unimportant questions, but curious

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

06/20/2006 10:30:32 PM · #51

Originally posted by GeneralE:

No, it's the same old can of worms people've been debating for a few thousand years ... we can go on to other topics : )

As far as it dates back in history, the human race have been trying to understand the meaning of our very existence. Say, what if, we are planted here as a seed on earth by extra-terrestials as an "insurance" - to make this planet inhabitable, so that when the time is ripe, they will return to claim this planet as their own? (I know we arent doing a great job keeping the planet healthy, but that's besides the point) And all those religious teachings, or evolution theories are merely attempts to answer THE question, or maybe a cover-up to keep us content and stop searching and learning the real truth? If any of you have watched The Island, it's the same concept - where these people are made to believe a fabricated story of an inhabitable earth outside, to keep them from trying to escape from the facility.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

06/20/2006 10:33:05 PM · #52

If a tree falls in the forest and noone is there to photograph it.. was the light good?

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

06/20/2006 10:35:55 PM · #53

Originally posted by idnic:

If a tree falls in the forest and noone is there to photograph it.. was the light good?

LMAO! I think Murphy's Law dictates that it was the most spectacular light ever! The shot would have been worth millions and a ribbon or two.

xianart

Canon EOS-7D

06/20/2006 10:36:49 PM · #54

Originally posted by idnic:

but, what was the question?

amandalore

Canon EOS-40D

06/20/2006 10:38:57 PM · #55

Originally posted by xianart:

Originally posted by idnic:
42

but, what was the question?

like jeopardy, duh, you're s'posed to figure that part out

amandalore

Canon EOS-40D

06/20/2006 10:38:58 PM · #56

oh no! I finally did it, stupid laptop keypad, double clicking

Message edited by author 2006-06-20 22:39:27.

06/20/2006 10:40:36 PM · #57

Originally posted by amandalore:

oh no! I finally did it, stupid laptop keypad, double clicking

That was a glitch in the Matrix. It usually means they have changed something ;-)

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/20/2006 10:44:16 PM · #58

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

That was a glitch in the Matrix. It usually means they have changed something ;-)

dejavu, Leroy.... follow the white rabbit

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

06/20/2006 10:44:30 PM · #59

Originally posted by idnic:

If a tree falls in the forest and noone is there to photograph it.. was the light good?

If a dog barks his head off in the forest and there's no human around to hear it, is he still a bad dog?

06/20/2006 10:46:35 PM · #60

Originally posted by GeneralE:

If a dog barks his head off in the forest and there's no human around to hear it, is he still a bad dog?

The dog can not bark his head off because at the precise moment when his head is severed, there is no barking

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

06/20/2006 10:48:10 PM · #61

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
If a dog barks his head off in the forest and there's no human around to hear it, is he still a bad dog?

The dog can not bark his head off because at the precise moment when his head is severed, there is no barking

Which in turn makes him a good dog :-)

xianart

Canon EOS-7D

06/20/2006 10:48:33 PM · #62

Originally posted by xianart:

Originally posted by idnic:
42

but, what was the question?

it's the mice you know...

06/20/2006 11:02:09 PM · #63

If I asked Cindi out would she expect me to meet her down in Florida or would she make the trip up yo meet me? *giggles*

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

06/20/2006 11:04:11 PM · #64

If energy companies managed to invent a source of energy that is self-replenishing, would they market it? Wouldn't they go bankrupt when there are no returning customers?

Message edited by author 2006-06-20 23:06:03.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

06/20/2006 11:05:36 PM · #65

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
If I asked Cindi out would she expect me to meet her down in Florida or would she make the trip up yo meet me? *giggles*

Neither. You're not meeting her :p

ROFL Alabama!?!?! Sorry, Leroy! :P

Edit to mention - I'm really a man, 6'4", 220 lbs and really really good at PhotoShop! :P

Message edited by author 2006-06-20 23:06:55.

06/20/2006 11:08:25 PM · #66

Originally posted by crayon:

If energy companies managed to invent a source of energy that is self-replenishing, would they market it? Wouldn't they go bankrupt when there are no returning customers?

There are several sources of self-renewing energy...sun, geothermal energy, wind, wave energy... you can answer the rest yourself ;-)

06/20/2006 11:09:42 PM · #67

Originally posted by idnic:

ROFL Alabama!?!?! Sorry, Leroy! :P

Edit to mention - I'm really a man, 6'4", 220 lbs and really really good at PhotoShop! :P

Oh yeah, baby, that's just how I like 'em, I've been searching for an Amazon woman :-P

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

06/20/2006 11:12:17 PM · #68

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by crayon:
If energy companies managed to invent a source of energy that is self-replenishing, would they market it? Wouldn't they go bankrupt when there are no returning customers?

There are several sources of self-renewing energy...sun, geothermal energy, wind, wave energy... you can answer the rest yourself ;-)

I think there was another thread on this, but yes there are several sources of renewable energy. Just the cost of implementing these new ways on a scale large enough to completely replace conventional means of energy production would be huge.

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the way to go. It's clean and efficient, the only hitch being disposal of nuclear waste. My solution: Shoot it into the sun.

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

06/20/2006 11:13:59 PM · #69

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by idnic:

ROFL Alabama!?!?! Sorry, Leroy! :P

Edit to mention - I'm really a man, 6'4", 220 lbs and really really good at PhotoShop! :P

Oh yeah, baby, that's just how I like 'em, I've been searching for an Amazon woman :-P

Ack! *giggles*

06/20/2006 11:15:41 PM · #70

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

That's what I'm trying to ask actually - would they market it?

Originally posted by SamDoe1:

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the way to go. It's clean and efficient, the only hitch being disposal of nuclear waste. My solution: Shoot it into the sun.

or anti-matter but that's too far ahead for our lifetime. Nuclear is the practical means for today. Shooting into the sun sounds good, why aren't they doing it already? Maybe space-exploration should be entirely privatized - it speeds things up.

Message edited by author 2006-06-20 23:16:19.

06/20/2006 11:24:42 PM · #71

Originally posted by crayon:

or anti-matter but that's too far ahead for our lifetime.

We have no natural source of anti-matter in near earth proximity to use for fuel. Yes, we can produce antimatter in particle accelorators, but the energy required to produce it far outweighs the benefits. Nuclear fusion will come before anti-matter energy is used.

For the most part, I prefer solar energy as the best renewable resource. The main drawback is that photovoltaic cells are very inefficient.

06/20/2006 11:25:55 PM · #72

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by idnic:

ROFL Alabama!?!?! Sorry, Leroy! :P

Edit to mention - I'm really a man, 6'4", 220 lbs and really really good at PhotoShop! :P

Oh yeah, baby, that's just how I like 'em, I've been searching for an Amazon woman :-P

Ack! *giggles*

I do like Florida ;-)

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

06/20/2006 11:26:45 PM · #73

Originally posted by crayon:

That's what I'm trying to ask actually - would they market it?

Sure they'd market it. It still costs money to run and maintain these plants. It just doesn't cost them money for fuel. But I doubt you'd see any drop in energy costs right away due to the gigantic initial costs of putting these plants in place.

Originally posted by crayon:

I think antimatter is closer than you think. They have already started to work a lot more with magnetic containment systems to hold the super hot plasma. The only major problem with this is finding adequate sources of antimatter, matter is readily available :). Shooting anything into space (orbit) costs a LOT of money (around $5k per pound) and more than that for out of orbit. Tack on the costs of the calculations needed to shoot something out of earth's gravity into the sun while dodging 2 planets and navigating their gravity and the costs go to an insane level. Privatization is already well on it's way (the x-prize being the first significant challenge). Most of these companies are working on transporting people to space though and not cargo. Once electrical companies from around the world come together, the costs will go down. Although this is not really going to happen anytime soon. So until all of this can happen, there needs to be a place to put all the waste and that's posing to be quite the problem.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

06/20/2006 11:27:33 PM · #74

Originally posted by idnic:

Edit to mention - I'm really a man, 6'4", 220 lbs and really really good at PhotoShop! :P

I met her in person. I can vouch.

~Terry

SamDoe1

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT