16 replies to this topic

[Jarno Mikkola]

I told you, you should write to the walls, and see what you have done! The thing is excellent!
And this is just classic!

liquid that made their legsh wobble

But, hhmm, I think that I have seen the same kind of approach to the matter in someplace else. Did you use one of those, hhmm, science shows as a base?

But the reasons, well as human beings go, all those are nice, but I still think that; Why does the Sun shine? It's god, after all, it created and maintains 98-100% of the life on Earth.

[Choo Choo]

Hee! Awesome, Scipio, this sent me giggling like.. um.. a teenage girl. I am a teenage girl. Anyway, that doesn't make it any less awesome!

[Scipio]

But, hhmm, I think that I have seen the same kind of approach to the matter in someplace else. Did you use one of those, hhmm, science shows as a base?

No. My base was three years of higher mathematics and physics, followed by the rest of my life trying to keep up with cosmology, physics, math and applied math. On the side there was the other part of the rest of my life that greedily devours the history of science.

Boring, hey?

[Scipio]

Scipio, this sent me giggling like.. um.. a teenage girl. I am a teenage girl.

Thank you, Choo Choo. You should hear how a menopausal wife can cackle.

Since teenagers are so bright and sharp ? and I really mean that! ? how do I put quotes from two or more people's messages into one reply?

[Jarno Mikkola]

Since teenagers are so bright and sharp ? and I really mean that! ? how do I put quotes from two or more people's messages into one reply?

You push the Quote button and the Add Reply button. Or you Quote the first guy then reply to it, select what you wrote and the quote, copy it, go back to the original topic and quote the second guy with Quote and Reply buttons and paste the the previously written content. Or you can edit...

[Scipio]

Since teenagers are so bright and sharp ? and I really mean that! ? how do I put quotes from two or more people's messages into one reply?

You push the Quote button and the Add Reply button. Or you Quote the first guy then reply to it, select what you wrote and the quote, copy it, go back to the original topic and quote the second guy with Quote and Reply buttons and paste the the previously written content. Or you can edit...

Aah... so it IS rocket science.

Thanks yet again for helpful information, you friendly northern hemisphere person. One day I shall attempt to reciprocate by telling you something that you don't know. How are you on non-venomous arachnids?

[Jarno Mikkola]

Aah... so it IS rocket science.

Yeah, but fortunatly there is also the undo buttons, that the astronauts don't have.

How are you on non-venomous arachnids?

Well, my knowledge is quite rusty, so if you can enlighten us, at least I'll be pleased... No, not sexually.

[Scipio]

How are you on non-venomous arachnids?

Well, my knowledge is quite rusty, so if you can enlighten us, at least I'll be pleased... No, not sexually.

Really? You want to know?

Among the Arachnidae, all ticks, mites, harvestmen and solifuges ("sun spiders") are non-venomous. Some of them do of course transmit diseases.

All scorpions, centipedes and whip scorpions are venomous. My favourites, the whippies, have mild venom (to us). I have never been bitten by one.

Of the 300,000 or so identified species of spiders, about 50 are non-venomous. Most spiders are of course not at all dangerous to humans.

The best spider I ever rescued from a pet shop was a Harpactira dictator, the South African baboon spider. It's a tarantula about as big as a Mexican redknee, but more bad-tempered. I called her Miss Piggy because she ate six beetles in three minutes the night I brought her home. She was pregnant and eventually became the proud mother of about 80 hatchlings. Then I was able to let her go because Harpactiras are a protected species.

So you did get some sexual enlightenment here.

I stopped being an active member of the South African Arachnological Association years ago but I still love spiders. If there is a God it's probably Lilth.

Of all Lilth's children, only three have ever bitten me. None of them was dangerous.

Spiders are usually easy opponents in BG because they appear to have been modelled on the Theridion genus ? a family of web-dwellers. They are useless away from their webs. If we ever get upgraded spiders in an RPG they should be based on wolf spiders.

PICTURE: The guy isn't me but the girl could have been my Miss Piggy.

[DalreïDal]

Hi Scipio,

I just read your piece and enjoyed it, though it's not really fiction, more like an editorial. Even though it's a realization that struck me a while ago already, it was good to see stated in a text of opinion the fact that science is not the absolute answer, but merely the best answer we found yet.

Hm, about spiders? As a biologist (and amateur entomologist) I was interested. What do you mean, non-venomous? Chelicerates are called that specifically because they use venom to overwhelm their prey. Alright, what would kill a fly isn't exactly enough to brind down a healthy human (unless he's allergic, which unfortunately is my case... I stick with good old insects and try to avoid spiders and others chelicerates). True, a harvestmen never bit me, but they must kill/paralyse their prey by injection of venom like other spiders, right?

Funny story with your Miss Piggy 80 hatchlings... being a spider mother really is a full-time job! And I would so fear a wolf-sized wolf-spider in BG!!! The sword spiders were bad enough already!

[Scipio]

...it was good to see stated in a text of opinion the fact that science is not the absolute answer, but merely the best answer we found yet.

Hello, DalreïDal.

It's good to meet such a brave person. I had to give up biology in high school because I couldn't pluck up enough determination to dissect a frog. I switched to applied math. If we lived in Candlekeep, you could be a paladin and I would be a librarian.

It may or may not have anything to do with a god, but the laws of physics and mathematics preclude the possibility of knowing everything in the physical Universe. I explained these restrictions in one of my Popular Mechanics articles, "The limits of knowledge." Without going in to any detail, at least four factors will forever hold us back ? Gödel?s Incompleteness Theorem, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principal, the knowledge boundary imposed by the Hubble Constant, and Chaos Theory.

If anyone is bored enough I can send them the article. Or post it here?

You may not completely enjoy my cynical, mechanistic observation, born of my cynical, mechanistic nature: "Cynics have asked what purpose science may ultimately serve if it admits that there are Universal Limits to knowledge. There are two sensible responses to this type of criticism. The first is that every addition to the fund of human knowledge should be welcomed. And the second is that if science can?t answer all of the questions, then surely nothing else can."

I suspect you would prefer this elegant prediction by the astrophysicist Robert Jarow, who was telling his fellow academics what the scientist can expect to find as he approaches that Final Answer: ?He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.?

Chelicerates are called that specifically because they use venom to overwhelm their prey.

My understanding is that "chelicerate" relates to the structure of the biting bits themselves and not necessarily to the plumbing which may be attached to the chelicerae. Be that as it may, there are 150 non-poisonous species of spider, not just 50 ? you've made me update my information! Thanks. These spiders are all genus Uloboridae, the hackled orb-weavers.

Like SHS Forums, Uloborids have a global presence. You'd probably find some as far north as Quebec.

True, a harvestmen never bit me, but they must kill/paralyse their prey by injection of venom like other spiders, right?

Harvestmen are not spiders at all. They are an entirely separate order, Opiliones. The most pronounced difference between them and true spiders is of course that the bodies of harvestmen are not segmented into thorax and abdomen.

Edited by Scipio, 19 February 2008 - 10:21 AM.

[DalreïDal]

It's good to meet such a brave person. I had to give up biology in high school because I couldn't pluck up enough determination to dissect a frog. I switched to applied math. If we lived in Candlekeep, you could be a paladin and I would be a librarian.

LOL! Nope, couldn't be a paladin. Would be scared off by all the hours working out. Definitely. I think I'd end up a happy librarian with you

It may or may not have anything to do with a god, but the laws of physics and mathematics preclude the possibility of knowing everything in the physical Universe. I explained these restrictions in one of my Popular Mechanics articles, "The limits of knowledge." Without going in to any detail, at least four factors will forever hold us back ? Gödel?s Incompleteness Theorem, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principal, the knowledge boundary imposed by the Hubble Constant, and Chaos Theory.

And here you go supposing that all these neat principles will still be held true in 500 years I'd say chances are we're in for a few other in-depth revolutions before then!

You may not completely enjoy my cynical, mechanistic observation, born of my cynical, mechanistic nature: "Cynics have asked what purpose science may ultimately serve if it admits that there are Universal Limits to knowledge. There are two sensible responses to this type of criticism. The first is that every addition to the fund of human knowledge should be welcomed. And the second is that if science can?t answer all of the questions, then surely nothing else can."

I suspect you would prefer this elegant prediction by the astrophysicist Robert Jarow, who was telling his fellow academics what the scientist can expect to find as he approaches that Final Answer: ?He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.?

I don't mind the cynicism, though I like Jarow's quote

Chelicerates are called that specifically because they use venom to overwhelm their prey.

My understanding is that "chelicerate" relates to the structure of the biting bits themselves and not necessarily to the plumbing which may be attached to the chelicerae. Be that as it may, there are 150 non-poisonous species of spider, not just 50 ? you've made me update my information! Thanks. These spiders are all genus Uloboridae, the hackled orb-weavers.

Like SHS Forums, Uloborids have a global presence. You'd probably find some as far north as Quebec.

Hey, amazing! You've just thrown down something I was convinced of since undergrad second semester!!! You made me check it up again, and now I realized I had misunderstood. I had figured no other type than hollow+poisonous chelicerates existed, but now I find that the poisonous ones are restricted mostly to Arachnids and centipeds. Wow. Never knew before now.

Harvestmen are not spiders at all. They are an entirely separate order, Opiliones. The most pronounced difference between them and true spiders is of course that the bodies of harvestmen are not segmented into thorax and abdomen.

