conscious mind has interpreted the information and prioritised it. In reality you would have recorded the same amount of information about both women as can be seen from experiments under hypnosis. During hypnosis we can see that the brain does actually record all information equally at the subconscious level, however it requires the conscious state to make sense of that information into what we call memories. This processing of the information also assigns a priority factor of how important it is for us to have that information on hand, this affects the speed of our recall process and also determines how much detail we can recall from a particular memory. 3. Nobody fully understands the way the brain works as yet, what we do know is that dreams arn't actually memories at all. They are not a conscious attempt to process and recall information, this is why there is no sense or order to our dreams. Though sometimes they may seem and feel real they are fabrications of fantasy and not based in reality.

If you could respecify the question then you are more likely to receive more help, without more detailed information I can only suggest salinity as a factor. However biochemistry in not my area of expertise.

I have seen no evidence that definitively proves that god doesn't or cannot exist, so I cannot entirely dismiss that possibility, but the evidence suggests it is extremely unlikely. So I must conclude that, given the probability that god doesn't exist.

We all experience many different events during our lives, many are common that most us can relate to, but we are also all unique people with our stories to tell of interesting and unique events. Which of these special events or moments really stand out in your memory and perhaps make you think that these were the best unusual things you've ever done?

Certainly they would perform better in the elections if they didn't keep get caught out lying or being hypocritical, it affects their credibility but then it would with any political party. Even they had a better stratergy for dealing with such events it would help. They need to have policies that actually appeal to the majority of voters as when they do get caught out, after a quick mea culpa so that no real momentum can be built in making a big deal out of their faux pas, they can actually present the public with something they actually want to hear. Also perhaps if they did actually start to introduce some popular policies and have some sort of a clear message they wouldn't need to do quite so much lying in the first place, as it is people seem to think they are far more interested in stopping the Democrats than actually taking the country forward.

"There is no such thing as nothing", this could certainly be correct, very much dependent on which definition of "nothing" you are actually using. I would suggest the most productive definition to prove this statement is correct would be:- "nothing is the absence of anything". Certainly this definition would prove accurate in this instance, as the absence of any properties whatsoever would make it impossible to detect, thus would have no possible interaction with anything else we are or could become aware of, there for to our frame of reference it must remain completely non-existent.

Perhaps those who believe in god are less broken and more stil under the residual power held by the world's religions. It's possibly not unfair to suggest it is only relatively recently that science has sort to offer explanations to questions for which religion has been fielding for millenia. Religion is still to this day capable of doing that which it has always managed to do and that is to grip the imagination and provide a way to conceptualise existence and demonstating an individual's place within it. It offers comfort and security and an end to their need for understanding. By contrast take away a religious belief in god and what is a person left with, a cold unforgiving reality that nobody is truely capable of understanding perhaps, or the lack of certaintity for person's place within the grand scheme of things, most definately no promise of a warm & fuzzy happy ever after. When faced with deciding to choose between a beautiful fantasy or a fearful reality many might not choose an unpleasant truth, even more so when you consider how our state of mental and emotional well-being is also directly tied into the perception of our reality and future. Perhaps willfully ignorant might be a more accurate assessment for the many capable of understanding the evidence, whilst uneducated in the facts and or indoctrinated by religion for others may also apply as an apt description of their condition.