This thread is for the more intelligent, any intelligent thoughts can be posted here by the more intelligent amongst us.
The thread is dedicated to bosley (bos) who only wants the more intelligent thoughts posted here.

Imagination is more important than knowledge; Einstein

MMMMMMMM, mmmmmmm

Here's a nice one from eric SEO thread.
EWRobson - 05 Aug 2005 22:01 - 8142 of 8143

'Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight!'

This is really intelligent.

http://www.intelligentagent.com/

More intelligent than what?

More intelligent than Bosley? Then how will he know (that they're intelligent)?

More intelligent than me? How will I know?

More intelligent than Driver? God knows!


sd

You may wonder why I am up so late, but then perhaps you never heard of the insomniac dislexic agnostic who woke up in the middle of the night wondering if there was a dog.

woof woof

sd

Up to your old tricks again stockdog ??????????????? SD

From the book "In the words of a very wise man - the quotes of hewittalan6" (available from hewittalan6 publishing at only 399.99 + P&P);

Don't blame the dog - you trod in it

If work was in bed, I'd sleep on the floor

Man with hole in pocket feel cocky all day. Man with hole in both pockets doesn't feel too cocky

Congratulations Driver. A photographic homage to the late, great George Burns allows me to face the miror on a Saturday morning with the comforting thought that things could have been worse.

namreh
I can see the resemblance.

If you yelled for 8 years, 7 months and 6 days you would have produced enough sound energy to heat one cup of coffee. (Hardly seems worth it)

Banging your head against a wall uses 150 calories a hour. (Don't try this at home, maybe at work)

An ostrich's eye is bigger than its brain. (I know some people like that)

Starfish have no brains (I know some people like that too)

I know one like that.
If every Mars Bar wrapper bought in one day were laid end to end, someone would have to pick them all up again. (I think thats it).

Driver - that one about shouting for 8 years for one cup of coffee - I'm not giving up now, I can just hear the wife stirring in the milk!

sd

In the days when I used to work my Japanese boss had the following plaque on his door:

THE PURPOSE OF LIFE IS NOT TO BE HAPPY BUT TO MATTER

I say "borrocks"

It's impossible to sneeze with your eyes open.
I know this.

Did you know that women blink nearly twice as much as men?

Depends whats happening to them at the time.

apart from humans, dolphins are the only creatures to have sex for recreation. Thats what my mate Flipper the scuba diver told me.

I sneeze a lot.

And the first couple to be shown in bed together on prime time TV were Fred and Wilma Flintstone.

my daughter REALLY can lick her elbow ( shes 16 and normally formed ). that makes me VERY intelligent.

My son can lick my elbow - does that count?

superrod, you find something new out everyday..... i never knew that you couldn't lick your own elbow. hurt my neck trying. it's like when i was back at school and one lad used to be able to suck his own c**k!!! nearly broke my back trying to copy!!!! i was so jealous.......

No your right bosley you can't , can some one call me an ambulance.

bos jimmy
May be you two should get together, problem solved.

I suffer from senile dementia - which is great because I get to meet new people everyday

Baza

Theres a cure for that baza, if we give you a dose of parkinsons you'll soon shake it off.
I am a dyslexic, so I've joined the FGOS (British Dyslexic society)
Alan

driver, your reward....

Bos, just to complete the anatomical triangle, if Jimmy can't make it, perhaps your elbow can assist where your mouth has failed you.

sd

bos
MMMMMMMM, MMMMMMMM ZZZZZZZZZZ, zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

driver, blimey , was that a quick five finger shuffle before you you fell asleep?

A pig's orgasm lasts 30 minutes. (In my next life, I want to be a pig.)

The flea can jump 350 times its body length. It's like a human jumping the length of a football field. (30 minutes..lucky pig! Can you imagine?)

I find licking one's eyebrows in winebars and clubs always attracts the expected attention!
Nam

Is the young lady with the large spectacles a relative of the aformentioned George Burns? I think we should be told.

sd, re: use of elbow. i haven't looked but i am pretty sure there would be a website for that kind of thing. i mean , i have found foot fetish sites, armpit sites, gaping hole sites (?), the uses of spectacles as semen receptor sites (cumonmmyglasses.com), and many other idiocincratic sites, but as yet, i haven't come (!) across any elbow sites. i will let you know if i discover one. maybe alan knows .

Here's a handsome pig, driver.



Looks intelligent too.

chocolat, at the moment , that's how mine feel. due to circumstances it's been a while...........

Sounds like bosley has had the snip, It doesn't hurt, does it,Give it a couple of days then get your lass to kiss them better.I hope you have told your doctor to take away the bruising, but leave the swelling.(haha)
That explains why scientists say a pigs orgasm can last 30 minutes.
from
H

Here's a handsome pig at his wedding.

A very intelligent handsome pig taking a dive.

Seems to be an latent infantile fascination with genitalia and sex on this thread. It has long been known that the more intelligent think about it more often than their less well endowed counterparts (ooooh err missus).

Keep up the good work.

