Science help please, I'm not a scientist

[Sternwallow]

Tenspace wrote

Only if the force of the stroke is equivalent to the atomic weight.

And you start with the heaviest element.

Shall we stick to natural elements or must we go to trans-uranic elements for the spank count?

[Kate]

Tenny wrote

Only if the force of the stroke is equivalent to the atomic weight.

Hmm? OH! Spanking.

I had another image there for a sec....that just sounds really, really hot.....

We could start with the natural elements.....see how he holds up under the stress. ;)

[Tenspace]

Okay, who's got the unobtanium? Wait.... these guys sell it:

http://newventuretools.taguspark.pt/...e_process.html

[calpurnpiso]

Tenspace wrote

Okay, who's got the unobtanium? Wait.... these guys sell it:

http://newventuretools.taguspark.pt/...e_process.html

"Hephaestus Materials has developed a range of "metal matrix" composite materials, the "Unobtanium" range based on a steel matrix and titanium carbide and titanium boride fillers. "

Hmmmm...gay metals!!..how quaint....but it is about time.....:)

[Sternwallow]

Tenspace wrote

Okay, who's got the unobtanium? Wait.... these guys sell it:

http://newventuretools.taguspark.pt/...e_process.html

Wonderful looking material. Thanks for the link. :) :) :)

[Sternwallow]

calpurnpiso wrote

"Hephaestus Materials has developed a range of "metal matrix" composite materials, the "Unobtanium" range based on a steel matrix and titanium carbide and titanium boride fillers. "

Hmmmm...gay metals!!..how quaint....but it is about time.....:)

Perhaps we will see Unobtanium in a body upgrade for Gus next season.

Um, you guys realize this is a creative writing exercise for business plans, right? And, anyway, Cal, gay elements have been around for a long time. Just look at fluorine, it will combine with anything, even the noble gases!

[calpurnpiso]

logarithm wrote

Um, you guys realize this is a creative writing exercise for business plans, right? And, anyway, Cal, gay elements have been around for a long time. Just look at fluorine, it will combine with anything, even the noble gases!

:lol::lol:...I stand corrected........vive le bidet fluoridiene...:lol:

[Choobus]

logarithm wrote

Um, you guys realize this is a creative writing exercise for business plans, right? And, anyway, Cal, gay elements have been around for a long time. Just look at fluorine, it will combine with anything, even the noble gases!

that's not gay, that's bi.

You're right...my bad. I had this thought in the back of my head (dope slap!) that gay was incorrect, but, wtf.

[Choobus]

maybe it should be called whorine......

Choobus wrote

maybe it should be called whorine......

:lol::lol::lol::lol: She'll take it in ANY electron configuration! :o

[calpurnpiso]

logarithm wrote

:lol::lol::lol::lol: She'll take it in ANY electron configuration! :o

..what about gayrine, who can open the back door to suck in big electrones?..:)

[calpurnpiso]

anon wrote

I do NOT think you guys are answering the call of the Question. However, you do NOT have to. First, I am a Theravada Buddhist and engage in Insight Meditation. Buddhism as you know is a NON theistic religion. To address your question why you would think I am a Christian, my answer is I am a very accomodating writer, that if you are a Christian and I am writing in RESPONSE to you, I would use theistic terminology. I can use non theistic terminology and if you look up the Abhidhamma, for some of the terms, you will find it will not gel with you, or most at least. The series of toing and froing was in response to a writer who spoke as I thought in prior posts elsewhere about Summa Theologica and Aquinas as if he was concerned of Christianity.

Secondly, my point is science can be a launch pad for understanding the time developmental universe and then philosophy can be a launch pad for understanding the purpose of life. This debate started in a way, because atheists like Jean-Paul Satre, chosen for the Nobel Prize but refused the award, view firmly there is NO purpose in life, and life has the meaning you give to it. I am stating there IS a purpose in life and science is a way to understand THE purpose of life, if science is reflected on beyond the universe's time developmental aspect.

As to why the priest cosmologist addressed me that way as if I am a Catholic, it is because he assumes that questions that are referred to him by a Catholic web site, are coming from Christians interested in understanding the purported literal interpretation of Genesis that contradicts science. As I said, I did not write to him, he wrote to me, to answer a question he was referred to. Apart from that email, I do not know him. But I sure do admire the Jesuit learning like this other Pierre Tielhard de Chardin, a Jesuit geoologist palentologist. If he were alive I would pay a visit to him, but he died 1955. But his works, I do try to read carefully.

Small point, I am a woman, and thinking is not the sole prerogative of man, today. So "GUYS", I expect MORE of you ALL. :- ))))))))

you seem to forget that the BRAIN creates god and gives life a "purpose". These are simply illusions created by a neurological disorder that over 6 million years ago made the brain evolve infecting it with abstract thinking. The brain had to make sense of the world, and due to this anomaly reality begun to be blend with delusions. Today the human brain still has this defect. It is called religious faith. This is the acceptance of irrational c0ncepts as if they were based on tangible realities.
You as a buddhist and believer in souls, spirits is infected by the anomaly. The reality of it all is that our brains CREATE thoughs of God, life after death, and purpose of life, when in reality no brain, NO US! and no way to perceive ANYTHING!. When the brain dies so do we!. The fact is that we can produce ideas of gods and the ethereal by merely INGESTING psychoactive substances. Bumping one's head will do it as well. So, god simply is an illusion and the acceptance of delusions as if they were reality ( the principal tenent of ALL religious beliefs) is a sign of mental illness, not unlike schizophrenia or Temporal lobe epilepsy.

IOW, religious beliefs are a mild form of schizophrenia thus a MENTAL ILLNESS. Faith is for those who are mentally challenged and must have delusions to guide their lives. A mentally healthy person aka atheist, does not need faith to answer questions, simply science and observation. One doesn't need to be infected with religious psychosis to meditate. A simple understanding of the neural work and the self by doing mental excercises and getting educated will suffice....:cool:

anon wrote

I do NOT think you guys are answering the call of the Question. However, you do NOT have to. First, I am a Theravada Buddhist and engage in Insight Meditation. Buddhism as you know is a NON theistic religion. To address your question why you would think I am a Christian, my answer is I am a very accomodating writer, that if you are a Christian and I am writing in RESPONSE to you, I would use theistic terminology. I can use non theistic terminology and if you look up the Abhidhamma, for some of the terms, you will find it will not gel with you, or most at least. The series of toing and froing was in response to a writer who spoke as I thought in prior posts elsewhere about Summa Theologica and Aquinas as if he was concerned of Christianity.

Secondly, my point is science can be a launch pad for understanding the time developmental universe and then philosophy can be a launch pad for understanding the purpose of life. This debate started in a way, because atheists like Jean-Paul Satre, chosen for the Nobel Prize but refused the award, view firmly there is NO purpose in life, and life has the meaning you give to it. I am stating there IS a purpose in life and science is a way to understand THE purpose of life, if science is reflected on beyond the universe's time developmental aspect.

As to why the priest cosmologist addressed me that way as if I am a Catholic, it is because he assumes that questions that are referred to him by a Catholic web site, are coming from Christians interested in understanding the purported literal interpretation of Genesis that contradicts science. As I said, I did not write to him, he wrote to me, to answer a question he was referred to. Apart from that email, I do not know him. But I sure do admire the Jesuit learning like this other Pierre Tielhard de Chardin, a Jesuit geoologist palentologist. If he were alive I would pay a visit to him, but he died 1955. But his works, I do try to read carefully.

Small point, I am a woman, and thinking is not the sole prerogative of man, today. So "GUYS", I expect MORE of you ALL. :- ))))))))

What has this to do with BEAJ's question, vis-a-vis help with science? btw, welcome!