OOOOHHHH a bible study thread starting to happen.
I was enjoying this until Darwinism and Mythology started to enter the frey.
Adam and Eve = single celled amoeba dividing into two.
Perfect subcellular geometry. A clone, a copy, just like trying to reproduce another board.
cheers
Hicksy
OOOOHHHH a bible study thread starting to happen.
I was enjoying this until Darwinism and Mythology started to enter the frey.
Adam and Eve = single celled amoeba dividing into two.
Perfect subcellular geometry. A clone, a copy, just like trying to reproduce another board.
cheers
Hicksy
Sorry, couldnt help myself.
Hello J,
I did not say that because there gaps in evolutionary theory, and that therefore God did it. I just said that there are gaps in evolutionary theory (it is mostly gaps) and that my opinion is that God did it. There is a huge difference between these two statements.
It is not appropriate for science to postulate the existence of that which it cannot measure. God is not able to be measured. You state that you must be able to define something before you look for it. This is not true. You are assuming that you cannot know something unless you can prove that you know it. This is also untrue.
You mention that genetic and DNA researchers are doing work on evolution. I take it that you are stating that they are working on evolutionary theory, which is a different thing from working on evolution. These researchers are adding nothing to Darwinian evolutionary theory. Darwinian evolutionary theory predicts nothing other than that evolutionary changes will take place. The reasons given by Darwinian theory for these evolutionary changes are as untestable as is Creation theory. The basic premise of Darwinian theory is that random mutations occur. Unfortunately it is impossible to demonstrate that an event has no cause, so it is impossible to say that any mutation is random. The theory has never gotten over this basic flaw, but it doesn’t matter to science, because Darwinian evolutionary theory predicts nothing specific anyway. Most scientists already know this .
This whole evolution theory discussion started when Silverback stated that shaping was a trial and error process, (just like the supposed trial and error process described by Darwinian evolutionists) I must say that I don’t do it that way. I have a process whereby I take a design inspiration and carefully turn it into a functional object using as much calculation as is necessary.
Hicksy,
It is strange how everyone bows and scrapes with great respect when any surfer talks about indigenous (read Hawaiiian) spiritual values, the spirits of their ancestors, and traditional gods, but how much crap gets thrown when I mention that I occasionally feel inspired by something higher when designing a board, or that nature uses geometry. I bet if I posted the same stuff in Hawaiian Pidgin and called myself Keaulana, that the grovelling would start. I have no intention of doing so because I hate seeing people grovel.
Please give my regards to the Pig of Steel
Roy - I don’t think this is a good forum for religious stuff - it kinda works everyone up
by the way i don’t admire druids - just saying that like you they admired wood
now - back to surfing please or i’ll confiscate your planers
well once again roy finds himself in the hot seat…
quite an enthraling thread , like a real day time soap…
im only going to make one comment, purely to highlight the work of a well respected scientist…
einstein…e = mc2
energy = mass x the speed of light squared…
as you delve deeper and deeper into an atom you essentially find nothing…
an enlarged hydrogen atom could be likened to a basketball (for the nucleus )and 3 kilometers away being orbited by a tennis ball (for the electron)…
as we examine the nucleus we find orbiting , quarks, mesons, leptons , the list goes on …
all of those particles made up of infinatly smaller particles…
the fact those particles are moving at the speed of light , gives them a seeming mass …
remember mass x velocity = momentum… momentum is a form of inertia…
if the energy that drives the atomic structure were turned off , everything would cease to exist…
find the source of that power and there is your answer…
simple applied logic…systematic power of deduction…
regards
BERT
Thanks for all the input. I have a couple more questions.
- How is geometry used while actually surfing? 2. How is geometry used to figure out how to catch the perfect wave?
You have to figure out the lateral angle to position your board to stay in the curl of the wave to keep moving. Too sharp an angle and you will outrun the wave; too blunt an angle and the wave passes you by. This is a function that includes the properties of your board.
The perfect wave is different for different boards/surfers. You have to learn to incline (vertical angle) your board forward so that you can keep your paddling momentum forward. If you are too far back in the lineup, your board has to be inclined more so that you catch the slope of the incoming sinusoidal wave. If you are too far in front of the lineup, you have to have less inclination because you will be on the slope of the sinusoidal wave and pearl your nose.
Good questions McKracken. Every surfer who posts to this board has a favorite surf spot and they could probably all tell you at what swell angle those spots produce their best waves. Every surfer here has no doubt been foiled in their search for waves at some point by using faulty inductive reasoning. Most of us have missed swells, the start of them anyway, because we made a conjecture based on a very small set of data. For example, the surf may have been flat for a week. We make the conjecture that the surf will be flat again tomorrow and don’t check it, only to find out from our more experienced friends that the surf was firing.
e=mc^2. We hear it or see it and think, “Oh yeah…Theory of Relativity…” But what if it suggested, not only something that can be experienced but also the method by which we can experience it? Perhaps c^2 can be experienced. Mystics seem to believe this, the idea of being everywhere and nowhere at once. But what gets in the way? Mass? What has mass? Matter. The matter. What’s the matter? My point exactly. Ask someone sometime, “Hey, what’s the matter?” Have a cup of coffee and a seat because most people have much that is the matter. Work through by detaching from the matter.
Now what does this have to do with surfing? Every surfer does this on every single wave he or she surfs. We’ve all caught rails, pearled, gone over the falls. Why? Because we didn’t sufficiently detach from the matter. When is this experience at its most intense level in surfing? Big waves. The tube ride. Perhaps on those days when we’ve managed to leave our various matters on the beach for a little while and go surfing.
I just have an image of this poor kid scrolling down, only to shake his head and take his math book back to school…gee Mr. Peters, I tried to do my homework but the dogs came out and ate my thread.
For surfboards as mentioned before, it is all about splines. Most boards can be defined by them. Use a spline for the outline, rocker, and thickness and add some bulkheads and you have what you need to define a surfboard geometrically. Your bulkheads can be made up of a combination of different shapes, can be a few splines put together, elipses and circles will work.
While surfing you use a lot of curves and lines in your path, curves to slow you down, lines to speed you up. Generally speaking at least.
To bad Einstien didn’t focus more of his studies on surfing and surfboards.
Surfers also will triangulate other surfers in order to re-locate them relative to the curl and thus position themselves closest to the curl giving them the priority position.
the thread was SUPPOSED to be about answering a question posed by a student. Try to stick to the topic.
ahhh roy - take it easy - you frustrated or something?
Roy, you were too busy being argumentative to have even read the homework assignment, so you get an “F”. Our student posted a follow up question, namely:
Thanks for all the input. I have a couple more questions.
I at least tried to answer part of his question instead of going off on TANGENTS.
a) how can you deny that you are argumentative? Read a thread on this web page over the past few months and what is consistent? Roy, arguing with people – everybody. For a lot of us, me included, it gets a little old. It’s not personal animosity, I’m just tired of the constant arguing over EVERYTHING. I don’t think its unfair in the least for me to point out the obvious. You are argumentative. Period.
Please, please, prove me wrong. Go for two weeks without getting into an argument.
b) No, I have no opinion on geometry in surfboards.
I knew you couldn’t do it.
From the dictionary:
Faith: Unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence.
And yet, Roy, you are willing to take advantage of all that science has to offer. A better example of a hypocrite might never be found. Take the intellectually pure path of an ascetic and reject materialism and all that science has to offer. You won’t have a computer, a power planer, modern commerce to fulfill your every surfboard building want, etc, etc… I think it’s called cognitive dissonance, that uncomfortable feeling that you’re not being honest with yourself.
Anyways, the kid’s last question was how is geometry used in surfing? The basis of geometry is the question, “IF?”, the corroborating, “THEN”, and the answer, “THEREFORE.”
IF I lean to the right, THEN I will turn to the right, THEREFORE my direction is controlled by how I lean my body.
IF I paddle into a late takeoff, THEN I may be pitched over the falls, THEREFORE I ought not forget those last two strokes.
IF the Jetty is 20 feet high and the waves are breaking over the jetty, THEN the waves must be at least 20 feet, THEREFORE I need my 8’6".
The basis of science and surfing, the continued questioning of what works and what doesn’t. Surfing is muddled slightly by the fact that lots of stuff works, and what works for you may not work for me. But anyone can push the red button and make the world go away, that’s the repeatability of science at work.
Not being honest with myself, since I love arguing about religion, but it’s definitely not the place for it.
Had to edit a typo, but meecrafty’s post further down with the link to the cognitive dissonance page was interesting.
Well at least people find my posts interesting enough to argue with! Try looking at the actual information which is being communicated rather than just seeing everything as a fight. I have no problem with a frank and vigorous exchange of ideas. If you don’t like arguments then why do you troll around picking fights with me anyway?
why do you troll around picking fights with me anyway?
I think its statistically relevant to say that one cannot avoid RoyS any more than you can avoid the
Supermarket clerk at the Supermarket. One is always there, the other just shows up on occasion to do business.
It would be intereesting if the moderators could make RoyS visible on the ‘Who’s Online’ section, it
would be interesting to note behavior akin to a crack addict constantly hitting the keys , seeing ‘who’s online’,
punching keys for the latest post, etc, etc. All at an obsessed pace–daily, morning,noon and night.
However, It may be more advantageous to the group to install a governor on the amount of posts
certain member can post per month. In the case of the FatPenguin or similar others, maxing out the
#posts per month at 10-20 could be the ultimate solution to problems.
I enjoy this group but as of late, I am finding it eerily similar to the way it was before it changed…pre FP.
As to geometry in Surfboards and Nature:
Geometry as it is studied in H.S. is about parallel lines, circles, triangles, polygons, etc…
More so than that, it is about thinking, axioms, theorems and proofs.
Although geometry is lightly represented in nature and surfboards ( I was never arguing about this. my point :LIGHTLY) , it is non-Geometry the Cubic Spline ( yet another mathematical construct) and other mathematical constructs that are abundant in nature.
As is frequently the case in this newsgroup, if I dont include that some shapers might use geometrical shapes exclusively than I’d have an argument on my hands…so consider it said!
Ive been dreading this newsgroup for quite a while with having to explain something 20 different ways to be inclusive for every argument, explain it for both lower level and upper level or you have an argument on your hands by someone with a bone of contention to pick on some minor point about which you have no contention or improperly constructed sentence or spelling!
This place is getting as bad as Usenet again!
hmmm, 9 minutes for a reply.
You must have had to use the bathroom.
GoodNight.
Cool, thanks. My project is due Monday. Think I got some good information here. Now I need some pictures.
Thanks again.