Sorry, I was still talking about Chelicerates... After the exam that forced me to learn the whole Arthropodes taxonomy tree back in second semester, I developped some reluctance to try and remember the divisions below sub-phyla (with the notable exception of insect families because of field classes in entomology). I always thought Opiliones were nice, now that I know that I can't be allergic to them because they are non-poisonous, I'll find them even nicer!

[Scipio]

[And here you go supposing that all these neat principles will still be held true in 500 years I'd say chances are we're in for a few other in-depth revolutions before then!

The Archimedes law of specific gravity has held true for two and a half thousand years. Some Sumerian and Egyptian astronomical observations that still hold true are five thousand years old. The four principles I mentioned are as watertight as anything in the domains of mathematics and physics. These aren't just suppositions. They are iron-clad proofs that we can't know everything.

Yet even so...

I am currently working on an article about the best inventions of the next 10,000 years. In my opinion the first thing we'll need is some new discipline to take over from mathematics when it's needed. Mathematics has just about reached its limits in uncovering the most fundamental secrets of Life, the Universe and Everything. Some equations are and will for ever remain impossible to solve with mathematics alone. Groups of cosmologists and applied mathematicians are already probing the possibilites of -- what shall we call it? --"neo-math".

I always thought Opiliones were nice, now that I know that I can't be allergic to them because they are non-poisonous, I'll find them even nicer!

Now you've got me going! Don't take my word about harvestmen, I'd better double-check if they do have venom or not. But take comfort from this: in numerous tests on toxicity, anti-venins, etc, our Medical Research Council has shown that little creatures like harvestmen have such tiny chelicerae that they can't penetrate human skin; their fangs aren't long enough.

[WizWom]

As I understand it, Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is based on an invalid proof; specifically, I challenge the idea that a lexical change makes anything but nonsense. And the Heisenberg limit hasn't even been approached with the technology we're using for particle physics. Hubble's Constant, well, it's hard to see beyond the beginning of the universe, but somehow we keep seeing a little further. Chaos Theory - that's a rather interesting subject; in general, I find it suggests to me that we cannot achieve with an ultimately discrete simulation anything more than statistical understanding of non-discrete event streams, such as the interaction between a set of charged particles or planetary bodies.

If I was in Candlekeep, I'd be a Fighter/Mage/Thief, myself. Making sure I can stay alive, bravely doing the jobs that need doing. Focusing on traps and locks. And understanding the universe, which, to me, involves Magic on Faerun. I don't know how to fit in the idea of being in contact with God, too, but something along the lines of a Chosen of a deity might work.

And there is a VERY good reason I don't get my scientific understanding from Popular Mechanics - it's usually half baked. No offense intended, but Science - or even Science News - is a better choice.

[Scipio]

As I understand it, Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is based on an invalid proof; specifically, I challenge the idea that a lexical change makes anything but nonsense.

I am not aware of any recognized mathematicians who have found any lack of validity in what is considered one of the greatest proofs of the 20th century. You make it sound as if it hinges on semantics; in fact it considers the hard mathematical reasoning, not the fancy words, in Godel's assertion that any formal axiomatic system must always contain a statement about natural numbers which is true but cannot be proven from within the system. And that's before we even start thinking about complex numbers.

And the Heisenberg limit hasn't even been approached with the technology we're using for particle physics.

So what? Even if we could reach the limit we would never be able to examine space with a diameter of less than 10^-35 cm or time with a duration of less than 10^-43 seconds ? which are respectively infinity and eternity away from the Big Bang if you try to view it from the inside.

But as you probably do, I wish the US government hadn't canned Steve Weiss's superconducting supercollider project in Texas about a decade ago. Weiss was reasonably confident that the SSC would have taken us close to the Higgs boson by now.

Hubble's Constant, well, it's hard to see beyond the beginning of the universe, but somehow we keep seeing a little further.

We did indeed, until we "saw" out to about 13.3 billion light years, the distance that corresponds with the time at which the Universe became transparent to radiation. And we are never going to see farther than that unless there is actually such a thing as non-locality arising from advanced waves... but so far there's nothing to suggest any information travels faster than light. Gough has tried to pursue the non-locality approach with his transactional interpretation (thereby trashing the metaphysical clap-trap from Copenhagen, hoorah!), but Wheeler and Feynman abandoned a similar track about 60 years ago because they saw it leading to a quantum dead end.

Chaos Theory - that's a rather interesting subject; in general, I find it suggests to me that we cannot achieve with an ultimately discrete simulation anything more than statistical understanding of non-discrete event streams, such as the interaction between a set of charged particles or planetary bodies.

Pretty much so, yes. The knowledge barrier here is all those sets of nonlinear complex functions. At the quantum level it's not just the mechanism that is complex, you have to fight through the literal mathematical meaning of "complex function", with all that "square root of minus one" stuff. Damn! You'd think something a simple as the concept of "spin" would be... well, simple.

