asmodeusca

Well I'm assuming we are talking about Wes without his powers since a vote on who would win a fight involving the altering of Time & Space would be moot and onstantly in flux historically, currently and in the future. :)

I agree. Nelix has a nasty side. He'd win and play dirty.

I'd love to see a mini-series WAY in the future where the federation is gone and something new is reforming. Sort of like Andromeda but with all the history, partial tech, races, ships (of various condition and age), etc of the Star Trek world. I think Sci-fi does better these days with imperfect worlds and a touch of suffering and tragedy. Think BSG, Andromeda, Firefly, Star Wars, B5 and SG's. These shows all have WAY more grit and sweat. All the recent Star Trek's have been sterile in comparison. The Federation became too perfect and powerful. I'd like to see something reform from it's ashes. Still exploring good / evil and morality but less of what to do and more of what not to do. My 2 1/2 cents :) Donald

Hi guys, It's been quite a few years since I've played with computer hardware except for a small computer on my sailboat. Reading your posts I get the feeling most of you think the chips we see in the market is a function of technology. I would be VERY surprised if this is the case. Both Intel and AMD are solely interested in profit. A key marketing concept is product tiering. The idea is to release your R&D assets to maximize profit and/or market share. If Intel is lagging in performance it is likely because they can. There is no good reason to start looking at upgrade your current product until it starts to loosing market share. Then you have to consider how much of an upgrade to make to maxmize profits over the longer term. I'm sure both Intel and AMD R&D are holding back significant technology waiting for the right market timing. A side effect of this is neither of these companies is likely to release comparable technology at the same time. They will constantly one-up each other. From this view, I would be much more inclined to hold Intel stock than AMD. When the time is right (OS, software, memory, motherboards, video, etc) you'll find Intel releasing new leap-frog technology and then milking it for as much as they can get. I see AMD's release of the 64bit chip as premature. I suspect it is an attempt to capture some leading edge (bleeding edge) market share before the big guy arrives. Cheers, Donald P.s. Intel Market Cap: 153.28 Billion AMD Market Cap: 5.93 Billion Assuming they contribute similar resources to R&D, Intel's R&D is about 25 times the size of AMD's.

I once took part in mid-summer in Mora. Is that anywhere near Lulea? I live in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Three weeks and my boat is back in the water!!!

I'm not going argue the sun is not hot :) I have no counter evidence and accept the proof. Nor is it useful in a day to day sense to consider a small (very very small?) chance that we feel heat for some other reason. However, I think you would agree it is POSSIBLE we/they are wrong. I guess I've beaten this to death so I'll bow out of the conversation. It is fun to ponder this stuff every now and then...good topic. Very applicable to a Science Fiction forum where many of the technologies we enjoy watching (i.e. transporter technology) are scientificallly impossible or if possible...would led to castastrophic results according to our understanding of mass and energy.

If we accept infinite universes and infinite possibilities than doesn't everything eventually becomes true and false? If this is the case then the only absolute truth would be existence. Analysis of this existence would never complete. OUch!

This is circular. I agree facts are provable and irrefutable. Provable to whom? Irrefutable by whose standard? The answer is the group. Which group depends on what base of knowledge you wish to access. In any case you are relying on an agreed to standard within the group. A consensus. In practice we label many things as fact which later we prove wrong. Many times the group is wrong. Just as the term 'impossible' really means 'not possble with our current knowledge base'...fact means...'irrefutable within our current knowledge base'. So facts are only facts as far as we can tell by methods we have collectively created. It is this consensus of a group that makes it a fact.....or truth. The whole point is moot since the search for absolute truth is a fool’s errand. Avoid black and white. Life is only worth living in the grey :p

Ahhh...that's not a funny european dating style....the canadian date format is also DD/MM/YYYY.

At least he responded.

Projectiles have the edge I think. True, energy weapons travel the speed of light and current projectiles are relatively slow. However, projectiles have mass and therefore can be fired at any relative speed (faster than light). Well...in a Star Trek world anyway. I would think an energy weapon would be limited to the speed of light. Wouldn't want to fire that at warp :cyclops: Besides, with projectiles you can fool with three factors....velocity, mass and payload. That gives you lots of options. I.e. if you are shooting at a ship velocity and payload are likely key......if you are shooting a planet I would focus on mass :) B)

I still maintain fact is by consesus. Even scientific fact is arrived at by procedures collectively accepted. The collective (pardon the pun) may be, and has been, reconsidered to be wrong. In fact (again...the pun thing), fact and faith are different only in the method of acceptance.

"Different cultures have different truths." "A truth is that which can be accepted universally." What are the implications for knowledge of agreeing with these opposing statements? One implication is that "truth" can change with time as cultures decline and grow. Some "truth(s)" seem truer than others because they have been passed on through generations...sometimes even spanning cultures. However, it is all a function of time. Also, -"truth" is a function of knowledge. - Knowledge is based on fact. - Fact is decided by concensus. Second implication is "truth" is a matter of opinion. General "truth" by popular opinion..personal "truth" the opinion of an individual. I didn't deal with the concept of "absolute truth" as the initial statement excluded it in it's defn.

The book says the car is governed at 240km/hr (~150mph). I guess I would need a track to find that out. The car drives beautifully at high speed but with everone else doing 110-120km/hr (70-75 mph) I'm afraid someone will pull out in front of me. Nova Scotia needs an Autobaun B) Winning the car was a strange event. Stranger when the BMW dealer wanted me to take it for a run around the block. I didn't know how to drive a standard :) People were very kind while I stalled at least 5 times within 500 feet or so. Major struggle getting the car home. Here's a foolish photo a friend took: http://ca.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/asmodeus_ca/detail?.dir=58fb&.dnm=bd6b.jpg&.src=ph

I recently won a BMW Z4. It's only the 2.5i engine. Fun little car. I had it up to 195kmh / ~120mph and it was still accelerating. However, I'm not the driver to push it further. :rolleyes: