you forgot one uncle K

What kind of hamster is that?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-33518-po...#pid961095

(June 8, 2015 at 1:16 pm)Alex K Wrote: Having the Dark matter in the form of a dark world as you propose, is a very exciting thought (I mean, how cool would that be), but unfortunately pretty firmly excluded by observations - we do after all know what the gravitational effects of the dark matter must look like, and your dark parallel world would not satisfy observations.

I am sad.
You, and this guy 'observations,' killed a fun idea.
I shall continue to pretend I own and care for a dark hamster.....named Ron.
It can't interact much less than my cat.

Whether it was the purpose of this thread or not.
Alex and Pyrrho, you have renewed my sense of wonder at how amazing the observed universe is and how much interesting speculation can be found in ostensibly simple questions when examined closely.

JuliaL, it if very kind of you to include me in your comments. Uncle K may, however, feel that since he is the one with actual scientific knowledge, compared with which I am as the village idiot as far as scientific knowledge is concerned, I say, Uncle K may not feel complemented by my inclusion in your remarks.

Nonsense, of course you can be included. And yes, JuliaL, well put, if this thread has one purpose, that should be it!

at this point, I am tapping out you all are way smarter than I am 

Alex as new results from Cern come out could you post a new thread?

Thank you for your time explaining all that stuff!

(June 9, 2015 at 8:59 am)polar bear Wrote: Alex as new results from Cern come out could you post a new thread?

Sure!

(June 9, 2015 at 1:17 am)Alex K Wrote: Nonsense, of course you can be included. And yes, JuliaL, well put, if this thread has one purpose, that should be it!

Of course, you are too polite to say what I stated.  I apologize for any such suggestion.

However, you might want to reread my post, as it was limited in what it was about.  However polite you may be, I have contributed nothing to the science of this thread.  It is only in deviating from science that my posts have any value in this thread.

I would never argue with you online about any scientific idea.  Even if you stated that the earth is flat, the most I would state online is something along the lines of that not being the generally held idea among scientists.  Of course, I would not believe such a thing, but I would not argue with you about it.  (And obviously, I am picking an absurd idea, so that everyone may understand the point.  You know more about science than I have ever known, or will ever know.  And I am smart enough to not argue with you about a subject when I know that you know much more about it than I do.)

And thank you again, Uncle K, for your explanations of various scientific ideas.  There are at least several of us who appreciate it.

And, as I have stated already, I appreciate the fact that you understand the limits of your subject and are averse to pretending that you know things that you do not know.  People who speak as though they know everything are automatically not believable.

(June 9, 2015 at 4:12 pm)Pyrrho Wrote: And, as I have stated already, I appreciate the fact that you understand the limits of your subject and are averse to pretending that you know things that you do not know.  People who speak as though they know everything are automatically not believable.

Bah. How painful to witness bigshot professors not admitting when they don't know something in public talks because they think it hurts their reputation as these towering intellects. I've seen it so many times and it's always embarrassing, because usually the audience isn't quite fooled by it.

But I don't only hope to understand the limits of my subject, but also the limits of my knowledge of my subject, which is possibly harder

(June 9, 2015 at 4:52 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(June 9, 2015 at 4:12 pm)Pyrrho Wrote: And, as I have stated already, I appreciate the fact that you understand the limits of your subject and are averse to pretending that you know things that you do not know.  People who speak as though they know everything are automatically not believable.

Bah. How painful to witness bigshot professors not admitting when they don't know something in public talks because they think it hurts their reputation as these towering intellects. I've seen it so many times and it's always embarrassing, because usually the audience isn't quite fooled by it.

But I don't only hope to understand the limits of my subject, but also the limits of my knowledge of my subject, which is possibly harder

Yes.  It is revolting when people are unwilling to admit that they do not know things that they do not know.

And, as I have already stated, that is not you.  It is one of the reasons why I am almost ready to believe anything you say about physics.  Everything you have stated seems reasonable (well, as reasonable as physics sounds in the past hundred years, which, honestly, all sounds crazy), and you have been clear about not wanting to go beyond, to some grand magical bullshit nonsense.  I respect that.

Uh-Oh. With great power comes great responsibility