Free speech.

[bogan]

I can hear Ed turning in his grave.

Nah, it's a bit cold out, won't turn over in those conditions; he'd have to leave the headlights on for 20mins first...

Yeah, I never really imagined you'd be interested in opening your mind.

I trust that now bogan has publicly stated his intention to watch the series with an open mind, that he'll follow through with it.

I suspect I might be disappointed though.

*start the series

[pritch]

What makes it science is the robustness of the method.

Science says that ghosts have neither mass nor energy, therefore they can exist only in the minds of men.
Science though has neither mass nor energy, therefore it too can exist only in the minds of men.

[mashman]

Science says that ghosts have neither mass nor energy, therefore they can exist only in the minds of men.
Science though has neither mass nor energy, therefore it too can exist only in the minds of men.

Human beings are 99% nothing.

[FJRider]

Science says that ghosts have neither mass nor energy, therefore they can exist only in the minds of men.
Science though has neither mass nor energy, therefore it too can exist only in the minds of men.

If Light can be seen ...it must exist. It too has no mass or energy.

[swbarnett]

If Light can be seen ...it must exist. It too has no mass or energy.

Yes, a photon is massless but it has energy.

Besides, we don't see light. Light is detected by our eyes, what we see is the brain's interpretation of the nerve impulses that light gets translated into.

[FJRider]

Yes, a photon is massless but it has energy.

Besides, we don't see light. Light is detected by our eyes, what we see is the brain's interpretation of the nerve impulses that light gets translated into.

So ... for things to be seen ... it must have (measureable ??) energy ... ???

[husaberg]

If Light can be seen ...it must exist. It too has no mass or energy.

errr light is clearly made of particles, so it has mass, it is also a form of electromagnetic energy.

[FJRider]

errr light is clearly made of particles, so it has mass, it is also a form of electromagnetic energy.

If a ghost can be seen ... it must clearly be seen (excuse the pun) to have particles ... thus mass.

Measuring the particle content of a ghost might be easier said than done.

Just because it has NOT been done ....

[husaberg]

If a ghost can be seen ... it must clearly be seen (excuse the pun) to have particles ... thus mass.

Measuring the particle content of a ghost might be easier said than done.

Just because it has NOT been done ....

Show me a ghost and we will continue..........
Otherwise its just Katmaning up the thread.

[Zedder]

Human beings are 99% nothing.

Human beings are 60% water.

[Ulsterkiwi]

So, your example was one of experimental repetition, but your point was that experimental repetition isn't required/possible/integral to science? help a guy out here will you, just what are you on about?

You probably need to read the post again. The first part answered your question, it was not my example. You are also using words I did not use nor even inferred. I did not say it was not possible to use experimental repetition nor did I say it was not an integral part of science, in fact I said the opposite. I said it was not the only way to produce scientific evidence.

The example I gave relating to Fenoterol was very clear. Overwhelming evidence was produced to show the drug was suspect and was in fact linked to a number of deaths. There were NO experiments involved in producing this evidence.

[swbarnett]

So ... for things to be seen ... it must have (measureable ??) energy ... ???

In essence, yes. If a photon didn't have energy it wouldn't react with the rods and cones in our eyes to produce nerve impulses. Also, solar panels wouldn't work and neither would photo-synthesis.

errr light is clearly made of particles, so it has mass, it is also a form of electromagnetic energy.

Actually, photons (light) are massless. According to relativity, if a photon had mass it could not travel at the speed of light.

Then there's the wave/particle duality of photons. They exhibit the properties of both in different circumstances. For example, put one photon through a narrow slit and you will produce a diffraction pattern. This shows a wave nature. Conversely, the photo-electric effect (the principle behind solar panels) relies on a photon acting like a particle.

[swbarnett]

Human beings are 60% water.

Actually the proportion of empty space in all matter is much higher than 99%. That 60% water is also mostly empty space. Compared to the size of sub-atomic particles the space between them is ginormous.

[husaberg]

In essence, yes. If a photon didn't have energy it wouldn't react with the rods and cones in our eyes to produce nerve impulses. Also, solar panels wouldn't work and neither would photo-synthesis.


Actually, photons (light) are massless. According to relativity, if a photon had mass it could not travel at the speed of light.

Then there's the wave/particle duality of photons. They exhibit the properties of both in different circumstances. For example, put one photon through a narrow slit and you will produce a diffraction pattern. This shows a wave nature. Conversely, the photo-electric effect (the principle behind solar panels) relies on a photon acting like a particle.

Thanks but I am well aware of Einstein's work as well as recent work by Rowan University.
The duality, meh.....mass is essentially energy. vica versa.

[Bass]

Actually the proportion of empty space in all matter is much higher than 99%. That 60% water is also mostly empty space. Compared to the size of sub-atomic particles the space between them is ginormous.

The analogy I was given at school regarding the size of a hydrogen nucleus (single proton) vs the size of the whole atom was a basketball in the middle of the USA