|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Favorite SciFi Quote (Read 15872 times)
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1387
|
Our liability is limited in your terran courts, as we are a Mars based company, though our award winning technical support center is based in India.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
Thanks for clarifying this for me.
And yes, Linux combine quality with quantity.
MacOS a form of BSD? Hmm, new to me. Must be because of me showing a one-sided interest for apple, apple like in cox, braeburn, golden delicious, gravensteiner, Granny Smith, gala, Jona Gold, Pink Lady, Idared and james Grieve.
Enjoy,
Krulle
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Icemage
Guest
|
Imaginary numbers, being numbers which represent numbers
which don't really exist.....that sounds a little fuzzy to me.
It appears some math gurus were sitting around and
trading math problems when they discovered,
"Oops, when I try to compute that, there isn't
a valid answer."
Well shucks. This Math thing was working out pretty well until
we ran into that little oopsy. Let's keep the system but add
sometthing to it to handle these occasinal cases. Yes, since
it doesn't work with the numbers we already have, we'll make
up something...imaginary numbers.
I can only assume they were very brillent and more than a little
stoned.
Actually, if you've ever played any game that uses 3-dimensional art or objects in the past decade or so, you've experienced first-hand a product of the development of imaginary numbers. The most common (and arguably most effective) way to handle the task of controlling a "camera" in a simulated world like a 3-D game universe uses something called Quaternions, which are sets of imaginary numbers organized in a matrix.
Despite the bizarre nature and somewhat unfortunate naming of imaginary numbers, they turn out to have quite real applications.
Icemage
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Draxas
Guest
|
Enough about math. I've always hated math. This one is more my cup of tea:
But for most of the rest of those theories (in other areas besides computers and engines), let's see some cool new machines (or biological advances). Seeing is believing.
Hmm, OK, let's talk biology, then. A few hundred years ago, there was widespread belief that life somehow just sort of... appeared. Lots of contemporary scientists, as well as religious scholars, were really keen on this idea. They called it Spontaneous Generation, and there were only a few people who thought the "something from nothing" concept it endorsed was false.
Fast forward a bit, and we have the total collapse of the theory of Spontaneous Generation, as Pasteur and others proceeded to disprove its existence even amongst microorganisms that are invisible to the naked eye. On a bit of a tangent, how's this for a scientific advance: The microscope, which allows us to see objects that are so miniscule in size, they seem invisible under normal conditions.
Fast forward again, to only a (relatively) short while ago. People have become intensely interested in Genetics (despite having unwittingly manipulated it for centuries among their crops, their livestock and pets, and even their children), and the molecule behind it, known as DNA. Since the molecule is beyond the reach of even the most sensitive microscopes, people have to figure out other ways to try and figure out what it looks like, and how it's constructed. Watson and Crick did just that, using X-Ray Crystallography; the discovery of the double helix structure (confirmed visibly years later, using extremely sensitive Scanning Electron Microscopes, yet another amazing scientific breakthrough) opened up all new possibilites for the manipulation of the molecule, since once we know how it's put together, we can start making a concious effort to change it.
Fast forward one last time, to today. I'm actually typing this post on a PC in a lab at work (I know, I know, shame on me). Behind me is an instrument about 3 cubic feet in size, that uses some fairly basic organic chemistry to assemble synthetic DNA, one base at a time. I work with this machine nearly every day, so this is commonplace for me. The DNA we make ends up in diagnostic kits for diseases, and makes fast and accurate testing for a variety of diseases possible and commonplace.
How's THAT for an advancement in the biological sciences? 
Wait, you want a scifi quote, too? Come on, I'm sure we've all memorized the UQM script by now. Just pick nearly anything the Spathi say. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1387
|
"Hmm, OK, let's talk biology, then."
I should clarify that I meant bio-engineering. Basically, carbon-based organic technology. Theories that don't produce tech don't count in this round.
"The DNA we make ends up in diagnostic kits for diseases, and makes fast and accurate testing for a variety of diseases possible and commonplace."
Honestly, I don't find that very impressive. We've all (at least in the US) been hit with an onslaught of presciption drug commercials talking about how they can fight (but not win against) all these relatively newly classified "diseases." And after you have been tested and diagnosed for "Acid Reflux Disease" or "Attention Deficit Disorder," you take some over priced pills, until they destroy one of you vital organs.
Stop using plastics for food containers, don't eat GMOs (Europe is dead on with this one,) lose the extra fat, live more like your species evolved to live (more excercise, less donuts,) try not to get stressed for extended periods of time, and stay close to those that you love. No offense, but these actions kick the ass off of your medical advances. Granted, it is much easier to take a pill, but it is easier still to do nothing, which is often less destructive in the long run, than drugs.
"Wait, you want a scifi quote, too? Come on, I'm sure we've all memorized the UQM script by now. Just pick nearly anything the Spathi say. "
On that, I concur. The spathi dialog is well done (voice acting helps a lot, too.)
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 16, 2005, 06:48:14 am by Deus_Siddis »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Draxas
Guest
|
I think bioengineering is pretty well beyond our capabilities for now, and probably will be for some time. Probably because nobody's working on it.
As for those "diseases" you mentioned, I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about real, life-threatening illnesses, like HIV or Hepatitis, just to name a few random examples. Besides, I don't make any drugs at all, just diagnostics. I like to think it's important work, and helps make the world a better place, even if I'm not directly helping to cure the sick.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sundiver
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 12
|
"Basically, the difference between science and religion is that science is about finding explanations for observed facts that can be used to predict other stuff, while religion accepts explanations that essentially allow anything to happen,"
I disagree.
Science is about what things are made of and how they work...religon is about how we treat each other and why we are here.
"Any signifiicantly advanced technology is indistiguishable from magic"- Arthur C. Clark
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 09, 2006, 10:29:58 pm by sundiver »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Neonlare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 277
Nut Case for Star Control
|
Simple, two answers to this, one book.
Ok, one.
I can't receite the Vogon Poetry, it'll kill a few people, so...
It's onto the next one.
*This answer was recieved 100000s of years ahead from when it was first asked to a mega computer.*
"The meaning of Life, the Universe, Everything."
"Your not going to like it."
"The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything, is Fourty-Two."
Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy got me ready for Star Control  .
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"would newton's law theory actually work if a Chmmr Avatar did a backwards pelvic thrust towards a planet and would this constitute an X=Y-0 in the part it ran straight into a Supox Blade and lasted long enough to survive?" - Elerium (as Valaggar)
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
|
|
|
|
|
