Played around with my list from before. Completely cut out open into wonder and have decided more to go with board state and a few unshockables. However since the draw was so important I did add the 4 of curious obsession which has worked wonders. I finally cut the 2 Jade Bearers and dropped to 20 lands with a 3rd song to make up the difference. Keeping my curve at 2 for creatures keep it alright. Merfolk Trickster is such a great card against RB aggro and Vehicles its insane. Few changes in the sideboard to add more counter spells for the UW control matchup.
I like it. One problem, though; it's missing any sort of after-the-fact noncreature removal (i.e. Naturalize).
I agree. I think Broken Bond would be best. I should remove one of the 3 counterspells in the sideboard and add them. I'm thinking spellpierce. Negate is just a stronger version of it for 1 more mana. I need syncopate for some troublesome creatures. I don't like not having ANY answer for them. But this allows slight ramp and kills saga's as well. Yeah I'll do that.
Played around with my list from before. Completely cut out open into wonder and have decided more to go with board state and a few unshockables. However since the draw was so important I did add the 4 of curious obsession which has worked wonders. I finally cut the 2 Jade Bearers and dropped to 20 lands with a 3rd song to make up the difference. Keeping my curve at 2 for creatures keep it alright. Merfolk Trickster is such a great card against RB aggro and Vehicles its insane. Few changes in the sideboard to add more counter spells for the UW control matchup.
...and the deck has evolved. Sorry, Pioneer and Branchwalker, you're benched. Tempest Caller and Curious Obsession, get in the game! Compass is out of both the SB and MD in favor of another Unsummon, Negate, and Spell Pierce, and Kumena gets another clone. Here it is, in all its new, improved glory:
Still 20 lands, which is more than enough with that mana curve.
Fan of the deck. Thinking about building something similar. The whole bit of your deck seems to hinge on unblockable creatures getting card draw and rinse/repeat while overwhelming with lords and tempo. With this unblockable shenanigan why do you not play river sneak? Was it once in the deck and you took it out or did it just not fit to have another 2 drop?
First off, thank you.
There just really isn't room for it. I like to create multiple avenues to victory in case one doesn't work out. A number of my decks look like aggro at first but you can generally expect there's some sneaky tempo action going on somewhere in there. I'm trying to make as broad an approach as possible to deal with a range of metas (as well as compensating for lousy card luck), while still having areas of focus. I wouldn't mind having some Sneaks in there, but there isn't much that I'd really care to shave. No way I'm cutting any of the few higher-cost cards for them, and everything has its job. Do I cut disruption? Card draw? Mana compensation in the form of the Songs? Or the slow roll of the swarm component? I might be barking up the wrong tree, but I'm wary of focusing too much on one particular strategy without a backup plan. Hopefully it'll mean more wins overall.
There's also an issue of giving up information to the opponent with the Sneak. Where otherwise I might hang on to my Mer until post-combat main to cast it, if I want the bonus, I have to drop it in pre-combat main. Trickster circumvents that with Flash, but all the other creatures are vulnerable to it. The worst case is the Silvergill Adept, where I'm giving the farm away as far as info is concerned for +1/+1 until end of turn. If we're talking about Tempest Caller and it's the right time, tapping everything down before an attack, that's one thing. But the cons outweigh the pros too often with the Sneak. Otherwise it's just a more expensive Herald.
Makes sense. This is the list I was playing around with before seeing your deck. It was far more aggro intensive.
This deck was more "all in" on the low curve go get em. The unblockable bit came from Open into wonder which was an alternative win condition. I don't know yet what I'm going to take out but I know I'm adding Curious Obsession. I hadn't given that card much thought before but it looked great when play-testing some hands from your list. Herald of Secret Streams was considered for a moment when making the deck originally (which was more of a +1/+1 merfolk deck rather than what is above) but was too slow and clunky. However maybe that was because I wanted to try and combo it with seafloor oracle. If I put more tempo in the deck and lower the number of creatures but have a higher percent of +1/+1 counters I wouldn't be opposed to running it like that. River Heralds' boon and Kopalia would be worth running if that was the case.
Either way the deck is constructed I feel like RB aggro out does me before I can get enough card advantage (since they have so many recurring creatures that just do so much more) and control manages to wipe me even when I try not to overextend. However the control matchup seems more favorable than the RB aggro matchup if I can land Deeproot Waters.
