Every once and a while I'll get struck with little bits of revelation or new ideas or old thoughts that I haven't thought on for quite some time.
Today I came upon the thought that although Western Civilization may be based on the ancient Greeks a vast portion of our modern civilization (past 500 years) actually comes from Germanic roots.
English is a Germanic language
Celts are derived from the Germanic regions of north and middle Europe.
Christmas trees, as we know them, come from Germany.
Modern thinkers:
Einstein, Bach, Brahms,Handel, Nietzsche, Mobius, Ostwald, Planck
Popular culture:
Hedi Klum, Claudia Schiffer, Arnold Schwarzenegger
Not to mention the royal families of the UK, Denmark, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands even Spain.
And so much more. Just rather interesting to think about.
4 Questions to Never Ask Your Guy
by Cosmopolitan.com, on Wed Nov 12, 2008
~~I think these are great questions to avoid and can be adapted to gay and straight couples, Xzavier~~
Unless you want to bruise your love bond, these questions are best left unasked.
1. "Am I better-looking/smarter/etc. than your ex?"
Would you want him to ask you that? If he answers yes to your q, you'll wonder if he's lying. If he says no, well, can your really handle that kind of truth? He's with you now, not her, so just don't even go there.
2. "Do you love me?"
Has he used the L word already? Well, there's your answer. If he hasn't--and you absolutely have to know where he stands--you might start by telling him how you feel about him, rather than putting him on the spot with a needy question.
3. "Can you lend me some money?"
A few bucks is fine, but asking for anything substantial (like a down payment on your car, a month's rent, etc) is unfair. You don't sleep with your bank teller, so don't borrow cash from your boyfriend.
4. "Are you cheating on me?"
If he's innocent, he'll resent the question. If he's guilty, chances are that he'll lie...and even when you have info to backup your suspicions, you better soft-pedal your accusation. If you're wrong, your relationship may never recover.
COMMENTS
Yes those are good questions to never ask.
I agree I've never asked any of my ex's such things.
Many of my friends argue a lot because of these questions especially no1 and 4.
Jeese I don't know what the hell is wrong with certain women, leave the bloody ex's out of the relationship!
hmmmmmmmmm
Before asking question number two...I like to get em in an arm lock.
Sometimes some questions you just don't want the answers to.
I am stuffed with things like that since I find it acutely painful to lie unless it is damn near life and death. I hate feeling cornered so I am in full agreement.
You know I get really tired of seeing womens breasts, and no it's not because I'm gay.
It seems like thats all anyone ever cares about on a woman are these two bags of fat (hey thats what they are). I understand straight men like them and woman should be proud of them but seriously folks, is that all you have to offer? Is that all you care about?
Yeah I really like seeing a guys cock and ass but if I had to choose between his dick or his face I'd take his face. A face has much more to offer, much more dynamic and and can keep a gaze of lust, heart and mind.
Everywhere I look it's "boobies boobies boobies!" It's annoying and generally pointless, that's what it is. Sure have fun with them, don't be afraid to show them off but don't let that be the focus of everything.
Plus (as for avatars etc) did you ever think that not everyone wants the first thing they learn or see of you is a shirt filled with flesh? I can appreciate a womans body (trust me I can) but I'd rather engage your eyes and smile before I turn jealous your rack is bigger than my first car.
Perhaps I'm rambling but honestly I'm getting tired of "fun bags" just as I'm getting tired of seeing only a guys package or ass.
I'm getting tired of women only showing off one bit of flesh that has as much use as a spare tire round the belly when not in service for babies. I'm getting sick of the statement (intended or not) that the only good thing about being a woman is having breasts. I'm getting tired of straight men acting like total pieces of shit by only caring about a girls rack. I'm getting tired of having nipples and large round things in my face when I'd rather see muscular pecks to please my pecker and a genuine smile to satisfy both my heart and mind.
Come on is that really all a woman is, a body?
Is that all anyone is, flesh?
Hell, my own body is nothing to laugh at and Ive got parts of me that would turn most heads. I've never been denied sexually and thats no exaggeration. However, if my body is something that's so obvious, if it's something that only has one purpose then why would I want to focus on it? You know what else is amazing? You know what I've got that everyone can appreciate, that many could be jealous of, that isn't so "instant gratification? A mind, a brain that weighs 3 pounds that can do more to your mind and conjure up more things to do to your body than something as simple as your breasts or my cock n ass.
Be sexy, get laid, show off, work hard so you look fantastic but don't make me have to ask if you're a hooker or not. Don't make me feel sorry for the kid(s) you're raising when all anyone who's around them ever cares about is some body that will turn to goo faster than the scars of emotional and sexual trauma will heal.
Maybe I've gone a bit nuts, I hope I've just learned that the body really isn't everything.
--X
COMMENTS
boobs , for those who love em no excuse is needed....for those who dont none good enough lol
Boobs are boring.
[/mesmerizing statement]
Doc,
Well said. looks at her lol Well, ya I do get tired of seeing all the lil girls showing off there lil girl ones, kind of disgusting.
thank you Doc. i agree with you on all counts.
i belong to an adult Dungeon site and i see an awful lot of this garbage. most of what we posted was tasteful, clothed bondage pics. i am very tired of seeing cocks, assholes, intercourse, breasts and various other things. for crying out loud, there is more to life!
i am usually drawn to a woman's legs myself.
Oh, come on.. admit it! You know you would love a pair of 38DDDD's (that is if you are looking to fall over) lol!
Well said, I get disgusted to see pics everywhere of boobs and men talking about us like we were made of plastic. And no I don't feel complimented if a man says I've got nice boobs, I want to be appreciated for my mind not body! And still saying: nice boobs I wanna fuck ya is not a compliment, you are pretty is but not nice boobs.
Honestly, I could care less about how someone looks though fake tits are repellent to me. I would take moobs over them any day of the week. I have always chosen my partners on intelligence (apart from some notable errors which I blame on very strong painkillers:P)
Hmmm, this sounds oddly familiar...lol. "your rack is bigger than my first car." ~dies laughing~ Awesome!
I totally agree with you about the boob thing. Here is something that I found pretty funny. I read somewhere that when women show off their boobs in a photo on websites, it is because of two reasons. One is they are overweight and two is they have low self esteem. I am not saying this is my opinion, only that it is what I read.
I am more of a leg and ass man myself. I would rather a woman have a firm smallish C cup and a really nice pair of stems and ass, than a D, DD or anything like that. It just gets in the way sexually, IMO, and seems to create back problems for the woman.
These two questions were posed by Sinora to me in the Star of the North Sci-Fi group. I love it!
"Why don't photons decay and where does all the light go?"
The jury is still out on whether or not photons decay. It seems that they don't but we don't know entirely.
If a photon decays it would probably have to do with it's interaction with the curvature (and general nature) of space-time (s/t). As a photon travels along it is, obviously, going through s/t and would give off/loose a tiny bit of it's energy (technically it's information) which would cause it to loose an amount sufficient enough to render it no longer a photon. An analogy that might be a bit easier to grasp is this:
Wet ice on wet ice has the lowest friction of any two known surfaces. Imagine a photon being a cube of wet ice sliding on a surface of wet ice (s/t, it has pretty much zero friction so we can use the same substance). Even though there is almost no friction there is some.As the ice cube travels for mile after mile it will encounter the minuscule friction offered by the ice sheet. It will also be going over ice at slightly varying temperatures which will create a tiny amount of differing 'information', thus a wee bit more friction. Space also has small variations in temperature which would have the same effect. So after millions of years of moving along the cumulative friction would have either chipped away enough ice to make it no longer ice or would have caused enough entropy (lack of order/change) to where our ice cube is no more.
That's about as well as I can describe it. I have no clue how long it might take a photon to decay, it could take a longer time than the universe has existed so there may not be any photons who have decayed.
Now then, on to where the photons go.
Photons spread out over distance and time. If you take a hand held laser pointer and shine it at the moon the laser will hit the moon's surface in about 1.28 seconds however, the beam is now something like 5 miles in diameter. This effect is part of whats referred to as the "light cone", a literal cone of light. Because of this effect light gets spread out and diluted an enormous amount through the course of the universe (being 156 billion ly across). The light that just keeps going will continue to travel. The main reason why the universe isn't lit up like a Christmas Tree is because for us to see light it must pass into our eyes, thankfully we only get to see a tiny tiny tiny amount of light.
Some of the light gets absorbed. When a photon is absorbed it's kinetic energy gets transfered into the absorbing medium (dust, water, metal, clouds, planets etc) and is then no longer a photon. It has become the energy used by whatever absorbed it. A vast amount of light gets absorbed. In fact when we see color what we are actually seeing is the frequency of light that didn't get absorbed but reflected.
Light that is reflected is simply that, reflected. Our little photon gets bounced around let say from the light bulb to the mirror to our pupils where it is then absorbed. When light gets reflected between two objects (a mirror to another mirror) it's transit time slows down, that is the time it takes for the light to make it outside of the area is drawn out. It may be interesting to note that a photon that is created in the middle of the sun can take over a thousand years to make it past the surface and from there 8 minutes to us. So, some light is bound up in eons of reflection. Another neat thing to know is that as light passes through a diamond it takes twice the time to be reflected out as normal due to the density (thus higher amount of reflection) of the diamond. In other words if there was a diamond 1 (regular) light year across it would take a beam of light 2 years to make it to the other side.
