>> ^Fade:

Nothing in the laws of physics...except that you can't physically travel through time, yes.
Time is only this moment. There is no future or past to travel to.


Not according to some elements of General Relativity. Meaning, some would have it that the past, future and present have all already happened and just exist in a different dimension, call it the Z' axis. When Kurt Gödel wasn't destroying the foundations of logical positivism, he devised a time travel tabulation called the Gödel metric which allowed for curves in space time that one might be able to use some variant of what we all know as time travel. It is all theory, of course, and most of the theoretical methods for invoking time travel require a device of infinite size, or arranging matter in such a way as to destroy your time travel machine as it becomes a singularity...oops. Time is hardly understood really. We don't really know what it is when we talk about time, and by we, I mean everyone! Is time a particle, is it a matter or energy of sorts, is it conserved, how is it created if it is a substance of a sort? Is the apparent nature of moments of time in our minds indicative to "it's" nature, or just an arrangements of information in our mind...could some other mind have a very different idea of time? If so, how real is our notion of time, as it would appear that forward moving time would not be objectively real in that case. The debate on time travel, as far as I can see, isn't over...but mostly because we don't even know what time actually is! </rant of one of my favorite subjects!>

Time to go eat...

Edit (wanted to add that some hold that rats memorize events in reverse! What I mean is when they go through a maze, they remember coming out of the maze first, and going in last! AMAZINGLY DIFFERENT WORLD! As such, a rat has a much, much different idea of the "flow" of time as a forward flow of moments, his time jumps from now, to the then that was near to the then that was far and back to the "now" which will become another then that was near, then a then that was far...a jambalaya that we would have no idea how to make since of lineally, but it works so well for rats that they are one of natures most sucessfull pests.)

>> ^cracanata:

I found the use of "fail" word discouraging my hopes for humanity. I agree with the use of it when something is amusing, but when terrible things like this happen is just wrong and dehumanizing.


It's still a fail...

To me it looked like the wingsuit didn't give him the lift he was expecting and he pulled the chute too late to make much of a difference. I understand 900 feet is not a lot of room for error but still, there was time for a seasoned veteran (anyone wingsuiting from a bridge should have some logged hours flying the thing in a less dangerous environment, say 12,000 feet higher) to pull out of the stunt and admit defeat, sparing himself the injuries.

I lump this 'tradgedy' in with things like the death of Kurt Kobain, Bon Scott or Steve Irwin. Choosing to do something risky where it is foreseeable that you could die or be seriously damaged is exercising poor choices, not tragic.

But of course it's all in the eye of the beholder. I just tend to have a low opinion of things like this being talked up as tragic because, as packo noted, there are plenty of real tradgedies where the victims have absolutely no choice in their situation and still suffer horribly.

you're probably right... i made a longer list initially and realized it was entirely composed of writers. i couldn't decide if it's because those are the people i've paid the most attention to in my life or if its because the nature of success is so incredibly different for a writer than a ceo. >> ^dag:

Maybe it's only the inventors. Da Vinci, Edison and Jobs fit that bill. Deep thinkers and pure artists are pretty different. >> ^peggedbea:
I'm pretty sure kurt vonnegut was at least reasonably kind. He wrote so many books about the value of human kindness.
crispin glover is also unabashedly sensitive and kind and contains all the charm of someone who is not at all charming until they're speaking about something they love. i guess you could argue that he is not a genius, but then i would just tell you to attend a viewing for one of his insane art house films and stick around for the three hour Q&A he'll host when it's finished. genius.
oh i bet neil degrasse tyson is only slightly prickish, and only in the kindest most charming of ways.
>> ^dag:
Just as a thought experiment - can you name one who was well thought of as an all-around nice guy? Edison was an asshole. I've heard that Da Vinci was a real prick.>> ^quantumushroom:
But do geniuses need to be assholes?
No. No they don't.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Maybe it's only the inventors. Da Vinci, Edison and Jobs fit that bill. Deep thinkers and pure artists are pretty different. >> ^peggedbea:

I'm pretty sure kurt vonnegut was at least reasonably kind. He wrote so many books about the value of human kindness.
crispin glover is also unabashedly sensitive and kind and contains all the charm of someone who is not at all charming until they're speaking about something they love. i guess you could argue that he is not a genius, but then i would just tell you to attend a viewing for one of his insane art house films and stick around for the three hour Q&A he'll host when it's finished. genius.
oh i bet neil degrasse tyson is only slightly prickish, and only in the kindest most charming of ways.
>> ^dag:
Just as a thought experiment - can you name one who was well thought of as an all-around nice guy? Edison was an asshole. I've heard that Da Vinci was a real prick.>> ^quantumushroom:
But do geniuses need to be assholes?
No. No they don't.

I'm pretty sure kurt vonnegut was at least reasonably kind. He wrote so many books about the value of human kindness.

crispin glover is also unabashedly sensitive and kind and contains all the charm of someone who is not at all charming until they're speaking about something they love. i guess you could argue that he is not a genius, but then i would just tell you to attend a viewing for one of his insane art house films and stick around for the three hour Q&A he'll host when it's finished. genius.

oh i bet neil degrasse tyson is only slightly prickish, and only in the kindest most charming of ways.

>> ^dag:

Just as a thought experiment - can you name one who was well thought of as an all-around nice guy? Edison was an asshole. I've heard that Da Vinci was a real prick.>> ^quantumushroom:
But do geniuses need to be assholes?
No. No they don't.

>> ^direpickle:

Yes. That three year old that can play piano by ear is absolutely the result of 10,000 hours of practice.
Are people really trying to argue that natural aptitudes don't exist? Rage.


More like them alone don't solely define your success. And most of those child stars have done their skill for thousands of hours, people with a natural aptitude tend to indulge that aptitude. But a person who is a natural born genius, but doesn't get alone well with others, or isn't in the right time or place doesn't always get ahead. Georges Lemaître, father of the big bang theory, isn't really remembered by any lay person...even though his theory shapes the entire field of astrophysics, much like Einstein, but everyone remembers him. Kurt Gödel, who's that, oh, a genius who ramifications in thought still haven't been fully explored 80 years later...but no one knows his name. Or even the famous composers and artists that we all love today, many died poor and unrecognized. Timing/luck seems AS fundamental for success as being a genius. The book isn't talking about actually producing the "best" but being recognized and reaping the rewards of being the best. It is a good read, I recommend it.

>> ^videosiftbannedme:

The moves that cheerleader makes at 2:05....mmmm-mmmm. Can't get enough.


Funny that you mention them:

8. The cheerleaders in the "Teen Spirit" video were recruited from an LA strip joint. Nirvana really wanted their friend in the band L7 for the part. They were overruled. (Bonus fact: Dave was dating L7's Jennifer Finch at the time.)

9. The janitor was the actual janitor from director Sam Bayer's apartment complex in Venice Beach.

10. Kurt was worried "Teen Spirit" sounded too much like a Pixies song. He was also worried it had too much of the same feeling as Boston's "More Than a Feeling."

11. Nevermind's original recording budget was $65,000. They ended up spending twice that.

http://www.alancross.ca/a-journal-of-musical-things/2011/9/24/20-things-about-nirvanas-nevermind-on-its-20th-anniversary.html

Tags for this video have been changed from 'rehearsals, MTV, Kurt, Cobain, Dave, Grohl, Krist, Novoselic, acoustic' to 'rehearsals, MTV, Kurt Cobain, Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic, Pat Smear, acoustic' - edited by SlipperyPete

This is awesome, but not what I expected. I thought it was going to be something that was born and then died - the fastest (the fastest living thang, like the kurt cobain's of the molecular world).

I wanted to be like a cross between Mad Max, Deckard, Kurt Cobain and Thurston Moore. But, now that I'm me and I have drank tons of alcohol and consumed many pounds of drugs I could be wrong about that, I think I might have forgotten.

Joining the 27 club... along with Janis, Jimi, Jim, and Kurt.

Ah, my favourite horror movie. I just love this movie to death, and Kurt Russell? The icing on the awesome-cake.

I remember the game, it was really cool initially... but kind of fell apart by the end. Still enjoyed it though. It's backwards compatible with the 360, if i find an Xbox copy of the game, I'll have to play through it again

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Dilettante. Russell obviously - in his "Captain Ron" period.>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:
Wow see the influence on Kurt and other modern music on that second one.

Vonnegut?

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

Wow see the influence on Kurt and other modern music on that second one.


Vonnegut?

Wow see the influence on Kurt and other modern music on that second one.