R Kelly was right.

You are flying right now, did you know that?

No part of your body, clothed or unclothed is touching any surface. Fact.

It may look like they are, you may even believe you are "feeling" contact, but it's a myth and here is why.

Imagine your foot on the ground. it looks like it's touching the ground but a closer inspection would reveal that only certain parts are....say the longer parts of your shoe or trainer sole.

They look flat don't they?

However, if we were to magnify using a microscope, the parts of the shoe that looked like they were touching the ground you would look far from striaght and in fact would be uneven and zig zagged..like and upsidedown mountain peak. So you could say then that the magnified sections that were close to the ground at the top...the moutain peaks if you like...they are touching the ground right?

Wrong. Magnify them and you find that they too are just as uneven and spikey as the original sole of the shoe.

And don't even get me started on magnifying the ground.

Basically you are floating around everywhere on air.

Well done.

Nice : )

And yet we "touch" enough to feel something. We move, lift, exert force, are exterted back upon..... it's a pretty cool world, don't you think?

That's actually pretty interesting.

You know Bob, I wonder how many more of my threads, innocently created and nothing to do with Moderators or you personally, you are going to try and mess up.

I post a light hearted bit of pop science in an effort to lift up the slow moving boards, and you link me to a child predator. You may think you are being funny, but that kind of comment is offensive and if I did the same with you I'd get penalized for it.

It's almost like you need someone to war against, because in my mind you are looking for a fight saying things like that.

Also, the puzzle at the heart of my post, that we are in theory all floating cannot be solved, nor proven one way or the other, which is why I posted it....

No bid deal...no conspiracy.

I think JHarrison summed it up quite well, actually.

Speaking of whom- Johnny, I'd love to hear more about those shorelines! How do they figure? It it just a matter of measurement and perspective?

I remember a moment a good number of years ago, when I was riding in the car, imagining giant humans striding across the field to the side of me. I started thinking how, if a giant were racing a normal-sized human, the giant may feel like he was excerting as much force as the human, but he'd be carrying himself further with each stride, simply because he was bigger. Did that mean he was going faster? Only if you judge speed by distance, on our scale, right? I mean, if you watch an ant run, and imagine being their size... those are speedy little devils, but we'd hardly consider them as fast as cheetahs, though they may be, on their own scale. So is speed all relative? Is size?

Heh, anyway. Seemed relatively related.

A pusillanimous curmudgeon! Ha, thank you, John D. Caputo.

I actually just felt like using that phrase.

But seriously, Winston! Dem beaches!

Take a perfect circle on a piece of paper. Now draw a star shape in the center. Your task is to reach the edge of the circle by adding extra triangle shapes into the original star, making it more complex and extending it out towards the edge...the only thing is that each triangle must be half the size of the last one.

Try it now on a piece of paper if you like.

You will never get to the edge, despite the fact the circle is finite and in theory the triangles are always moving to the edge of the paper..always.

It's just a mind game...a cute little puzzle, just like the first one....it's not serious science Bob and not something I need to defend!

And the fact you said you knew how I'd react, and you still posted that stupid message really speaks ill of you. Bad patter old bean...bad patter.

On Bob's behalf lol The first thing I thought when I saw the thread title was "who would associate anything with R. Kelly" lol I would have used a better name.

I didn't know about R Kelly, i'm not in th habit of following celebrities lives.

Regardless, Bob was out of line, again, and once again he'd like to make light of it as if we're old friends sharing jokes with each other...I wonder how you'd feel, or anyone else would feel if I linked them, their actions or words to a child abuser or sexual predator.

I doubt very much you'd laugh it off, not if you had any self respect.

I will let it go Bob, you should apologize but I doubt you will, but I'll let it go. Don't joke with me again, we are not friends and I don't like your humour, thanks.

No as for the matter at hand. I did explain it. The basic point is that when you get close enough to anything it no longer has the solidity or form you thought it did. Solid objects are actually moving atoms and sub atomic particals...moving...with gaps inside and around them.

It really is as simple as that, but like I said the issue of whether or not we are actually floating is kinda a joke theory used to stretch the mind a little.

Illuminatix, there is a marked difference in my response to Ddavid and what Bob said to me....a huge difference in fact...but it's all Mods together...I know..rock on.

I don't have to folow celebrity lives to know what R. Kelly has been in trouble for, they talk about it on the news. I thought people created threads to talk, laugh, debate, whatever the case may be. I'm glad Bob posted it before I did, I could be exiled as well lol Funny Kevin, I used to enjoy your banter and your topics, maybe you should just ban Bob from your threads so the rest of us don't have to witness your petty anger towards him.

So.

Bob mentioned the soul. People have talked about it for centuries: arguing, defining, etc., but we really don't know anything about it. What do you guys think? Tangible substance? Theoretical concept? Spiritual thing? Biological construction? Something else?

You know, if any of you actually don't like the theory, which is not mine but is actually a quantum scientists whose name escapes me, but he wrote a book called "The Holographic Universe" I think...anyway if you don't like it, you know think it's stupid...then refute it with something substantial...you know like counter theories or arguments.

You will find that you can't, because it's one of those annoying lines of thought that cannot be disproven, a bit like God or no God, funnily enough.

It's not my theory though, and that is important to remember when being critical of it.

You know, what did I say to Ddavid that was sooo nasty it makes it ok for Bobby to be so rude to me in the name of fun, because he likes messing with me? And keep it in context mind...I hate poorly explained cut and paste jobs...

You see here we have a classic example of what I was talking about.

DD and I are in a circle, which is finite and totally measurable, say it's a circle of debate on dialectics...just for example...: )

He draws a star of a theory right in the centre and asks us to reach the edge of the circle to win the prize. yet, every time I draw another facet to the star I'm told it's half the size of his one...and so i keep drawing and drawing and even though I feel I'm getting closer to the edge, in reality because of the nature of the star and the restrictions placed upon me...I will never get there...ever no matter how hard I try....and no one will.

Hows that for dialectical multi faceted out of the box thinking and reasoning.

Are you still going on about getting Moderated with your multiple accounts? And you tell me to let go! Ha

What do you think about the nature of the soul, Kevin? For some reason, I think I've asked you that before, a long time ago. I would guess you'd fall along JHarrison's line of thought. Would you?

This thread is so out of touch...so negative that it is repulsive. Oh, the irony is electric.
Hahaha...I also couldn't resist stepping in with the puns.
But really, people can be so goddam touchy...
Hahahaaaaaaa...I'm too much, have mercy...

Yeah, according to quantum physics, we are all space, particles, waves, energy, whatever. Literal touch (atoms cannot physically touch), perceived touch (neuronal firing patterns, visible contact and effect between things), and philosophical touch (how is touch interpreted?) are all radically different/relative things. How cool. However, at the most basic level, at the point where uncertainty is greater than certainty, we are all ultimately made of concepts, and we can all amaze and scare ourselves with what we unveil.

That may be why the idea of the soul, a unique and identifiable essence- not only in living things but also in inanimate objects- is so important to us as thinking, macroscopic beings, heh. Otherwise, we are merely globs of ordered stuff interacting with other globs of stuff.

And I think souls CAN touch, at least poetically, and surely more so than any two literal things. They can certainly dance together for a while.

Fellows! Stop apologizing, and just -stop!- The "bigger" man is obviously going to be the one secure enough in his own ego and opinions to cease the petty arguing. Having the last word doesn't mean you "win," and why should you be trying to win anyway? Please.

"And I think souls CAN touch, at least poetically, and surely more so than any two literal things. They can certainly dance together for a while."

I'd agree. Someone up there said that sould were the one thing that didn't touch... but I think perhaps they're the only thing that can.

Also, I see no problem with understanding the world from a poetical reality. I often feel that poetry and myth are more real, at some basic level, than any literal or proven science that we can discuss haughtily over brandy and cigars. So to speak.

Ha. I suppose that is why the stuff of poetry is at the cradle of science, art and religion.

Dddddaviddddd, your brakes are in awful condition! Get those checked out!

You may have let it go in the last thread, but I think bringing it up here to say "look what I did!' kind of negates the whole point. Gah.

Love you both. Merry Christmas. Let's talk about interesting things, please.

I wonder what "the stuff of poetry" is. I've been thinking about it for a good while, but I can't ever seem to pin it down.

I'd like to quote Moby at this juncture.

"People they come together
people they fall apart
no one can touch us now
we are all made of stars"

Have any of you tried the star thing inside the circle? It's ace fun...really messes with you...try it with your friends in the pub next time you are out.

My mate Dave used it as a chat up line and he is still with the girl...whats more it was at a fancy dress party, her party, she is polish and he went dessed as Joseph Stalin.

He is a smoothy.

I never thought of it that way thanks though!!

Yes we are "floating" to a degree, but that is not the same as never touching anything as some people have stated. The earth, unlike space, is not a vacuum. Some sort of matter fills the areas of those valleys and peaks, so we ar always connected to something. It is called a root. Look it up. Those with a stronger root may be floating, but are still better connected with the universe and gravity. Trees may actually be floating. But it is damn sure that none of us can move them.

I'd like to say one final time, to everyone to who is taking my initial post seriously, of course we are not flying!

It was meant only as a slightly jovial mental excercise of theory..nothing more. I'm baffled that so many of you have actually tried to defend the fact you are really sitting on a chair or touching the keys!...it's very amusing.

Hurrah!

I knew there was some real science behind this...bravo sir...you have proven me right and wrong in one fell swoop!

LOL

interesting...

xx