That is a good suggestion. I have passed it along to admin.

Done!!
 

That has already been done. Whenever anybody starts a New Thread, a list appears at the bottom of the webpage, warning the member of existing threads on the same subject.

bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 

Interesting coincidence today. Here we were discussing bumblebees and what do I come across while I am downloading pics? A tgirl with a bumblebee tatoo which is something I do not remember seeing before. This is Jannyane, from Rio, from Bobs Tgirls.

And yes, Sesame, the point in the my post was that perhaps the new thread page could be revamped - perhaps by moving the previous thread list to a position above the new thread box so the member would be more likely to look at it before beginning the new thread.

What tattoos do you have, Jenae?
This Bumblebee Tgirl is very pretty, I must admit.:yes:

Lev. 19: 28
 

When I was younger it was considered as something that only "low lifes" did and then of course there was the biblical proscription in Leviticus against it. I had lots of tatoos as a kid, but those were only the temporary ones that came with a piece of bubble gum. I never really had the urge to have one, so never did.

What are some books you'd recommend for leisurely reading?

Stupid men
 

Why are men so insecure ? Why are their egos as fragile as a house of cards? They say they love T girls but wont admit it in public.

Basically, it's a survival thing.
 

__________________________________________________ _______________

I really don't believe men are alone in being insecure. It doesn't take much contemplation to bring to mind all the instances of insecurity in women. So, I will agree that most people are insecure to some degree or another.

As to their ego being as fragile as a house of cards and them being unable to admit to loving a Tgirl, I will say this. Nearly all men (and women) are social animals; most of their behavior and beliefs are governed by the culture and society in which are raised and in which they spend their day to day lives. It takes a rare man to even think differant from the stream of group consensus and an even rarer man to make a stand upon his convictions and stand like a rock against the stream. History is full of people who have braved the tide of popular opinion and beliefs. Some were burned (Jeane d'Arc), some were thrown in jail (Galileo), and some were even crucified (Jesus of Nazareth). Life ain't easy for the one who is differant. Some were lucky; they were only derided and looked upon with scorn. Man is not much better, if at all, than the animal kingdom where the odd one is often turned upon by their fellows and destroyed. If you see where I am going with this, then this is where you interupt me and say, "So what does this have to do with the question?"

The issue of transgenderism is still relatively unkown to the greater masses and thus most of their opinions are based on ignorance and misinformation.
It is the chasm, between this lack of knowledge about the subject by most of his peers (the group consensus) and his personal feelings that place our hero in a very difficult position. On one hand ,he has found this person who he is attracted to, and on the other hand, if he affirms this in public he may be subjected to the ridicule and contempt of his peers (the guys). Most men are going to go with their gut instinct which is of course that of survival.

There are a lot of paralels between this situation and the case of a pair of mixed race lovers a few generations back. And yet, look how much easily
mixed couples are taken in stride today. Sure there are pockets of resistance, but they are shrinking all the time. Hopefully this will become the case with TG relationships also. Hopefully it will evolve to tolerance, than to acceptance, and finally to loving people for who they really are and not judging them by the little boxes we tend to put them in.

I really hope you have the compassion and understanding to see the situation from your significant other's viewpoint. I realize that you have probably tried to discuss this with them, and it wasn't easy. Hopefully, I have helped to put you in a more knowlegable position for further discussion.

I do want to caution you that this is only one facet of the problems facing transgender couples, and my simple answer doesn't really begin to cover the subject. I am sure there is a wealth of information out there on the web. Have you really spent some time googling this subject and reading and thinking about what's out there?

Equation
 

A man's fear of being called a "fag" or rediculed by the society (and relatives) is greater than his Love for the Tgirl.


Fear > Love

Thats the simple equation of insecurity.

As we know some man loose hair geneticly when they get older. How is it with trannies? Does this count also for them if their father or grandfather was bold, or this doesn't happend with them because of the hormons they take?

Fear of ridicule
 

Yeah I think you are both right. The very rare few come out of the closet.

Hair loss in TG women
 

__________________________________________________ ______________

I'll admit that I had to do some research on this one. While I have lost some of my hair over the years, I am a very long way from being considered bald, and thus I had no reason to think much about this problem. The idea that baldness is inherited from ones maternal grandfather was commonly believed through the ages as that is what the evidence suggested. This would seem to hold up in my family; my mom's dad died with a fairly full head of hair. My cousin Roger was going bald before he was out of his thirties and his maternal grandpa was bald also. Some believes that this factor accounts for about 90% of all baldness.

Now as to your question, I believe the best answer is:

"Body and scalp hair may change in testure but hormone treatment will not inhibit beard growth or improve male pattern baldness."

this quote if from: http://www.transgenderzone.com/research/hrt.htm

which seems to be a very good place to answer this question and other questions you may have.

I would like to point out that as woman, tgirls are much more at liberty
to wear wigs and such to improve their appearance. We have all encountered a zillion jokes about rugs, toupees, etc. The truth of the matter is that many women experiance a balding problem, especially during, and after menopause. They account for a large percentage of wig sales every year. And no one puts them down for it. Another "inequality of treatment for the sexes" ??

Please define your term
 

88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 88888888888888888

I really don't know how you define leisurely reading. A comic book? The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire? The Encyclopedia Britannica? the National Enquirer?

Please give me some examples of your idea of leisurely reading and then perhaps I can give you possible reccomendations.

Mostly fiction and sci-fi but I like realistic sci-fi.

Oh dear, this just got very hard...............
 

************************************************** *********

Realistic Science Fiction ???????

I am not sure what you mean by the add on term "realistic" that you use here. I think you are using the term to exclude fantasy type stories with elves, witches, wizards, etc. As you know. the line between the two genres is often blurred as in the Pern stories which focus on dragons. The worlds of science fiction are usually set in our future which makes it un-realistic to many so I will just reccomend some SF that I have found enjoyable and worthwhile.

1. Anything by Robert Heinlein starting with Stranger in a Strange Land . There is a reason he has won more Hugo awards for novels than anybody else.

2. The Dune Series by Frank Herbert. Even the continuation of the series by his son with K. Anderson are worthwhile.

3. The Ender Wiggins series by Orson Scott Card. I have never ever forgot the short story that spawned this series. Talk about a big oak tree that sprang from a little acorn.

4. The Foundation Series by Issac Assimov. Another author like Heinlein who has written tons of great books.


These are just a few. I could go on for hours talking about SF. But on to other genres. I have favorite authors of whom I love almost anything they write.

Stephan King - The master. There is a valid reason why he is the yardstick by which others are measured. The Stand is one of my all time favorites!

Anne Rice - Even if you don't care for vampire fiction, you should read Cry to Heaven and Memnoch the Devil. Forget about the crap she has written since she returned to the fold and embraced Christianity. She comes across like a naive beginner in those.

Colleen McCullough - Her series on Roman history has been characterised as "a work of monumental fiction" and I couldn't agree more. They are a great read. It doesn't matter if you are familiar with the history of Rome or not, she brings the characters to life like few other authors can, and creates a totally believable scenario from the immense amount of research she did prior to her writing.

James Michener - Which of his books did I like? Every last one of them!

I hope this is enough for now. It is hard to recommend a book to someone. Especially when you know next to nothing about them. I have read a lot of books in my life and it is hard to separate out the ones to reccomend; I have read so many good books. My folks gave me and my siblings a big advantage in this area. There was no TV in our house when I was a child and since we lived in the country, books were a constant influence. The interesting thing there is that my Dad, who was primarily responsible for this, wasn't near a voracious reader as any of us kids. Never understood this, or him, I guess. In later years he spent hours watching sports on TV; something I consider a great waste of time. I could give rat shit about whether the Broncs beat the Chiefs in a game, and I damn sure wasn't going to waste time watching the process. Thanks, Dad!

Why do men disrespect the Tgirl escorts and yet want to sleep with them?
 

Why do men consider the escorts business unethical and "sinful" ;) and yet drool to enjoy their services?

In one word Hypocricy

Now of course you meant only some men. As to why some men (and women)are hypocrites? Wow! Tall order there. Line up 100 hypocrites and you may find 100 differant reasons. One thing I have noticed. is that there seem to be a greater percentage of hypocrites found among "religious" people. In this case, I believe you would find that religious "guilt" would be responsible for quite a few of these two faced fellows.

We all rationalize the things we do, some more than others. And, sexual matters are one of the prime areas for this failing. We all have certain beliefs about what is right and wrong. And there is a great variance in where we draw the line that separates what is acceptable from what is not.

If we are honest, then what we profess as our position is the same as where we actually stand, and the same as where our behavior indicates we stand. What is really sad is that some people lie not so much to others as they lie to themselves. I am sure you know people like this. I myself would classify these as mental abberations, and possibly mental illness - depending on the severity of the case.

This brings up the question: What can be done about it? The only answer I can come up with is that hopefully they will change. It's not likely. Most people only change their thinking patterns when they get hit right in the face with something new and they are in a vulnerable position. That is why your religious converters have more success with the down and out, the hurting, the lost, the guilty-feeling, etc. Are you in a position to effect a change? Do you care enough about these people to expend the effort? Is there a danger to yourself in a confrontation? These are some of the questions only you can answer and must weigh carefully before acting.

Hi there.

You will ansewer all?

How about these two riddles?

They're kinda easy, here goes.

1- The condemmed man is offered a choice he tells the judge a true or false statement, if the statement is true they will drown him, if the statement is false, they will burn him, what would your statement be?

2- The riddle of the sphinks (excuse my french), what animal walks on 4 legs in the morning, 2 legd in the afternoon, and 3 legs in the night?

Please specify if you already knew the ansewers.

Good Luck.

Johndowe.

Jeanne d'Arc:: Joan of Arc
 

Why do you think was Joan condemned by the Church of blasphemy and executed in a ghastly manner? On May the 30th 1431, she was tied to a pole and burnt alive in the middle of a marketplace!!

500 years later, this same Joan is cannonised to Sainthood by the Vatican Church!!

My querries are:
1)How can a "blasphemous witch", as she was called, become a saint over time?

2) Jesus said in essence to love your enemy as yourself---to pray for and bless your enemy. Now how can the Church disobey it's God and inflict inhumane torture? In so doing, the Church is going against Christ himself!

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Easy ones and yes I heard the second one years ago, the answer of which is man.

As to the first one there is a multitude of statements you could make that are not provable one way or the other. You could say there are 16 planets circling the star Orion. Since they will not be able to prove your statement either way, they must defer sentance untill they can. Of course by that time your life will be long over so what do you care. There are a zillion statements that would work in this manner. Of course I suspect here that the answer you are looking for is a conundrum of some sort or another. A classic conundrum is the following:

"The second part of this statement is false, while the first part is true."

There are many like this around and there are many you may encounter in life. That is why there if the often used quote:

"damned if I do, damned if I don't"

I am curious to see if your answer eliminates the possibilities of both punishments or simply hanging hiss ass.

Image tweaking
 

1 ) Rationale simply put ? Well in those times, Secular Politics wielded Power through the Sword ofetn reinforcing its Social control by claiming religious precedents. With ever increasing power, Religious orders were able to tailor their coats to suit their own purposes and reverse previously spin-based decisions.

Power corrupts but to achieving absolute power one must surrender to corruption ( with Apologies for corrupting poor old Lord Acton's quote )

2 ) The only God the Christian Church of the time truly worshipped was Power.
As is so sadly all too often the case, genuine carriers of ' Christ's ' message of Love and Forgiveness were few and far between, and usually silenced by Fear of the consequences of speaking out too boldly.

Hi there.

The ansewer to the first riddle is: You will burn me.

if they go for the burn option the statement is therefore true they'd have to drown him, if they go for the drowning, the statement becomes false so, by their rules they can't execute him, et least not by burning or drowning.

JohnDowe.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I see Mel already beat me to the punch here, but I will tell you how I see it.

Question 1 Answer : First I would say that saint and witch are only labels. As labels they are only a tag which we use to denote something. Jeane d'Arc was neither a saint or a witch, her essence was/is separate from any label. Labels change and evolve over time. Ex. At one time the earth was flat and the center of the universe. If you didn't believe it, then off to the rack with you. Now we know the earth isn't flat, and we know that it certainly isn't anywhere near the center of the universe if there is such a position in a seemingly infinite cosmos. Yes, it is nice to know that the CC can change it's position on matters when it becomes politically expediant to do so. These guys are not stupid you know - witness the change in their stated position on evolution. This kinda leads into the next answer.

Question 2 Answer: "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" - Mat 7-20

The church could disobey their god because:

1. They really didn't believe there is a god and thus did not believe they would be accountable for their actions. And/Or...........
2. They were able to rationalize their actions by dismissing the core teachings of Jesus and pouncing on older teachings in the Old Testement which advocates attacking your enemies. Instead of turning the other cheek as Jesus advocated they were much more willing to smite them hip and thigh.
It's almost as if their bible was the Satanic Bible which urges:

"Hate your enemies with a whole heart," The Satanic Bible advises. "And if a man smite you on one cheek, smash him on the other! Smite him hip and thigh, for self-preservation is the highest law!"

3. In those days, the heads of the church were oftimes the most despicable sons a bitches that walked the earth. They were power-mongers whose main aim was the preservation of their control at any and all cost. They ruled through ignorance and the threat of excommunication and all that entails. They had the authority and the power to do pretty damn near anything they wanted. To put it simply, they were the survivors. They stamped out any dissenting views as heretical; as you may or may not know, the Crusades weren't just against Muslims, they also were against other branches of Christianity. Look up the crusades against the Cathars and the Albigensians if you are not familir with this topic.
I know my church history, even more so than the Founding Fathers of the United States did. They didn't put in the clauses separating Church and State on a whim. Considering it's bloody, bloody past, the Catholic Church has come back closer today to what Jesus taught. But, they still have a hell of a long way to go. When they take most of the resources they have and devote them to really helping the children of Jesus; they will then approach the ideals he spoke of. Meanwhile the Cardinals travel around in limos and fly in private jets...........they are still rationalizing their behavior.

Perhaps by now you have thought to youself, "this guy is ranting." Yes, if that is how you see it. I too like Jesus know that "most do not have ears to hear, nor eyes to see" to paraphrase him. Most people are so locked into their regular habits of thought that they cannot see the Truth right in front of them. My hope is not that you will believe my convictions; rather my hope is that you will find out for yourselves. That you will search out the truth of the matter for yourselves. That you will gather evidence and arguments from differant sources and both sides of the question. That you will weigh the data in a rational manner and decide for yourself.

Ah, I need a break. Catch ya all later, alligators.:lol:

Crusade in 1204
 

I am aware of the 4th crusade, when the Crusaders, the saviors of Christianity, ransacked and looted Churches in and around Constantinople; they murdered infants and raped most of the nuns too. I can see the kind of Holy Battle they were up to.

They can kill him in the water for the true statement and burn him after to fulfil the statement.

Hi there.

I think you're missing the point.

The statement canot be true & false at the same time!

Enough about that anyway.

JohnDowe.

Truths and lies
 

I always tell the truth even when I'm lieing:innocent:

The statement is not false, they will burn him, after drownig him.
Nothing says that only one thing will happen, or that he will die while burning.

Hi there.

It's a riddle, not a heavy phylodophycal discussion, it is supposed to be a clever ansewer to a unfair choice.

You have the riddle and you have the ansewer, what else do you want? (Rethorical, do not ansewer).

JohnDowe.

Question #8
 

Whats the string theory?:drool:

I think I have a neurosis to answer this question. I waited, cause it's not my answer threat, but I can't anymore. I'm sorry if Jenae wants to answer.


The string theory tries to explain the four fundamental interactions. To do that, it had to combine quantum mechanics and general relativity (gravitation).

The string theory is not one theory, but a bunch of similar theories with little differences. They are different approximations of the M-theory.

The theory says that the smallest parts are, not as in the standard model 0-dimensional dots, 1-dimensional strings (lines). The strings are closed or, in some theory, can be open. The different shape and the different vibration of the strings describe their properties. This vibrating strings form everything that we know. Even the vacuum is made up of strings.

The theory isn't finished or has been experimental proved. But it is on a good way to explain the world. E.g.:
The standard model gets with the big bang or black holes to gravitational singularity or spacetime singularity, cause of the 0-dimensional dots. Singularity is not defined in math. The string theory avoids this problem with the 1-dimensional strings.
Also quantum mechanics can be explained better and more logic.


If you meant the band string theory or the Star Trek novel, I can't help.

Thanks Tread, I am sure everyone got that.:lol:

And, thanks for the slap in the face from your previous post.:lol: It woke me up to some realities of the situation on this forum. I am still considering what I want to do about it.

Now, back to string theory. I didn't answer Sesame because he was just flucking with me. If he really wanted an answer to the question, I am sure there are a ton of pages on the internet that are devoted to the subject.

The developments in theoretical physics have opened up so many possibilities that are simply staggering to our concepts of what is. Just the issue of branes alone presnts so many possibile doorways to other realities. In the area of UFO studies it presents possible answers as to where they come from and what they are. Branes may also hold the key as to mysterious disapearances and appearances of people and things that are unexplainable up till now.

One of the many things about these new concepts that intrigues me is the possibility of a connection between the idea that we are basically comprised of energy, and the many concepts of gods, angels, and even man that define them as beings of light and energy. Time after time, in the history of mankind and his metaphysical beliefs, you encounter these notions.

Notions like: chakras, auras, "light of god", "inner light", etc. Even:

"you're here to be light, bringing out the God-colors in the world."
- Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:14) just one of many sayings that deal with light.

Food for thought??;) even for an theist like me.

String theory
 

Aww, C'mon, Sister Jenae, I couldnt see any clause in your thread saying,
"I wont entertain those questions, that have already been answered elsewhere in the infinite Internet!".

Well answered indeed! In that case, may I ask,
how many Strings are there?

For example, there are so many elements in the periodic table that combine in different proportions to create this world. Now, how many strings are there that combine to create this universe? Or is it a Multiverse? :p

So far, we find the smallest particle to be a Photon. Its even lighter and smaller than an electron. Photons are real particles. But then, photons are different as they vibrate in different frequencies.

Are these strings only a mathematical possibility or are they real, like photons?

Harumph!
 

I think all this stuff about string theory is a lot of mathematical hocus pocus.
there is no physical evidence for any of it. I am waiting for the Higgs Boson to arrive in the Large Hadron Collider, then, maybe, we can get a handle on what is going on in the subatomic world. :yes:

Also Jenae commented on energy. The Indian mystics contemplated the inner energy in humans and called it kundalini which is the latent female energy in all of us. Much of Tantric meditation involves activating this energy which transcends the ego and produces "enlightenment". Transsexuals and their admirers could be interested in this Tantric Yoga since the male and female energies are intertwined. :inlove:

The image is of a bisexual god/goddess worshiped in India.:respect:

In principle there are infinity possibilities of vibrating strings.
The problem is to detect and measure them. The strings are described in 32 dimensions. Until now the dimensions are reduced to 10-, 11- or 26-dimensions in the sting theories. The Branes Jenae talked are a way to reduce the dimensions to our 4 measurable, 3 room and 1 time dimension. Until this happens, the energy of strings is too high.
The other problem is the "bigness" of strings, 10^-35m = 0,0000000000000000000000000000000001m. No one can measure it today.

I'm sure the number of strings is limited strongly by conditions. Until now minimal 18 particles are theoretical known, and then there is vacuum, time, dark energy and dark madder (I'm sure I forgot something). But nobody knows how many.
In the string theory, vibrating strings form everything. Bosons (photons, gravitons, higgs-bosons, ...), leptons (electron, different neutrinos, ...) and Quarks.
Quarks and leptons form fermions. Fermions and bosons form hadrons. Hadrons and fermions form nucleons (proton, neutron). Nucleons and electrons form atoms (elements in the periodic table).

I never heard someone was able to measure their bigness. But they can only a bit bigger then the string that form it. Their mass is 0, until someone find anti gravitation you can't find something lighter. They can be created and can be destroyed, without noticeable particles. So there must be unknown strings everywhere.

You can't say something is real or not until it is proven. No one can prove it today. The string theory and the surrounding theories are not ready. They must develop further. Until now they are the best way to explain the word.
They are not a mathematical possibility, they are fundamental in the string theory. But the theory is only 1 mathematical possibility, but only a theory and not finished.



I trust the mathematical hocus pocus more than the religious hocus pocus. And as said, it's only a theory.

In Tantra you lose life energy when you ejaculate.

Tread
 

Tread
"In Tantra you lose life energy when you ejaculate."
Yes, perhaps that's why tranny lovers like to consume it! ;)

Anyway, Tread, you are very knowledgeable about nuclear theories. Do you think the Higgs is a valid theory or is something else coming along? :respect:

Photons ans Strings
 

About Strings
Dear Mister Tread,
It was nice reading your little article. But you forget one tiny detail. Its the Law of conservation of matter and energy.
Matter cannot be created, nor can it be destroyed.
Similarly, Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it only changes form.
Even If you apply E=mc^2 formula, matter only gets transferred to energy. So, the sumtotal of all energy always remains the same. Now, how can you say that this most fundamental of all particles, can be created or destroyed? If its created, whence does it come? (If it originates from something else, its not the smallest one! ) If destroyed, where does it go? Bothways, its fundamental nature is proven false.

Now, about Photons:

We all know that Light is Radiant energy. By Light I include visible light and both sides of the spectrum. Radio waves with the lowest frequencies of 10^2 hertz,... microwaves 10^11 hertz... visible light 10^14 hz... UV 10^16hz... Xrays 10^19 hz....to Gamma Rays 10^20... cosmic rays 10^22hz the whole bunch! We can explain them by the wave theory as Electro Magnetic Radiation. That explains the velocity of light, reflection, refraction and so on.

But, Light can also be explained as consisting of particles, which explains Defraction and deviation of light from a straight line, while passing masses of great concentration and magnitude. Like planets, stars, black-holes. Scientists say that this happens due to the warping of the matrix around those bodies. And Photons (Light particles) follow the matrix. This my friend, can only be explained by the theory of Particles. And where there are particles, there has got to be some mass and bigness!

Higgs
 

You guys are ignoring the Higgs boson, which is the fundamental particle which creates MASS in other particles. The following is from Wikipedia.

The Higgs boson particle is one quantum component of the theoretical Higgs field. In empty space, the Higgs field has an amplitude different from zero, i.e., a non-zero vacuum expectation value. The existence of this non-zero vacuum expectation plays a fundamental role: it gives mass to every elementary particle which has mass, including the Higgs boson itself. In particular, the acquisition of a non-zero vacuum expectation value spontaneously breaks electroweak gauge symmetry, which scientists often refer to as the Higgs mechanism. This is the simplest mechanism capable of giving mass to the gauge bosons while remaining compatible with gauge theories. In essence, this field is analogous to a pool of molasses that "sticks" to the otherwise massless fundamental particles which travel through the field, converting them into particles with mass which form, for example, the components of atoms.:yes:

Time for a lesson on the electromagnetic spectrum, Sesame.

The lowest radio waves start and 10^3 hertz. Lower frequencies are referred to as voice frequencies. Microwaves start at just below 10^9 hertz and go to just below 10^12 hertz. Visible light is just below 10^15 hertz. In between microwaves and visible light is infrared. The rest I will agree with you.

Shedding Light on ILLU
 

The extremely low freq Radio waves start from 3 x 10^1 to 3 x 10^2 hz.
Ila dear, learn from brother Sesame! For a detailed knowledge of radio waves, see the picture below. :D

I knew it would come from you, Ila!
Microwaves= 3 x 10^8 to 3 x 10^11 hz
So, is 10^11 hz wrong? :no:

Visible Light is 4 x 10^14 to 7.5 x 10^14 hz

Visible Light lies between Ultra Violet and InfraRed range.
UV lies between 10^15 to 10^17 hz. And I said 10^16 hz, so am I wrong?

So, you should agree with me all along, Ila, my friend!:p

Frequency Charts
 

The frequency charts for Radio waves and visible light are given below.

I cannot completely agree with you, sesame. Radio waves are always considered to start in the VLF range 3 - 30 khz (3 x 10^3 at the lower end). Anything below that is audio frequencies and frequencies at 3 x 10^1 and 3 x 10^2 are audible to humans.

You are right about microwaves, but your first answer only gave the upper end of microwaves. The least you could have done if you are going to quote only one number is to give the midrange.

The rest I will agree with you on. And yes, I was being picky, but only because it's fun to debate with you.

Remember sesame, tread lightly when you walk into the area of my trade.

Light on Radio waves
 

Ila dear,
Please shed your majestic gaze on the above picture.
You will see, to your amazement, that Radio waves begin at 30 hertz only in the Extremely Low Frequency Range. ELF.

After that comes Ultra Low Freq beginning at 300 Hz. ULF.

After that comes Very Low Freq, starting at 3000 Hz. Its called VLF.

Refesh your info from time to time. Its very helpful.

Lots of love,
~sesame :p

Light and sound
 

Dear friend,
We are talking about Light here. Light is ELECTRO MAGNETIC RADIATION. It doesnt need any medium to travel through.

Sound is NOT an ELECTRO MAGNETIC RADIATION. It is only the vibration of the particles of a medium. Its a form of energy though. It cannot travel without a medium.

Human Audio range is between 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz. So, even though 30Hz sound overlaps with 30 hz Radio wave, we cannot hear a radio wave, because it doesnt vibrate air.

Light and Sound are two different things.:yes:

I said without noticeable (for us by now) particles, and there must be unknown strings everywhere. I meant creating out of these strings and destroyed into these strings. I had better said changes into stings and photons.
But in today measurement we can not detect strings. It seems like they are created and destroyed out of and into nothing. Not clear written by me.

I did not say photons are most fundamental of all particles. The strings are the most fundamental objects that form photons, in string theory.

If you can explain reflection, refraction and so on fully by only using Electro Magnetic Radiation, you would know more than anyone else. This are also effects that only can explained with light as wave and particle.

Photons have no electric charge. But they carry electromagnetic force.
It could be possible that this causes the detraction of light by passing masses of great concentration and magnitude.
As long as nobody knows how gravitation, gravitons, works, we could not exclude an interaction of with zero mass photon.
It could also be possible that the photon has a mass, but then we need something new for quantum mechanics. It needs zero mass photons.
I don't know for sure, but in string theory every one calculates with zero mass photons.

If some one understands light fully or can combine quantum mechanics and general relativity, the Nobel prize is sure.




You answered the most yourself with wikipedia.

The Higgs bosons (there are five kinds of it) and the Higgs field are the easiest way to explain mass. Without mass none physic theory would work.
Maybe mass is more complicated, I don't know, but something must cause the mass.

If Higgs bosons exist, we are very close (a few years) to find them in particle accelerators like the LHC (Large Hadron Collider).

OOPS!! Big typo error there! Meant to type atheist there but I dropped the "a" somehow and didn't proofread as I was in a hurry to get somewhere. Bit of differance between an atheist and a theist, doncha know.:lol:

Looking over the posts above, I have noticed that some of you have a habit of stating theories as facts. Also some of the paraphrasings here are ambiguous and somewhat incorrect. I believe we had all best keep in mind that most of this field is simply theory built upon mathematical constructs or models. It is going to take some time and a great deal of moolah to prove or disprove much of it.

