Posts by SciManStev


log in
1) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Scenery (Message 1571888)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
From the top of Mount Washington, New Hampshire.



Steve
2) Message boards : Cafe SETI : Scenery (Message 1571109)
Posted 7 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
From the top of Cannon mountain, after riding the tram with Bernie during his visit last year.



Steve
3) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Time Travel (Message 1568718)
Posted 12 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
The way I see it, you need time to describe the position of an object. You can move the object through a Cartesian plane, and it changes coordinates. The thing is that by changing the coordinates of an object, it is still where it was, at a specified time. Time moves in one direction, but is still required to determine exactly where an object is in space.

An example is that the dinosaurs existed 65 million years ago, and they still exist at that time. If you had a big enough telescope, and could travel 65 million light years away, you could theoretically observe the dinosaurs going about their daily lives.

Steve
4) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Time Travel (Message 1567329)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
Time travel in the forward direction is possible and most likely inevitable for long distance high speed space travellers. But I doubt that anyone will ever invent a machine that you can step into, push a button, and seconds later step out into a different time, either forward or backward.

I totally agree!

Steve
5) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Time Travel (Message 1566993)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
I understand your skepticism, and I share it.
Here is the embedded link explaining a little bit.
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140619/ncomms5145/full/ncomms5145.html

Nature Communications owns Scientific American, so this is a bit more reputable source.

All they did is use current knowledge of quantum mechanics to work some equations.
Mathematical evidence is certainly not conclusive, but it is more than there was. I personally don't think we will ever have a mechanism to travel back in time, even for an elementary particle, but I will look at evidence. If they can back it up with experimental proof, then I would be more open to the idea, once I understand the mechanism. Without experimental proof, it is just numbers.

Steve
6) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Time Travel (Message 1566950)
Posted 15 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
In the article, there is no need for faster than light travel, and they have only theorized about it at the photon level. I am quite skeptical, but am willing to look at evidence whether it agrees with my current understanding or not.

After learning that something actually lived on the surface of the space station for some time, caused me to re-think my position on life traveling on comets or asteroids, instead of just the building blocks. I still think it is more likely the building blocks could be transported over millions of years, rather than life itself, but now I think there might be a possibility that some form of life could survive millions of years in a space environment.

As to time travel, the math is working at a very small scale, but like M-theory, nothing experimental has been done to confirm it.

Steve
7) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Time Travel (Message 1566936)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
I am not sure what to make of this, but it is interesting.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/03/grandfather-paradox-resolved-simulation_n_5758148.html?ir=Science

Steve
8) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD and PSU's (Message 1562177)
Posted 25 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
FalconFly i agree the PSU's i have been using should be enough but there simply not and i can't understand why this is happening even if they only produce 60% of there power it should be enough but it's not .

I have always used Intel and i tell you what if the next PSU fails within a month i'm going to trash this piece of crap and go back to intel and never never use AMD again

The fact that the same PSU used in a Intel q8400 shows the 12 volt at 12.55 at idle and the AMD says 12.3 tells me there is no PSU that will work with this chip at full load and nobody has explained why the voltage is different i suspect it's using a higher voltage to start off with and there is the main problem unless you can explain the difference i can see me trashing this chip and board .

I have ask AMD the same question in a email i just sent to them if they say what your saying i'm gona get real peed off with them

Was the old PSU a single rail?
Wattage is really a secondary consideration, as I have seen 1250 watt PSU, that had multiple 12 Volt rails. The problem with that, is that a CPU or GPU combination can use up all the current for a given rail, while being no where near the wattage limit for the supply.

I use a Corsair AX1200 supply with a single 100.4 amp rail, and ran a heavy load of 975 watts on it for years. It may be getting tired now, but the key was single rail. they have a new Corsair AX1500i that has a single 125 Amp rail.

Wattage is important, but make sure you have all the needed current on your rail, and it won't matter if the CPU is Intel or AMD. If GPU's are loading down the PSU, the CPU will sense it quickly, and possibly crash. A single rail system makes that very unlikely.

Steve
9) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD and PSU's (Message 1562024)
Posted 25 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
Just stick to 1 that only has one beefy 12V rail in it, leave the dual/multi-rail 1's alone.

Cheers.

This is very good advice. Single rail PSU's are the way to go.

Steve
10) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Stardust Team Reports Discovery of First Potential Interstellar Space Particles (Message 1557062)
Posted 36 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
Very cool Lynn! That was very interesting.
Thank you for posting that.

Steve
11) Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Black Holes part 2 (Message 1556175)
Posted 37 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/12/tech/black-hole-nasa-nustar/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Steve
12) Message boards : SETI@home Science : Wildfires In Northern California Threaten The Search For Alien Life (Message 1552649)
Posted 45 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
http://www.popsci.com/article/science/wildfires-northern-california-threaten-search-alien-life?src=SOC&dom=fb

Steve
13) Message boards : Politics : First Scientific Proof Of God Found (Message 1546519)
Posted 58 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
OK. Let me be a bit more direct. By understanding how the Bible got here and why, what it says, and how it contradicts itself, it makes decoding human DNA from such a questionable source, impossible except in your own mind.

