assassin_696

Kinda bad, I'm off to Derby tomorrow for the launch day of an engineering award scheme or something, there's a team of 4 from my school going and 2 teams of 4 from the opposite girls school. And guess who's going on the girls team? Yup, my ex. Sod it.

We have to wear a tie with a suit as part of our 6th form uniform. The problem is, it has to be a school tie, which look awful and are far too thin to tie into a decent knot. For the record, the Windsor knot is the best. If I had a choice I'd probably go for solid stripes or solid colours.

Bet you wouldn't have done that if it was a new release by Charles Wright & The Watts 103rd Street Rhythm Band :P Got the download today, great new album.

Genius lyricist, little odd at times, prefered his work with The Smiths, but his solo work is no bad thing by any means. That pretty much sums it up for me.

Feeling absolutely exhausted because i've got man-flu, which is far worse than any little common cold, honest *splutter* Luckily, I don't have much homework so i'm just going to sweep that aside, go lie down on my bed and watch a funny DVD until I fall asleep. Oh yeah, found out I have a triple maths test on Monday. &$!@

What do you care what other people think? That's a tough motto to live by, but the more you try and do it the more your confidence will grow. Personally, i'm very self-conscious, I never really speak without thinking about it, I dread making a joke and not being laughed at and, yeah, generally I do care about what other people think. But the times when I've really gone for it and just done something not caring about how I looked are the times I've really had that confidence boost. But i'm a lot more confident now, i'm just not a total extrovert, but that's just who I am, and that's fine. But yeah, don't worry about it, it's normally just a teenage thing. Highlanders, relax man.

What do you care what other people think? That's a tough motto to live by, but the more you try and do it the more your confidence will grow. Personally, i'm very self-conscious, I never really speak without thinking about it, I dread making a joke and not being laughed at and, yeah, generally I do care about what other people think. But the times when I've really gone for it and just done something not caring about how I looked are the times I've really had that confidence boost. But i'm a lot more confident now, i'm just not a total extrovert, but that's just who I am, and that's fine. But yeah, don't worry about it, it's normally just a teenage thing.

What do you care what other people think? That's a tough motto to live by, but the more you try and do it the more your confidence will grow. Personally, i'm very self-conscious, I never really speak without thinking about it, I dread making a joke and not being laughed at and, yeah, generally I do care about what other people think. But the times when I've really gone for it and just done something not caring about how I looked are the times I've really had that confidence boost. But i'm a lot more confident now, i'm just not a total extrovert, but that's just who I am, and that's fine. But yeah, don't worry about it, it's normally just a teenage thing.

Turned 17 today ( :D ) so just had my first driving lesson...in the dark...in rush hour. Which was interesting. Only stalled once though (it was a hill so meh!) and the car's a Mini, which is nice. Just reading over some notes for maths at the moment, then i'll be having a nice family dinner.

Excellent question, but the kinetic energy has two components: mass and velocity. As velocities (speeds) approach the speed of light the mass begins to increase, therefore requiring more energy to continue to accelerate the object. While the speed of light limits the velocity, the mass can increase indefinitely, so the kinetic energy continues to increase. So if you accelerate an object composed of exotic matter (with negative mass), would its mass decrease to negative infinity, thus propelling it faster, or would its mass, like that of normal matter composed of baryons, increase to infinity? And if the first case is true, then wouldn't exotic matter be shooting around the universe through time, since it would be going faster than the speed of light? Tachyons are going faster than the speed of light anyway, if they even exist, which I doubt.

Excellent question, but the kinetic energy has two components: mass and velocity. As velocities (speeds) approach the speed of light the mass begins to increase, therefore requiring more energy to continue to accelerate the object. While the speed of light limits the velocity, the mass can increase indefinitely, so the kinetic energy continues to increase.

Is There A Ghost - Band of Horses

I think Ginger_Warrior's point of us having instinct for doing what's best for the species is generally a stronger idea than this on a base level. If our primary instinct was to look out for number one, then why are we still here? Why did we not, in our more primitive state when we were no where near as 'enlightened' as we are now, all fight each other out of existance? Why did we have families and communities? Why do we still have these things? Surely the fact that we've come through this primitive stage would tell you that we have an inherent basic nature of cooperation over a simple selfish 'look out for number one' mentality. We were taught morals, and those morals eventually overcame the need for self-centered behavior. And were animals taught morals as well? Since they display communal and cooperative behaviour, even across species. Not to mention that the more advanced species even display behaviour dangerously close to being "human". Elephants mourn their dead, dolphins and monkeys play. In fact, there's a direct correlation between the intelligence and self-awareness of a species and their ability to display behaviour which you might call moral.

Don't bother, she'll only break your heart.

Trivial YouTube links to be posted here Locked.

Haha, take that Australia :P

In which case I'd probably say yeah, we're a pretty selfish species for who acting altruistically is very rare. In fact, you could even get into a debate over whether many common "altruistic" actions are actually done purely because of the sense of self worth they give us. That said, we're probably the only species who seems to have gained an ability to be able to regularly override genetic instinct. It helps a lot, but even after people know the difference between right and wrong, some will still choose wrong because it benefits them. Otherwise we wouldn't have so much crime (by crime, I mean the full gamut from petty theft to tax evasion). Again, true, although the coin flips both ways, some people who are brought up in appalling circumstances (perhaps ethically as well as materialistically) are still capable of incredible acts of kindness. But still, I think if we know we can get away with something which might be conventionally considered wrong, we'll probably do it if it has benefit to us.

Fast Car - Mutya Beuna As much as I might dislike the Sugarbabes, I have to admit this is a cracking cover song by one of them.

Who...wait, what? :?

Evil, in the conventional use of the term, is a very strong trait to say that we have built into us. In fact, it stinks of an absolute, which I don't believe in. I don't think anybody is inherently evil, I think people have certain genetic instincts and traits, which they might or might not act on, which might lead them to do things that we might consider evil, but generally if they're genetic they'll only encourage us to do things which will propogate our genes. I think a lot of it, as Bari said, has to do with nurture, how the child is brought up in the world, how it's taught right from wrong. Whether or not nurture could completely override instinct i'm not sure about.

Sorry about that, the only thing I have read (and remembered) was Newton's theory of gravity. The way my professor was talking about just lead me to assume the stuff that I mentioned, but we never talked about the "speed of gravity." We never went further than Newton's theories when dealing with gravity either. I've also mentioned Newton throughout all of this, but now that I think about it, it might have been someone else. Who made the F~(m1xm2)/(d^2) proportion? Nah your posts were fine, I wasn't really referring to them. Newton's laws are still the only ones taught in school so I wouldn't really expect anyone else to know about relativity and stuff unless they'd read a lot of popular science. And yeah, the inverse square law you referred to was formulated by Newton.

Firstly, stop bumping your own threads. Secondly, read this sticky and learn how to make a good topic in M&M. Thirdly, locked.

Gah, so much bad physics dotted around here. Gravity is a force, which theorists believe is propogated by particles and their associated waves. That's what the graviton is all about, it's basically the particle equivalent of the photon (which propogates visible and all other forms of EM radiation). Gravitons, or gravitational waves travel at the speed of light. Nothing can exceed that speed barrier. As for the original question, that's pretty much what happens in particle accelerators. Electrons and other massive (i.e. have mass) particles are accelerated to 99.9% of the speed of light and smashed into each other. Lots of exotic particles are produced, tiny tiny constituents which rapidly decay and stuff. So yeah, it's done. But, no particle with mass can reach the speed of light. Period.

Some hair works really well long, other doesn't. Mine can get kinda long (it's quite thick), but not like a surfer dude or anything, so I just keep it thickish but short.

QFT :P Locked