SCIENCE

Originally posted by Iuckshot Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc Mass being the total amount of Matter in an object and staying the same no matter where the object is at, and Matter increasing in a moving object suggests that objects collect and trap extra matter when moving and release only the extra matter as they slow. or matter expands retracts. made me read into it a little and appearantly there's a difference between mass in rest and relativistic mass, which i didnt know aboutwhen i said an objects mass is determined by its density i just talked about rest masshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativitysome info about it, topic didnt interest me enough to read it allit mentioned about the mass depending on the frame of referencefor the object itsself, its mass doesnt changefor other frames of reference, a net worth of kinetic energy is involvedit doesnt 'trap' mass, i think energy is added into the mass (not sure if thats what you meant)

you still have to realise that its not yet known 4 sure what causes mass. so saying 4 sure wether extra matter is collected and trapped while an object is moving or the existing matter expands while the object is moving is just impossible atm.

it may be known soon though?   

Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc Mass being the total amount of Matter in an object and staying the same no matter where the object is at, and Matter increasing in a moving object suggests that objects collect and trap extra matter when moving and release only the extra matter as they slow. or matter expands retracts.

made me read into it a little and appearantly there's a difference between mass in rest and relativistic mass, which i didnt know about
when i said an objects mass is determined by its density i just talked about rest mass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity
some info about it, topic didnt interest me enough to read it all

it mentioned about the mass depending on the frame of reference
for the object itsself, its mass doesnt change
for other frames of reference, a net worth of kinetic energy is involved
it doesnt 'trap' mass, i think energy is added into the mass (not sure if thats what you meant)

Mass being the total amount of Matter in an object and staying the same no matter where the object is at, and Matter increasing in a moving object suggests that objects collect and trap extra matter when moving and release only the extra matter as they slow. or matter expands retracts.

since gravity and speed are both factors in try'n to measure an objects mass, a proper scale or formula is needed to measure an objects mass.

the standard model of partical physics thinks that mass is caused by higgs field, physicists are experimenting at Cern with a large harden cillider to try to find the higgs field. but atm what gives an object its mass is still unknown for sure.

They leave you a choice in China, choosing only one kid gives you HUGE bonuses though (as in money and I think maybe even more like a workplace or place to live but not sure about that).

in China they already do so ... I think (talking about the only child)

Originally posted by valjohn indeed but then again we could fix some laws like 1 kid by couple only

that would be intrusion, and besides there's to many laws already

maybe spade or nutered lol

Originally posted by valjohn "the Mass increases when a body or object is in motion and gets bigger and bigger the faster the body or object goes"   if that is true, stop running then     Really, I have no idea ... I've always hated physical science

the theory's aren't all that complicated because most of the work has already been done.

how we age could be applied and we could concievably stop the aging process. but that would lead to an over populated planet xD

Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc Originally posted by HanFei Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc evolution is still in question atm even though many scientists do think there's enough evidence to support it.tools found on Flores island have been dated back to 1 million years ago? homo sapiens existed 1 million years ago? what does that do to most models for evolution?chimp-homo sapien-neanderthal-homo sapien? evolve-de evolve-evolve? the dates still don't add up yet imo Do you have some source for this? There are 1,321,369 peer reviewed Journal Articles that include evolution - from a quick search on a public library. http://ncsu.summon.serialssolutions.com/search?s.cmd=removeFacetValueFilter(SubjectTerms,evolution)&s.fvf%5B%5D=SubjectTerms,evolution,&s.fvf%5B%5D=ContentType,Journal+Article,&s.pn=1&s.q=Evolution If you pick up intelligent design, you can have your faith and science too! i don't just pick anything Han Fei. when looking for the truth you have to concider the source. there's strong motivations to prove religion is wrong! and im talking about science not religion here! there are many scientists looking for ways to discredit religion! “when religion is a thing of the past”? ‹--thats clear bias and it doesn't belong in science period! that being said everyone needs to guard against false facts that are motivated by any kind of bias in science. BIAS is the enemy of science and logic! the true facts about human evolution are still in question at this time imo. what if they dig up an older skeleton in lets say France next week? my point in that is unless the whorld is dug up we can't say for sure what all the facts are. 1 million year old tools? there's always someone who knows something that you don't know, and that goes for all of us.