The last thought I'd like to express is maybe its because I'm not sold on Kumena. I get he has good value but I just don't like him. I prefer Kopala against any deck with removal. I already have plenty of draw, evasion and buffs without him. I might just be shortsighted however since most successful merfolk play him.
...and the deck has evolved. Sorry, Pioneer and Branchwalker, you're benched. Tempest Caller and Curious Obsession, get in the game! Compass is out of both the SB and MD in favor of another Unsummon, Negate, and Spell Pierce, and Kumena gets another clone. Here it is, in all its new, improved glory:
Still 20 lands, which is more than enough with that mana curve.
Fan of the deck. Thinking about building something similar. The whole bit of your deck seems to hinge on unblockable creatures getting card draw and rinse/repeat while overwhelming with lords and tempo. With this unblockable shenanigan why do you not play river sneak? Was it once in the deck and you took it out or did it just not fit to have another 2 drop?
Is this going to be a kitchen table deck or something you want to take to FNM? The biggest problem is that it looks like you will get run over hard by aggro decks in the first three turns. All you have is mana dorks and the two you have chosen seem poor choices. Replace one with a Llanowar Elf and the other with some of the cheaper land fetches like thunderheard migration. Another good addition that gives you more meat on your bones and an additional dinosaur to trigger effects would be Ranging Raptors.
I really like this deck idea. I don't think it will take a grand prix or anything but a good FNM. And looking at the core of the deck its less than 15 bucks. World Shaper is another idea. It self mill's and when it dies it also accelerates land. Sylvan Awakening is a great win con if you can mill tons of cards into the graveyard. Old-growth Dryads Might have some synergy if we are gonna wipe out the lands.
Not necessarily true. though I concede your point on time not being Symetrical for us on this level.
So which is it? Is it not necessarily true, or is it asymmetrical?
this is why quantum mechanics is hard to explain to someone who mainly knows Relativity and newtonian physics.
Can we reverse time? No. Does that mean that causality is 100% on the past. I have not said that time is REVERSABLE in the idea that the future causes the present ALONE. I stated a theory and then defended the theory. The theory states that the future AND THE PAST both work together for causality. If time WERE to be reversed then BOTH the past and the future would still work together for causality.
Not that one or the other but both. Always. So it doesn't matter which direction time would be flowing they both hold equal amounts of weight.
There is another theory that states that it may be lopsided but still requiring both.
Though it still doesn't appy to coutner anything I said. If causality was EQUALLY reversable then yes it would be countered.
You have said it is.
No. You have misread what I have said. Or you simply don't understand. I have NEVER said that the future ALONE causes the present. But that the theory works that BOTH are responsible.
But the idea that the past and the future cause now doesn't mean that its countered.
The idea of the future causing the past violates causality. Furthermore, you cannot reverse time. We just got through saying that time is not reversible.
Wrong again. It violates traditional causality. However read ANY of the links I've provided. Our idea of traditional causality may be inherently flawed. Time wave collapse is why time is not reversable in the quantum universe. what this means is that something has to be observed for it to exist. Without being observed its in a state of limbo where it both exists and doesnt' exist at the same time.
The only reason our current past and present exist would be because of our futures "observing" our outcome. Does this make sense to you?
It simply adds on to causality rather than changing it. I don't think you understood that part. If I didn't explain it clearly then that was my mistake.
The problem is it's outright wrong. You cannot say that the future causes the past. That makes no sense.
There is a lot that doesn't make sense in the quantum universe and physics in general. Get over it. Just because it doesnt' fit conventional logic doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
It doesn't make sense at all to state that time moves slowly for someone moving at a high rate. Or that our mass isn't set and its determined by our speed. A beam of light shot from a moving vehicle still moves at the same speed of a beam shot from a stationary position. Light can be a wave, particle and a beam at the same time. Our mass only exists due to the interaction with the higgs boson partical. Dark mater and anti matter are both doosies. The fact we have 7 more dimentions past the 4th dimention of time. If you have gravity hit a certain point it actually repells rather than attracks. The weak force, color force ect ect ect.
I mean I can go on and on and on and on but do not EVER dismis something simply because it doesn' make sense in the vaccume of everyday layman logic.
Let me say this differently. He created every specific moment in time from the begining to the end of the universe. Thats what it means to have created the universe. He created/creates/will create EVERY second of my life. In what way would that mean I have any control?
Why does the fact that he created every single moment have any bearing on free will at all?
Answer: It doesn't. I am either a free-thinking, free-willed, decision-making entity or I am not. If I am, then I have free will. How I got that free will, whether God gave it to me, or whether I got it randomly doesn't make a difference with regards to the question of whether or not I have free will.
I think you vastly undderate the meaning of "everything" when I use that word.
But put simply I do not believe in free will if things are pre-determined via an intellegent creator. I am by extention no different than rocks in the end by that logic.
Though If I were to play the devils advocate on your part you should have come at it with such statemens as
"If he is omnipotent why couldn't he only create a partial universe"
or
"If we made us in his own image as well as stating in genisis that we are now as gods because we both know good and evil? And this could be interpreted as god giving us free will and we are now as powerful as god in that we create our own futures as concious beings that don't just follow simply physics but instead can make our own informed decisions?"
Those two would have thrown me for a loop and I would have had to think on it for a while. But instead you attacked the physics.
Specifically, entropy, which is why your reversal of force with regards to a glass shattering is bogus.
Not necessarily true. though I concede your point on time not being Symetrical for us on this level. Though it still doesn't appy to coutner anything I said. If causality was EQUALLY reversable then yes it would be countered. But the idea that the past and the future cause now doesn't mean that its countered. It simply adds on to causality rather than changing it. I don't think you understood that part. If I didn't explain it clearly then that was my mistake.
Also note when he postulated this. This was before Enstien as well as being before Quantum Mechanics. His best knowledge was still from Newton. for practical usages his modle still works. However quantum mechanics still sides with my piont.
EDIT: So again to make myself clear your point doesn't counter mine. His arrow of time simply states our perception of time moves forward rather than backwards. It doesn't mean god can't look backwards or touch at all on what it would be like for us to have a reverse perception of time.
I don't think I've ever said that we don't expereince time moving forward.
and lastly I still don't see what this tangent we have gotten onto has anything to do with my reasoning for why god doesn't allow free will if he is omnipotent and everything is his creation.
In the OP you said "an addition 20k each year on my loans" meaning you are already bringing debt to the table. What are the terms on this debt? (Interest Rate, Repayment Term) How do you get $20k up front?
RoI does matter, but unfortunately a "good job" is not guaranteed. If you can get your student loans like I did for 2.5% then you can beat that investing in even conservative assets. If you are getting a private loan for 9% you're payment is going to be $250-300 a month on just that 20k.
20k for both years is probably what I"ll end up paying. Intrest rate doesn't start till 6 months after I start on my job or 1 full year after being out of school. Which ever happens first.
The intrest rate is low. I forget the exact intrest rate but its very low.
And i'm going for Accounting. They have a 4.2% unemployment rate. I'm not really that worried.
Is that in response to me joande?
I never said mens rights don't matter. If I did then I would like to see it. The comment about MRA members was an intentional poke at commons as he has stated on numerous occasions that Feminists are not what they say they are in core context.
Historically sexism has stopped women from being sucessful in politics. Doesnt' necessarily count as to now. And the only reason that they are this sucessful now is because of feminisits working to attain equal rights and decrease discrimination.
There is no sexism against boys that I have seen. As a male who has been through the school system what are some hard and specific laws/principles that are geared to keep men down in the education system. The numbers alone don't mean much unless you show me other parts to it.
We are both in CFL, so I know we have discussed what happened to me in this area. I will be happy to rehash it if you so wish.
EDIT:
Sure. Feel free to tell me your personal anecdote. However please keep in mind that there are several exceptionts to rules for both men and women when it comes to sexism. Though if there is a major policy in place that has resulted in your mishap I would like to know it. I don't deny that any could or do exist but that overal as a whole there is not a massive degeneration of mens rights.
Not as much an anecdote as the AD of our High School flat out told us we couldn't have a mens lacrosse team because even if he allowed it the school board could/would shut it down because of Title IX, even though there was a female Lacrosse team and even if we paid everything from bus travel to protective gear.
Why? The title had "men" in it? And you already have a school with a women's lacross team? But no men's lacross? This does seem to be a serious violation but forgive me for feeling that there is more to it
I would like you to direct me to the legitimate scientific backing of Retrocausality, yes. What experimental findings do you have to back up the scientific statements you've been making on this thread?
Additionally,
Do you want a paper? Its also covered in qantum physics as well. Its a quick google search if you just want the basis of it.
Here is a scientific paper though its rather heavy and if you don't have a strong physics background you might struggle with it. But there is your "legitimate research". This particular paper works specifically with tiny tiny tiny particals smaller than atoms specifally.
Here is Another and this one specifically talks about Time symetry. Obviously they both are theoretical physics but real legitimate physics none the less. You'll have to download the version if you wanna see it. It may be for just my computor but I can't view the PDF without downloading it.
This one was done as a Thesis for a Ph.D student and it works with advanced waves. It is to be noted that its a Ph.D in Cognitive Psychology but he seems to ahve a good grasp of the physics as well. This one may intrest you most due to it being directly related to our "perception" rather than just Micro particals and time symmetry.
Though again all of them are fairly heavy but the last one seems to be the lightest if your not reall adept in your physics.
However it is still an eternal truth that for the most part it is true. If you were take yourself sitting right now and re-trace your steps or peer backwards through time you would view yourself in a world in which causality is reversed. You ate a cracker because you were thirsty to quench your thirst sort of deal.
Its not up for debate as its fact.
Where is the data to back up this time-reversal statement of yours? How do we know reversing the arrow of time is possible and would have the effect you describe?
The second paper specifically that I linked to you talks about time symetry which is where the idea that the future is just as important as the past. But this idea that we can go backwards in time doesn't require it to be possible as the regression of time for all practical purposes IS impossible for us.
However you seem to be under the notion that we "move" through time. We don't "move" through time in the same way that we move across the room. We to a degree can control the way we move however we cannot control or accurately "sense" our movement through time. The basic reality and assumption I have been arguing from has been that we exist. Reguardless of when we exist. And the idea that we "move" through time at all seems to be wrong. But rather we can only precieve the past. It has something to do with causality and how information travels (if it travels at all). Information doesn't necessarily follow the laws of physics at all. Information is very unknown to physicists and our understanding of it is miniscule.
But for example we know that it isn't bound by the speed of light. It cares not for distance and for whatever reason it may care for the direction of time. The idea of seeing into the future is all about reciving information from the future. Either way the perception is what causes us to "view" ourselves moving through time. But if the universe simply "exists" then we don't move through time. Your experience of moving through time is smiply the transmition of information and its state at any given point.
All of it rather moot actually is not my main point of why in a god crafted universe we don't have free will.
Explained above. It is physics. and it doesn't mean that the future causes the past but our current state (an infinitly small measurement of time or flashframe of the universe) is determined by both the past and the future. The theory was theorized under the understanding that if you play something in reverse it behaves as such and does not change.
This really has me interested. Can you direct me to the legitimate scientific backing for the idea that the present is caused by both the past and the future?
[/quote]
Here is a paper on it. Its not a terribly new idea. Well I suppose it is but not within the past decade or anything. The Higgs Boson experiments are newer.
But the general gist of it is that the observation of the present affected the past. Or the future observation in the future affects the present. It has to do with "reality" and how our reality is formed. To get to "now" we have to have gone through the "past" or at least have had causality bring us to the present state but not only that the future has to be observed.
This paper also touches in some things I haven't brought up which is that the future and the past DON'T exist. Only the present exists and the past only exists by what information or recorded observations that are kept in the present. Its also possible that the future is what locks our reality into place as it follows the same line. Or that we are at a single spot in time could be an illusion and in reality we are in several spots in time at once.
Again all of this last paragraph is moot in terms of the debate and is on the even trippier side of quantum mechanics.
Is that in response to me joande?
I never said mens rights don't matter. If I did then I would like to see it. The comment about MRA members was an intentional poke at commons as he has stated on numerous occasions that Feminists are not what they say they are in core context.
Historically sexism has stopped women from being sucessful in politics. Doesnt' necessarily count as to now. And the only reason that they are this sucessful now is because of feminisits working to attain equal rights and decrease discrimination.
There is no sexism against boys that I have seen. As a male who has been through the school system what are some hard and specific laws/principles that are geared to keep men down in the education system. The numbers alone don't mean much unless you show me other parts to it.
We are both in CFL, so I know we have discussed what happened to me in this area. I will be happy to rehash it if you so wish.
EDIT:
Sure. Feel free to tell me your personal anecdote. However please keep in mind that there are several exceptionts to rules for both men and women when it comes to sexism. Though if there is a major policy in place that has resulted in your mishap I would like to know it. I don't deny that any could or do exist but that overal as a whole there is not a massive degeneration of mens rights.
Its only terrible in standard b/c his architype isn't good here. Like if we randomly re-printed stoneforge mystic in standard it would suck b/c its architype isn't here. We don't have swords, batterskull or any other overpowered equipment. Likewise Vexing devil doesn't see play as it needs to be in a burn deck. Some zoo decks also experimented with him.
