m082844

Objectivism, to me, is a philosophical system that makes sense of the world in which we live to better allow me to control my life for my life. I've seen other sciences accomplish the same task, but in different realms -- not strictly to my life and its relationship to reality.
As an example, I'm an engineer and the course "statics" really built a system of thinking involving stationary/inertial objects that allowed me to design solutions to achieve desired ends. Most engineering courses built on this framework and expanded my understanding, and therefore, my power of control over the world around me involving physical objects. There is truth to the old adage, "with knowledge, power (usually in Latin)".

The same applies to a massage therapist I know. Biology and human anatomy helps make sense of what she senses in the human body (knotted muscles) and why certain areas are damaged and in pain, and what the remedy is. Bad therapists don't have these understandings.

I'm sure any profession worth the money for its services is the same but maybe to a different degree. What makes philosophy unique is that, unlike the specialized examples I gave, it is the ultimate generalization, and therefore, It affects everything.

The kid has a point. I took an astronomy 101 class and I wondered a similar thing, but never sought out to disprove anything (thought they taught it in the 102 class). For one thing we think the Universe is 13.7 billion years (I believe) because that’s as far as we can see (13.7 billion light years). The Universe could be bigger (I think it is), but the expansion rate of space keeps light from reaching us much like a black hole keeps light from reaching those outside of it. The kid was wondering if carbon could be formed in the beginning—he concluded that was unlikely given the model. He then concluded that the carbon formation would take about 20 billion years (longer than the model’s age of 13.7 billion years). I describe the theory of elements formation below.
Supposedly, only hydrogen without electrons (proton) and electrons formed from the beginning. So where do the heavier elements come from? If you start combining nuclei, then you start to get heavier elements, but in order to do that you need pressure (lots of it). You have four fundamental forces in nature. The electromagnetic (same sign repulse, opposites attract, and magnetism), strong nuclear force (what keeps the nucleus of atoms together), the weak nuclear force, and gravity.

As these hydrogen scatter after the big bang, their gravity pulls some of them together. Groups collect with other groups, and those bigger groups collect into bigger groups, and even bigger groups. Gravity is pulling inwards and the structure of the atom (electromagnetic forces are pushing the protons away from each other). Once enough hydrogen is pulled together, the gravitational forces start to overcome the electromagnetic forces and the protons become close enough for the strong nuclear forces to form helium and that reaction (fusion) produces an immense amount of energy and more outward pressure (which equalizes with the inward pressure of gravity or the mass goes poof). Assuming enough gravity, the young star consumes hydrogen and produces helium and a system of convection keeps a flow of hydrogen to the core to be fused into helium. It takes more pressure to turn He(2) into Be(4) than it does to turn H(1) into He(2) so the helium just hangs out.

There are more than (2) ways for starts to die as I understand. As soon as the hydrogen is consumed to the point where fusion stops gravity pulls helium together (denser than hydrogen) and either there is enough mass to increase the pressure so that fusion occurs with helium or the star dies (and the core is left); or there is enough gravity to initiate more fusion of heavier elements, but not enough mass to keep it together and the star goes super nova; or there is fusion and enough mass to keep the reaction going (there is still a smaller nova, which ejects part of the content of the star). These same three options affect heavier fusion processes, but only to a point.

There is a point where the electromagnetic forces are overcome all together by gravity and electrons fall into their nucleus and neutralizes the protons; this produces a Neutron Star (the biggest visible star) which are more prevalent the closer you get to the edge of the visible Universe (take that into account with time difference and I don’t think they exist anymore). The last element to be made before a neutron star occurs is suggested to be Fe(26) (I believe). If gravity becomes any bigger than neutron stars, then it may overcome the strong nuclear forces of the neutrons collapsing the nucleus structure, and producing a singularity (a black hole), which eventually fizzle out over time.

Where do the heaver elements than Fe (26) come from? Perhaps there are side reactions to make heavier elements while Fe(26) is being made; IDK, that is the extent of what I know. The process takes a very long time. The kid I believe took an estimate of how much carbon exists on earth (or in our solar system) and calculate how long the fusion process would take to produce that much carbon and came up with 20 billion years. The weird thing is our star isn't big enough to produce the heavier elements (Just He I think) so I have no idea where they came from.

I think Thomas Paine was getting at the absurdity of assuming a properly restrained government. I haven't seen one. It's kind of like who will police the police? And who will police them? And so on. The nature of governments is to find, create, and make up excuses and reasons for their continued existence and why they should become more influential (at the expense of natural rights). Their nature is what I consider evil.
Also, I think a common saying around here is the only evil is the refusal to think. Well the only people who are elected to run the government continually refuse to think. How do we fix that aspect of evil? Each generation would have to relearn what those before them discovered, which actually requires intelligent effort. The tendency seems to be that each generation becomes dumber, and therefore, the government becomes more evil over time.

I think Thomas Paine was getting at the absurdity of assuming a properly restrained government. I haven't seen one. It's kind of like who will police the police? And who will police them? And so on. The nature of governments is to find, create, and make up excuses and reasons for their continued existence and why they should become more influential (at the expense of natural rights). Their nature is what I consider evil.
Also, I think a common saying around here is the only evil is the refusal to think. Well the only people who are elected to run the government continually refuse to think. How do we fix that aspect of evil? Each generation would have to relearn what those before them discovered, which actually requires intelligent effort. The tendency seems to be that each generation becomes dumber, and therefore, the government becomes more evil over time.

I believe that there is a God; I follow her philosophy to the best of my ability too. I see no contradiction. God is an assumption I make, and if I'm wrong, then reality will eventually show me otherwise; but by then I don’t think I’ll care if I’m wrong.

The Constitution is laid out quite clearly. It doesn't require a historian or some other special knowledge to understand. It is there plain as day for any man with a basic level of reading comprehension to understand, and that was on purpose, regardless of what Constitutional revisionists would lead you to believe:

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html

The general welfare and the other aforementioned powers of Congress are clearly defined right below that statement in what you would call the enumerated powers. As such, nothing can be done with the excuse that it is for the purpose of the "general welfare" if it is not one of these specifically listed powers. This was done to avoid abuse and to restrain government power, just as is the purpose of the Constitution in general.

"The enumerated powers are a list of items found in Article I, section 8 of the US Constitution that set forth the authoritative capacity of the United States Congress.[1] In summary, Congress may exercise the powers to which it is granted by the Constitution, and subject to explicit restrictions in the Bill of Rights and other protections found in the Constitutional text. The 10th Amendment states that all prerogatives not vested in the federal government nor prohibited of the states are reserved to the states and to the people, which means that the only prerogatives of the Congress (as well as the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch) are limited to those explicitly stated in the Constitution.
Historically these powers have often been expanded to include other matters through broad interpretation of the enumerated powers by Congress and the Supreme Court of the United States.[2"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumerated_powers

Notice how it says nothing about health care or social security, which otherwise would have had to be amended into the Constitution if it were not for the loose interpretations. That is one of several reasons why the amendment process is quite difficult to successfully complete and requires a large amount of agreement, along with the prerequisite that it may not violate the bill of rights or Constitution in the process.

I believe that there is a God; I follow her philosophy to the best of my ability too. I see no contradiction. God is an assumption I make, and if I'm wrong, then reality will eventually show me otherwise; but by then I don’t think I’ll care if I’m wrong.