If I was in Candlekeep, I'd be a Fighter/Mage/Thief, myself. Making sure I can stay alive, bravely doing the jobs that need doing. Focusing on traps and locks. And understanding the universe, which, to me, involves Magic on Faerun. I don't know how to fit in the idea of being in contact with God, too, but something along the lines of a Chosen of a deity might work.

I'd be OK as a librarian there, but I'd rather be a bard who looks like Jon Bon Jovi. Then I could pull the chicks. Do you know if Imoen's free this weekend?

And there is a VERY good reason I don't get my scientific understanding from Popular Mechanics - it's usually half baked. No offense intended, but Science - or even Science News - is a better choice.

"Scipio, you write for crappy magazines and you're selling us snake oil." But sure, no offense taken! I also wouldn't seek my scientific understanding from Popular Mechanics. Or Science. Rather subscribe to the journals or swipe them from your friendly neighbourhood lecturer.

The reason I'm likely to try to impart some scientific understanding through PM rather than Science or SciAm or the other mags is that their editors don't come to me and ask for articles, but PM does. When you write for a living you go where the bucks are.

Now if you feel like giving yourself a migraine, buy "The Road to Reality" by Roger Penrose. The UK edition is published by Vintage Books. It's about 1,200 pages of pretty up-to-date (viz. revised 1987) overviews of where we're at in mathematics and physics.The physics part is OK but the math chapters had me groping for my 40-year-old textbooks. "A general grasp of undergraduate mathematics and some post-graduate material is presumed." Right. Cool light reading. It does include all the equations for Heisenberg, nonlinear systems, etc.

Do you think our exchange is going to win the SHS prize of the month for most entertaining fanfic?

[Shadowhawke]

Hello Scipio! Welcome to the Fanfic board again... I'm so sorry it took me so long to review here, the only excuse I've got is that I read your extremely entertaining (and interesting too, of course!) essay one segment at a time, and so now I've finally finished. A great layman's essay that still delved into that very strange world of quantum physics... in short, it was both an educatory as well as an amusing read, so nicely done!

If you ever have another essay you want to post up here, please feel free to go ahead and do so.

[Scipio]

If you ever have another essay you want to post up here, please feel free to go ahead and do so.

Thank you, Shadowhawke. I shall dredge through my recent archives to see if I've written anything appropriate and amusing in the last few years or if it's just more of "Generally accepted auditing standards with reference to GAAS" (for a client in Abu dhabi), "Case study in Emiratization" (Dubai client), "KwaZulu-Natal economics and contribution to national and regional gross domestic product" (South African client), "Strategic assessment of the China air cargo and express market" (American client), "Ethical considerations in the deployment and application of fuel air explosives" (South African client), "Hyperbole and limitations relating to hydrogen fuel cells" (South African client), "Overview of casino integrity, game fairness and payment mechanisms" (Australian client).

No. I've thought of a much more fruitful exercise. Let me figure out how I could have allowed myself to spend the last 10 years researching and writing such mind-numbing drek instead of getting my own writing ready for publication. But maybe there's something buried in those stacked-up files that I'd like to share with mentally unfettered people.

By the way, if you ever decide to shorten your name to Skyhawk you can be a Douglas A-4 carrier-borne attack aircraft. They take out orcs by the hundreds, especially if you hit them with air fuel explosives.

[Shadowhawke]

Thank you, Shadowhawke. I shall dredge through my recent archives to see if I've written anything appropriate and amusing in the last few years or if it's just more of "Generally accepted auditing standards with reference to GAAS" (for a client in Abu dhabi), "Case study in Emiratization" (Dubai client), "KwaZulu-Natal economics and contribution to national and regional gross domestic product" (South African client), "Strategic assessment of the China air cargo and express market" (American client), "Ethical considerations in the deployment and application of fuel air explosives" (South African client), "Hyperbole and limitations relating to hydrogen fuel cells" (South African client), "Overview of casino integrity, game fairness and payment mechanisms" (Australian client).

No. I've thought of a much more fruitful exercise. Let me figure out how I could have allowed myself to spend the last 10 years researching and writing such mind-numbing drek instead of getting my own writing ready for publication. But maybe there's something buried in those stacked-up files that I'd like to share with mentally unfettered people.

Good to hear. And I do sympathise with you as to your previous exercises... sometimes it's hard to imagine the things that people want written. 0_0. But still, the research and writing experience definitely shows through "Why does the Sun Shine?" so I'm sure that if you were pressed, you could always compile a book of such essays. Or at least post more here.

By the way, if you ever decide to shorten your name to Skyhawk you can be a Douglas A-4 carrier-borne attack aircraft. They take out orcs by the hundreds, especially if you hit them with air fuel explosives.

*snickers* I'll keep that in mind.