Legacy burn DOES use him. I use him as a 4x in my legacy burn. Some legacy burn players don't use him but thats for consistancy choices. he can be very powerful but he isnt' consistant.
It depends. If men are biologically prone to do more stupid things then how is it not their fault? Thats like saying women have a harder time in lifetime careers because she will have to choose between child rearing and her job.
ummm you do realize this is called OPPRESSION by feminists when those same factors negatively impact women right?
Indeed. However they have viable solutions. Things like extended work leave and flexible hours. Feminists have also fought for these same rights for MEN.
What do we do for boys hyped up on testosterone? Drug them? Give them a double standard with punishments if the act was deemed "stupid"? I don't see necessarily how we can do anything about it aside from teaching self control which usually isn't the school's job anyway.
Try looking at Third world countries. Or middle eastern countries. Or lets say 100 years ago was it acceptable to have a woman in congress? At this moment I don't see them as having troubles but in the past they sure as hell did.
So you are referring to sexism anywhere/anytime but in the western world now gotcha. My focus is on western society NOW.
Gotcha? Really? Well try to be a little more destinct. And also read my posts before jumping in and maknig a fool of yourself. I said HISTORICALLY. Take note again. I said HISTORICALLY. Which differs in general definition than CURRENT, MODERN or NOW.
HISTORICALLY women have been opressed. CURRENTLY they have rights equal to men. Society in western culture is getting better. Several other non-western societies still suffer from a great deal of sexism and opression of females.
I agree. I think Broken Bond would be best. I should remove one of the 3 counterspells in the sideboard and add them. I'm thinking spellpierce. Negate is just a stronger version of it for 1 more mana. I need syncopate for some troublesome creatures. I don't like not having ANY answer for them. But this allows slight ramp and kills saga's as well. Yeah I'll do that.
New list
4 Kumena's speaker
4 Mist-cloaked herald
4 River Sneak
4 Deeproot Elite
4 Merfolk Mistbinder
2 Silvergill Adept
4 merfolk trickster
Enchantments
3 Deeproot Waters
3 Song of Freyalise
4 Curious Obsession
4 Blossoming Defense
Lands
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Hinterland Harbor
2 Unclaimed Territory
5 Forests
5 Islands
2 Swift Warden
2 Kopala, warden of waves
3 Syncopate
3 Broken bond
3 Silent Gravestone
3 Negate
4 Kumena's speaker
4 Mist-cloaked herald
4 River Sneak
4 Deeproot Elite
4 Merfolk Mistbinder
2 Silvergill Adept
4 merfolk trickster
Enchantments
3 Deeproot Waters
3 Song of Freyalise
4 Curious Obsession
4 Blossoming Defense
Lands
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Hinterland Harbor
2 Unclaimed Territory
5 Forests
5 Islands
2 Swift Warden
2 Kopala, warden of waves
3 Syncopate
3 Spellpierce
3 Silent Gravestone
3 Negate
Makes sense. This is the list I was playing around with before seeing your deck. It was far more aggro intensive.
4 Kumena's speaker
4 Mist-cloaked herald
2 Jade Bearer
4 River Sneak
4 Deeproot Elite
4 Merfolk Mistbinder
4 Silvergill Adept
2 Merfolk Branchwalker
3 Deeproot Waters
2 Song of Freyalise
Sorcery Instant
2 Open into Wonder
4 Blossoming Defense
Lands
4 Botanical Sanctum
4 Hinterland Harbor
3 Unclaimed Territory
5 Forests
5 Islands
2 Swift Warden
3 Kopala, warden of waves
4 Merfolk Trickster
3 Silent Gravestone
3 Negate
This deck was more "all in" on the low curve go get em. The unblockable bit came from Open into wonder which was an alternative win condition. I don't know yet what I'm going to take out but I know I'm adding Curious Obsession. I hadn't given that card much thought before but it looked great when play-testing some hands from your list. Herald of Secret Streams was considered for a moment when making the deck originally (which was more of a +1/+1 merfolk deck rather than what is above) but was too slow and clunky. However maybe that was because I wanted to try and combo it with seafloor oracle. If I put more tempo in the deck and lower the number of creatures but have a higher percent of +1/+1 counters I wouldn't be opposed to running it like that. River Heralds' boon and Kopalia would be worth running if that was the case.
