Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Its highly refutable. There's a just a preistlike order preaching dogma on the topic. I'm an agnostic but too many people preaching it have a vested interest in it.

Did anyone see Ben Stein's movie "Expelled"? It was cool and worth watching if you are intrested in the "Church of Science".

Here's Roger Ebert's review of "Expelled", aka "From Darwin to Hitler": http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.html#more

That was a great read.

OK, a couple of points here:

Black holes do not emit particles, nor do they emit energy directly from within the event horizon.
They do, however, emit Hawking radiation from just outside the event horizon, which shrinks the black hole until it eventually disappears.

Travel faster than light is not forbidden by general relativity, it is only impossible to accelerate a massive object (any object with an intrinsic mass, however small) to the speed of light in a vacuum.

It must be noted that it is possible for something to exceed the local speed of light (for example in water or some other, similarly dense medium) provided that the speed of light in vacuo is not exceeded.
This phenomenon is observable as Cherenkov radiation (its a funky blue colour ).


As to the definition of life - it must be a system that absorbs energy and stores and processes information, including that sensed from its surroundings. As it is possible to create machines which meet this criteria, I would further define it as an evolved, rather than a created, system.

Kilkrazy wrote:That was a great read.

QFT. Very enjoyable read and succinctly phrased too.