Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 101
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Well I have analyzed this over the last several hours. Here are my results-

    xn+yn=zn has no solutions in integers for n being equal to or greater than 3, therefore God could be the solution to the explanation of gravity.

    Dr. ATM
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    I makes perfect sence if you add the vowel back in.

    Thread Crapper
    ~ August 16,2005 Poll-Master ~
    August 17, 2005 Century Club Member ~ August 29, 2005

    I have a fondness for intelligence.
    I often black out when doing something really stupid. I supose that's why I'm such a danger to my self
    .



  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    I still haven't heard a good scientific explanation of gravity. Curved space-time? Gravitons? Something else? For something so basic in our lives, it is remarkable that science can't explain what it is.
    Sounds like quite a lame complaint to me. As far as anything practically relevant (including sending rockets to space) is concerned, the actions of gravity have been fully explained by Isaac Newton in 1687. Of course there are more detailed views of gravity, and more profound explanations, such as Einstein's General Relativity, but compaining about a lack of "good scientific explanations" of gravity is really far-fetched.
    Last edited by clulup; 08/17/2005 at 03:15 PM.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLiveSoundGuy
    Check again. I think you forgot to carry the vowel.
    How much does a vowel weigh? And then, what would it weigh...on the moon, with less gravity?

    (trying to stear this ship back on topic...)
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    Seriously, I point out the issue about gravity as a reminder that while scientists do the best they can, we still don't really have a clue about the fundamental workings of the universe.
    What are you talking about? The fundamental workings of the universe are extremely well known. Of course we can still learn more, but we know a hell of a lot already. Which question in particular is not answered to your satisfaction?
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    How much does a vowel weigh? And then, what would it weigh...on the moon, with less gravity?
    I know how much "I" weigh. "U" however is none of my business.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLiveSoundGuy
    I makes perfect sence if you add the vowel back in.
    At risk of forfeiting in intellectual credibilty I may have around here, I'm still lost.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    What are you talking about? The fundamental workings of the universe are extremely well known. Of course we can still learn more, but we know a hell of a lot already. Which question in particular is not answered to your satisfaction?
    What happens in a black hole? Why do the laws of physics change as you go from the very small to the very big?
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Sounds like quite a lame complaint to me. As far as anything practically relevant (including sending rockets to space) is concerned, the actions of gravity have been fully explained by Isaac Newton in 1687. Of course there are more detailed views of gravity, and more profound explanations, such as Einsteins General Relativity, but compaining about a lack of "good scientific explanations" of gravity is really far-fetched.
    It doesn't seem "lame" to seek the truth of the matter. While Newton's explanations offer almost perfect predictors of behavior, his theory is simply wrong. According to Newton, gravational effects are felt instantaneously across space. This view requires speeds greater than the speed of light, and was disproved by Einstein.

    For one who values scientific thought, I'm surprised that you are fine with scientific principles known to be false. Close enough doesn't count when seeking the truth, does it? You seem to be a big stickler for truth and accuracy when it comes to the bible - why not the same with science?
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    The fundamental workings of the universe are extremely well known. Of course we can still learn more, but we know a hell of a lot already.
    With answers that were created by, and used by, those that created them.
    ie; Man.

    Thread Crapper
    ~ August 16,2005 Poll-Master ~
    August 17, 2005 Century Club Member ~ August 29, 2005

    I have a fondness for intelligence.
    I often black out when doing something really stupid. I supose that's why I'm such a danger to my self
    .



  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    At risk of forfeiting in intellectual credibilty I may have around here, I'm still lost.
    add the vowel and take away the original 6 from the equation and it's clear as a bell!

    Thread Crapper
    ~ August 16,2005 Poll-Master ~
    August 17, 2005 Century Club Member ~ August 29, 2005

    I have a fondness for intelligence.
    I often black out when doing something really stupid. I supose that's why I'm such a danger to my self
    .



  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    What are you talking about? The fundamental workings of the universe are extremely well known.
    HAHAHAHA! That's pretty funny. Here are a few fundamental questions off the top of my head:
    1. Why does light have a wave/particle duality? How can those particles in light travel at the speed of light?
    2. Which irreconcilable theory is wrong: general relativity or quantum mechanics? Or are they both wrong?
    3. What caused the Big Bang?
    4. What is the force behind gravity?
    5. What invisible force holds a nucleus together?

    While scientists get better at making predictions, they don't have a clue about the fundamental forces which their predictions are based upon. They can explain with accuracy HOW the earth revolves around the sun, they can't explain what the fundamental forces are that cause it to behave that way. (Gravity? It's just there? Right?)
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  13. santas's Avatar
    Posts
    624 Posts
    Global Posts
    641 Global Posts
    #33  
    Wow. I read the title to the thread and thought it was a joke (actually I thought it was a pretty funny one).

    I'm speachless
    Less than 400 posts to get my own little treo icon!
  14. Erch63's Avatar
    Posts
    66 Posts
    Global Posts
    69 Global Posts
    #34  
    That is an article from a humor satire newspaper called the onion. If you have some time to waste or need a good laugh check it out.

    www.theonion.com (I think)
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by Erch63
    That is an article from a humor satire newspaper called the onion. If you have some time to waste or need a good laugh check it out.

    www.theonion.com (I think)
    Yes. He has the link at the bottom of his post. I don't think anyone took the story seriously.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  16. #36  
    Hey ERCH63,
    Didn't you overdose 28 years ago yesterday?

    Thread Crapper
    ~ August 16,2005 Poll-Master ~
    August 17, 2005 Century Club Member ~ August 29, 2005

    I have a fondness for intelligence.
    I often black out when doing something really stupid. I supose that's why I'm such a danger to my self
    .



  17. Erch63's Avatar
    Posts
    66 Posts
    Global Posts
    69 Global Posts
    #37  
    I knew no one took it seriously, and I missed the link. Sorry.
  18. #38  
    Who cares why gravity is here. Just be thankful for it, especially when idiots jump off buildings. We don't need that kind of thinking in the gene pool.
    .
  19. #39  
    If we didn't have gravity, dead birds would stay up in the sky.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    If we didn't have gravity, dead birds would stay up in the sky.
    So would dead people!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions