Welcome and intros

I will start and just for now call myself "Admin" - but this is a place for any new members (gosh I hope I get some!) to introduce themselves and say whatever they would like to say about themselves and their ideas and interests. Share as you may wish to.

You should give yourself a name, Admin, and obviously a made-up name will do and the simpler the name the better. You could even have an Admin name when you're doing Admin stuff and an ordinary name when you're doing science and philosophy stuff. If I have to keep calling you Admin then I'll have to start calling my missus "wife".

Can you offer me a name? I can have multiple names (well, all of you can if you want to here) The mind makes so many connections! After reading this, I was talking with my supervisor at work about all the rain we have been having in May and thought about how it is April showers bringing Mayflowers (incidentally my name on the net is usually Mayflow). Then someone listening in said "Like in the pioneers?" - so he connected to many things including the ship the Mayflower. In recognition to his connection, I mentioned the Nina and the Pinto and the Santa Maria.

The supervisor laughed and said "It is not Pinto like in pinto beans, it is 'Pinta'."
so I thought I can sometimes use the name Pinta.

Pinta then will have to have to do about exploring and pioneering. However, I think I may like the name Nina better for this. Decisions, decisions!

I used to be indecisive myself but nowadays I'm not so sure. Whatever name you decide on the members will soon come to realise that you have an Admin persona in addition to an ordinary member's persona.

Then I will for now be Mayflow. After all a rose by any other name is still a rose - or is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namarupa

May is a fan of Eastern philosophies.

Yes, unless it's on the ceiling or a watering can!

Well I have to admit that! (Mostly because I have no idea what it means) - sounds like a rosy world to live in though!

A ceiling rose in the UK is the fancy bit in the ceiling around the light fitting. A watering can rose is the bit you stick in the end to make a sprinkler.

Jilan1 wrote:A ceiling rose in the  UK is the fancy bit in the ceiling around the light fitting. A watering can rose is the bit you stick in the end to make a sprinkler.

Luckily Australian English is close enough to British English for me to pick up the reference, Jilan.

I think it was Winston Churchill who once said that the US and Britain are two great nations divided by a common language. He was a smart bloke, was Winston, although never entirely sober.

Sounds like my kinda guy!

I think that mayflow is a good and intrinsically apt internet user name. If you take the first three letters and make it "me and you flow"...

Hi all, came on over to have a looksie... Nice! I've seen most of you posting down at TPF, (The Pit Fight...lol)...Hi all, and thanks for inviting me Mayflow

Hi Pav, well this isn't much of a pit fight, but that does seem an apt description for that place. Welcome to the forum! Everybody here so far has been by invitation, partly because I want the core membership to set better standards than most forums I have seen.

"Hello" works great for me, so long as good enough for everyone else! I would like to introduce you to myself.  So...I guess I pretty much just did that.  But, come to think of it, I'm not entirely sure who I am, or that I am for that matter!  I suppose I could fall back on that old 'wives tale' that goes, "I think therefore I am." but then I find myself questioning whether I do, or have ever truly thought anything at all!  I remember thinking, I think...but I don't KNOW that I can say that I KNOW that I KNOW that I really have ever done so; since it's possible that the apparent perception of my past thoughts were purely artificial in some way, shape or form.  I feel that I'm now forced to further digress to another proclamation made by some elderly gentleman a little while back, or so they say, "I only know one thing, and that is that I know nothing."  In a final attempt to 'find myself', so that I can introduce myself, I find that the phraseology of the quote is far less than helpful.  If I also knew that I knew nothing, then I would either not know that I knew this (since I've admitted to knowing nothing) or conversely I would indeed know something (the fact that I knew nothing).  Both are further contradictory!  It's a strange-loop, displaying anomalous consistency while equally being a consistent anomaly.  Strange how they don't cancel one another out and leave me with the notion of neutrality.  Or maybe that's the problem in the first place!  But they just don't!  Anyway, now I've become ever so aware that by arriving at this non-conclusion, I have probably said more about myself than I could have with focused sentences.  So, consider yourself introduced to me!



Hello there, "MayFlow" is it?  You can rest assured (w/o losing any sleep over it) that "a rose is" [repeat ad infinitium.]

I tried calling one a daisy the other day...It remained a rose.  The only change that I noticed was that it now appears to be looking at me with a more condescending pedal arrangement, and I feel like it probably resents me - and understandably so.   It’s not a big deal, we were never really all that close so I'm really not all that shaken up over it.  Nevertheless, it's still a rose.    



