To post articles based on Heisenburgs uncertainty princple or anything relating to chaos theory on this site.

Each article would get bogged down on with out of the blue "best friend" references.

I would be more then interested to discuss principles of uncertainty, or any other chaotic situations.

The cat is dead.
The cat is not.

FIN.

LOL

I was discussing this with my brother last night

I for one fear the magentic reversals of the poles.

The cat may only be real because your mind says it is.

No need to. Even if the magnetosphere would suddenly wink out, we'd be just fine.

The correct response would be: The cat is only real because it's been observed. Once you have opened the box, it's wave fucntion collapses, thus bringing it to it's current state. However, the issue at hand then becomes what's to say what form you exist in.

thanks for elaborating on the same point. you certainly get a +1 for using bigger words.


The real question is: How does light know we are observing it?

But because the last was was 10 million years ago, no one knows what could happen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_mag...field_reversals

theory = 780,000 years ago.

But doesn't awnser the question of what could happen.

I enjoy watching this: http://endofourworld.ytmnd.com/

Not exactly the same point. You leaned further on the philisophical side. "Because your mind says it is".

You might have meant to be signifying the chemical reations occuring between neurons, but it sounded more like. "I think therefore I am". If that wasn't the case, I apologize.

One doesn't need to know it's being observed to be observed. Light, by itself, as we understand it, is not alive, nor sentient.

This isnt as hilarious as you suggested it would be.

this shit is way too complicated compared to what im used to on this site, so im dropping a tl;dr and leaving

The atmosphere would take over doing what the magnetosphere does now. (For the most part, however, if it were to wink out, animals who rely on the Earth's magnetic field to navigate will have trouble. Human electonic communications and other electronic devices will also probably malfunction. )

Because we're not using the term that would make it hilarious.

no, I was talking about philosophy. but the same concept really holds true for both, as the fact of observing changes the previous state (yes, it's a reach).

Also, I can't remember exactly what it was, but they were studying light (I think it was light), and they theorized that light actually changed based on if it was being observed. Trying to find what it was.

No worries. Theoretical physics sounds very much like philosophy.

And if you find an article on that (light changing based on it being observed), I'd love to read it.

Realized*

No. Relized (apparently) wasn't like that before...

It would be more amusing if you actually posted that you weren't a virgin.

That would have been more amusing had I not been looking over at a picture of my wife and son.

posting in thread

carry on

so?

the only post in this thread that i must agree with

Probably cuz its the only one you understand, dumbass.

no. i just prefer more exact science then philosofy, b/c this theory belongs only there

tl;dr

how do you know it is not exact if it is not exact?

that, that's not your son

The background radiation left over from the big bang, and it's tempature (2.7k) was predicted by, well, theoretical physics.

Now the uncertainty principle, that's a different story.

i'm more fascinated by the aurora borealis

so you are saying that unexact science is exact, thus making mushroomz comment null and void?

that's a porn star's name.

I'm saying all science is unexact. That's why it's science. What we know is constantly being revised.

Some people like to view Science as a religion. Well, the difference with religion and Science is scientists aren't afraid to be wrong, in fact being wrong helps further our knowledge.

Tell the common garden variety creationist that and their head would explode.

On the seventh day, HE rested.