Steve
14) Message boards : Politics : First Scientific Proof Of God Found (Message 1546505)
Posted 58 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
you need one of the hand-written originals


As I pointed out by linking you to Bart Ehrman's research, there are no original texts. Only copies of copies, and they were changing constantly.

I know you only looked at two minutes of each video, so you didn't get the evidence. This is true for both the old and new testaments. Bart looked at the oldest texts in existence, then the newer ones to develop a time line of what was added and when. Many times he can even explain why.

The Old Testament had at least 40 different authors, and was written over 1600 years. The new testament had thousands of authors, and evolved as church leaders tried to explain the inconsistencies and differences. It didn't even become a Bible until about 300 years after the time Jesus was alive.

There was so much evidence you passed up, because you only saw two minutes of each video, and decided you didn't like what you heard.

Steve
15) Message boards : Politics : First Scientific Proof Of God Found (Message 1545063)
Posted 61 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
I have my money on Bart Ehrman. He has done the research, and isn't teaching theology, but history.

What you claim as your research is the biggest pile of nonsense I have ever read.

That is my opinion.

Steve
16) Message boards : Politics : First Scientific Proof Of God Found (Message 1544872)
Posted 61 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
I think the actual answer is much more simple for a change.
Did you watch the second video I posted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNn7b_kz9dM

This describes the process that the scribes changed the texts. There were both accidental and deliberate changes. When a certain manuscript went to one section of the region, future copies from that region were changed based on what they were given, and didn't have the changes that went to other regions.

There were numerous meetings between theologians arguing about the different versions. Which ever version won out became Orthodox, and the versions that did not win out became Heretic.

Jesus was not originally though of as God or even the Son of God. That came later as rulers attempted to unify their subjects.

This link describes that process, once again in video, so you don't have to read. It is about 37 minutes long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yte-ad6Y31s

Finally, this is as a more direct explanation of who changed the Bible and why.
It is quite revealing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RduigO1dsrk

Steve
17) Message boards : Politics : How I learned about God - David C. Pack (Message 1544258)
Posted 63 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
Here is more, just over 13 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNn7b_kz9dM

Steve
18) Message boards : Politics : How I learned about God - David C. Pack (Message 1544254)
Posted 63 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
Batter Up,
I have never seen Jimmy Swaggart in action. And I don't want to see him in action either. But i'm glad you enjoy watching him.

Yes, I agree with you, David C. Pack can be very long winded and doesn't actually give you nice quick straight answers. Its like he has scripted his videos to make you watch the full 30 minutes to get the answer you are looking for. And you don't always get the answer.

Either way, he is the best I could find on Youtube. And even though he is very long winded, he does something that other TV style preachers don't do - He backs up his statements with quotes from the Bible that you can check. And secondly, David C. Pack decodes out some of the very complex stuff that is described as Prophesy. And that is why I watch his videos. I need him to chain the stuff together and explain what the Bible is trying to tell you.

This is one of the few forums where sock puppets are permitted. That is usually an immediate ban even if they behave.

???? I don't know what that means?

John.

Here is what I have been trying to demonstrate. This is a video, 8 minutes and 14 seconds long, by Bart Erhman. If the source of Christianity has been proven to be so flawed, how can one make so many determinations based on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ln-S7ZraUc

Steve
19) Message boards : Politics : Afterlife? (Message 1540574)
Posted 69 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
All I do is follow the evidence as best I can, without caring where it leads. If I am wrong, then I will reverse course, and admit it. If I don't know, then that is a valid answer also.

Steve
20) Message boards : Politics : Afterlife? (Message 1540459)
Posted 69 days ago by Profile SciManStevProject donor
The why are we here question does have an answer.
OK got it; it happens. You don't have a clue how it happened or what will happen next. You say there is no proof so it cannot be. There is not one shred of proof that ET is out there yet you search for him. Why scoff at those who search for a reason for being?

I am trying to be as non-offensive as possible, and still give as correct an answer as I can.

It has been demonstrated that people, and in fact children try to put a purpose behind events. Recently, I saw a show that showed a craggy rock and some lions. The children were asked if the craggy rock was there so the lions could scratch their backs, or was it there naturally. I forget the exact number but at least 70% said it was there to scratch the lions backs.

This may have been a useful adaptation, as early man looked for resources, and decided that they could be used in ways other than simple objects. Even now, as I take on some home project, I will find a new purpose for some old piece of wood I was ready to discard.

I am not trying to scoff at others, as believing in an after life can be both helpful in remembering a loved one, or very dangerous in believing that if you blow yourself up and kill innocent people you will be rewarded with 72 virgins.

As for ET, I am going on the high probability that we are not alone, but I have no delusions. The search may never pan out, or it may take thousands or even tens of thousands of years if we discover anything. Given the current very limited way we able to search, I am not holding my breath, but I am a part of that search. In addition to that search, I have come to know people from all over the world, many of which I consider very strong friends. Some think the way I do, and some do not, but they are my friends just the same.

I realize I may be treading a fine line, but my intent is not to scoff at those who think differently than I do, but to point out the best answers I can, based on the information I have available. That information does not take sides, either for the grieving mothers, or desperate fanatics.

Actually, I would do anything I am capable of to help those I consider friends, regardless of how they think compared to me. Helping anyone is actually quite rewarding.

Steve


Next 20

Copyright © 2014 University of California