Here's a related riddle that I just make up in real-time (as opposed to imaginary time I guess):  If you keep repeating the word "rosy" over-and-over as many time as you feel like, when you stop you will find that the sum of all that you've said in the end is "rosy" exactly one single time...  Try to figure that one out!

Why hello there new friend! Now with a clever rose in the garden, or do we even have a garden here yet? Note to self - we should think of creating a garden here if don't yet have one.

I think if you call a particular rose a rose - it may not feel you feel that it has a single special uniqueness about it, then you have to think of IT as an unhappy or apathetic towards you rose. Which reminds me, with a login name like yours, we are almost certainly going to have to choose a nickname for you.

As to the idea of "self" or "non-self" yes it sure seems to be quite a conundrum.

Gosh where are my manners? Welcome to the forum, and thank you for joining, Eschewer of Obscuration!

Well, Hello New Friends... I am so excited about being one of the early members of what will be a great forum for the exchange of ideas, support for new ideas in academic growth and place to make new friends that want to grow, understand and share their love of the mysteries in the sciences. Yeah, I probably sound like an over-zealous puppy when daddy gets home from work, but that’s how I feel. After chatting briefly with the ‘heartbeat’ of this forum and what the objectives are for its future. I am wholly convinced that this site will be a great experience for those that will adopt the spirit and constructive intent of this forum. So, for those that lay in wait to toss condescending diatribes and unfounded, jealous hostilities into the serenity of this community, please find another universe to attack. Believe me, there are plenty of forums that will welcome all the bullshitus you can deliver. Now don't get me wrong,  I am sure that this forum is not going to be a mutual admiration society full of kiss-ass jerks, but a community that will encourage exchange of ideas and philosophies without fear of being castigated by self-propertied geniuses that think they understand General Relativity or the deep mystery of Dark Matter. What you scribble on a chalk board can either blind your audience brilliance or baffle them with bullshitus. Please use good sense when discussing and/or debating your interests. Everyone deserves at least a minimum amount of respect and consideration whether you believe in what is presented or not.  Let’s all take the ethical high ground, and leave the valleys to those that are digging their own graves.

Hi Doc. I am overly glad you could make it here. I hope all is going well with you. I understand the body has had it's challenges lately, but your mind-heart has risen to the occason which is so so encouraging to see. Your Spirit here is great to see. We can all learn and use a little deeper knowledge in chemistry. This will maybe be your main niche, but I have a feeling you are not meant to be limited only to a niche.

Thank you for the invitation and warm greeting. Yeah, I've still got a ways to go to get back to 100% physically, but you have 100% of my support for the community . Let me know how I can support your efforts as well as the efforts of the community as a whole. Have a great day. Doc :-)

All I expect from you Doc. and want from you Doc, is for you to continue to be you. Of course I cannot help but appreciate the enthusiastic support.

MayFlow wrote:Welcome to the forum, and thank you for joining, Eschewer of Obscuration!

Thank you kindly, MayFlow!    

Now let’s get down to business!  How dare you try go and to deprive me of the use of my full, undoctored, God-given name assigned to me at birth!  May I call you “Flo”? j/k.  Actually, the sign-up processing routine of the forum is flawed.  I made numerous attempts to enter other (shorter) usernames, and it repeatedly insisted that “this username has already been taken, please try another”…I click on member-list, there’s nothing remotely like any of the first three names I tried, each of which only used standard uppercase and lowercase letters, not as much as a space was used.  After trying each several times, double checking my email to be sure it didn’t just say that, but actually create the account, and trying to start a new session several times, I gave up on a normal name.  I typed one that was one character shy of the maximum number of characters allowed, mostly out of spite, and it worked the first time!  Now who has to process the long name every time I perform an action?  Yup, the same forum that wouldn’t let me type what I wanted…Serves it right!  I learned it a lesson!

MayFlow wrote: you have to think of IT as an unhappy or apathetic towards you rose.

