For decades, physicists, who view window glass at the molecular level, have pondered the question of whether or not glass is a solid or merely an extremely slow-moving liquid. An Emory University research team led by physicist Eric Weeks has yielded another clue in the glass puzzle, demonstrating that, unlike liquids, glasses aren’t comfortable in confined spaces.
Scientists fully understand the process of water turning to ice. As the temperature cools, the movement of the water molecules slows. At 32 F, the molecules form crystal lattices, solidifying into ice. In contrast, the molecules of glasses do not crystallize. The movement of the glass molecules slows as temperature cools, but they never lock into crystal patterns. Instead, they jumble up and gradually become glassier, or more viscous. No one understands exactly why.
Previous research has shown groups of particles in dense suspensions move cooperatively. “Our work suggests glasses are solid-like because these groups can’t move when the sample chamber is thinner than the typical size of these groups,” Weeks says.
Yes, my first thought was of Bob Shaw’s short story classic, “Light of Other Days” – about slow glass.
It amazes me how the seemingly simple things in nature continue to baffle scientists. We’ve come so far yet there is so much more to learn and discover.
This glass question wouldn’t be such a blight on our once great nation if the sheeple of GOUSA would stop having unwanted babies and getting fat off fried chicken and playing Xbox all day long enough to pay attention and not elect criminals like Bush.
Obviously the Jesus freaks are trying to solidify our liquid glass and I for one say its time to take this battle to the streets… or else I’m moving to France!
=======
Just taking this thread where you know you want it to go! đ
>>It amazes me how the seemingly simple things in nature
>>continue to baffle scientists.
And in the face of that, it amazes me that worshipers at the Altar of Atheism claim that because science can’t explain God, that’s proof that He does not exist.
Blind faith is a powerful thing.
Okay, since no one wants to talk about glass, I won’t either.
“Light of Other Days” is one of the very best SF stories ever written. Six perfect pages!
>>Okay, since no one wants to talk about glass
Well, it was a darned interesting article. I learned some things from it that I didn’t know before. But what are we supposed to “talk about”? Should we post “darned interesting article!”, and then move on?
What do YOU have to say about glass?
#6 – What do YOU have to say about glass?
It’s not half full or half empty. It’s twice the size that it needs to be…
#4 – And in the face of that, it amazes me that worshipers at the Altar of Atheism claim that because science canât explain God, thatâs proof that He does not exist.
Nice out of the blue strawman about a claim that isn’t made by people who don’t exist.
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby… but that indisputable fact aside, atheists do not claim that because scientists have not explained a god that it means the god doesn’t exist. Because atheists tend to have a far better grasp of logic than theists, it would be pretty damn embarrassing to make such a claim because it simply wouldn’t stand to reason…
Among other things that don’t stand to reason, however, is the archaic and primitive notion of a god.
Now if you want to turn this thread into the “let’s argue some more about God just like we do everyday” thread, well, I can support that. By working together, we can usher in a new and exciting thread full of intelligent debate from atheists and predictable rhetoric from Xians, complete with personal attacks and insults and lots of unrelated tangents for flavor. đ
A Bob Shaw reader, eh? That kix my estimation up a notch or two…
Glass will sag over a long period of time. You can see it in many old windows.
Arguing about abortion seems to be the hottest topic lately.
#9 – I’ve heard (but do not know) that the fact the old glass windows being thicker at the bottom is a byproduct of how windows were made in those days. They were thicker at the bottom the first day they were installed, and they simply put the bigger end at the bottom as it was the heaviest.
#7 – “Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby”
Haha, I love it. First time I’ve read something so well put it made me laugh. Thanks for that, I’m still laughing at the eloquence.
“I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.” – Friedrich Nietzsche
#4 – Mister Mustard – And in the face of that, it amazes me that worshipers at the Altar of Atheism claim that because science canât explain God, thatâs proof that He does not exist.
I’ve seen you trolling with the Altar of Atheism for a while now… Let me bite… Atheists do not believe in any deity, so there’s no need for symbols, hocus pocus and blind faith to get us through life. We do not indoctrinate our kids to believe that the is someone watching their every move and that they should fear this thing. Atheists are free from mental restraints and can live their lives to the fullest.
Blind faith is a powerful thing.
Sure is.
>>Because atheists tend to have a far better grasp of
>>logic than theists,
Hoo boy. That flight of fancy just about says it al, OFTLO.
>>âI cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised
>>all the time.â
That’s fine, hmeyers. You are free to believe in one who doesn’t care to be praised all the time. Or one who doesn’t give a shit. You are even free to believe in one of the strongest faiths, the non-god of the Church of Atheism. Until Dumbya and Ted Haggard get there way, we still have freedom of religion in this country.
Personally, I thought the “not collecting stamps” thing was one of the least relevant comparisons I have heard from the anti-God crowd. Not collecting stamps, like not believing in God, is neither here nor there. Believing that there are no such thing as stamps, and that nobody collects them, that makes you a kook. Believing that God does not exist, that deeply held (anti)theology makes you an atheist, and just as much of a blind-faith adherent as the other 90% of the folks in the country.
But again, you’re free to believe whatever you like. What bugs me is the relentless need on the part of Church members (Atheist Church) to tell me how stupid I am, how illogical I am, how little proof science has offered for the existence of God, yada yada yada. If you don’t like God, don’t fucking go to church. Stay home and congratulate yourself on your self-proclaimed intellectual superiority.
You’re free, my son. Go whither thou willst.
If I believe in God and he doesn’t exsist then am I a emptytheists?
Let’s type that again………….. If I believe in God and he doesn’t exist then am I an emptytheists?
14. “Believing that God does not exist, that deeply held (anti)theology makes you an atheist, and just as much of a blind-faith adherent as the other 90% of the folks in the country.”
You keep making the exact same arguments, I keep showing how you’re wrong.
Before I put too much effort to show how you’re wrong yet again, while you ignore my arguments and do that pathetic ad hominem song and dance you love so much, let me ask one question. Do you understand the difference between these two concepts?
“I believe that stamps do not exist.”
“I am without a belief as to whether stamps exist.”
If you admit you understand the difference between those two concepts, I’ll debate you. If not, there’s no point in going though all of this all over again.
Mustardarerro –
Having painted you into a corner you couldn’t get out of without resorting to the tried and trite “I don’t wanna talk about it any more” copout in another thread, I’m, as they say, ‘sore amazed’ that you’re back for more. It would appear that the impulse to intellectually embarass oneself in a public venue has compulsive aspects… đ
So let’s get started, shall we? đ
Here’s what you offer us as an unqualified declaration of what you imagine to be fact:
“Atheism claim (sic) that because science canât explain God, thatâs proof that He does not exist.”
I’d personally enjoy reading where “Atheism” claims this. Got linkz? No? Didn’t think so. The common or garden-variety straw man is one of your favorite logical fallacies.
But it’s simply a falsehood. Science does have an explanation for God. A very sound one, in fact. Come right down to it, it’s the best theory of God available, because it’s the only one that fits the known facts.
From extensive research and a mountain of empirical experience, psychology has been able to determine how and why myths, legends and superstitions come to be.
And in a nutshell, the Abrahamic deity has every defining characteristic of a nonexistent, mythical figure created by human minds and in fact, is significantly less credible to an educated modern mind than many others. The primary origin of the mythical “God” is aan agglomeration of legends and tales, always distorted and exaggerated in transit, of human rulers in distant, exotic lands. As is always the case, these people become “larger than life” and take on superhuman abilities and characteristics, particularly in the scientifically illiterate times that gave rise to the myth. People of the time, unlike today, did not know that the events involving and the actions and characteristics attributed to their “God” were physical impossibilities.
⢠⢠⢠⢠⢠⢠â˘Â â˘
I could go on at length, but my point is made. Science DOES have the ONLY explanation of God, and it fits every known fact like a glove. And THAT means that it is, by incalculable orders of magnitude – if you understand what that means – the explanation MOST PROBABLY TRUE.