And if we move from the super microscopic view of particle physics to the other end of the scale, and we look at the big, big picture and start discussing black holes, universe creation, etc?? Much the same situation. A lot of theories based on mathematical projections and little proof for now. So where are we?

I say it doesn't matter. The important thing is that at least some of mankind is reaching out to try and understand our place in the grand scheme of things. It is really pretty damn inspiring to me when I think about how far we have come since the "flat earth" state of knowledge. I realize that we are fast approaching the limit of what one man can learn in a lifetime in order to apply what he knows to new possibilities. We may have to develop artificial intelligence in order to progress much more. The problem with men as thinking entities is that we have to devote much of our time and resources to just plain living day to day, and all that entails.

As far as I can see, it is all just another part of the evolution of mankind. The big question is if we will survive to continue down the road. What will favor the survival of the fittest in the years to come? Will it be religious fanaticism? Will it be tolerance and brotherly love? Will it be just a matter of chance? Your guess is as good as mine.

Wikipedia: Radio waves begin at 3Hz.

Sorry, have correct. Threre are radio waves under 3Hz, also wikipedia.

Alchemy
 

What do you have to say about transmutation of elements?
Yes, I'm talking about converting other metals to Gold!

Gold
Atomic num= 79
Group=11
Period=6
Series= Transition Metals
Crystal Struc= Cubic face centered
Latin= Aurum

I think, Hg-->Au has the greatest potential.:D

Mercury
Latin= hydrargyrum (liquid silver)
Atomic num= 80
Period, series are same as Gold.
Group=12
Crystal structure= Rhombohedral

Possible, already done, but highly inefficient.

It's logical possibility in physic standard model. Lead into gold, Platinum into gold and Mercury into gold have successfully be done.

From your kind question, I see that you are not unknown of transmutation of elements. So what do you want to ask really?;)

[quote=sesame;101267]What do you have to say about transmutation of elements?

************************************************** *************
http://home.att.net/~LCMArtistsmgmt/...lf_POUSSIN.jpg

And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it. Exodus 32-20 (King James Version) Note - calf was made of gold

So what is it with GOLD? What was the value of gold to ancient peoples? Why did the Incas gather so much gold, yet used only a small portion of it for religious purposes and some jewelry. Why did ancient miners of 5000 years ago dig hundreds of feet through solid rock to extract it? Is there anything to ORMUS?, shrew bread, the Philosopher's Stone, etc. ?????????

Why do you believe mercury is the best candidate for transmuting to gold? Is it because the ancient Chinese believed so? Did this idea migrate from the East through India and Arabia and from there to the alchemists of Euroupe? Is it just a big coincidence that mercury is associated closely with gold in alchemy texts throughout differant cultures and times, and is right next to gold in our present day periodical table of the elements??????

Getting back to the golden calf; What was the purpose of Moses burning the calf, grinding it down, chucking it upon water, and having all the people drink thereof? Normal burning of gold would simply melt it; so did Moses burn it in a special way? And how do you grind gold? Was Moses converting the gold into a monoatomic state? ORMUS?



;) ???????????????????????


Sesame, I see you have a new Avatar. Can we interpret the rays as light rays? And who was Lucifer (Satan) but "the light bringer"? And then there is the Sun - Son connection. :lol::lol:

In water extract cyanide dissolution (I hope it is translated right), gold reacts with oxygen, and other elements, and form “metal complex” structure. And this metal complex can possibility be grinded.
I doubt that Moses knew this. But there is a possibility to let gold react with oxygen (“burn”). It would be a bad idea to drink something that contains cyanide.

Why mercury: I’m sure sesame can answer you.

To the other questions: I don’t have a clue about ancient history and their psychology.

This thread is called “Ask Jenae for real answers – no games”. I know I started unasked answering, but now you start questioning.:p

__________________________________________________ ____________

I was using the Socratic method to answer his query as to my views on transmutation. Some investigation into the various subjects I mentioned would open a variety of interesting avenues to approaching the subject of transmutation. Have you googled Ormus to see where that lead you?

Oh yeah, buy the unbelievable wonder powder that heals all kind of disease, only 70$ per ounce.:lol:
Totally full of pseudo science and false explanations.
I was talking about influence nucleus and electrons of an atom.

__________________________________________________ _____________

That was a very shallow hole you dug in your search Try this instead:

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/ormus/ormus.htm

Why Mercury?
 

Compare between the atomic structures of Mercury and Gold.
Just take away one proton from Mercury's nucleus and you will get Gold!
Well, somehow you will have to get rid of 3 Neutrons also.:D

Also see the electronic orbits of Gold.
2, 8, 18, 32, 18 and 1
It's electrons are almost satiated, thats why it chemically reacts so scarcely. Just take away that extra electron and it will become completely Inert.

By Rasayana Alchemy

Rasayana is Indian alchemy, thousands of years old. The Yogis could do it in ancient times (as the legend goes). Some yogis until 100 years ago, could somehow digest Arsenic and mix it with their digestive juices (bile). Next they anointed copper in that juice and heat it for hours. When everything cooled, the copper would change to Gold!

The great Buddhist Philosopher Nagarjuna of India, invented 16 methods of gradually purifying Mercury. That involved several chemical reactions. Eventually Mercury would lose the affinity to react at all and its property would change. What is left behind, is a powder. That powder, when added to molten copper and heated for several days, yields Gold.

There is another method prevalent among the wise sages of the Himalayas (called, the Rasayaniks= chemists). They dip mercury for a whole year in a special mineral soln. The rest is the same as above. Actually these men are not in it for the Gold. Gold is a by-product to a medicinal substance that is supposed to extend Life... to many more years.;)


The western alchemists searched ardently for the Philosopher's stone. Their secrets were shrouded in the fog of myths. They gave each element a unique nickname and a symbolical expression. Even the intermediate compounds and alloys had secret identities! Below are 2 pictures depicting such symbols.

Sun
 

Jenae, thats my self portrait, you were talking about. Sun's son... well, are we not? We are each a bundle of the sun's energy. The Sun is the source of all our energy. Chemical energy, heat energy, even the food we eat has it's source in the sun.

I don't know what you want to tell me with the link. I have read similar articles before it. The only useable links refer to the admitted mathematical physicist Sir Roger Penrose and his controversial model of spirit and consciousness.
I thought that you as atheist (not agnostic or theist), would be more critical to such theories.
The rest are physical effects that are without evidence connected to "ORMUS".

It is highly suspicious that it exists in high amounts, is easy to find, has incredible properties, only known by ancient cultures, and nobody discovered it before 1977.

In the end it leads to the wonder powder that heals everything.

Once again you are generalizing and incorrect
 

__________________________________________________ ______________-

"The sun is the source of all our energy" Not so!

Consider geothermal energy. Geothermal energy's originates from the consolidation of dust and gas which formed this planet along with most of the rest of our solar system more than 4 billion years ago. Since the same process formed the sun then you could point to this consolidation as the source of all our energy. And then you could point even further back to the Big Bang if you wanted to.

