Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (428)	3/1/2002 10:40:48 AM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

What caused the First Cause again? I forget.

To: Neocon who wrote (428)	3/1/2002 10:41:46 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

... to those who wot not of the mathematics of (and leading to) complex systems, cannot grasp the vastness of time, and would see predestination in quantum mechanics... gah. I'll never get done coding at this rate.

To: Neocon who wrote (428)	3/1/2002 12:18:51 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The very dominance of the Big Bang Theory implies that there is a First Cause. Nuts. Current physical theory is that given enough "time" (whatever that meant before the Big Bang), a large enough statistical fluctuation in the "vacuum" to cause the Big Bang was bound to occur. And the very fact that life evolved into multi- cellular organisms, when it should have been content to swim in the primordial ooze, You know this? Go collect your Nobel Prize! and when it is problematic how one gets cellular differentiation piecemeal It is? By "celllular differentiation", I presume you mean the presence of organelles in a the cell. There is good evidence now that those were once independent lifeforms that "infected" the cell and ended up being adopted by it.