Yo sry to pick up this post again, but now you said how important good sources are, although didn't provide any still.

maybe i shouldn't of used religion as an example xD there's already a lot of history of bias on both sides science and religion lol

Mass is the amount of Matter in a Body or Object. hahaha

We don't yet know what gives a Body or Object its Mass? hahaha

any ideas? hahaha

Originally posted by ASHYTEBUBLExD Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc Originally posted by HanFei Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc evolution is still in question atm even though many scientists do think there's enough evidence to support it.tools found on Flores island have been dated back to 1 million years ago? homo sapiens existed 1 million years ago? what does that do to most models for evolution?chimp-homo sapien-neanderthal-homo sapien? evolve-de evolve-evolve? the dates still don't add up yet imo Do you have some source for this? There are 1,321,369 peer reviewed Journal Articles that include evolution - from a quick search on a public library. http://ncsu.summon.serialssolutions.com/search?s.cmd=removeFacetValueFilter(SubjectTerms,evolution)&s.fvf%5B%5D=SubjectTerms,evolution,&s.fvf%5B%5D=ContentType,Journal+Article,&s.pn=1&s.q=Evolution If you pick up intelligent design, you can have your faith and science too! i don't just pick anything Han Fei. when looking for the truth you have to concider the source. there's strong motivations to prove religion is wrong! and im talking about science not religion here! there are many scientists looking for ways to discredit religion! “when religion is a thing of the past”? ‹--thats clear bias and it doesn't belong in science period!that being said everyone needs to guard against false facts that are motivated by any kind of bias in science. BIAS is the enemy of science and logic! the true facts about human evolution are still in question at this time imo. what if they dig up an older skeleton in lets say France next week? my point in that is unless the whorld is dug up we can't say for sure what all the facts are. 1 million year old tools? there's always someone who knows something that you don't know, and that goes for all of us. I Hate when people say "science is against God" thats bull... Scientist can do there personal thing... but when it comes down to it NOTHING in science goes against Godand not even evolution, Did I say the God as cristians understand him? NOPE, a first un-caused cause, a being of higher intelegence. I think we should Be carefull of confusing the word God with the meaning religion. << I wasnt disagreing with you BTW.However the theory of evolution is flawed, and theories were made to be disproven not proven =]

first off what we hate hearing is irelevant. science is science and its not against anything except bias,dishonesty and irrationality! but if you don't already know that certain groups of scientists try to discredit religion then id have to conclude that your not very informed. like i said im talking about SCIENCE not RELIGION!!! religion is just an example of 1 of the bias's that exists.

i don't know how i could have made my points any clearer? which tells me what i already knew to be true. people listen or “READ” and as they listen or “READ” some people tend to put there own twist on what there hearing or “READING”. its sort of like poor translation. or saying to yourself this is what they really ment by that.

i was speaking on evolution and science only! religion was just an example!!!!!!!!!! lol    

are you a physicist? im not being an ass i was just wondering if anyone knows physics?

Science is no more interested in destroying religion than the Bible can explain science.  Each has it's purpose.  Let's let them coexist.

Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc Originally posted by HanFei Originally posted by uc SYZYGY uc evolution is still in question atm even though many scientists do think there's enough evidence to support it.tools found on Flores island have been dated back to 1 million years ago? homo sapiens existed 1 million years ago? what does that do to most models for evolution?chimp-homo sapien-neanderthal-homo sapien? evolve-de evolve-evolve? the dates still don't add up yet imo Do you have some source for this? There are 1,321,369 peer reviewed Journal Articles that include evolution - from a quick search on a public library. http://ncsu.summon.serialssolutions.com/search?s.cmd=removeFacetValueFilter(SubjectTerms,evolution)&s.fvf%5B%5D=SubjectTerms,evolution,&s.fvf%5B%5D=ContentType,Journal+Article,&s.pn=1&s.q=Evolution If you pick up intelligent design, you can have your faith and science too! i don't just pick anything Han Fei. when looking for the truth you have to concider the source. there's strong motivations to prove religion is wrong! and im talking about science not religion here! there are many scientists looking for ways to discredit religion! “when religion is a thing of the past”? ‹--thats clear bias and it doesn't belong in science period! that being said everyone needs to guard against false facts that are motivated by any kind of bias in science. BIAS is the enemy of science and logic! the true facts about human evolution are still in question at this time imo. what if they dig up an older skeleton in lets say France next week? my point in that is unless the whorld is dug up we can't say for sure what all the facts are. 1 million year old tools? there's always someone who knows something that you don't know, and that goes for all of us.

I Hate when people say "science is against God" thats bull... Scientist can do there personal thing... but when it comes down to it NOTHING in science goes against God
and not even evolution, Did I say the God as cristians understand him? NOPE, a first un-caused cause, a being of higher intelegence. I think we should Be carefull of confusing the word God with the meaning religion. << I wasnt disagreing with you BTW.
However the theory of evolution is flawed, and theories were made to be disproven not proven =]