[TAG] Weather

Fri Apr 21 18:01:13 MSD 2006

On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:23:44AM -0400, vince werber wrote:
> Ben...
> 
> Gee... you take my babble and turn it into something serious??  What's the 
> computer icon for 'tongue in cheek'?

Well, ':p' or ';p' come pretty close.

> As Dr. Stephen Hawking said... (paraphrase) the big bang does no preclude the 
> existence of a Creator but only puts a time line on the creating... 
>
> That sounds a little like CYA speak to me...

Heh. A real scientist does not commit to a definite answer in the
absence of data  (except possibly "there's a definite absence of data").

> But what does Dr. Hawking know?  From the news stories he's into S&M...  
> hmmm...  Chips, dips, chains and whips...

Heck, sounds to me like you've answered your own question: not _only_ is
he a brilliant physicist, but he can also tell you what an Andrew's
cross and a Wartenberg wheel is. Boy, I sure do admire versatility of
knowledge... :)

  A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything.
   -- nicolai at esperi.org

> And yes... computer do have a bit to do with the ozone layer going batty... 
> that fact makes me want to pound more than 24 hours into a day <heh>

Well, these days, the PS transformers aren't made with PCBs anymore -
but the volatiles from chip making are pretty horrendous. [sigh] I can
only hope that this is one of those (extremely common, but not commonly
recognized as such) "solution inherent in the problem" situations -
i.e., that we can use computers to figure out how to stop ourselves from
sliding into ecological hell.

> As for the Cherokee... It comes from stories passed down generation to 
> generation...  much like history books but without the re-writing <heh>

Well, retelling has a much higher error rate than transcription. Oral
traditions are a very cool thing, but trying to get accurate data out of
them isn't going to be very productive.

> Now for the big question...  let's prove any of these 'theories' in a lab...  
> several times and then I will believe one way or the other ...

Sure - doesn't even take a lab. You know those shoes you're wearing?
That aspirin you take when you have a headache? That asphalt road you
drive on? That, and a near-infinity of things that you use or come in
contact with every days are _every_ _single_ _one_ of them a result of
some theory. Without someone thinking "I wonder if I do *this* and
*this*, will I get *that* result?", none of those things would have come
into existence. Moreover, if the question they asked had been a wild-ass
guess rather than a product of experience and/or previous theory, the
chance of their new theory being proven correct would have been nearly
zero. Theories generate hypotheses, which - when proven correct - form
new theories.

Should I even mention computers, which are products of quantum theory?
Or cars, which (as their major function) provide clear illustrations of
Newton's theories? Or would that be shooting fish in a barrel? The proof
of millions of theories lies around you, within arm's reach.

> Until then I 
> will keep an open mind to both sides of the issue... Dr. Page always said 
> that...  seems to make sense but then...

An open mind is indeed a great idea... at least, so goes the theory. :)
It may yet be proven false. :)

* Ben Okopnik * Editor-in-Chief, Linux Gazette * http://linuxgazette.net *