Nam

Two very intelligent monkeys posted on another thread by OneChunkyMonkey.

anyone who IS intelligent should read "The Last 3 Minutes" by Paul Davies.

many books have been written about the first 3 minutes of the universe, but this explores just about every possible scenario for the last 3. it seems a very bleak outlook whatever happens.

there is a very disturbing piece about "positive vacuums". very small chaps that appear (in theory) spontaneously, but contain so much energy that should one appear it would annihilate the universe in less than a trillionth of a second.

and now for the REALLY intelligent bit.

scientists at an american university are actually TRYING TO CREATE one.

you couldnt make it up.

Re "positive vacuums".

a parting shot before bed.

every cubic centimetre of the so called vacuum of space contains a billion billion neutrinos.

Beats counting sheep I s'pose.

I was going to write something here , but iv'e been reading the posts and it's far too intelligent for me, i'll have to go back to the NOWT thread..

jimmy, i agree. superrod spoilt it by actually saying something intelligent!!! back to nowt!

I tried to fine some pictures of INTELLIGENT PEOPLE on yahoo and this is what came up !! Maybe i am intelligent .

Driver, why has you got your eyes shut? What ARE you doing with your right hand?

Bosley, The question has to be : How did you know he could suck his....ermm.... and Did he prove it by demonstration?
Just curious
:-)

plantec, he used to demonstrate his party trick in the music room, churches, classrooms, pretty much anywhere whenever someone wanted to see it.

Superrod
Re vacuums. Presumably a vacuum is only a vacuum if it is empty, devoid of matter (wave-particle duality debate aside), thus a vacuum cannot contain a billion billion neutrinos, can it?

This would violate the uncertainty principle by allowing us to give an exact value for both the speed (zero) and position (also zero) of the vacuum. In order to avoid violation of the principle we must allow for quantum uncertainties and therefore apply a non zero value to these values!!! It has been suggested that a vacuum is actually a seething mass of particles popping into and out of existence very rapidly, by annihalating with their opposite number. This theory has given much credence to superstring theory by suggesting these particles originate in one of the 7 extra dimensions required by string theory.
Phew, I'm glad I got that off my chest!!!
alan

SD
It's not me its bos and jimmy after there get together.

jimmy
You don't have to be intelligent for this thread, just say a couple of words on the BIG Bang, OK just the one then.

there was nothing. then there was a big bang. a couple of millenia later there was this thread. the circle is complete.

driver, it could well be. i am what is known as a happy drunk.

thanks alan

As Werner Heisenberg was not my favourite physicist (politics included) shall we dispense we all the delta p.delta h and E(psi) = H(psi) + nonsense crap. Eigenfunctions - smeigenfunctions. More likely to be bowel functions! String and superstring theories are more fudges dreamed up by mathematicians justifying their
grants and massaging their egos.
There, rant over

Nam

i like string.

ps it is the language that is the problem. We tend to use and abuse words and notations which have become accepted in daily use when we should be much more specific.

Rant over (again)

Nam

Sorry meant to say Delta P.Delta x - not h (been a long weekend!)

Nam

Ah. We can agree. All theories regarding the universe should be elegantly simple, in my opinion, and those which are not, may well be wrong. I believe many scientists of the modern era look for difficulties where simplicities exist and overlook the obvious because the simple and obvious does not fit with currently accepted hypothesis.
I would wipe away all physics since the general theory and start again. Too much is based on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and from a philosophical viewpoint, this is only correct while we are bounded by the laws of time. Step outside of time and the uncertainty disappears. I feel certain that the laws of our universe are not constricted by the fastness of time!!
Anyone for religion?
Alan

Now you really are talking cmplex. Too much for my puny intellect. Must go and count angels on a pin-head. Mine!

Man

Ahem - complex and Nam. (lie down darkened room etc etc)

Nam

bos
Nam means this sort of string not what your talking about.

Theoretical physicists today still use a core technology that was developed in the 18th century out of the calculus pioneered by Isaac Newton and Gottfried von Leibniz.
Isaac Newton derived his three Laws of Motion through close, almost obsessive observation and experimentation, as well as mathematical reasoning. The relationship he discovered between force and acceleration, which he expressed in his own arcane notation of fluxions, has had the most impact on the world in the differential notation used by his professional rival, Wilhelm von Leibniz, as the familiar differential equation from freshman physics:
After Newton accused Leibniz of plagiarism in the discovery of calculus, Leibniz' vastly more convenient and intuitive differential and integral notation failed to become popular in England, and so the majority of advances in the development of calculus in the next century took place in France and Germany.
At the University of Basel, the multitalented Leonhard Euler began to develop the calculus of variations that was to become the most important tool in the tool kit of the theoretical physicist. The calculus of variations was useful for finding curves that were the maximal or minimal length given some set of conditions.
Joseph-Louis Lagrange took Euler's results and applied them to Newtonian mechanics. The general principle that emerged from the work of Euler and Lagrange is now called the Principle of Least Action, which could be called the core technology of modern theoretical physics.
In the Principal of Least Action, the differential equations of motion of a given physical system are derived by minimizing the action of the system in question. For a finite system of objects, the action S is an integral over time of a function called the Lagrange function or Lagrangian L(q, dq/dt), which depends on the set of generalized coordinates and velocities (q, dq/dt) of the system in question.
The differential equations that describe the motion of the system are found by demanding that the action be at its minimum (or maximum) value, where the functional differential of the action vanishes:
This condition gives rise to the Euler-Lagrange equations which, when applied to the Lagrangian of the system in question, gives the equations of motion for the system.
As an example, take the system of a single massive particle with space coordinate x (in zero gravity). The Lagrangian is just the kinetic energy, and the action is the energy integrated over time:
The Euler-Lagrange equations that minimize the action just reproduce Newton's equation of motion for a free particle with no external forces:

The set of mathematical methods described above are collectively known as the Lagrangian formalism of mechanics. In 1834, Dublin mathematician William Rowan Hamilton applied his work on characteristic functions in optics to Newtonian mechanics, and what is now called the Hamiltonian formalism of mechanics was born.
The idea that Hamilton borrowed from optics was the concept of a function whose value remains constant along any path in the configuration space of the system, unless the final and initial points are varied. This function in mechanics is now called the Hamiltonian and represents the total energy of the system. The Hamiltonian formalism is related to the Lagrangian formalism by a transformation, called a Legendre transformation, from coordinates and velocities (q, dq/dt) to coordinates and momenta (q,p):

The equations of motions are derived from the Hamiltonian through the Hamiltonian equivalent of the Euler-Lagrange equations:

For a massive particle in zero gravity moving in one dimension, the Hamiltonian is just the kinetic energy, which in terms of momentum, not velocity, is just:
If the coordinate q is just the position of the particle along the x axis then the equations of motion become: which is equivalent to the answer derived from the Lagrangian formalism.
Classical mechanics would have had a brief history if only the motion of finite objects such as cannonballs and planets could be studied. But the Lagrangian formalism and the method of differential equations proved well adaptable to the study of continuous media, including the flows of fluids and vibrations of continuous n-dimensional objects such as one-dimensional strings and two-dimensional membranes.

The Lagrangian formalism is extended to continuous systems by the use of a Lagrangian density integrated over time and the D-dimensional spatial volume of the system, instead of a Lagrange function integrated just over time. The generalized coordinates q are now the fields q(x) distributed over space, and we have made a transition from classical mechanics to classical field theory. The action is now written:

Here the coordinate xa refers to both time and space, and repetition implies a sum over all D+1 dimensions of space and time. For continuous media the Euler-Lagrange equations become with functional differentiation of the Lagrange density replacing ordinary differentiation of the Lagrange function.
What is the meaning of the abstract symbol q(x)? This type of function in physics that depends on space and time is called a field, and the physics of fields is called, of course, field theory.
The first important classical field theory was Newton's Law of Gravitation, where the gravitational force between two particles of masses m1 and m2 can be written as:

The gravitation force F can be seen as deriving from a gravitational field G, which if we set x1=0 and x2=x, can be written as:
Newton's Law of Gravitation was the beginning of classical field theory. But the greatest achievement of classical field theory came 200 years later and gave birth to the modern era of telecommunications.
Physicists and mathematicians in the 19th century were intensely occupied with understanding electricity and magnetism. In the late 19th century, James Clerk Maxwell found unified equations of motion of the electric and magnetic fields, now known as Maxwell's equations. The Maxwell equations in the absence of any charges or currents are:
Maxwell discovered that there exist electromagnetic traveling wave solutions to these equations, which can be rewritten as and in 1873 he postulated that these electromagnetic waves solved the ongoing question as to the nature of light.
The greatest year in classical field theory came in 1884 when Heinrich Hertz generated and studied the first radio waves in his laboratory. Hertz confirmed Maxwell's prediction and changed the world, and physics, forever. Maxwell's theoretical unification of electricity and magnetism was engineered into the modern human power to communicate across space at the speed of light. This was a stunning and powerful achievement for theporetical physics, one that shaped the face of coming 20th century as the century of global telecommunications.
But this was just the beginning. In the century that was just arriving, the power of theoretical physics would grow to question the very nature of reality, space and time, and the technological consequences would be even bigger.


jimmy, I hope your keeping up.

I really must go back to the NOWT thread !! my head hurts....

it's still string.

Driver

That is the abridged 101 version quoted there. Hope Bos isn't feeling too STRUNG OUT!

Nam

I like this bit, so self-explanatory,
Functional differentiation of the Lagrange density replacing ordinary differentiation of the Lagrange function.

String Theory:

Rule No. 1: Don't take your fishnet tights off too fast or you'll look like a waffle.

Rule No.2 - never explain, never complain!

Nam

Hewitts first law; Everything will cost more and take longer than estimated.
Hewitts second law; Hewitts first law still applies even when you take Hewitts first law into account.

too true, alan . too true. i discovered that when i began renovating my house 3 years ago. nearly finished........

So what your saying is , it's going to cost me more and take longer even though i thought it would ...

yes. even though you know it will , it still does......

In a nutshell.......

Its lonely on the nowt thread.

DocProc's Rule No 1: Never miss a chance to either have sex or complain - and don't explain.

DocProc

Before or after, both or either?

Nam

Just got back from the Doc. He said I was a paranoid schizophrenic. Well he didn't exactly say that but we know what he was hinting at.

drivers rule No 2, No 1 is the same as DocProc, never leave a piece of cake in the fridge some one else will eat it.

I thought the Proc in DocProc was proctologist. Don't forget half of analysis is anal.
Keep taking the tablets.

Nam

well said. there's never been a man on his deathbed who has said, " i wish i had slept with less women"

No, but I bet there have been a few who have said "I wish I slept with less woman" !

Nam

yep!! been there!!! ride those waves!!!! yee haaa

I have never gone to bed with a fat ugly woman. However, I've woken up with loads............

I'll have you know I'm a crack investigator!

Probing the dark crannies of the human condition eh. It's a lemon entry my dear Watson.

(Bloody hell, the rag day humour really is to the fore this afternoon)

Nam

A sort of anal fissure-man, you might say.

Nam

This definitely is the thread for intellectuals.

Never worry about what you didn't do yesterday because you can
always try do it today, which tomorrow will be yesterday so you can
try again to do what you should have done yesterday in the future.....
;>)

jimmy
Stop winging and get on with it.

Sorry Jimmy, Guv'nor, touch forelock, cringe and fawn meaningfully.

Discussions on how Soren Kierkegaard's religious upbringing influenced his sphere of thought in existentialist circles are far too mundane for this thread.

And trying to wade through Hume's Treatise always leads to the drinks cabinet for a long session followed by endless hours of mindless bumblings.

Trebles all round then!

Nam

jimmy
I put jimmy in Yahoo and look what came up.

Driver

Put Jimmy only in places your father advised. Sermon over.

Nam

driver,you liar!! you didn't google jimmy at alll...... all you've done is take the glasses off the chimp!!!

It is not possible to tickle yourself. The cerebellum, a part of the brain, warns the rest of the brain that you are about to tickle yourself. Since your brain knows this, it ignores the resulting sensation

There you are an intellectual fact...although if i knew some one was going to tickle me could'nt i do the same ???

We seem to be veering onto a very dodgy path when talking about facts. Always remember that - the truth is more important than the facts - and that in 'civilised societies' there is no such thing as justice, just the law.

My double frontal lobotomies, being antipodean from the cerebellum, has removed all feeling, both sensory and metaphysical from my being. On the upside though, the trepanning of the area at the same time means I pay less for smaller bobble hats. Swings and roudabouts.

Nam

i think, therefore i am..... a thinker. but nobody calls me a thinker.
i build walls ,.........i'm a builder. but nobody calls me a builder.
i make furniture......i'm a carpenter . but nobody calls me a carpenter.
i paint ceilings.........i'm a painter. but nobody calls me a painter.

i shag just one sheep.........

You might think that New Zealand has the most sheep per capita in the world, but here's a fact to turn alan and bosley green with envy.
While New Zealand only boasts 20 sheep per person, the lucky lads on the Falkland Isles, with over 700,000 sheep to 2,000 people get 350 each!

If you were to leave the earth on a ship going near the speed of light, time would go slower for you. Meanwhile, much more time would have passed on earth, and by the time you got back, perhaps everyone you knew when you left would be dead.

Q 1. According to the Theory of Relativity, wouldn't it be impossible to designate which was going fast, the earth or the ship? In that case wouldn't both people on the planet and those on the ship be able to claim they were the ones travelling fast and the other would be stationary?

Q 2. And, in a similar way, couldn't you assume the ship has stayed stationary and it was the earth that sped away at the speed of light and eventually came back to the ship?

Q 3. If you make it sorta kinda 50/50 and each leave the other a the speed of light, wouldn't these things cancel each other out and neither would age?

jimmy
No comment on the pic then?

It looks just like me !

jimmy
Thats good I thought you might be offended.

Boss, second job.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. oops.

Nam

Offended, by you driver ,,never

driver, re post 104. that's a little too close. has someone been whispering in your ear?

bos
My spies are everywhere.

There may be a lot of life in the universe. If so, its a safe bet that most of it will score lower on the SATs than you.
Just consider the situation on one planet: ours. There are millions of species on Earth. Millions. Among this protoplasmic plentitude, how many species are smart enough to be interesting on the telephone or able to help you with Sundays crossword? Well, theres Homo sapiens, and then theres nobody.

ZZZZZZZZZZ, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

There you go driver, he looks intelligent

But he was dyxlexic. What if, when he wrote E=MC2, what he really meant was MC=E2. Modern physics would be knackered!!! Oh yes. Now thats my idea of a fun time!!!!

But he was dyxlexic. What if, when he wrote E=MC2, what he really meant was MC=E2. Modern physics would be knackered!!! Oh yes. Now thats my idea of a fun time!!!!

OOps. Bloody computers on the fritz again. Must be the wrong equation after all, and thats what causes my computer to go wrong.

Nothnig rong wiht biegn dislexxic alen..

There may be a lot of life in the universe. Part 2

Is this a momentous fact or not? Is the circumstance that we can look around and find were the brainiest boffins on the planet merely a trivial result of being the first species able to notice? Or is there some reason to think that intelligence is actually a rare and unlikely evolutionary development, and Homo sapiens has lucked out?

This is more than just another good question to bandy about after dinner, between the cigars and the port. It goes right to the heart of our place in the universe. And its also of obvious and critical importance to SETI researchers. After all, were on a fools mission deploying our SETI telescopes if theres no intelligent life out there.

why would there be any intelligent life out there? there's none in here.

Namreh
sorry for late reply....I HAVE A LIFE...LOL.

a vacuum cannot exist because everything has a vapour pressure ( a few atoms escape from ANY matter all the time ) . neutrinos travel at ( or very close to ) the speed of light so weigh nothing or as close to nothing as makes no odds. every day of your life a billion billion billion neutrinos pass through the average body. the chance of just ONE hitting a body particle in your lifetime is about evens.

and if it did you wouldnt even feel it

superrod, i couldn't find a pic of neutrinos, but i did find some new chinos

oh, heres some.

nah
neutrinos are black, thats why you cant see them.

is that better , superrod?

There may be a lot of life in the universe. Part 3
So how can we judge whether intelligence is a likely evolutionary development or not? We do the obvious, and look for hints in Earths history. Earth is, after all, the only example we have. Since high IQ critters appeared here, theres a tendency to assume that our planet is just another typical, run-of-the-mill rocky world, and what happened on our planet might happen on their planet, too. Sooner or later, intelligence will arise.

But there are flies in this ointment. Sixty-five million years ago, a rock the size of Brooklyn slammed into the Earth, wiping out three-fourths of all species, including the dinosaurs. If this hadnt happened, the rat-like mammals that eventually evolved into Homo sapiens wouldnt have inherited the world. And 245 million years ago, another catastrophe (known in polite society as the Permian extinction) wrote finis to an even larger percentage of species. These cosmic accidents were all forks in the long road that eventually led to us. Maybe on other worlds, the road never gets that far.

That's a pair of dockers bos, do you want those , what size are they ?

Dunno about you, but I can still see them.

jimmy
You keeping up part 4 coming soon.

Sixty-five million years ago, a rock the size of Brooklyn slammed into the Earth, wiping out three-fourths of all species, including the dinosaurs

That's the bit i don't get driver , if the rock was the size of Brooklyn how did it do that much damage ?unless three fourths of the species just happened to be in that area , maybe there was an event going on and they were all congregating in one place..Does that sound sensible ?

jimmy
No, it was a big rock

You've lost me again , i thought i was starting to sound intelligent.

Maybe it was a rock like this.

The rock you mention caused utter devastation everywhere, except in Australia!! Scientists at Leeds University have hypothesised that this is because Cathy Pacific and Quantas had not yet been formed and nobody went there. On the intelligent life debate, Drakes equation shows that the universe must be teeming with intelligent life in all places except the obvious (the surface of stars, Manchester, etc.), but the really significant thing about drakes equation is that it looked really good on a T-shirt until the day when people started wearing one that said "Frankie says Drake knows jack shit".

Who's Drake??

Charlie Drake..

Francis Drake

Brittney Drake

All Drake's

if i had to chose a drake for company on a desert island , i think i would have to go for brittney. i think the conversation would be rivetting!!!

Can't imagine for one moment what made you think of rivets (Oooo-errr, matron).

nice chinos bosley......hope they are paid for .

now here is a poser.

you are in a lift staring down the cleavage of the woman opposite. THEN.....your worst nightmare. the cable breaks sending you to a very messy death in the basement ( forget the auto brakes ). OR DOES IT?

what actually will happen is that the lift will shoot UP to the top of the building where you will be squished anyway. at least the surprise wrt direction will take your mind off your impending demise.

not a lot of people know that ( ask a lift engineer ).

A bit of non intelligents or from the unintelligent

insiderinside - 11 Aug 2005 07:11 - 8299 of 8305
Lets take 4 words
Due
Responsibility
Diligence
Accountability.
All just simple guesses and IMO and must not be misunderstood of course in the event you could misunderstand any meaning you should ignore this post.

I would very happily ignore all ii's posts were it not for the inherant comedy value.

There may be a lot of life in the universe. Part 4

On the other hand, there are some common behaviors among animals that seem to favor intelligence. Social interaction, for example. If youre a critter that hangs out with others, then theres clearly an advantage in being smart enough to gauge the intentions of the guy sitting next to you (before he nabs your mate or your meal). And if youre clever enough to outwit the other members of your social circle, youll probably have enhanced opportunity to breed (to put it graciously), thus passing on your superior smarts.

Predator-prey relations are another type of interaction that can ratchet up intelligence. When a lioness catches a wildebeest, shes more likely to snag the dumb one that wasnt paying attention. Result? The lioness has a meal, but the average IQ of the wildebeests has been raised. This puts the lions under increased pressure in running down their next meal, and the dumber cats will preferentially drop out of the gene pool. Both predator and prey will be under selective pressure for intelligence.

All of this sounds as if Nature whether on our planet or some alien world will stumble into increased IQ sooner or later. But keep in mind that many of the dinosaurs were in predator-prey relations (and may have been somewhat social, too). Why didnt they get smart? After all, they had 140 million years to do so.

When it comes to the evolution of intelligence, the bottom line is that we dont know the bottom line. And indeed, we may never know how likely it is that intelligence will appear unless and until we find it elsewhere. So well keep deploying those SETI telescopes.

Cosmic !!

i just love photos like that. WHY is it that my wife will see something like that and just shrug her shoulders? i have found that women in general ( no offence to the MORE INTELLIGENT ), think the sky just consists of the sun, moon and the few stars they can see through the light pollution. the missus cant even see that the stars she CAN see are different colours ( and yes i appreciate that most of the spectacular photos from deep space are colour enhanced ).

They prefer to read them than look at them!! Why?. Another one of lifes mysteries! That picture is amazing.

superrod
May be if this was real she would understand.

This is a good one.

saw a guy on holiday painting pictures like that with spray paint. superb!!

and me in Canada (Vancouver Island)!

Anyone like the fantasy art of Boris Vallejo?

NO was my answer ( til i saw the second one LOL ).

What a genius , got any more Doc !

Nuclear fission is the splitting of an atom into several smaller fragments. This is induced by bombarding an atom of fuel (usually uranium-235 but could also be plutonium-239, uranium-233, and possibly thorium-232) with neutrons. The fissionable atom then captures the neutron and splits (decays) into two smaller atoms (isotopes such as iodine-131, caesium-137 and strontium 90) and two or three neutrons, which go on to split other fissionable nuclei resulting in a chain reaction.
The combined weight of the fission products is less than the weight of the original nucleus and following Einstein's E=mc2 this loss of mass (about 0.1% of the original mass) is converted into the massive energy output of the reaction.

There are many problems with this technique, the most famous and most crucial is the safety aspect. The products of the fission are all highly radioactive and the process itself results in a substantial amount of both beta and gamma radiation. There is no safe, permanent way to dispose of the radioactive products and further safety issues arise in the mining, refining and transportation of the fissionable material. Also the consequences of incompetently operated reactors was made tragically clear with the Chernobyl disaster.

And add to that scenario, some religious fanatical hatred or even a very slight potential risk towards such, and we can begin to see why, if Iran don't reduce a nuclear risk to external countries and communities, then someone lke the USA or Israel, will reduce it for them.

PS. Look at the following for Boris Vallejo art on the Internet:-

Boris Vallejo

well after enjoying all the intelligent conversation I thought I should contribute to the debate on gender issues and perhaps why boris and the stars don't quite work on the female of the species....now I think I learnt how to operate the top of the machine when I was about 12..now i'm 37 and as for the lower part i'm still trying to find the missing pages of the manual, you know the ones, the bits that the suppliers think are too obvious to bother writing down but everyone gets stuck on....to press the green one before the red one, or vice versa? or is that only in the morning?

which is the button that activates the woman ultimate get out clause whenever she is losing an arguement, the one that activates the line, " yes i know that's what i said , but that's not what i meant!!!"

nice tits on the pics , btw.

Hmm...that's a superlarge pink LED for the blokes.

that's alan's feminine side!!!

A bloke just needs something sticking out and a little pink thing near it and he can do it.

Out of all the millions of different ways to help a lady turn on, can you find the right one? Some will need them all. Some will need them all and in the right order too.

Q. Does knob size count?
A. Only if it has writing on it!

chocolat, it makes the women feel more at ease and less defensive

No one got any thing intelligent to say while I have been away.

me and baza had a blond moment today........ well i did and told baza about it and he agreed so he's just as blond.

The orbit of a particle near a black hole depends on the curvature of space around the black hole, which also depends on how fast the black hole is spinning. A spinning black hole drags space around with it and allows atoms to orbit nearer to the black hole than is possible for a non-spinning black hole, as seen in the right-hand artist's rendering of a stellar black hole. In the left one, no evidence for spin was found.

A supermassive black hole at the center of this galaxy, Centaurus A, blasts two jets of high-energy particles into space. Astronomers use the outflows to help them understand the shape and physics of black holes.

Even the fish arn't real?????????

Intelligent thoughts in the box below please.

Would just like to say that I can't make my mind up about the uncertainty principle.

Secondly, if nothing can travel faster than light, how come the dark always gets there first.

Answers on a five pound note to my usual address.
Alan

Al
You need to read this.

Yep, read it. All 13 words (including the long ones). Now what??
Alan

Tesla technologies?

Nam

Got a bit of a conundrum here guys. I've just pushed the button on my keyboard marked "pause" and nothing happened. This has led me to the Zen like question; Is it working? I think my head is about to explode as I try to unravel the complex logic on this one.
Alan

I haven't got a "pause" button does it look like this.

Or like this.

Doesn't Leanne look great in a bikini? She has a great belly button.

Who's Leanne?

Took you a while to come up with that Saintserf ..

jimmy, i did wonder who leanne was myself and was going to ask , but something distracted me............. anyone for toasted baps?

Another Leanne?

Thats a nasty bruise on her thigh. Wonder if she got it falling off her chopper?
Still, she should be safe. Its important to wear leather when riding one of those.
Alan

Brrr are you kidding.....in this weather!
lol
;>)

How about a quad, bunnie?

Can't wait till that one falls off.
I've got Knife fork and gravy boat ready.
Alan

mmmmmmmmm

THATS MORE LIKE IT!!

Oi - wotchit

Blimmy all the nutters have arrived on the more intelligent

Nice one chocolat , all called mr white.

Can everyone get back to the NOWT thread , this is drivers for intelligent people only..

Sorry about that Jimmy.
Erm, can you give me directions, please.
Alan

Jimmy
Stay your OK.

After hours RNS:

It has been confirmed that the More Intelligent Threat (MIT) has received a takeover approach from the Talk To Yourself Thread (TTYT). The board of MIT will consider the offer and report in the foreseeable future

the board of mit convenes to discuss ttyt's takeover bid.....

I can confirm that the offer has been turned down, the board are considering a hostile take over of (TTYT).

The ,more intelligent.

Loving this thread - lmao!!

A thought for the day:


I'd like to die peacefully, in my sleep, like my grandfather.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not terrified and screaming, like his passengers.

soul traders
Nice one (Driver)

Scientists have discovered water on one of Saturns moons today, giving rise to the hope they might also find life.
Yorkshire water have imposed a hosepipe ban since there has been little rainfall on the moon for several billion years.

Al
Looks like quite a bit of water.

http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96781308/K=Saturns/v=2/OID=78195d1e5f2fac3e/SID=e/l=VDP/;_ylt=A9iby0e9WBFE3UEACBj8w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=126g9nh2b/EXP=1142073917/*-http://www.jaky.sulinet.hu/space/SaturnsTitan.mpeg

That won't stop Yorkshire Water. All they need is about 20 minutes without rain and they cry shortage.
Its a constant problem here in Gods own county, but I have the solution.
Everyone should be made to dilute their water so it goes further.

Well its p**sing it down here on the radio yesterday they said we could see stand pipes next week.

been saying for a long time now that we need more reservoirs, you know more people, more dish washers, new attitudes towards you must 3 showers a day, more bidets, more larger, more natural water (filled with tap water) WE NEED MORE RESSERS, but too intelligent for some. durh!!

Or a French approach to personal hygeine.

Kivver
I can't see how it can help.

well, we need somewhere to dump our insurance write offs.

just a small input


when i was at south east london tech in 1977, we did a thing called the Hopkinson test ( electrical engineering ).

this involved two similar motors, each rated at 100Kw.
one was connected to the other via their drive shafts.
one was powered from mains electricity acting as a generator for the other whos output was fed back to the first....a lesson in perpetual motion....

i can still remember how amazed i was to see 2 100Kw motors running flat out and the only power input was 1Kw. ( from mains electricity ), due to losses wrt windage, resistace, etc

Probably cos of Quantum and the space-time coninuinuinuum.

Al
I think you are properly wrong again in your assumption that it was Quantum and the space-time coninuinuinuum, The fabric of space-time is thought to be "foamy" rather than smooth, that explains the phenomena such as radioactivity and antimatter, and no other theory can match its description of how light and particles behave on small scales. There fore its is of no surprise to see 2 100Kw motors running flat out and the only power input was 1Kw

However it must be wrong.
All theories must be wrong, for a given value of "wrong".
No theory, past or present can predict accurately both the small scale world and the large scale universe.
String theory attempts to, of course, but it relies on the dubious mathematical trick of "renormalisation", where infinities cancel each other out.
There are those that argue the reason no theory can describe everything is down to our inability to understand increasingly complex theories well enough to make the predictions accurately.
For my part, I tend towards the strong anthropic principle that answers the question ; "Why are we here?" with the answer ;"Where the hell else should we be?"
The debate therefore becomes whether the anthropic principle is a dereliction of a scientists duties, or a willingness to accept that the universe is not as mathmatical as we think. I would argue that if the famous uncertainty principle is correct (and the foamy universe relies on this somewhat) then we can never really predict anything from our theories as all the values we apply have to be approximations and where we use an approximation, the result that emits from our beautifully constructed equation has to also be an approximation. The goal of science, therefore has to be finding answers that are less wrong, rather than finding answers that are right.
Alan

MMMmmmm I will have a think on that But you are properly wrong again!!!!

You told Kivver I needed his help!!!!!!
It's you thats stuck for a response!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alan

Youre having a laugh stuck for a response, go and sell your BBC.

"Why are we here?" with the answer ;"Where the hell else should we be?"

Al thats probably the most intelligent thing ive ever read , thanks for sharing that , now iv'e just got to sit down and get my head round it ,this could change the meaning of life for me, ,and anything i have ever believed in ..