AND – contrary to your false assertion, that is NOT regarded as “proof that God doesn’t exist”, it is EVIDENCE WHICH SUPPORTS the theory that God is nothing more than a human myth. A theory, exactly as with evolution and gravity, so complete and explanative of the phenomenon in question, and utterly devoid of any credible evidence to the contrary that it may be, with complete safety, be considered a FACT.
You wanna play logic-chopping with the big boys? Or you gonna start bawling when you get hurt, “I don’t wanna play any more” and skulk away? Hmmmm?
>.Do you understand the difference between these two concepts?
Yep, I understand it well. We learn that kind of thing in the Ivy League.
If you are “without beliefs as to whether stamps exist”, that would make you an agstampgnostic..
If you “believe that stamps do not exist”, that would make you an astampeist.
Can you transfer these concepts to theism, or should we see about getting you a tutor?
(hint: if you continually harass those who believe that stamps exist, calling into question their intelligence, honesty, and credibility, making pseudo-statistical arguments for the non-existence of stamps, ridiculing those who buy, use, and collect stamps, you know which side of the fence you’re on).
>>You wanna play logic-chopping with the big boys?
Fishgirl, if you find any “big boys”, be sure to keep me posted.
So far you’ve shown nothing but the typical xenophobic, self-aggrandizing, “One Way” intolerance characteristic of holy rollers, Islamic extremists, and Atheist True Believers.
Your unrelenting insistence that I choose not to play this silly game with you and yours 14 hours a day (do you have a JOB, or anything??) is evidence that I’m embarrassed, logically challenged, and the rest is pretty much par for the ad hominem course of the True Believer, who refuses to let others practice their ways of life in peace.
Give it a rest, honey. You believe what you wish to believe (or not not not believe), let me believe what I believe.
All this anger, lashing out, hatred, and frustration against believers in God is making you look even sillier than you imagine that I look. Think about it.
20. “If you are âwithout beliefs as to whether stamps existâ, that would make you an agstampgnostic.. If you âbelieve that stamps do not existâ, that would make you an astampeist.”
I’m going to say this one last time and be done. The prefix “a” means without. Thus an atheist is someone without a belief in theism. And an agnostic is someone without a belief in gnosticism. There is nothing in the definition of either term which even implies a denial of a belief. However, again and again you say that atheists deny god’s existence.
Are there people who deny that god exists? Sure. Some fools even write books arguing that god does not exist. Which in my mind are about as pointless as a book discussing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Who fricken cares?!
My problem is that when you lump all atheists into that idiotic camp you’re doing us all a disservice. Saying that all atheists deny god’s existence is like saying all republicans are racists, merely because some of them are.
If you want to yell and scream about idiots like Richard Dawkins, I have no problem with that. Just keep me and other atheists out of it, please!
#20 – Yep, I understand it well. We learn that kind of thing in the Ivy League.
If you are âwithout beliefs as to whether stamps existâ, that would make you an agstampgnostic..
If you âbelieve that stamps do not existâ, that would make you an astampeist.
You are close…
Please enlighten me about what’s special in this Glass / God relationship…somewhere along the posts I think someone lost it…
PS. Is it that God is also slow moving liquid? Today looks like a white haired elder westerner, and some centuries ago looked like a fattish bald oriental dude, and even before like a spidery dancer…weird…
#20, #21 – Mister Mustard
Still trolling, huh…
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
FASCinating.
I almost hate to tell you, but your responses (always a mĂŠlange of diversionary tactics and ad hominem ) advertise like a purple-and-green neon sign that your battleship’s been sunk. Glub-glub.
We all notice (hard not to) that you can’t come up with even an attempt at logical refutation. You can’t rebut the premises, you can’t invalidate the reasoning – and since the only remaining option in that case is to concede the point, and you certainly can’t do that – so you (try to) change the subject, redirect attention from your failure to address the argument and transparently attempt to bait your opponent into overlooking these ploys.
This just in to DU Headline News: Didn’t work this time either. Sor-ree.
