Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Isn't the probability of anything logically possible > 0?

No. A frog jumping from Earth to Jupiter in a single bound does not entail a logical contradiction, but the probability that such an event will occur is 0, because it entails a violation of the physical laws of the universe.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
No. A frog jumping from Earth to Jupiter in a single bound does not entail a logical contradiction, but the probability that such an event will occur is 0, because it entails a violation of the physical laws of the universe.

Actually, it doesn't. I'm sure there is a solution to a wave-function with an amplitude equal to the distance between Earth and Jupiter.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
No comeback this weekend?

I know lucifershammer was really pulling for you. I was kind of hoping to see you restored to full health myself. I guess it just wasn't God's will. (Not yet, anyway!)

[b]Volo vivo!

Dr. S

P.S. Sorry, didn't mean to shout. I forgot you were just sleeping.[/b]

Note to no1 - no "moral outrage" here?

Originally posted by Halitose
Would she want to come back to this dump of a place where her own husband wanted her dehydrated to death? I wouldn't.

If only that were the only thing he did...

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Actually, it doesn't. I'm sure there is a solution to a wave-function with an amplitude equal to the distance between Earth and Jupiter.

You think that a frog could jump to Jupiter?

That which I denote by the term frog is a beast whose leg muscles cannot enable it to attain escape velocity on a single contraction.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
You think that a frog could jump to Jupiter?

That which I denote by the term frog is a beast whose leg muscles cannot enable it to attain escape velocity on a single contraction.

Have you forgotten your Uncertainty Principle? 🙂

If you know the velocity of the frog, then you don't know its position...

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Have you forgotten your Uncertainty Principle? 🙂

If you know the velocity of the frog, then you don't know its position...

Did Jesus lay still in the tomb?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Did Jesus lay still in the tomb?

That's quite profound, Doctor.




Oh, Terry Schiavo...[insert head-lolling, slobber-drooling emoticon here].

Originally posted by lucifershammer
If only that were the only thing he did...

You, Ivanhoe and the a few nuts are the only ones left parroting the slanders against Terri's husband. Court cases and autopsies don't mean anything to the Crusaders against the "Culture of Death". Nor does the fact that Terri, like the great majority of people, preferred the cessation of her body's existence under the terrible circumstances she was left in. But by all means whine about "moral outrage".

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
With Jesus, all damage is reversible. Terri could still use your prayers.

Just because he (supposedly) rose from the dead! I doubt Terri will though.

Originally posted by Halitose
Ah... gotcha.

I guess then that a debate between passive and active euthanasia (where Schiavo was one of those very difficult borderline cases) proponents has been beaten to death in these forums.

It was hardly 'active' euthanasia - she'd be (and, indeed, is) dead without the machines! It's more "active anti-euthanasia".

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Actually, it doesn't. I'm sure there is a solution to a wave-function with an amplitude equal to the distance between Earth and Jupiter.

Indeed, the frog would just have to generate the 25,000 mile per hour escape velocity (within the arc of its hip and knee joints) and become heat-resistant.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Did Jesus lay still in the tomb?

In QM, I think the answer would be - no.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You, Ivanhoe and the a few nuts are the only ones left parroting the slanders against Terri's husband. Court cases and autopsies don't mean anything to the Crusaders against the "Culture of Death". Nor does the fact that Terri, like the great majority of people, preferred the cessation of her body's existence under the terrible circumstances she was left in. But by all means whine about "moral outrage".

Slanders? What slanders are we parroting?

Court cases and autopsies don't mean anything to the Crusaders against the "Culture of Death".

Court cases aren't absolute truth - no. Especially not this one.

As for autopsies, the autopsy doesn't tell us what Terri's brain was like in the 90s, does it?

Nor does the fact that Terri, like the great majority of people, preferred the cessation of her body's existence under the terrible circumstances she was left in.

We're back to court cases and absolute truth.

But by all means whine about "moral outrage".

Well, for a guy who exhibits moral outrage at the apparent besmirching of the memory of Bruno, don't you think it's double standards not to show moral outrage at the opening post (and others) in this thread?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
It was hardly 'active' euthanasia - she'd be (and, indeed, is) dead without the machines! It's more "active anti-euthanasia".

I define passive euthanasia as the removal of extraordinary medical care (e.g. ventilators etc.) and allowing the body to die a natural death; so by my definition (which takes such things as antibiotics and food as ordinary care) she was actively euthanised.