RE: Dinosaurs

RE: Dinosaurs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Aswad -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 7:42:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus It's a known fact that I can be had for a back scratch and a fairy cake. Tellingly, no one offers either! Aha. I just perved your profile, s'all. It didn't list back scratching. [:D] A couple of hours of back scratching never hurts, though it's hard to keep it light enough to avoid desensitizing the skin when one is unfamiliar with the person receiving it. On the bright side, I also do massages, ranging from splayed fingers (that the right way to say it?) to outright sadism, depending on how hard those knots are and how deeply they are located. There's other areas that can benefit from such use of the hands, too, but I hear it's poor form to mention that, so I shan't dwell on it. ;) Unfortunately, I don't do marzipan, so I'm going to have to bribe the two other ladies into arranging the cake... somehow. See? Now you have offers. [:D] IWYW, — Aswad.

FrostedFlake -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 8:06:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake I hope that patched the hole you poked in mine. Probably did. We can call it a draw if you like? Incidentally, the inflation thing was a sidebar, hence the "anyway" in the next paragraph. If you would like to spar about the idea, we could make a thread about it, but I'm not a physicist and not up for an actual refutation. If you don't want to call it a draw, a starting point for reopening the hole would be that the absolute tension effectively cancels one dimension and doesn't seem to allow for further reduction in dimensionality due to already maximal tension. An increase would be bounded in your model of recursive black holes, as the size is already minimal for the parent space and the curvature of any extra dimensions would be just as flat as the dimension that was effectively cancelled. Given the observation of the trace evidence of a change in dimensionality in our own universe having taken place a long time ago, this fixed dimensionality of a black hole surface would seem to preclude this being a black hole. Of course, there may not have been such a change. A perhaps more plausible suggestion would be a currently collapsing black hole in a higher dimensional universe. Increasing the curvature in one dimension until that dimension starts to approach flatness might give rise to a sigmoid curve from the collapse and simultaneous temporal dilation, resulting in a worldline for this universe that resembles the observable one. Or surface pertubations grow increasingly sparse as the wavelengths elongate from temporal dilation and entropic excess bleeds off to facilitate the most compact and completely collapsed state possible, the infinities themselves being asymptotically approached in local time, with an observable outcome similar to cosmological expansion. The whole dark fluid thing always struck me as the more fascinating idea when it comes to gravitation and the like, this notion of a universe whose space behaves in line with a gravitation based phase change between the crystalline solid of black holes, the glassy solid of mass, the dark fluid around nucleation centers, and the dark gas whose pressure drives the centers of mass apart. Why it's not sucked up by the black holes, I can't recall, though. Just remember it was an interesting read at the time. But, as you can no doubt tell, I'm talking out of my ass here. I really don't have a clue. IWYW, — Aswad. I would be pleased to do so well as to walk away with a draw. I am not trying to do anything so much as have fun. And you are fun. The inflation thing may be a sidebar, from where you are standing. For me, it is the hook on which this line of reasoning hangs. I have never like inflation. Because I could never figure out WHY. Or HOW. I could never get an answer better than, "It's in the book, it's on the test. Do you want a good grade or not?" There is something about it that is just not elegant. I have always had the suspicion it was merely crutch to support a theory that could not otherwise explain the anisotrophy of the Cosmic Background Radiation. "Without inflation (he said as if extolling wisdom) the Universe would not expand fast enough to keep the various parts from equalizing temperature." See also the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The Cosmic Background Radiation shows the Universe has an Entropy Deficit. Implying that it is not isolated. This is neatly covered up by inflation. A blanket to hide from God under. The Big Bang is said to be a Unique Event. Those are pretty rare. Please excuse my doubt. Looking about for anything remotely similar to study inevitably leads one to consider the Black Hole. The closer I looked, the more the model fit. Einstein, with whom I have occasionally tilted windmills, used "Thought Experiment" to achieve good results. I tried it. That made it much easier to step inside the Black Hole. The interesting thing is, the inside of that looks just like the outside of this. Consider that a piece of paper can be bent only 180 degrees. Space can be bent infinitely. Paper, when stretched, tears. Space, when stretched, stretches. Far from being a tiny thing the inside of a Black Hole is essentially limitless, depending on when you are talking about. Likewise Time, when bent and stretched, becomes essentially limitless, depending upon where you are talking about. A microsecond outside the hole could be a trillion years inside it. The reason a Black Hole is black is not that it is closed, it is that it's open. The singularity at the center is a pinpoint speck in what amounts to infinite spacetime. The acceleration it imparts is counterbalanced by the expansion of the spacetime its' presence creates. The Mass the acceleration is not felt by arises from the Energy of the collapsing parent star. Naturally, I did not present this theory in freshman physics. I wanted to pass. Now, let's briefly consider how many Black Holes there are in our Universe alone. And how quickly the Theologians would burn me at the stake, if they could, to protect their flocks' virgin ears from my blasphemous revelation of the truly vast extent of Gods' Creation. Edit : to add one word. Do. An important word, all must agree.

ARIES83 -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 8:17:05 PM)
Yer the correction was correct but I expandeded on what I was trying to get across below the first statement. I'm not saying God "is arn't that is arn't", I'm saying the only way we know he said anything to Moses by the account of it in the Bible, So surely the account needs to be fact, how bout another look at the bolded parts. And before you go off on a spaceship remember, if your to play the advocate, the solution has to be intuitive to the masses, no bible worshiper is going to put aliens in the bible no-matter how hard you try. quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 That is some of what god said to moses, so for that statement itself to be true, it must follow that the account of Moses must also be true. The difference between Moses saying "god said this" and god actually saying it is important for the statement to have been said, The account must be the truth. So Moses was an ok dude, he is popularly attributed to being the "editor" of the first torah (though there is some debate) which consists of five books as I understand it, one of which is the Book of Exodus, in this book, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh." is the response God used when Moses asked for his name (Exodus 3:14). To give credibility to the account of Moses is hard to do directly, what I would probably do there, is find a heap of other accounts made about Moses that are verifiable, I could then say "look now #1 is true, #2 is true, #3 is true, there is a history of his accounts being accurate, so there is at least a some likelihood #4 may also be accurate." One type of account which I believe is the best attempt in the bible to be an accurately, factual record is the genealogy, there are black and white statements saying who exactly people were descended from and who they fathered. According to the Book of Exodus, Moses was a son of Amram ... Now we know that if the genealogy is used right back to Adam as fact then there is the Evolution vs Creation stuff to address, which I'm sure nobody wants to get into. You will most likely have to find a point at which to cut the line and say past this point the genealogy is an accurate account or argue against Evolution. So do you discard Adam & Eve to preserve Moses even though it I think it would be like cutting off a leg and a foot. And since the account is unsubstantiated, a case that lends weight to the account needs to be built... At this point I'm seeing it as a fictional book with the best intentions, but masquerading as fact. Like I said, at least the tiniest part needs to be literal fact or it's entirely fiction. happy hanukkah to tha Grouuunnd! -ARIES You will have to deside if you are going to keep the geneaology then but be careful, If you metaphorize the record that may open some big ass holes, there is a lot of genealogy... Adam is at the moment a basis for a lot of genisis and that is cross referenced a lot... you may be throwing away something solid for airy concepts... The masses need solid. Since theres already scientific findings casting doubt on the bible, moral lessons aside, you may have to either argue against some of the emperical points pressuring it or build up some supporting, reasonable conclusions that can be respected by average people as logical assumptions. So no aliens for you, period. [sm=rofl.gif] -ARIES

FrostedFlake -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 8:40:07 PM)
ARIES I hope you do not expect to find more than a local, tribal, little g god in the Bible. You know, do like I said because I said so. I will strike you and your childrens' children, unto the seventh generation. Fear not, for I am here to test you, and cast those who come up short into a lake of fire for ever and ever and ever. Etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum. Does any of this sound like God? You know, the creator of the universe. The guy with no ego problems. Or does it sound like a weak politician trying to pull a Wizard of Oz routine? I am that I am is a word game. A man, a mouse or a moose could say the same. God did not create the Universe so that you could kiss his butt. He certainly didn't create the universe so that you could kiss the priests butts. Put down the Bible and back away from the god. It's just a story. The only reason it ever caught on is, Jews used to stone folks that didn't buy in. That's over.

ARIES83 -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 8:52:38 PM)
I totaly agree, It's a shame I got a Seventh Day Adventist preaching this stuff to me, and to him all of this stuff is historical fact, and evolution is a lie, demons only leave you alone if gods looking out for you. It's just a shame. What do you say Aswad, we say the Bible is Fiction and leave it there? It does seem like a waste of brainpower... -ARIES Sorry Bible but looks like I'm introducing you To tha Grrooound!

Aswad -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 9:02:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake I would be pleased to do so well as to walk away with a draw. I am not trying to do anything so much as have fun. And you are fun. Thanks. I'm enjoying it, too. quote: There is something about it that is just not elegant. Agreed. And, to boot, some findings seem to suggest that there is interference between coherent wavefronts in the CMB, indicating a point source that appears to carry information across from, well, whatever went before. How you get a coherent wavefront transmitted across a big bang, I have no idea, but the interference pattern should reveal an imprint of the inflationary epoch if it originates prior to it, as the scale would have changed dramatically in that period. I'm aware of no such imprint. Maybe the data is insufficient, but it's certainly something my naive mind would have wanted an answer to. For that matter, temporal dilation in the early epoch, dropping off rapidly, or a later onset of temporal compression, would also be interesting to look into. That would be compatible with the lack of an imprint, but might result in some CMB anomalies that would be revealed by a hyperspectral imager. Unfortunately, hyperspectral imaging in the far infrared is hardly off the shelf hardware and probably wasn't even available on the necessary scale when the CMB data were first collected. Nor is it easy to collect much, as the exposure time will probably be insane. Even compressed sense technology would find this challenging, I think. That, of course, is a nod to your black hole idea. An initial gravitational anomaly doesn't require a black hole, though. Just insanely high concentrations of energy, or something else that will generate this sort of anomaly. Maybe someone was doing some seriously crazy hypertech in a parent universe with a graser (you heard it here first; graviton laser). As far as I know, that can't be done, but who am I to question the parent universe... it would certainly account for coherent wavefront interference, at least. quote: The Cosmic Background Radiation shows the Universe has an Entropy Deficit. Implying that it is not isolated. This is neatly covered up by inflation. A blanket to hide from God under. Someone pumped in a bit too much energy in the beginning, or maybe took some out? Oh, great... McKay!! quote: The Big Bang is said to be a Unique Event. Those are pretty rare. Please excuse my doubt. If one can come up with a simpler, more elegant solution, it is customary to consider it correct. Then again, the conditions would be hard to reproduce, so uniqueness of the event isn't a problem in itself. The real problem in that regard is the uniqueness of the mechanism, or the lack of understanding of why it would behave that way (formulated in a general way that accounts for both now and then). Dark fluid is more elegant, in that it is conceptually simpler to envision the positive pressure of space as a gas that expands, going through a phase transition and behaving differently. Of course, maybe it's just a degeneracy on the level of what you see in a black hole, with an interaction being restored once you get below a critical level. There aren't many candidates for holding the universe together, though, at least not that would be sufficient to slow a pretty explosive inflation down to what is otherwise observed. Of course, I don't even remember the exact "shape" of the inflationary epoch transition. quote: Looking about for anything remotely similar to study inevitably leads one to consider the Black Hole. I'll have to have a closer look at it. The thought (which I snipped most of), or related ones, has occured to me. It isn't entirely satisfactory, though. quote: Naturally, I did not present this theory in freshman physics. I wanted to pass. Sounds familiar. As to vastness of creation and heresy, I am reminded of Tolkien's words to a clergyman on the subject, though they don't spring to my fingers at the moment. IWYW, — Aswad.

FrostedFlake -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 9:08:30 PM)
Wow, Aries. That was quite a video. Hat tip.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/14/2012 9:41:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule I shift paradigms. I can do that just about any moment of the day. High IQ people cannot do that. They are bound by paradigm. If they are real geniuses, they may have about six orginal thoughts during their lifetime. If you are not a High IQ person, how do you know what we are capable of?

Rule -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 12:42:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake Now, let's briefly consider how many Black Holes there are in our Universe alone. None. I am certain that stellar mass black holes do not exist: they are simply neutron stars, I do not know about the mega black holes in the centers of galaxies, but by extension I rather suspect that they do not exist either.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 1:34:02 AM)
I love the joining of scientific intellect, poetry, and interpersonal here. It's goooood.

ARIES83 -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 5:20:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sunshinemiss I love the joining of scientific intellect, poetry, and interpersonal here. It's goooood. This is the most active fourm I've ever seen, ...may be related to the kinky sex in some way... Cough... But it's the two handed typers that make it interesting! [:D]

Aswad -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 5:54:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 But it's the two handed typers that make it interesting! [:D] Hey, don't go dissin' the amputees, it's a kink site, after all. Rampant discrimination... harrumph. [sm=biggrin.gif] IWYW, — Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 5:56:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 It does seem like a waste of brainpower... You seem to neglect that I have some to waste. [:D] IWYW, — Aswad.

ARIES83 -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 6:01:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 It does seem like a waste of brainpower... You seem to neglect that I have some to waste. [:D] IWYW, — Aswad. Put your money where where your beard is! I'm calling you ooouuttt! You have a CMail[;)]

needlesandpins -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 7:22:31 AM)
uuummmmm i have read quite alot of this thread and found myself shaking my head quite alot. Rule, your words are just nuts! from the moment history starts as we know our evolution there is no way we could have evolved enough as hunter gathers to turn into a star faring travelers. for a start it is well known already that we can not build anything near big enough on earth that is capable of deep space travel. these ships have to be light in matter, and huge to support any amount of life worth ferrying out there. so while it is feesable that something happened that wiped out any existing trace of this earlier super brain power humanoid here on earth....erm.....what about on the moon (where it is debateable as to whether we've even actually been there yet according to some) which would have to have been their first port of call? ya know...a stepping stone? and in orbit for the huge craft building platforms and so on? ok so you could say that certain powers don't want us to know that this has happened before so they are keeping it top secret. however, everything that is visable to those powers is visable to everyone else too. i don't think that would stay secret for long. some of our top scientists already say the moon landings by man is a hoax because there is no way we can produce a ship that is light enough in matter to get us there, that can also protect us from the radiation belt we'd have to get through to get on the moon. not only that but you would also need cryogenics (sp) to allow a population to actually have a large enough gene pool to exist once it gets to where it's going. we can only just deep freeze our blummin food for crying out loud, let alone ourselves. there is nothing at all that could wipe out every single trace of a pre existing human population with the ability to get into space, not just to our own moon, but deep space as you claim. pagens did you say? i think you will find that they are a very new group of people compared to how long we have existed, and every other faction who have existed before them. unless of course these pre brainiacs built ships that travel faster than the speed of light, in which case they will have had to have met themselves coming back surely? because i'm telling you now, there is no way they could get far enough away from here in the time allowed, and get back to repopulate this place. they would most probably still be on their way to wherever they set out for. needles

needlesandpins -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 7:53:44 AM)
now for the rest of my thinking. 'god' does not exist. simple. or if there is such a thing as an almighty being that created us it is flawed beyond belief. here's why. it creates us to satisfy its own ego, as a thing that has to worship it everyday, week, year. it gives us a set of commandments that it is impossible to live by, no matter what some may say to the contary. it makes us extremely flawed within our selves so that we are set to fail from the outset. it makes us genetically flawed so that we bare babies that live but suffer. our cells are flawed so that they go nuts and give us cancers. these make us suffer, they kill us. it lets some of us build huge monuments in its name as a place to worship. it allows the gluttony of these people who hoard a wealth of land, and money while the rest suffer. it states that we are not allowed to kill, but does not smite down anyone who does. every religeon has this commandment in some fashion, and yet every single damn one of them think they have the right to do so in the name of their so called god. it lets billions of its subjects suffer in poverty, starve, be abused or murdered every single day. it allows some to commit the most horrendous crimes and does nothing to stop it. oh, apart from casting from heaven's gates? jeeze, now i feel better no being like that above deserves one moment of my time in worship. only comtempt and to be dispised. were such a being to really have created us it is long gone. it nolonger cares for its experiment that is us. its 'mind' is elsewhere concentrating on the beta try maybe. as for the bible. adam and eve. adam was created as the first human. really? why when he has no way of reproducing? if he is the template why the fuck has he got nipples? woman, female is the first creation because without us there is no life. we are the beginning and end of creation. an egg can be brought to life without sperm. sperm can not create anthing on its own. the bible is a male ego creation to set women back, and put themselves forward as the dominant. hence eve being the one to screw things up at the start. those who believe can claim metaphore, and such, til the cows come home to explain the huge discrepancies in the bible, or any other such publication, but it's still twoddle. humans realised that they were flawed. we are fully awear that we are not perfect. what we don't like is to think that it is all our own fault. much better to think of a higher being with a purpose. god for the good, and the devil for the bad. but i ask you to tell me clear cut which is which, because i see no good in a god that allows the shit that goes on in this world, and sits back doing fuck all about it. needles

Aswad -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 9:12:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins now for the rest of my thinking. Dang, that was simple. IWYW, — Aswad.

GreedyTop -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 9:29:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins uuummmmm i have read quite alot of this thread and found myself shaking my head quite alot. Rule, your words are just nuts!snip You could have stopped right there [:D][:D][:D][:D]

ARIES83 -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 1:43:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins uuummmmm i have read quite alot of this thread and found myself shaking my head quite alot. Rule, your words are just nuts!snip You could have stopped right there [:D][:D][:D][:D] I thought he was trying to stir people up? How can he be so blatantly backward on everything... It has to be a joke.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Dinosaurs (8/15/2012 1:48:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins uuummmmm i have read quite alot of this thread and found myself shaking my head quite alot. Rule, your words are just nuts!snip You could have stopped right there [:D][:D][:D][:D] I thought he was trying to stir people up? How can he be so blatantly backward on everything... It has to be a joke. I don't think it is.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125