So between light being bound up in a stars core, to getting gobbled up by black holes, being absorbed by dust or our pupils, flying through s/t for an eternity, spreading out and possibly decaying over trillions of years we now know what happens to all that light :)
I hope reading this was as enjoyable to you as it was for me to write it. Great question Sinora! :)
COMMENTS
um Higgs? hello thats only an assumption. Plus what do protons have to do w photons? (I could just be real tired n read that diagram wrong)
Ta hon...*hugs*.
Veiled Mockery on VR
...This may be "just the internet" but how we act when we feel we can let our 'hair down' is indicative of either how we'll act in real life or at least how we'd act if we felt we could get a way with it.
Rather like the old saying "you'll know how a man will treat his wife/girlfriend by how he treats his mother."
I don't understand how people can act like jerks or let things blow up without using logic and wisdom to determine the truth. Living your life with an even temper and not acting a fool off the fly is paramount to maintaining both a real and cyber life of relative peace and happiness.
Besides, it's ignorance to think that people will behave any differently online than they do off-line. In real life people will abuse power, spread rumors, get mad etc.. why wouldn't they do it in a world where they don't have to worry about real life consequences?
Be reasonable, show respect and don't be ruled by emotions that can change on minute by minute bases. Plus no one, no one can MAKE you feel anything.If you get hurt or upset over something it's because you allowed it. I may be able physically harm a person but there's no way I (or anyone) has the power to alter how you think or experience things, which includes emotions.
--Xzavier
COMMENTS
Not true. Some men will push their mom down a flight of stairs and love their girlfriends to pieces without incident! Jussayin' *runs*
"Matter Excitation and Propulsion from Tachyon Stream"
The primary field generator will be on the left side. It will contain an omni-directional propulsion system and large EM constrictors to shape the tachyon stream into a sphere.
The secondary generator will be 1/3 smaller and will serve as phase transistor it will also aid in the stability of the device.
The PFG will create a collection of tachyons which must be stored using magnetic constriction. These constrictor chambers will be of similar design as modern tokamaks.
When a ship enters the staging area a preliminary wave of tachyons will be release by both parts of the device creating an envelope around the craft. The external constrictors will bind the tachyons and will limit them to their lowest speed of c.
The secondary generator will release an axial barrage of EM and neutrino bursts. This will help phase the craft away from normal space-time. Once the tachyon field as reached it's peak concentration an -n mass field should be created around the craft.
This -n mass field will provide the final push out of normal space-time and allow the craft to float with/inside the tachyon field. Once the main sequence has been completed the craft must initiate it's own tachyon constrictor to enable proper propulsion.
Secondary sequence will consist of a release of the devices magnetic constrictors and will initiate craft propulsion by flooding the outer limit of the tachyon field with free roaming tachyons.
The craft will now be moving at or above the speed of light.
To stop propulsion the craft must release a large amount of electrons, n mass fields and then finally turn off it's tachyon constrictor.
For this to be efficient the craft should return to a 'gate' so the tachyons can be recycled. If travel is stopped outside of a 'gate' the tachyons will become free roaming and be lost.
--Just for you O Merry Christmas! :)
COMMENTS
Reverse time, insofar as tachyons are concerned is, in reality, an irrelevant issue
You're not reversing time silly boy :P Just making it irrelevant.
Jumps up and down and claps hands~ Ohhh Zav! Thank you!!!!!!!!
Best Christmas EVER.
There is a santa clause.:)
I don't know, I liked my theory better, even if it could destroy the universe.
--MGA "still assessing" impact of Bratz ruling: CEO--
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – MGA Entertainment Inc is "still assessing" its next move, including whether to lay off staff, after a California judge barred the family-owned toy company from selling its popular Bratz doll, founder and Chief Executive Isaac Larian said on Thursday.
"Bratz is an extremely important part of our company and we are currently assessing the impact of this ruling," Larian told Reuters in an interview conducted by email.
Larian said MGA would appeal the order, issued late on Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson and stayed until next year, but was "open to any reasonable settlement" with rival Mattel Inc (MAT.N), which won rights to the $1 billion-plus doll line in a copyright infringement trial earlier this year.
"But, it was relayed to me that Mattel wants it all," he wrote.
A Mattel spokeswoman declined to "speculate" on whether the toy giant, which makes the Barbie doll, would sell dolls and other products impounded by court order or if it would discontinue the line altogether.
Mattel sued MGA and former Barbie designer Carter Bryant for copyright infringement a few years after Barbie began losing market share to Bratz, launched in 2001, and after its attempt at making an edgier doll, called MyScene, failed.
A California jury ruled in Mattel's favor on its claims that Bryant had invented Bratz while under contract to Mattel and had illegally sold the property to MGA.
