CalBear68;585143 said:

---

Would someone please take pictures of some of the vehicles parked in the NL spaces. I'd hate to think that someone associated with the Big Bang Theory would be driving a Corvette.

---

You're right....they should be driving this.........

There's a photo on SFGate of him holding up his new Laureate parking permit

http://blog.sfgate.com/inberkeley/2011/10/05/berkeleys-nobel-winner-gets-real-prize-a-coveted-cal-parking-permit/?tsp=1

CalBear68;585009 said:

---

Yeah, but were the expanding particles hand or machine timed?

---

Were those times "wind aided".

oskirules;585059 said:

---

This thread is going to be become very OT, very fast. I don't have a problem with the Big Bang as a theory but it has its limits. Evolution is something separate from the Big Bang. Darwin wasn't a physicist. I do have a problem when people put this into a package and tell me there was nothing and then there was mass and then bang and then we had bacteria that evolved into monkeys and then humans with a billion steps in between. The chances of that happening are slimmer than Chip Kelly giving a decent halftime interview.

---

The odds of this are slimmer than all other explanations...but one.

oskirules;585059 said:

---

This thread is going to be become very OT, very fast. I don't have a problem with the Big Bang as a theory but it has its limits. Evolution is something separate from the Big Bang. Darwin wasn't a physicist. I do have a problem when people put this into a package and tell me there was nothing and then there was mass and then bang and then we had bacteria that evolved into monkeys and then humans with a billion steps in between. The chances of that happening are slimmer than Chip Kelly giving a decent halftime interview.

---

The chances may be slight but the evidence is sitting here typing this message right now.

Cal_Fan2;585228 said:

---

You're right....they should be driving this.........

---

Not bad. What is its 0-60 time? I would love to be tooling down the highway in this at 65+ mph with a big Cal decal on the side.

CalBear68;585009 said:

---

Yeah, but were the expanding particles hand or machine timed?

---

68great;585234 said:

---

Were those times "wind aided".

---

You mean were those times "dark energy aided."

68great;585238 said:

---

Not bad. What is its 0-60 time? I would love to be tooling down the highway in this at 65+ mph with a big Cal decal on the side.

---

Quote:

---

Speed: 0 to 60 in about 10 seconds

---

Looks cool be way to expensive for what it delivers....haven't seen one yet and it's 2 years old.....

Car of the Future is Electric and has Three-Wheels: Aptera 2e



http://www.jasonhharper.com/auto/535/car-of-the-future-is-electric-and-has-three-wheels-aptera-2e/

pappysghost;584680 said:

---

What about my work on why Sofele should not be used in short yardage??? I proved his mass was too small in any universe. I hate it when I don't win the Nobel prize. I guess I'll go for economics next.

---

If a guy like Paul Krugman can win a Nobel Prize in Econ, anyone can.

JerseyBear;584979 said:

---

Well, that entrenches us 6th on the list of schools with nobel laureates associated with
the school.
As per Wikipedia,
but whose counting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_by_university_affiliation#University_of_Paris

---

you know i could swear a while ago our nobel count was in the 60's, like 65 or something, right behind MIT. Why did it drop to the 40's?

I assume it is the difference between "official count" and "unofficial count", but why is there such a big difference between the two?

Maybe Perlmutter can help JT with play calling in the red zone. We could use some intelligent, creative thinking in those situations.

TorBear;585138 said:

---

OTOH, if you believe God was behind it all the whole time, the miracle of the Big Bang and evolution fit nicely into the picture. The difficulties arise when one remains wedded to a literal interpretation of the creation story in Genesis. Darwin wasn't a physicist, but neither is the Bible a science book.

---

Agree. That is what many people overlook.

Nor is the Old Testament written by first hand human witnesses (unlike the New Testament which is likely written/dictated by people contemporary to the events reported).

And what we read today is an English translation of a Greek or Latin translation of a Hebrew original or its Aramaic translation.

That is not to say that it is not "God's word"; but one must be very careful on how it is interpreted.

For example: The Bible says the universe was created in 6 "days". But there was "Light" on the first "day"; and the Sun was not created until the fourth "day".

This would lead a believer to conclude that "light" does not mean "sunlight"; and that "day" does not mean the 24 hour period that it takes for the Earth to make one rotation. Obviously something else was intended.