I suppose I’m easily amused, but there are worse things to be I guess.  But a rose that’s apathetic -  that’s amusing!  How does one approach another’s apathy anyway?  While one might be innately empathetic towards the apathetic, should they be sympathetic?  Hmm..  I’m more befuddled by the word itself, actually, who decides on how these words come to be spelled?  I’m just saying that I see apathetic as the prefix “a-“ meaning not or the opposite of, which describes the rest of the word “pathetic”, which means pitiful and/or miserably inadequate.  So why, oh why, would it not be a term of endearment, it sounds like it should mean that you’re not pitiful!  Of course that’s not NECESSARILY flattery at it’s finest, depending on how it was said, i.e. tone, wording.  For instance, it could be intended to mean that you don’t quite rise to the level of pitiful, but that doesn’t deny you very closely approach it!  It’s just uncalled for, to make it look like it was arranged one way only to leave you wondering what good suffixes and prefixes are if you can’t trust them anyway!  Here’s a good example, lets say you find a container of liquid in your front yard, and all it says on it is inflammable.  Being quite the astute individual that you are, you decipher the commonly used and well known meaning of the word from it’s prefix ”in-“ meaning not, and the radix “flam[m]” altered from “flame” meaning fire, and the suffix “-able” meaning able to or can be.  So you realize that it doesn’t have the ability to lead to fire, ergo it must be safe to play with near flames!  This is wonderful, you’re kids were just starting a bonfire around back, so you let them have it to play with for a little while.  I guess you know how that one turns out! Who knew, “in-“ means not, but an older prefix “into-“ means…well, as it suggests, into. And sometimes, it’s abbreviated “in-“ just to maintain sanity and in this case safety…somehow?  Since “into the fire” is slightly different than “not fire”, but someone thought it would be funny (or so I must assume) to use one meaning of “in-“ in like 99% o the cases, and then in the one that might get you blown to smithereens, they sneak in the archaic meaning that’s pretty much the opposite!  Smart, right?  All the acetylene, oxygen, and propane tanks that everyone has with the big bold “INFLAMMABLE” sticker  on the side!  Interestingly, inflammable = flammable for all practical purposes.  Could someone have not allowed the word to evolve in such a way OR have started using “flammable” stickers 50 years ago – or even starting today?  The opposite of flammable (obvious not inflammable) is nonflammable.  And you wonder what I approach apathetic with such…apathy.  Regardless of  the meaning of the word irregardless, it’s also got a weird vibe attached to it.  IT doesn’t take a genus to have an ingénues idea of  what to do with these words!  But anyway, back to your quote above, I think the part where you say it’s an “apathetic towards you” rose, is a nicely worded description.  It’s subtlety hilarious, the wording that is!  I don’t mean to come across as making fun or the likes, but like I say, I guess it’s my easily amused mind that sees that as hard to read without laughing a little!  Anyway, I’ll leave my humor and overanalyzes of a word isolated to apathetic or the moment!  Let’s not even get started with how the rose “…may not feel you feel that…”, because that’s just to deeply layered feelings that my rose is having.  It creeps me out, and now I have to sleep with garden clippers under my pillow every night!  Thank you or that!

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, you may have assumed to have flown in, under the radar, in your previous post with respect to answering my riddle, but I did indeed notice your distinct lack of any reference to it.  Surely you’d bring it up if you figured it out, so I’m going to have to call you out on that one!  Reread it, think about it, say it out-loud, repeat it, listen to your words, every last syllable, and then solve it!  It’s not exactly ‘riddle of the sphinx’ material, but it’s an exercise in thinking outside of the box (which, buy the way, I have a strong argument based in philosophical physics that proves a box has no naturally defined absolute inside or outside, and since there can’t be two “inside-outsides” I suppose they must be assumed to be called something like two spaces.  But the actual specifics are beyond the scope of THIS post & thread!).  Anyway, this IS supposed to be a forum for the open-minded, which are said to think in such abstract ways, correct?  Then here is a chance for you to do so – no pressure!  Is it NOT better to try and fail then not to try atoll at all!  Now, if you would be so kind as to give my idea a chance, I would be quite grateful.  Oh, I’ve included the answer below, but it’s hidden by a ‘spoiler box’.  Now I know you’re not the type of person that I would have to tell NOT TO CHEAT by peeking!  So I won’t insult you by doing that!  But if and when you figure out the riddle or want help, just ask or tell me the answer you arrived at, DON’T even use the ‘spoiler box’ unless I die or become placed on a ventilator in a perpetually vegetative state, okay?!  Promise!  Well here it is!...See how difficult it is to truly practice self-restraint!  Well I’m sure you’ll do just fine!  Thanks!