Then consider nuclear energy. It's source lies in the beginnings of the universe also and is not derived from the sun. Then consider that there are also forms of magnetic and electrical energy that are not derived from the sun either. So???????

Oh, I do tend to be critical, but I choose not to blind myself to possibilities
 

I thought that you as atheist (not agnostic or theist), would be more critical to such theories. - Tread

The fact is that I do folow the recomendation given by John Trapp
in his Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, 1647:

"This is to be taken with a grain of salt."

But on the other hand I try to be receptive to the idea that there may be a kernel of truth in old legands, myths, religions, folk remedies, etc.... I do not say "where there is smoke, there is fire." Rather I say "where there is smoke, there may be fire."

Please note that I was neither advocating that Ormus had any value or even any legitimacy; nor was I saying that it was pure baloney. I was just throwing possibilities into the wind to see what they might yield. I too have a great deal of skepticism regarding the whole Orme story and the vendors of white powder of gold (ORMUS). And yes, it seems to me that if there was anything much to it; we would be hearing more from the scientific world on the subject.

There have always been charletans who come up with all kinds of "miracle cures and treatments" involving little understood aspects of science. Witness all the treatments involving use of electricity that were so prevalent in the early part of the last century. Many of these were even endorsed by the medical establishment of the time. Of course most of these were later proved to be hogwash, but today there are approved uses of electricity in the medical field, notably for pain supression. And how many people are alive today due to electrical shocks to restart an arrested heart.

The point is that until more evidence is in I'll just say MAYBE.

"Maybe so, maybe not"

Sun = Energy Source
 

Quite so! The earth is a piece of the Sun! We belong to the Solar family, remember? Furthermore, can you eat, breathe, drink water, get sunlight, burn patrol and firewood without the sun? NO, you cant!

Food: ultimate source= Plants ---> Photosynthesis--->Sun

Oxygen: same as above

Water: Rain and snow--->Icecap--->Rivers--->oceans--->evaporation--->sun

Patrol wood bioenergy: Plants--->Photosynthesis--->sun

__________________________________________________ _________________

I can see you didn't head the class in the area of science. "The Earth is a piece of the sun." The sun and the earth had a common origin, as I said above, in the consolidation process. NO! The earth did not come from the star we call the Sun. By the time the proto star had compressed enough to begin the fusion process and then be considered a star, the earth had already assumed most of it's planetary mass and orbit.

You also talk about water in relation to energy. I suppose you think water came from the sun also? No!, most of the water on Earth is believed to have come from comets.

You mention petroleum, at least I guess that is what you meant by "patrol". Yes, most of the science world believes that petroleum comes originally from plants and animals. However, there are dissenting view on this from some.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/Energy.html

You seem to think that by stressing accepted scientific facts that you are proving something. Your whole argument fails because the earth did not come from the sun; instead, they had a common origin. Just the same as you did not come from your sisters and brothers; rather you share a common origin.

Wouldn't this make you more an agnostic, than an atheist?

Science
 

Science is primarily dealing with quantitative aspects of reality. The ability to measure and collect data are the essence of science. The qualitative aspects of reality are not easily measured. This is the realm of philosophy, myth and religion. How do we measure a dream or a thought? They are real as far as our mind is concerned. The Indian mystics recognized this and spent a lot of time meditating on the mind's relationship to reality. Amazingly, they comprehended many aspects of reality, such as the age of the earth and the big bang thousands of years ago. Without science, how did they do this? The mind is composed of the same elements as the stars, add some energy, billions of years of evolution and viola comprehension becomes part of the universe. :cool:

The trouble with words and labels.
 

__________________________________________________ ________________

Def. from The American College Dictionary (applicable parts)

agnostic - one who holds that the ultimate cause (God) and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable or that human knowledge is limited to experiance.

atheist - one who denies or disbelieves the existance of God or gods.

Damn, do I have to pick one. :lol:

I am an atheist in the sense that I disbelieve the existance of God(s) as supernatural beings. Having been raised in a primarily Judeo-Christian culture and that history being the one I have studied the most; I have not the slightest belief in the existance of God, Jehovah, YAHWEH, EL-SHADDAI, etc.... As far as I am concerned, the ideas of God promoted by Jews, Muslims, and Christians is fanciful nonsense. Each of these religions would seem to have the God of the patriarch Abraham as their one true god. And yet look at the differances between them. And why would there be any differances if these faiths sprang from the same source. No, it is because these faiths are from the minds of men, and all men's minds are differant and reflect the various influences life has made upon them. Then you have, each faith splintered into so many differant branches; some with so little in common that they may as well be differant faiths. If there was such a god, then he must be a schizophrenic if one was to do a clinical assessment of the evidence of the behavior patterns attributed to him.

I am not an agnostic because I do believe that if the race of mankind survives long enough, we will expand our scope of knowledge to understand the essential nature of things. Look how many things we already understand the cause and effect for that were once things attributed to the gods. We no longer believe the sun is a chariot of fire being pulled across the sky. We know thunder and lightening have nothing to do with Thor, Jupiter or even Susanoo or Chaac. Droughts and plagues are not sent by gods to punish us. People are not possessed by demons, rather they suffer from mental illness. (I would even say they people are not possessed of the Holy Spirit, rather they are suffering a mental aberation.) It is very simple to see why biblical type miracles do not happen anymore (outside of the National Enquirer anyway). Think for a bit about how many things we take for granted as a common occurance would be heralded as a miracle a thousand years ago.

"And the lord NASA did speak to his child NEILA, who had journeyed to the moon in a silvery chariot, and commanded him to return to him, and to convey homeward the rocks he did find there"

FDR said that we have nothing to fear except fear itself. And what is so true for mankind except that we fear most what we don't understand. Ignorance is the prime cause of fear. I don't fear God because I understand. I do fear what paths ignorance and fear may lead us down. I despair of mankind when I see how easily fear-mongering leaders can motivate people to go against the basic tenets of their religious beliefs by using religion to foster hatred against others who are "differant".

Aw hell, I need a break here.

Well sister Jenae, if a person thinks that petroleum or coal came from any other source than plants and animals, he is a moron!

I didnt say that water came from the sun, I merely referred to the H2O cycle of evaporation and rainfall. The energy behind that cycle is sunlight and heat. You must should have paid more attention in the geography and biology classes, instead of making origami, hiding in the last bench!:p

If there was no sunlight, all life on earth would perish due to starvation and cold.(may be some anaerobic bacteria and virus may go on living...) All the food we eat, has its source in the plants. No sun, no plants, no food, understand, little sister?

Where do you think all this oxygen in the air we breath came from? The plants photosynthesized and filled the atmosphere with oxygen. Before that, the air contained all the other gases, but no oxygen. Again, dear, no sun, no oxygen to breath. There was oxygen on earth, trapped in compounds, but not in the free molecular state that we inhale.