A second jury considering damages awarded Mattel just $10 million of the nearly $2 billion in it sought in damages for copyright infringement. The panel also awarded Mattel $90 million for damages related to other claims.
Unresolved by both juries was which company could continue to make the pouty lipped, urban chic dolls beloved of young girls who are Barbie's target market.
Larson approved Mattel's motion to stop MGA from selling the dolls or using the Bratz name after court-ordered talks to work out a royalty scheme or other settlement failed.
On Thursday, Larian was mum about whether he and his legal team would approach Mattel about reopening those talks: "That's the job of the court appointed settlement officer," he said.
As to whether the company will launch another fashion doll, Larian said MGA was "currently considering our options."
(Reporting by Gina Keating; editing by Richard Chang)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081205/bs_nm/us_mattel_larian
//
I wish the dolls weren't being sold because they look like whores and promote vanity, sexuality and the objectification of woman for kids 12 and under but this will do for now.
I really can't see why parents would spend billions on these things when Barbie is supposed to be the 'evil' doll. Learn how to say NO, keep their skirts longer than your local prostitutes and if you have kids you may wish to stop wearing clothes just like theres.
Geez, how hard is it to be decent in this world?
COMMENTS
horse pucky like your torsion fields lol
I never said I fully believe the torsion field theory. As for quantum foam it's not some hair brained theory and has a lot of backing science.
I think some of that actually made sense to me : O
Before any of you start don't give me that "infinity plus 1" bull. It is impossible to add to infinity for by it's very nature infinity is all that can be at any and all moments. *coughs ayw*
There are an infinite number of universes and each universe has an infinite number of universes parallel to it's own. Each action has a potentially infinite outcomes and each outcome has even more infinite reactions. This is the reality in which we live.
Things are infinitely large and many are infinitely small as well. But how can there be infinite size when there was a beginning? How does the infinite become finite? We know that during inflation, after the Big Bang, the universe inflated faster than the speed of light and we know that those areas are still moving at the speed of light or more. It's easy to understand how something can go faster than light when you take relativity and the fact the light is a physical substance that is part of space-time into consideration.
But what about the infinite? All universes, regardless of their "home" dimension came from a point in both time and space. Does the infinite mean only that it is all of what currently has transpired? Or is it in it's truest extent, all things, all times and all places?
We are a universe parallel from another universe and we may have budded off from another, larger, universe. If this is so then we are not ourselves in the way we think. We are that "other universe" and they are the beginning or perhaps the end. When we look at the Big Bang we see only that we came into existence and it seems as though the BB came from another place, another universe. Or did the BB create all universes?
I have been thinking on this a very long time and the implications are astounding.
COMMENTS
see that is where you are wrong and its hard for some to get their mind around temporal mechanics...there was no focal point of time and space at a beggining, as a mad scientist you should know this lol.....*hugs* what would i do without my xzavier to keep me entertained ? hehe
Ah but there was a point in time, the moment time began. Time has a finite beginning in this universe, it's those others that have no "moments." Silly man :)
The idea that there was a beginning is an assumption and contrary to many forms, variants and spin-offs of Big Bang theory.
Assumption is a large part of logic. To my observations (reality) nothing existed prior to my birth however I assume that there was a creative force, be it my mother, god or a quantum singularity.
Poor example I know but I'm tired lol.
time never "began" it always has been, the big bang was just another cycle of that.....yep i said it no beggining, hard to grasp that concept because of the human need for closure but its the law of ayw, i mean the universe lol
Xzavier, the mad scientist of the family ... questioning the MIghty AYW......I'm gonna keep my opinions to my self.
Can I give you a neck rub after all that thinking dear ?
i might also add that infinity is 1 and not a set value that 1 can be added to.
Plotting one's conjecture to align with demonstrated evidence is not pure assumption. It is evidentiary conjecture. Logic is what we are taught to be expected by the the events in the universe around us. It is a set of conclusions based on demonstrations, not just assumption.
If there was a big bang maybe it is still going somewhere. Thereby creating universes so that there are always universes for any particular point in time. Makes time travel seem a bit less O.O
This is a map, of sorts, to time and how it works. I've been working on the temporal sciences for several years now and it is one interesting study. In the coming days and weeks I'll have more about this image and time in general.
COMMENTS
your theory of a secondary time line looks a lot like a diverted river around an exposed bedrock, is it possible that the outer area of the black hole loops on itself and the secondary timeline / new universe and primary time line "second phase" is really just an illusion or am i missing something here?
The far flung corners of the universe are traveling beyond the speed of light.
COMMENTS
-
atyourwindow
09:35 Dec 24 2008
sure you can cherry pick the very best out of society its much more interesting the more morbid history of those ethnic peoples....*sticks toungue out at you* lol
StoneCrow
11:57 Dec 24 2008
Let's not foget Calvinism in the work ethic (more the bother really).