Answer to the 'rosy riddle'. ONLY to be used upon event of my death, otherwise NEVER click this!:

In a post to Old_Doc48, MayFlow wrote:I have a feeling you are not meant to be limited only to a niche.

.
A niche is like a crutch (minus the wood and screws or aluminum rods mind you), and we should all rise to a higher-level, where all the internichery blurs, and soon fades away.  Existence above all perceivable niches, or supernicheuality is said to be next to Godliness.  Jealousy from those that cannot or simply do not attain such a higher state of being, remain confined to their niche forever, hence the common negative sentiment that those found down in the niches have toward the super-niches, often abbreviated “snitches".  C’mon now, pretend to crack a smile - you can't just make this kind of stuff up! (Well I guess you can, but you didn't, so I did... .)

But, returning to a more serious state-of-mind, (assuming one exists, and I can remember where I left it last), it's nice to meet you Old_Doc48!  Since MayFlow has made it clear that you have some form of connection to the field of chemistry, I thought I might point out that I too have a history in this area of science, although doubtfully as formal or significant as I suspect yours to be.  It was mostly due to the many "exceptions to the rule" that were always pretty much explained away as emerging from a complex quantum phenomenon - beyond the scope of whatever made such a statement, that's what drove me to physics in the first place.  Those kind of holes in a science just bother me, I wanted to see the completed picture, not reference a "periodic table" with something like 85% periodicity, for instance!  Don't get me wrong, I love Swiss cheese!  I'm just saying that I enjoy it even more if the holes were all filled in...There'd be more cheese to enjoy - that's just common sense, right?!  

Anyways, I'm sorry to butt-in like that, and to further identify you (and myself) as chemists, since these days the majority of people think that if they looked up the term "chemistry" in a thesaurus they would find the words like "terrorism" and "meth-lab" mostly!  "So earlier today I'm walking along and I have a container of Root-Killer (CuSO4) and Contact-Cleaner (C6H14) in my shopping-cart at the local Wal-Mart.  And as I walk by, people are pulling their children tightly to their side, shielding their eyes as they give me a subtle look of fear, anger and a touch of shame!" Quite a lovely feeling!  Okay, that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but not as much as you might think.  So, I hope I've not drawn any unwelcome attention to this aspect of who you are!  But it is nice to know there's someone here who might relate, contribute or help with chemistry related topics.  (Hey, any novel ideas for the separation of cupronickel alloys into their metallic derivatives - I'm only kidding, at least insofar as posing the question right here/now, but I am currently researching this matter.)  And welcome, by the way, to this place - the forum of course!

Have a nice day

Hi. Welcome.
Good to see you have the general spirit of what the forum is all about.

Hey there Old_Doc48

Great you could join us! Personally I find what people think and why they think it to be really interesting, even if I don't agree with it. I'm willing to give any idea a run through and normally find some point that I can identify with. It amazes me that there are people who set themselves up as "know it alls" on the internet. Clearly ones learning curve stops under such circumstances and their frustration becomes evident in rudeness and hostility to alternative perspectives.
Actually, admittedly, this can become amusing reading material in a sort of soap opera kind of genre, if you ignore the fact of the OP's original intention of discussing their idea and meeting brick wall. (Just seen thread were xOx blows top...again )
I'm sure we can all travel our valleys and hills here in "amusement" also, but perhaps without taking ourselves so seriously ...

When one becomes angry at somebodies passive opinion,
its a sure sign from the subconscious mind, that one has
missed some important detail, and that one should pause,
reconsider the entire topic, and keep searching until one
finds that illusive concept.

When one is is no longer angry, then consider it found.

Anger at non-aggressive issues, should always be cause for introspection.

Lol, I'm such an idiot, I've only just found page 2...and I had thought no one was posting.

Do you think it a cause for introspection when one finds oneself amused by others on the net becoming uppity and uptight?

PavhftltstE wrote:Lol, I'm such an idiot, I've only just found page 2...and I had thought no one was posting.

Do you think it a cause for introspection when one finds oneself amused by others on the net becoming uppity and uptight?    

16:12:17
I think it depends on your psychological type - we will have to create a psychology category. I figure you would be rather a knot-head to not find them amusing, and worse yet to be so weak as to be like them, but to reflect on it would require probably an introverted mind. This would be me, btw.