I undestand most of what you say, i knew why they accept time as a fourth dimmension to me it still sounds inadequate and very losely explored. I mean with quantum physics all Einstiens theories can be proven wrong, but i dont want to get into an arguement over physics and dimmension because i know very little. Personally it intrest me, but not enough to dedicate time to.

I mean with quantum physics all Einstiens theories can be proven wrong

uh, no, no no... no and NO. not in the least
first of all QF is the more flawed of the two, lack of gravity and all that. Einsteins only real problem is its innability to describe distinct particles. and second of all Einsteins theorey is completely right, but its not completely complete
so please; stop using "prove wrong" for gods sake, it sounds like nails on a blackboard.

Okay then, i said i knew very little thanks for proving me wrong   

lol, I dont know a lot. its just that I have some preliminary dabbling in the subject.
which I might add, is a lot (relativity is a massive-huge-big thing.)

and I get irritated with "prove wrong" becuase, well. Einstein is like THE MAN of physics.
like
LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
*golden angels descend upon white steeds* *choir of blond fat ladies sing*
that sort of thing.

Yes, but even he said that the atom was the smalles particle and he was wrong. Hes THE MAN currently, but how long till the next MAN.

statements are wrong all the time. but the theories are rarely so.
take for instance his statement "madness is doing the same thing twice and expecting different results"
this was a direct attack and quantum mechanics, which allows electrons to exist in a plurality of states, only one of which is fully realized in the physical world.
the result: multidimensions.
Einstein was a devout disbeliever in that idea. but nonetheless his theories remain intact.

Wait now you ahve me confused(rarely happens). How did you relate that quote to quantum physics.

when you move down to the level of electrons in terms of size, energy and matter start to occur at random. things occur without pattern, and unrelated to any variable.
the thing is that in this area doing the SAME EXACT THING may create different results.
the result is that every time something occurs in an electron, the universe splits up into innumerable multiverses, one for each outcome.
basically, you can do the same thing over and over AND expect different results

Oh, okay still i dont see much relevance in that qoute, although i do now see a relation.

hes saying that the same experiment constructed in the same exact way cannot create two distinctly different results

but quantum mechanics defies this.

Well then one or the other will just have to be changed, or thought through to find a medium.

no, his statement is wrong. not the theorey.

as for relativity and quantum mechanics, yes, thats the idea behind the unification field. to find a theorey that elegently includes both principles.

Here's something interesting Linkey link

Of course it is possible that it is just a trick of the light or something that the wind blew in but still, the possibility is fascinating. If it is water that trickled out then that would suggest that some sort of aquifer exists beneath the surface. And if there is liquid water then there is the possibility that there is something living in it (probably just some microbe at best but still, that would be a HUGE discovery).


And if you've never seen this website before then you should spend some time checking it out. It has been posting a picture a day since some time in 1995. I have been visiting it for years. Some really cool pictures and their little blurbs about them can be quite intersting. And the best thing is that they are loaded with links so you can easily set of on a long surfing journey this way

well, noting some significant errosion at the top of the crater I'm doubtful...
but it WOULD be cool.

If it is true, than the cost of a possible colony would be drastically reduced. Since water is used for so many things and is vital to survival haing something like that already present on Mars will allow us to easily support a colony.

and if it can be seen from space we can be quite certain that its a large deposit.

has anyone ever considered what earth would be like without life? wouldnt that be interesting?
probably just another crater-filled hole. except that it would have lots of water... that and it would have constant tectonic plate movement. something other planets dont have due to the lack of a heavy metal core.

You forget that most planets are also dormant and frozen on the inside.

thats because of the heavy metal core.
the heavy metals generate heat as they descend downwards, this powers the constant movement of the mantle, and hence tectonic plate movement.

I never said they werent related.

you implied that in saying that I forget that most planets are frozen inside
which I implied I knew by pointing out an indirect fact taht would indicate that we are special in having a viscous mantle.

Well then we both underestimated each others knowledge then   

i guess so.  

Looks like the old threads are dieing, even though they were annoying(but enjoyable), its a pity not many others post on these threads.

even though they were annoying(but enjoyable),

its definately one of those types of things that if your not into it, dont bother reading. it'll just ruin your day.
besides, we can always just create new ones.

you implied that in saying that I forget that most planets are frozen inside which I implied I knew by pointing out an indirect fact taht would indicate that we are special in having a viscous mantle.

Mars used to but doesn't anymore. It has cooled as Emp said. Evidence? Olympus Mons. The biggest volcano in the solar system.