Al
I have thought about it, I think that the anthropic cosmological principle asserts that the laws, constants and basic structure of the universe are not completely arbitrary. Instead they are contrained by the requirement that they must allow for the existence of intelligent observers, ourselves.
Example: Why is the visible universe about 15 Billion light years in diameter? Because that means the universe is about 15 billion years old. Our sun is at least a second generation star because it contains Carbon, Oxygen, Silicon and other elements. It had to get them from earlier stars that had exploded--they were not available just after the big bang (which could only have produced Hydrogen and Helium). Hence the sun as we know it could not have existed much earlier in the history of the universe. Since we in turn require those elements, we could not have existed in a much earlier phase of the universe. You also have to allow a few billion years for evolution. We see a universe that is 15 billion light years across because the universe had to grow to that size to permit us to exist. We could not, incidentally, observe a universe that was a lot older, since by that time the stars will have burned out and there will be no available energy to support life. Many other examples are discussed in the following references.

There are lots of other facts in physics, astronomy, and chemistry, that can be interpreted in this manner. You can argue that this is all coincidence, and some of these observations have been referred to as "cosmic coincidences". You can also argue that this is obvious--nothing else would be possible. The subject is very controversial.

One aspect of this is that the Principle asserts that there is something special about our place in the universe. The example above shows that we must live in a particular segment of cosmic history. This goes against the general trend of science since Copernicus; that there is nothing special about our place. This makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable, but I think it is hard to dispute, THIS SHOWS HOW WRONG YOU ARE..

The Anthropic principle actually argues that there is nothing special in our place and time in cosmic history. It argues that in a series of universes (either cronographically a series or as the multiverse theory), conditions must arise at some place and time that are suitable for intelligent life like ours and that the intelligent life should not therefore be suprised that the conditions at this point are perfect for them.
The part of cosmic history we reside in therefore becomes irrelevant. It must exist at some point, and that is the only point we could possibly observe, so the only sense in which it becomes special, is that it has observers.
It becomes even less special when you take into account the number of states in which intelligent life, and therefore observers, could exist.
We are not equipped to understand any other dimensions than the 4 we posses, but there is nothing to say intelligent life cannot exist in a greater number of dimensions.
If this is held to be true, then our current position in space and time become even less remarkable, as others may have existed before or after us or in other universes, and we are not, after all, a one off.
Alan

Al
Shall we call it a draw?

Go on then.
Due to the uncertainty principle we could never be sure who had won anyway.
Alan ;-)

:-)

Al, no wonder your posts on the NOP thread are so laconic - you spend most of the day arguing quantum physics on here!!

Its much more fun tearing holes in the fabric of the universe than making money.
Anyway if I make any more money, I will breach the Chandheskhar limit (think I spelled it right) and all the cash in my wallet will rush exponentially into a collapse that will create a black hole, from which nothing, not even the price of a pint, can escape.
Then what would I do????
Alan

Perhaps start taking your tablets again.

Can't afford 'em, fred, since I put my money in YOO!!! I know less about investing than I do about Physics, and I know nowt about Physics!!
Alan

Al
You can say that again.

Did you know that today would be Albert Einsteins 127th birthday???
Of course, he still has a bit to do to prove himself worthy of posting on this thread.
Alan

Ive eaten all the cake.

I think the caption should be "Any Essex girls here? I'm on the pull"

Are you sure David Essex has any daughters Al?

Kims getting all Metaphysical again.

Not into heavy metal Al, more soft rock me.

PapalPower
pp's interpretation of cusp

The transitionary point perhaps, on the cusp of something means, it nearer than near but not actually happened yet, but it will in a very short space of time :

I've got to examine this a bit more.
So. if something is "on the cusp of hearing" does that mean;
a) You can hear a sound that hasn't actually happened yet, but will very soon, or
b) You can hear a sound, just before ears have been invented.

Whatever the answer, WOW.

BTW. Speaking of a very short space of time (and remember time is something humans invented to stop everything happening at once), the shortest time interval known to man is the "Central London Second".
This is measured as the amount of time between traffic lights in central London turning green and the black cab behind you blowing its horn.
Here we encounter a paradox.
If you turn your car stereo up full blast, then the cabs horn will be on the cusp of hearing, therefore you will hear it slightly before it is blown, ie in a shorter time frame than allowed for by the "Central london Second". This breaks the laws of Physics. Therefore you must never hear it, in which case the "Central London Second" is dragged on for infinity, and time ceases.
The lesson is that turning your car stereo on too loudly in central London will result in either a breakdown in physical laws and the end of the universe, or getting a black cabs wheel brace wrapped around your ear.
Interesting.
Alan

This looks more interesting a cusp on the sun.

Mmmmmm interesting.

Alan,

"on the cusp of hearing" ?? I thought cusps were part of your teeth, not your ears.

If I'm wrong, now I at least know why I've always hated going to the dentist.

These were the days, Eh?

You can't stop the waves but you can learn to surf!

Wearing a shirt like that automatically disqualifies one from this thread.

Explore, Search and Discover

Download the new Google Earth you can switch from earth to sky.

http://earth.google.com/tour/thanks-win4.html