And about the origin of the earth, scientists are of many opinions. You are stressing on only one of them.
Even if the earth and sun are brothers, for arguments sake, my other points stick, they dont fail. Your Logic is horrible!

Take special classes in Geography, biology and logic; it might help you and change your life!

Do we reincarnate?
 

I would like to believe so. It would seem to be a more equitable way for one's soul to progress towards a higher state of being. It is obvious that some people have a much easier path to be a good person than others whose path is strewn with obstacles. What chance does a child who is born of a drug addict mother and an alchoholic incestuopus pedophile father to grow into a person of high morals and behavior. One hell of a lesser chance than a child who is born of and raised by 2 good parents who teach love and compassion by their examples of behavior. It makes a nice picture that each soul would be able to experiance many opportunies through many lives to progress and eventually would reach a state of Nirvana and beyond.

But do I believe so? The answer is NO!

If you want to know why, ask me.

[quote=randolph;101469], they comprehended many aspects of reality, such as the age of the earth and the big bang thousands of years ago. Without science, how did they do this?
____________________________________________

Somebody told them. I refer you to the Library of Halexandria which google will lead you to. Read their version of the history of the world. While I don't think they have all of the answer, I do think that they sound a hell of a lot more credible than the biblical history which any student of history knows is a mishmash of legend, myth, and wishful thinking.

Q & A #10
 

WHY?

What is beyond Nirvana?

Good post!:respect:

TraiLokye Yani Bhutani,
Tani Sarvani Dehatah.
~Yoga Shastras. (sanskrit)

Meaning: Whatever is contained in the Universe, is already there inside the human body. Whatever happens in the Macrocosm, can be known by knowing the Kundalini trapped inside the Microcosm. The Nine chakras resemble the external Universe.

No. Time for humanity to let this fairytale go.

Soul
 

I don't believe in reincarnation, however, as I have mentioned before, the mind goes beyond quantitative science, it is qualitative. Discovering ones kundalini latent energy will confirm this. Transcending the ego and becoming aware of ones inner female energy is "enlightment". She is often called Uma Parvati the inner goddess, the soul. I worship her, she is the ultimate pleasure. :heart::inlove:

Soul
 

What is the mind then, if it can transcend the physical plane?

On one hand you admit the inner God /Goddess as the soul; and then you deny the existence of the eternal soul!

Does this Inner Goddess die? Was she ever born out of anything?
If not, you and I are talking about the same thing.
You call it Uma and I call it Soul, someone else calls it God.

The Yoga Sutras say that we are born again and again because of this desire for ephemeral things. When we realise our inner nature, which is complete and eternal, we do not thirst anymore... for we become one with the ultimate source of bliss and peace. That is called Kaivalya or Nirvana.

soul
 

I am not Indian or Hindu so this is difficult for me to conceptualize into words. My inner female spirit/soul is unique to me as I "view" her. When I die this female energy returns to the vast field of female energy in the universe. An analogy might be the Higgs field, which I imagine as female dark energy, which science is unable to "see". Each one of us, while living, has some of that energy within us. That energy is the same in all of us. I relate to mine as Uma. Another adept may relate to it in another way, but always female.
I think the Yoga Sutras are another way of saying that when we transcend our ego, we no longer direct our desires and needs outward. I meditate for two hours every morning. During that time I love the goddess. We play with each other, she takes many forms including transsexual, she is very erotic. I feel that since she is a spirit lacking a "body" she enjoys the sensual pleasures created within my body, my body is hers. The ego strongly resists this relationship. He wants to control all of my thoughts and actions. However, Uma is a lot more fun to be with. After my meditation, my ego returns and the usual daily life returns.
As the Dali Lama once said when asked "what is the meaning of life" he answered, "pleasure". :yes:

Randolph,
Did you notice one thing? The Ask me oracle is not answering our queries anymore. We are answering each other. I think thats a degeneration of commitment on her part. Bad Bumblebee! :D

What you are doing in your mind during your vivid meditation is Visualisation of the Tantras. Now, Tantras dont deny the existence of the Soul, but their philosophy is based on the evolution of the Soul to power and freedom. Have you read MahaNirvana Tantra or, Tantra of the Great Liberation? There is a nice version translated by Sir John Woodroffe.

The mind is the group behavior of the neurons that make up the brain. If the properties of neurons and chemicals in the brain are fully accounted for along with how they interact with each other, then the mind becomes a quantitative science. Since we do not know all the all the properties of neurons or at least cannot fully grasp how they interact with each other then it only appears to go beyond quantitative science. That is only our failure to fully grasp what is going on.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Arthur C. Clarke

Thanks
 

Thanks Sesame,
You are the first person that I have been able to share these ideas with. I have many books in eastern mysticism and have been meditating for ten years. I tried go get my wife interested but she refused. There are no gurus where I live so I have taken the path alone. Thanks for the references, I will check them out. :yes:

the mind
 

We will probably eventually build a machine that can read thoughts. That could get us closer to "knowing" the mind. However, we still do not understand quantum mechanics. The mathematics work but as Fineman said "nobody understands quantum mechanics". We are no further along than we were sixty years ago. Until we can come up with a quantum theory compatible with Einstein's, the mind will always remain an enigma from a "scientific" standpoint. Until then, the goddess rules! :yes:

Neurons don't depend on our understanding to work the way they do. The mind is quantitative regardless of our understanding of the processes. Don't make the mistake of believing in Idealism. And by the way, we have made a lot of advances in quantum mechanics in the last 60 years.

Do T/girls
 

As a old in age only Australian bloke do T/girls seek to find true love like marriage??. I have only been here a few weeks and my readings so far have not uncovered this topic.

__________________________________________________ _________________

I think they are just like everybody else. Mainly they are looking for love and acceptance. Marriage would be a possibility after that, if they live in a locale where the laws allow same sex marriages, and they wish to have the benefits of marriage. As the stigma of living togather in "sin' fades away in many cultures, there is less and less reason to get married now outside of tax benefits, insurance purposes, etc. Legitimizing offspring is of almost no concern unless it makes it easier to adopt children. I am not informed at all on that possibility.

Msg
 

Is there a remedy for MSG poisoning ? I got very sick from that darn stuff this weekend. Had to call out sick Monday. It makes me feel like I'm hungover with the Flu.

So Mr Sesame, ref. your assertion
" Matter cannot be created, nor can it be destroyed ",
and " Similarly, Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it only changes form "

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MATTER MEETS ANTIMATTER ? ( The existence of both has been proved experimentally )

I'd be interested to see the theoretical Interaction Equations.

Oblige me please.

MSG Poisoning?
 

First off there is no known antidote for msg poisoning that I could find that was absolutely guaranteed or recommended by authorities in this area. Possible antidotes include vitimins B-3, B-6, taurine (like in Red Bull), aspirin or ibuprofin, and ingestion of L-Glutamine which you can find supplements of in the vitimin/supplement section at the store.

A chinese guy that runs a resturant (famous users of MSG) says that a teaspoonful of salt dissolved in some Coca Cola will do the trick.

