Should it be easy to debunk or mistrust some results when there are always some people who are finding it hard at believing what they are seeing?

Just a curious thought.

Anyway, found these three web-links thanks to the knowledge of Chris S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_space

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_vector

Very interesting stuff there, but really you need to be a mathematician.

Ouch! Google Street Maps.

Found a very clearly defined UFO when just having a break off in the night and started snooping around randomly (really, that's how things have become - my left arm has halfway vanished when it comes to feeling and movement).

Correct street address for the relevant person here, of course.

Thanks!

There should be no doubt that the notion of religion and religious belief is because of the existence of the church and our current approach of worshipping a possible deity by means of possibly believing in either Jesus Christ or God.

What is meant to be happiness and joy for most people may also end up becoming sadness and tragedy for some of us. This is supposedly something which there may be a logical reason for, but eventually hard to comprehend for those who are becoming victims of such events.

Anyway, if you happen to be an agnostic or an atheist, you probably would love to know about the possible existence of Darth Vader.

He is the commander of a space ship being part of a type 3 civilization which is existing in the Milky Way.

Anyway, this Darth Vader is supposedly an evil man, only obeying the laws as given by the "Emperor".

If that belief of reality is not enough, possible deities (or angels) may have been observed other places as well.

Like for example Harrison Ford, in Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981).

Try digging up some archeological treasures and be prepared for an unpleasant surprise when the situation warrants it.

It just ends up becoming entertainment.

If you happen to be a theoretical physicist, black holes, wormholes and time travel may be on your mind. If you rather want to tell a story meant for younger people which is about possible extraterrestrials, you rather want to tell about "little green men" instead.

Other people are making thoughts about whether we may possibly be visited even in our bedrooms while we are asleep.

Stories about cow or cattle mutilations as well as crop circles and crafts possibly visible in the sky which are not supposed to be belonging to us broadens the picture even more and makes things even harder to explain and hard for most people to swallow.

Even fishermen are not escaping this science fiction story completely either.

The so-called "Shag Harbor" event which took place in Nova Scotia, Canada, probably in the 1980's is still being remembered by those few people who are still alive and became witnesses to the event as it happened.

Again, it Christmas right now, but the celebrations are supposed to end the day after tomorrow.

I never heard of Shag Harbor. I will have to look it up.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Is there a difference between harbor and harbour?

Definitely this story is a true one and an event which actually took place.

Found a YouTube video about this incident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrIPSA9Dz0U

What is the difference between a straight line and a curve?

A straight line is supposed to be a one-dimensional object in space and could possibly be having no limits when it comes to the length which it may be representing.

Bend a line and you get a curve instead. A curve makes out the basic principle for a shape (either two-dimensional or possibly three-dimensional) and may imply gravity as well.

A point is something in space which can not be readily measured. Space as well as time becomes irrelevant inside what we think as being a point in space.

The only thing we know is that time either is at a standstill, runs slower than usual, or is running at normal speed.

Space should be regarded as being three-dimensional. Add time and you may get four dimensions instead.

Unless comparing the annual seasons of the year, or possibly looking at the calendar trying to make a difference between tuesday or thursday (oh, I am getting late at work again), time on its own is irrelevant. Still it is one of the most important things to us in our daily lifes.

In the end time is a measure of differences. It therefore should be possible to quantisize the notion of time.

Check out this YouTube video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ifhOgriECY&list=PLB7AA93B3611ED938

Your opinion please!

What's the name of the creature which supposedly bites off the head of its opponent in order to get a dinner?

Speaking of egg donation, eh. Is it supposed to be for the good or the better?

So it is better doing science than practice religion I guess.

But the problem is all about being able to prove something and being able to obtain some results.

Not just speculate and making wild guesses.

What's the name of the creature which supposedly bites off the head of its opponent in order to get a dinner?

Speaking of egg donation, eh. Is it supposed to be for the good or the better?

Praying mantis? But the female does that to the male after they mate. So as to feed the young when they hatch or pupate or what ever the young do.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Thanks James.

You gave me the correct direction here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantis

Sticking to the scientific part of this. These creatures apparently are insects. Also they are still in existence and have not yet become extinct.

Also they are able to fly and are probably most active at night.

These insects reminds us that science at some times is about the bad and ugly and not the pleasant and delicate opposite Things which may also be found in nature.

Meaning that 0=1

Back in 1987 Steven Weinberg won the Nobel Physics prize for the discovery of two particles (possibly W and X).

This discovery made scientists able to merge the theory of electromagnetism and weak nuclear forces into the theory of strong nuclear forces.

By the way, these three theories are not the result of neither Isaac Newton nor Albert Schweitzer.

So, the question then becomes - how much has been proven and how much is still theory and speculation.

Is it possible to prove anything when it comes to Quantum Theory, or is it all just hypothetical?

One famous equation states that E=mc2. What is the difference between an equation and a law when it comes to mathematics?

Also, where is the notion of time in this equation?

An equation or "=" only means that one thing equals or is equal to something else (possibly more than one thing).

Is it perhaps an assumption that the theory (or two) of Relativity could possibly be merged or integrated into Quantum Theory, or is is possibly meant to be the opposite way around?

Just asking.

680 and not G80 I assume?

Sorry, reading the rest of it did not help. The question is still valid.

Hi, James.

Do you happen to be a nuclear physicist perhaps?

Are you able to satisfactorily explain everything that is around us?

Take the nucleus of the atom, for example.

A nucleus of an atom (with the exception of normal hydrogen) is having protons and neutrons in its core. The proton is positively charged. The neutron is as its name says, neutral in charge. Also the neutron is slightly more heavier than the proton. Also there are electrons orbiting the nucleus, for the most time the same amount as the numbers of protons or neutrons in its core, although they are only 1/1850 (or slightly "more") or so of the weight.

What is the reason that neutrons are holding together positively charged protons? Really, this should rather be an explosive combination of charges or particles, but generally it is not so.

Inflation (which is thought by some people to be "taking off" once more) is a force that is stronger than even gravity. Inflation makes the Universe fly apart and gradually vanish into oblivion.

Please explain these things to me, James.

Thank you very much!

A little more about the so-called Higgs boson right now.

I assume that the existence of this 'God' particle now has been verified by scientific measurements (and not theory and speculation alone).

But apparently there is the fact that scientists are not generally willing to speak of the possible existence of God, neither by means of numbers, religion/faith, or possibly something else, because science is meant to be carried out in an objective fashion, meaning that you are supposed to be either an agnostic or an atheist in order to be able to prove any given facts.

There was someone here who said that Stephen Hawking did not wanted or expected this discovery because doing more research would then be of no value.

Please bear with me on this. I need to go back and read once again what was said. I have not been doing so yet.

By, the way, out of my mind - isn't Stanton Friedman supposed to be a nuclear physicist in the end?

I will check out this with the Wikipedia.

Here is some more about this respected man:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanton_Friedman

Hi, James.

Do you happen to be a nuclear physicist perhaps?

Are you able to satisfactorily explain everything that is around us?

Take the nucleus of the atom, for example.

A nucleus of an atom (with the exception of normal hydrogen) is having protons and neutrons in its core. The proton is positively charged. The neutron is as its name says, neutral in charge. Also the neutron is slightly more heavier than the proton. Also there are electrons orbiting the nucleus, for the most time the same amount as the numbers of protons or neutrons in its core, although they are only 1/1850 (or slightly "more") or so of the weight.

What is the reason that neutrons are holding together positively charged protons? Really, this should rather be an explosive combination of charges or particles, but generally it is not so.

Inflation (which is thought by some people to be "taking off" once more) is a force that is stronger than even gravity. Inflation makes the Universe fly apart and gradually vanish into oblivion.

Please explain these things to me, James.

Thank you very much!

Sorry no I am not A nuclear Physicist. I cant figure out my wife. If I could do that Id be richer than King Soloman:)

---

[/quote]

Old James

holiday

Steve.

I need your help.

I posted a number here some time ago regarding my best gaussian score.

Now I have lost it.

Can you please help me?

Thank you very much!