Doubt

How should we think about weird things?
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Oct 04, 2017 6:35 pm

Straw man alert !

I never said I objected to scientists researching the possibility of FTL. As a general rule, I am in favor of research of all kinds. Who knows what they might find ? ( But probably not FTL.).

I do not think I said you were being difficult for citing such scientists. You are difficult for clinging to trivial differences in opinion like a bulldog. For example, Matt is a very rational skeptic, and a smart guy. He knows perfectly well that some things are a million to one chance against, and he uses the short cut of saying no. You treat the "no " as if that were some kind of major fallacy. That is what makes you difficult.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:02 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Straw man alert !

I never said I objected to scientists researching the possibility of FTL. As a general rule, I am in favor of research of all kinds. Who knows what they might find ? ( But probably not FTL.).


OK, my bad. Thanks for clarifying. I withdraw my question.

Unlike some people on this forum, if you tell me I misunderstood your point, I will take your word for it. You know better than I do what you intended to mean. And it does neither of us any good for me to pursue straw men.


Lance Kennedy wrote:I do not think I said you were being difficult for citing such scientists. You are difficult for clinging to trivial differences in opinion like a bulldog. For example, Matt is a very rational skeptic, and a smart guy. He knows perfectly well that some things are a million to one chance against, and he uses the short cut of saying no. You treat the "no " as if that were some kind of major fallacy. That is what makes you difficult.


Likewise I feel you and Matthew are being difficult for saying something is impossible when you know it's not. To me, that's not a trivial difference.

So we have that in common, we are both stubborn. ;)

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:20 pm

Trivial: one in a million.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:06 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Trivial: one in a million.


Depends on the context.

Ask any of the winners of PowerBall lottery if they think it's trivial.

Not to mention, in the US, million-to-one odds happen more than 300 times a day.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 05, 2017 6:27 pm

Xouper

Your maths is defective.
In the USA, million to one odds happens trillions of times a day, often enough that the real odds are not calculable. However, that type of playing with numbers does not change the simple fact that the possibility of FTL is still only one chance in a million. So low that for practical purposes, it can pretty much be dismissed.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:11 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:. . . the simple fact that the possibility of FTL is still only one chance in a million. So low that for practical purposes, it can pretty much be dismissed.


Maybe so, maybe not.

That fact has not been established.

It seems to me, it is a number you merely pulled out of your ass thin air. ;)

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:58 pm

My arse is not made of thin air. It is very solid.

But of course you are correct, in that the 1 in a million is my estimate. It could be wrong. It might be one in a trillion .

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:33 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:But of course you are correct, in that the 1 in a million is my estimate. It could be wrong. It might be one in a trillion .


Or it might be one in two.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:34 pm

Figures, figures ...
FTL is not a matter of probability. It can either be achieved or it cannot - there's no other option. We apparently think that the outer reaches of the universe are receding from us at effectively more than the speed of light. If that's true, then FTL is possible (yes it may involve expansion but that doesn't alter the fact) as we can see it happening.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:57 pm

No Poodle.

The expansion is faster than light because space itself is expanding. Human travel is through space, not by its expansion. If the space between here and the nearest star to our sun is 4.3 light years, then the expansion of space will put us further away, not closer. We still have to travel THROUGH space to get there, and that is 4.3 light years at less than light speed.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:12 am

Ah - you missed the point, Lance. The expansion of space can (I think you said this yourself earlier) mean that two points can move apart at a rate faster than the speed of light. That's what I alluded to in my last post. If two points in the universe can do that, then it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light, assuming c to be constant,
Maybe you are suggesting that the speed of light itself expands along with the universe?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:26 am

Poodle wrote: FTL is not a matter of probability. It can either be achieved or it cannot.
That makes sense. :D

Poodle wrote: We apparently think that the outer reaches of the universe are receding from us at effectively more than the speed of light. If that's true, then FTL is possible (yes it may involve expansion but that doesn't alter the fact) as we can see it happening.
This bloke says that the speed of light and inflation are two different measurements and should not be mixed together.

"The expansion of the universe, which I think you are describing as a ‘cosmic inflation rate’ is not a speed at all. It is a rate of increase and could be written as % per year or something equivalent (it would be about 7.4×10−97.4×10−9 % per year). This is not a speed."

"At a great enough distance this will give a rate of increase of distance that is greater than the speed of light. But this is not a speed, it is an increase in distance."

https://www.quora.com/Theoretically-the ... -inflation

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:35 am

This other bloke makes a good point about the initial Big Bang and speed of light. I'm thinking that this is the same logic for current universal inflation and the speed of light.

"The Big Bang itself expanded much faster than the speed of light. But this only means that "nothing can go faster than light." Since nothing is just empty space or vacuum, it can expand faster than light speed since no material object is breaking the light barrier. Therefore, empty space can certainly expand faster than light."
http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/w ... d-of-light

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:44 am

Thd correct way the law should be worded is that nothing can travel through space faster than light. Space itself can expand at any speed, but that is definitely not the same thing.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Forget Spaceships / Is it any "Information"

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:45 am

It is my understanding that the speed of light limits any information being transported faster than the speed of light.

Jo 753, in the other thread wondered if a normal mass spaceship could be converted into a "non-mass thingy". I don't think that would make any difference, if any form of information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light.

If I split two electrons of the same spin and separated them by some enormous distance. I could collapse one electron's wave and identify its spin and the other electron would collapse at exactly the same time with the corresponding spin. The problem is the spin of the first electron is going to be random. No actual information is being transmitted.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:47 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Thd correct way the law should be worded is that nothing can travel through space faster than light. Space itself can expand at any speed, but that is definitely not the same thing.


This thread is a wording nightmare. We are trying to describe things that have nothing to do with the evolution of human language and the way our brains work. :D

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:48 am

A rate of increase of distance is not a speed? Speed is "The rate at which something moves ..".
Therefore, the rate of increase of distance is not proportional to the rate at which something moves.
I'm struggling with that one, Matthew.

And yes, let's assume that empty space can expand faster than light, So what's empty space? Let's say it's the bits between material objects. They expand and, as if by magic, the material objects are further apart and they achieved that position by hitching a ride on the interstices between bits of expanding space. Lo and behold, they travelled faster than the speed of light. The alternative, I suppose, is that the universe is expanding but it's leaving behind a core of matter as that can't go along with it.
I'm struggling with that one too.

It all makes my head hurt :D

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:53 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Thd correct way the law should be worded is that nothing can travel through space faster than light. Space itself can expand at any speed, but that is definitely not the same thing.

I have to ask you again, Lance - does the speed of light remain constant during expansion?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:00 am

Poodle wrote:I'm struggling with that one, Matthew.
So am I. :D

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:36 am

Poodle

The speed of light THROUGH SPACE remains constant, even if the space is expanding.

My head also hurts when I try to consider what space actually is. It is a real material. It is usually seen as just vacuum, what is left over when the other stuff is removed. But it appears that space has a reality of its own. It is not just vacuum. But that does not mean I know what it is.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:49 am

"I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose."

— J. B. S. Haldane, in Possible Worlds and Other Papers  (1927), p. 286.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:54 am

Poodle wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:Thd correct way the law should be worded is that nothing can travel through space faster than light. Space itself can expand at any speed, but that is definitely not the same thing.

I have to ask you again, Lance - does the speed of light remain constant during expansion?

Its been said about 3 times now. Why is the concept of the speed of light THROUGH space so difficult to accept? "We" don't even need a deep understanding of statistics to just accept or reject such a simple statement/concept.......... not to be confused with what flows from that statement.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Fri Oct 06, 2017 1:55 am

Poodle wrote:I'm struggling with that one, Matthew.

Matthew Ellard wrote:So am I. :D

Lance Kennedy wrote:My head also hurts when I try to consider what space actually is. It is a real material. It is usually seen as just vacuum, what is left over when the other stuff is removed. But it appears that space has a reality of its own. It is not just vacuum. But that does not mean I know what it is.

Seems we all have something in common.

Perhaps we could use some kind of headache remedy:

Image

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:41 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Why is the concept of the speed of light THROUGH space so difficult to accept?


One of problems, that is making my brain hurt, is the uncertainty principle trade off. I can know exactly where something is but not know its speed....or I can know something's speed but not know where it is.
photon.jpg

Soooo.... if a photon particle/wave is going at light speed across a fixed distance, then I can't really say where it is. So if that same photon particle/wave is going across expanding space at the speed of light, I'm not too sure if I can say where it is, at any point in time, to determine if it has gone faster than light speed in it's own frame. That's why I think the previous bloke was saying expanding space is a measurement of distance and a separate issue to the speed of light.

Solution
We simply need Pyrrho to dip into the Skeptic Society reptile fund and hire us a Nobel prize level physicist. That person can answer these questions.
:D
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:19 am

Matt: Ha. ha..........we could use a few actual experts around here.

I reflect that its easy for me to accept the mantra: "Speed of Light THROUGH space is Maxed Out." My brain doesn't hurt regarding speed through expanding space because..........I just repeat the mantra. Thats what mantras are for.

.............and I thought the whole point about Special Relativity was that there was no such thing as "fixed space"........ but I don't have a mantra for that................OOPs.......I started thinking about an outside observer looking at light in expanding space.............what would he see?...........So, Is stopped thinking. "Speed of Light THROUGH space is Maxed Out."
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:17 pm

A photon travelling though space is not a discrete photon particle. It is a 'fuzzy ' thing, being as much wave as particle, and has not a clear cut location. You can describe it mathematically as a probability function.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:10 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:A photon travelling though space is not a discrete photon particle. It is a 'fuzzy ' thing, being as much wave as particle, and has not a clear cut location. You can describe it mathematically as a probability function.
That's why I specifically wrote "particle/wave" in the text and mentioned the uncertainty principle. :D

The question was : Does light take the same time to travel across expanding space time and somehow this is increasing the speed of light? I don't think it is a comparable measurement.

I think the solution comes from observable red-shift and normal inflation in the observable universe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerat ... e_universe

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:21 am

Nope.............I'm still not thinking about it.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:37 am

OK - let's see (I think I'll set a trap) ...

A fuzzy bit of particle wave duality expression goes out for a measured mile sprint. It sets off at the speed of light (which is absolutely as fast as the poor thing can go) but, by the time it reaches the point where the one mile marker used to be, it's moved further ahead. Damn, thinks the FBOPWDE - but then it realises that it can't possibly have been travelling at its maximum speed else it would certainly have reached the marker by now. So it trots on a bit further until it reaches the marker and only then realises that it has reached the marker in no time at all because it used up all its allowed time reaching the point where the marker USED to be.
Well, well, thinks the FBOPWDE - That means my speed is effectively infinite. What a wonderful thing it is to be an FBOPWDE!

(Shades of Achilles and the tortoise, I know).

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:10 am

I'm still not thinking about it.....but seems to me the poor dear only goes C on its own but goes C+ because of the space expanding. Seems just exactly like an airplane going 100mph but with a tail wind of 50...so...its moving thru the air at 100 but its groundspeed (seen from outside its own reference and limitations) is 150. IF I THOUGHT ABOUT IT....I thought this was exactly what Einstein thought was not true by doing that light speed experiment imaging trains? Trains....wind...observation from outside the expanding space==>all the same thing.

But.............I'm NOT thinking about it. You can't go FTL!.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Confidencia
Poster
Posts: 309
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Confidencia » Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:05 pm

xouper wrote:
Confidencia wrote:Have you ever known a fifth grader to be civil much less intelligent?


Matthew has shown in other threads that he can behave with civility and intelligence when he wants to.


Want being the operational word here. What you see as civil and intelligence is merely a reference to ignorance and obedience, the two are interchangeable where Mathew's concerned.

A deeper and broader intelligence base goes way beyond the confines of memory and there is no proprietary concerns when you are dealing with the fact of the matter.

So providing you stick within the realms of conventional wisdom and you don't mind being restricted to his comfort zone (what the books say) then I'm incline to agree. However you only need to read a few of his post to realise you have identified a sock puppet who cannot think outside the prescribed consensus.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:59 pm

Confidencia wrote:... A deeper and broader intelligence base goes way beyond the confines of memory and there is are no proprietary concerns when you are dealing with the fact of the matter.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:29 pm

To Bobbo

You think that the speed of light THROUGH expanding space is a problem .....

Try this one.
Two space ships are heading towards each other, both at half the speed of light. One ship sends a laser message to the other. The beam of light has its speed measured as it leaves the ship, and it is travelling at exactly the speed of light relative to the ship. When the beam reaches the second ship, it's speed is measured relative to the second ship, and it is travelling at exactly the speed of light. Both measurements are just under 300,000 kms per second, which is the official speed of light.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:26 pm

Lance: Newton says wut??????

Mantra says: "Nothing is ftl .............thru space." That "thru space" is why I attend this forum. Overflowing with knowledge it is.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8245
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Doubt

Postby Poodle » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:45 pm

That's true only if you're equating 'space' with 'vacuum'.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11140
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Doubt

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:29 pm

Poodle wrote:That's true only if you're equating 'space' with 'vacuum'.

I'm starting to get sleepy, but I'll say it anyway: "space" strikes me as a concept, purely theoretical...probably from math as most concepts are. Whereas vacuum is an actual "thing" you can observe and measure and even create.....in some sense. I have no mantra for " In the vacuum of empty space....quarks come into and go out of existence spontaneously..." Seems not to follow the simple (sic!) meaning of empty, and vacuum.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10249
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Doubt

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 07, 2017 8:52 pm

No one said this was easy.
In a sense, it is like quantum physics. No one can understand quantum physics, and the geniuses out there simply describe it in math. Ditto for relativity.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:50 pm

Confidencia wrote:Want being the operational word here. What you see as civil and intelligence is merely a reference to ignorance and obedience, the two are interchangeable where Mathew's concerned.
We are talking about the speed of light in this thread. Try a forum for retarded hippies if you are feeling lonely. :lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26780
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Doubt

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:02 pm

Poodle wrote:(Shades of Achilles and the tortoise, I know).
Yep. We were told about the dying frog that jumps half as far each time, an infinite number of times, for Calculus. :D

Hands up here who had printed Log tables at school?

All Stations To Central :D

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10760
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Doubt

Postby xouper » Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:45 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:Hands up here who had printed Log tables at school?


:oldman:


Return to “Skepticism and Critical Thinking”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Linkdex [Bot] and 2 guests