I do have a question concerning this. How do you know that it was MSG poisoning? You related flu-like symptoms. Perhaps it was a strain of flu or some other bug. I have had the topics of MSG and aspartame poisoning brought to my attention at various times due to the fact that I am a Diet Mt. Dewolic. I have not experianced any problems from these products that I have noticed. Maybe I am just not sensitive to either one.

[quote=Cocks with beauty;101998]
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN MATTER MEETS ANTIMATTER ?
__________________________________________________ _______________

.
E = mc²

The reaction of 1 kg of antimatter with 1 kg of matter would produce 1.8×1017 J (180 petajoules) of energy (by the mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc²), or the rough equivalent of 47 megatons of TNT.

The above is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

Are the SI Units (like kg and J) so unknown in the USA, that you have to link them?
Why USA, Burma and Liberia don't accept le Système international d'unités, like everyone else?

Msg
 

MSG (monosodium glutamate) is a salt like substance. My experience was at a Tai restaurant, apparently the food was loaded with MSG and I got heart palpitations and an asthma attack. It's bad stuff in large doses. :frown:

Metric
 

Gasp, do you think as true Americans we are going to accept socialist commie pinko things like the metric system? ;):lol:

OK I'm pulling back the question, I fit is necessary to post Links.:p
It has nothing to do with them. They are only able to use the right system.

************************************************** ******

Although I got a chuckle out of Randolph's reply; the answer is; No, they are not so unknown. As I stated below that, it was from a Wilkipedia page. When I copied and pasted; it brought the hyperlinks along with it.

I don't know exactly why the USA never completly switched over to the metric system. I remember that they said we would over 40 years ago when I was in school, but it hasn't happened yet. Right now we have a mixed up system. Think how lucky folks are in other countries. I have to have two sets of mechanics tools just to work on my vehicles.

The progress towards metric usage in the USA is happening; it is just rather slow. Just another example of the "will of the people" in action.
People have a natural resistance to change. Most likely that is an inborn survival trait. They resist change unless there is a clear-cut advantage to it. So far, this country has been able to get by without changing for the most part. Other countries had to change to compete economically. In areas like the sciences; the USA change was instituted long ago. Most of the Federal government has changed to the metric system.

One area that has changed is that alcohol (booze) is sold by the metric system. It is now sold in metric containers with a 750 ml bottle replacing the former "fifths" which were about 757 ml. Beer however is still measured by the old standard ounces like soda pop. Both usually display the metric volume in parenthesis also.

88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 888888888888888

Sounds like you may be sensitive to the nasty stuff. Maybe you should try the salt-Coke recipe or have a Red Bull with your next Thai. But then I have heard warnings about Red Bull also:lol: Maybe it is just best to practice the old adage about "all things in moderation."

Now you see it, now you don't
 

I don't want people to think I am replying for Sesame, or that I am trying to take anything away from Jenae's authorship of this Thread, but it looks as though you have assumed that nothing is left when Antimatter hits Matter.
This is not so. Almost invariably intense Gamma Radiation is created with a very short duration, which is why I would imagine Jenae quoted E=mc2. In fact the velocity of stellar Gamma Ray emissions is far less than the speed of light, which is why it takes a hell of a long time to reach instruments here on Earth, and sometimes never reaches us at all if it is not aligned with our galaxy. Only a small proportion of Gamma Radiation received from space can be accounted for in this way, and Matter-Antimatter interactions in Space are one of the Holy Grails sought by many Astrophysicists.

And yes, the product of Matter-Antimatter interaction is pure energy ( mostly Gamma Rays )

What irritates some Astronomers is the observable fact that some stars apparently self-destruct without any apparent residual radiation ! Spooky stuff eh ?

[

What irritates some Astronomers is the observable fact that some stars apparently self-destruct without any apparent residual radiation ! Spooky stuff eh ?[/quote]
************************************************** *******
Not sure what you mean by "spooky", and really am puzzled by the Astronomers being irritated by it. I for one can accept that we are limited in our observations by what our senses and instruments can detect. No need to get mad, get even! Build a new theory, based on the data you have, to account for it, and figure out a way to test the theory. Do again and again as necessary until you get it right. Only thus will you achieve harmony and enjoy peace and tranquility.:lol:

petajoules
 

[QUOTE=Jenae LaTorque;102046]Hey Jenae,
What would happen if I tried to peta your joules? :lol:

msg
 

After many years of sometimes getting this weird sickness and wondering what it was it was suggested to me to check content labeling. I had purchased a store brand of bread crumbs that I knew didnt have msg. I purchased more in a different flavor ( plain and Italian style) Got sick looked at labels again still none in the plain however the Italian style had it! I've also gotten sick from frozen pizzas that didnt have msg listed in contents but I knew the symptoms so it was in there somewhere.

Rachel
 

Homemade cure for food poisoning. I was deadly ill last night. I drank huge quantities of water and vomited 4 times. My fever receded instantly and I felt better. After that I prepared a solution with glucose and salts and kept drinking it to prevent dehydration.

Metric vs mad
 

The metric system is much more scientific than the ounce pound foot mile hodge podge.

The metric system progresses in Tens. Its clean and uncomplicated.
mili centi deci meter deca hecto Kilo
Perfection!

Old English system: Jumps in threes and twelves... usually;)

1 digit=3/4 inch
1 Nail=3 digits = 2+1⁄4 inches = 1⁄16 yard
1 palm=3 inches
1 foot=13 inches... 12 inches from 1066AD onwards!
1 cubit=From fingertips to elbow, 18 inches.
1yard=36 inches
1 fathom= left fingertip to right fingertip with arms outstretched= 6 feet (not always!! :lol:)
1 rod=16 1/2 feet, used to be 20 feet earlier.
1 furlong= 660 feet=40 rods
(One plough's furrow long; in Saxon, furrow =furh)
1 mile=1760 yards= 5280 feet=8 furlongs... after 1066ad, became 5000 feet.

You see, its like some private measuring system going haywire! Those ancient barters and farmers didnt care about science or measurement standards. They managed with whatever they had, palms, hands, feet, ploughs even!

Do you think NASA uses this mad system in it's space programs? No. They use the metric system for scientific endeavours.

Balance of energy
 

The sumtotal of all matter and energy in the universe is a constant. When matter and animatter collide, the result is not NOTHING, but the release of huge amounts of energy in the form of Gamma Photons. Each gamma photon carries 511 Kilo electronVolts of energy. If you apply E=mc^2, you will see that the matter-energy equation still holds true.

Antimatter~ example
When a very fast proton collides with a Hydrogen neucleus consisting of 1proton only, the proton and it's kinetic energy is converted to a neutron, an antiproton and a meson. The total electrical and the baryon charges are conserved in this materialization.

But the question is, if there is matter(mostly) and antimatter in this Universe, why doesnt it self-destruct?

What was it then with the Mars Climate Orbiter 98? Ok, it was a NASA subcontractor from Lockheed Martin.