Who said I hated science? I said science will never give you the sense of fulfillment you are looking for. Read the Bible and you will find God.
Evolution is science. You disdain it. Your mockery of such empirical evidence and sound logic is telling.
I'm not looking for fulfillment. Science is very fulfilling. You would know if you actually accepted it. The bible, on the other hand, is not fulfilling at all if you have a shred of common sense.
Obviously not if you feel the need to mock people who believe in a creator. Why bump a thread that was already dead? Just so you can feel better about yourself or to reassure your belief that we came from a fish? Come on man.
By the way, I grew up having to go to church and being forced to go to CCD (AKA brainwashing camp) after school. Even as a kid, I knew it was all bull . It's hard to believe an adult could still believe in stories like Noah's Ark.
Sounds like a personal problem to me. Don't blame God for your brainwashing and bad experience, other people may have been responsible for it but not God. Why is it so unbelievable? With God helping anything is possible.
I do have a personal problem with fraud. What does "with god helping anything is possible" even mean? We know for a fact that a lot of devout Christians pray for things to happen everyday... often for legitimate selfless things too (i.e., not just for a new Ferrari or to win the lotto) and they don't have their prayers answered.
Getting "fulfillment" from a magical invisible sky man and his book of fairy tales
Who says they're fairy tales?
I do get a fulfillment out of reading the Bible, is there a problem with that if it's my life? Where do you get yours from? Spurstalk?
That's not how God works, and no true christian with real knowledge and faith in God would pray to win the lottery.
" Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.” -Matthew 19:24
I know, that's why I say "Not". There are devout Christians who get cancer and pray for a cure that never comes or for the return of a child who goes missing and never returns... there are probably tens of millions of prayers that go unanswered by God that are NOT related to wealth.
Like I said, a complete fraud.
And if praying for legitimate selfless things is not how God works, then how does God work? You can't give us a distinct proposition of this without it getting easily exposed as fraud.
Good thing Jesus died for my sins
Your avatar is Goku sjj4 no? Why his face is look weirdz though?!?
should of rolled a joint on this episode... trippy episode.
People with logic and common sense.
An astist's rendition of an X-ray binary (like Cygnus X-1 talked about last night):
A better discussion:
The equation at the end comes from the conservation of energy. Initially the potential energy U = 0 since we drop it from infinintely far away and kinetic K = 0 since we drop it at zero speed. So E = 0 gives the total mechancial energy. Since it crashes onto the neutron star with potential U = - G * M * m/R and kinetic energy K=1/2*m*v^2, by the conservation of energy we have 0 = E = K + U = 1/2*m*v^2 - G*M*m/R.
No it's SSJ4 Nigel Thornberry
Ah man, this thread. You try to actually talk science and it's ing crickets.
I'm not anywhere near that level to form a decent response.
Thanks for posting though. That's incredibly amazing .
Walter Lewin going off on a tangent in his intro mechanics physics class at MIT.An astist's rendition of an X-ray binary (like Cygnus X-1 talked about last night):
A better discussion:
The equation at the end comes from the conservation of energy. Initially the potential energy U = 0 since we drop it from infinintely far away and kinetic K = 0 since we drop it at zero speed. So E = 0 gives the total mechancial energy. Since it crashes onto the neutron star with potential U = - G * M * m/R and kinetic energy K=1/2*m*v^2, by the conservation of energy we have 0 = E = K + U = 1/2*m*v^2 - G*M*m/R.
He retired but was very good. Notice the slice of cantaloupe on his sweater...
The artist's rendition shows visible x-rays, that would be artistic license.
Indeed it does. Don't think anyone would get too excited by a rendering in the visible spectrum. You ever seen his lecture on Rayleigh scattering? Or his rainbows lecture from 8.03?
Not really a tangent though, as he discusses astrophysics all the time in that group of lectures on angular momentum from that course. The collapse into a neutron star is so much more interesting than the iceskater pulling her arms in and speeding up when discussing the conservation of angular momentum.
No. I mostly watched the mechanics.
So now question for the board since we all watched the Lewin lecture above:
what would the largest theoretical radius our sun could be to form a black hole (answer in km)?
I trust you can look up the mass of our sun and the universal gravitational constant...
Baselinebum can't answer.
You want crickets, I'll give you crickets.
Yes but within that there is discussion on E and M, which I don't think these kids have taken.
It's all good, he relates stuff to his interests and research, many profs do this.
Personally I think changing the moment of inertia by spinning a student in a chair holding weights out and having them pull the arms in is damn neat. Or get on those horizontal merry go rounds on a playground and have everyone walk towards the middle except one person... Damn fun.
Last edited by pgardn; 04-01-2014 at 11:32 AM.
Ok I'm going to do some work now.
i will post the answer when I am done with the work.
you don't want to be disappointed so I expect answers before I return about 3 CST (Boutons especially)
Ready, start.
I think so too, but no way that competes with stellar collapse!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