To spare you the trouble of running this msg through Babelfish (my polyglot cousin) to translate it into English you can understand, all the foregoing means is, you can’t refute what I said. I win.
FYI:
⢠I’m male.
⢠No, in fact I don’t have a job. I trade stock and I am the companion and personal assistant to the beneficiary of a petrochemical-industry trust. I will never have to work another day in my life. I hang around on here when playing hooky from working on my art projects and music. As Anthony Quinn once asked Sal Mineo, “Whatsittoya?”
⢠You were never dragged into any of these discussions with a gun at your head, as far as I can determine. You enjoy them just fine up to the point when you are nailed between the eyes. Then it’s “Mommy, those mean people are teasing me!” Have a lollipop. We big kids play rough. Isn’t it past your bedtime? đ
⢠None of this stuff gets me mad, foaming at the mouth, or otherwise in a lather. It a bunch of fucking words on a screen. And people that I REALLY don’t like – I don’t waste my time with. I enjoy the sometimes-adolescent back-and-forth here because I don’t go out. When I stop addressing you, THAT’s when you’re actually on my shit list. Some people need to stop taking online talk so fuckin’ personal. Now go look in the mirror, O Mustardized One. đ
I’m glad to find out that you’re a boy, FishFinger. There seems to be some ambiguity here.
>>We all notice (hard not to) that you canât come up with even
>>an attempt at logical refutation.
Ah see, that’s the joy of living in a free (at least for now) country. I don’t NEED to come up with a logical refutation. I have never tried to convince you that what I believe is the “One True Way”. I have never suggested that you believe what I believe. And other than your nonsensical pitbull-like insistence that your system of belief regarding God is not every bit as much a Religion as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Wicca, Sikhism, Bha’i faith, Confucianism, etc., I have never attacked your beliefs, either by ridiculing them, or suggesting you should believe mine. (Contrast that with your actions).
If you’d like to see where your religion falls in popularity, check out the Religious Tolerance web site:
http://tinyurl.com/5cdok
There are fifteen times as many believers in your faith (2.5%) worldwide than there are Jews (0.2%). Woo hoo! Felicitaciones, you’re famous in the religious community. Unfortunately, there are only about one-fifth as many of you as there are people who list “no religion” (12%). I’m tolerant of you; perhaps you would return the favor?
Give it up, boy. Before you start sweating like Nixon. You’re getting awfully hot under the collar for somebody who “doesn’t believe”.
Go have a beer.
Well, I just learned something while having my preconcieved prejudice confirmed at the same time:
Glass is subject to semantic definitions. But one fact is that it doesn’t sag atleast over a 2000 year period of observation:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Glass/glass.html
Religion? I admire you guys can argue the same points with the same freshness you gave it a month ago. I must be stupid?
#27 – l’Homme de la Moutarde
“I donât NEED to come up with a logical refutation.”
When you enter a discussion and expect your arguments to be taken seriously, you do. ‘Course if your only reason for jumping in is to take potshots and run off, why, no, sure you don’t. Like Sheryl Crow said, “If it makes you happy”…
>>When you enter a discussion and expect your arguments
>>to be taken seriously, you do.
Fishy, the only thing I need to refute is your increasingly indefensible position that Atheism is not a religion. And no number of irrelevant silliness about “stamp collecting” will mitigate the fact that you have had your scaly ass kicked, little man. It’s a fucking religion, admit it (if you’re really a “male”), and get on with your life. After all, might makes right, and there are fifteen times as many adherents to your religion than there are Jews.
So. Take your pisshots, run off, and make a pot of herbal tea for your Keeper.
Czecz, pan.
30–Mustard==what is your defintion of religion?
>>Mustard==what is your defintion of religion?
A belief concerning God that cannot be proven or disproven by scientific or objective physical evidence. That includes belief IN THE EXSITENCE OF and belief in the NON-EXISTENCE OF.
And you, son, are free to take any position regarding what you believe. Or, feel free to pick “no religion” as the box you check. Just don’t make the mistake of trying to check two boxes, and selecting “no religion” AND “Atheism”.
They’re mutually exclusive.