|
|
Posted by thanatoid on 04/27/06 21:50
Gene E. Bloch <spamfree@nobody.invalid> wrote in
news:mn.d2877d642f09b621.1980@nobody.invalid:
> Interleaved...
>
> On 4/25/2006, thanatoid posted this:
>> Gene E. Bloch <spamfree@nobody.invalid> wrote in
>> news:mn.cc137d64bfac563e.1980@nobody.invalid:
>>
>>> On 4/25/2006, thanatoid posted this:
>
> ...
>
>>> But I thought brain cells started to fade before age
>>> 30...
>>
>> I read 30... I'm sure it varies, especially depending on
>> how much you drink and drug yourself. But apparently the
>> brain is still growing as opposed to deteriorating until
>> about 20. Then there's a steady-state (term usage?) for
>> about ten years. Who cares. We're all getting dumber,
>> that's all there is to it.
>
> Maybe I remember the number wrong because (drum roll) I'm
> over 30 :-)
>
> I don't think we're getting dumber, though. Yes, some
> function is reduced, but I don't think enough to compensate
> for more experience and better judgment. YMMV, but...
Real geniuses (like DaVinci) either didn't get any dumber or
they were so brilliant to begin with that even at the time of
their death they were still smarter than anyone else alive.
Between 35-40 I started noticing I was getting stupider, but it
was only a few times a year. Now it's like every fucking week!
> I'm assuming not too much chemical behavior, of course :-)
All behavior is chemical, but no, I never did much drugs. Most
of my problems I owe to my idiot (though quite intelligent)
parents who should have KNOWN they should never have a kid.
>>>> Being over 50, I understood just enough to get a good
>>>> idea, and I thank you for taking the time.
>>>
>>> Once in a while I swithc nto my teaching mode - I can't
>>> help it :-) Bu to me you're a yongster.
>
> BTW, the above is an example of how good a typist I am, and
> why I try to spell-check every posting. I obviously let
> that one slip through...
No spell-checker would miss swithc... I'd tell you of a great
spellchecker but MesNews sounds like a linux program...
>> I would say "it's all relative", but I read once that
>> (although that phrase is used billions of times every
>> day), Einstein's theory of relativity ACTUALLY means
>> exactly the opposite. Perhaps as a physicist, you could
>> clarify.
>
> The problem: I don't really know what "it's all relative"
> means,
In this case, it would probably mean "well, if you're 75, I may
seem young to you" - even though I was just called "the 50-year
old dude" in another group. Sigh.
> except perhaps that you're free to make your own
> moral or esthetic judgments, or that it depends on your
> culture, or something. This has nothing to do with physics,
> and vice versa. Except metaphorically, of course (as if
> that helps me understand the phrase!).
> As I understand it (and I'm not an expert), Einstein's
> theory says, in general, that the laws of physics do not
> depend on where you are or how you're moving, which could
> mean that "it's NOT all relative".
That's sort of what I thought, it's only relative depending on
where YOU are but in fact everything is rock solid, for lack of
a better (to put it mildly) phrase. (Like ANYTHING is "solid" at
the molecular level and beyond... just one big bitter smelly
rotting soup... stirred by the blind idiot god Azathoth...)
> However, the theory also
> means that the numbers your get from a specific measurement
> DO depend on where you are and how you're moving.
> Metaphorically, you could say that the *measurements* sort
> of fudge themselves to make the *laws* constant.
> In short, it's not too simple :-)
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> BTW, AFAIK, even the built-in ringtones of all cell
>>> phones are weird, so don't blame it on downloaded
>>> ringtones :-)
>>
>> I know, they should all be set to vibrate-or-tazer mode.
>
> OTOH, when I set my cell phone's ring, it is very loud, but
> when someone calls me I never hear it. Einstein again?
That RAT!!!
> Ciao,
> Gino
:-)
--
thanatoid-Tip #9 (an opinion this time)
HTML is very simple, very clever, yet stupid and pointless. But
PDF is so brilliant I can almost forgive Adobe for killing off
all their real and imaginary competitors.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|