Either way the deck is constructed I feel like RB aggro out does me before I can get enough card advantage (since they have so many recurring creatures that just do so much more) and control manages to wipe me even when I try not to overextend. However the control matchup seems more favorable than the RB aggro matchup if I can land Deeproot Waters.
The last thought I'd like to express is maybe its because I'm not sold on Kumena. I get he has good value but I just don't like him. I prefer Kopala against any deck with removal. I already have plenty of draw, evasion and buffs without him. I might just be shortsighted however since most successful merfolk play him.
Fan of the deck. Thinking about building something similar. The whole bit of your deck seems to hinge on unblockable creatures getting card draw and rinse/repeat while overwhelming with lords and tempo. With this unblockable shenanigan why do you not play river sneak? Was it once in the deck and you took it out or did it just not fit to have another 2 drop?
Can we reverse time? No. Does that mean that causality is 100% on the past. I have not said that time is REVERSABLE in the idea that the future causes the present ALONE. I stated a theory and then defended the theory. The theory states that the future AND THE PAST both work together for causality. If time WERE to be reversed then BOTH the past and the future would still work together for causality.
Not that one or the other but both. Always. So it doesn't matter which direction time would be flowing they both hold equal amounts of weight.
There is another theory that states that it may be lopsided but still requiring both.
No. You have misread what I have said. Or you simply don't understand. I have NEVER said that the future ALONE causes the present. But that the theory works that BOTH are responsible.
Wrong again. It violates traditional causality. However read ANY of the links I've provided. Our idea of traditional causality may be inherently flawed. Time wave collapse is why time is not reversable in the quantum universe. what this means is that something has to be observed for it to exist. Without being observed its in a state of limbo where it both exists and doesnt' exist at the same time.
The only reason our current past and present exist would be because of our futures "observing" our outcome. Does this make sense to you?
There is a lot that doesn't make sense in the quantum universe and physics in general. Get over it. Just because it doesnt' fit conventional logic doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
It doesn't make sense at all to state that time moves slowly for someone moving at a high rate. Or that our mass isn't set and its determined by our speed. A beam of light shot from a moving vehicle still moves at the same speed of a beam shot from a stationary position. Light can be a wave, particle and a beam at the same time. Our mass only exists due to the interaction with the higgs boson partical. Dark mater and anti matter are both doosies. The fact we have 7 more dimentions past the 4th dimention of time. If you have gravity hit a certain point it actually repells rather than attracks. The weak force, color force ect ect ect.
I mean I can go on and on and on and on but do not EVER dismis something simply because it doesn' make sense in the vaccume of everyday layman logic.
I think you vastly undderate the meaning of "everything" when I use that word.
But put simply I do not believe in free will if things are pre-determined via an intellegent creator. I am by extention no different than rocks in the end by that logic.
Though If I were to play the devils advocate on your part you should have come at it with such statemens as
"If he is omnipotent why couldn't he only create a partial universe"
or
"If we made us in his own image as well as stating in genisis that we are now as gods because we both know good and evil? And this could be interpreted as god giving us free will and we are now as powerful as god in that we create our own futures as concious beings that don't just follow simply physics but instead can make our own informed decisions?"
Those two would have thrown me for a loop and I would have had to think on it for a while. But instead you attacked the physics.
Not necessarily true. though I concede your point on time not being Symetrical for us on this level. Though it still doesn't appy to coutner anything I said. If causality was EQUALLY reversable then yes it would be countered. But the idea that the past and the future cause now doesn't mean that its countered. It simply adds on to causality rather than changing it. I don't think you understood that part. If I didn't explain it clearly then that was my mistake.
Also note when he postulated this. This was before Enstien as well as being before Quantum Mechanics. His best knowledge was still from Newton. for practical usages his modle still works. However quantum mechanics still sides with my piont.
EDIT: So again to make myself clear your point doesn't counter mine. His arrow of time simply states our perception of time moves forward rather than backwards. It doesn't mean god can't look backwards or touch at all on what it would be like for us to have a reverse perception of time.
I don't think I've ever said that we don't expereince time moving forward.
and lastly I still don't see what this tangent we have gotten onto has anything to do with my reasoning for why god doesn't allow free will if he is omnipotent and everything is his creation.
20k for both years is probably what I"ll end up paying. Intrest rate doesn't start till 6 months after I start on my job or 1 full year after being out of school. Which ever happens first.
The intrest rate is low. I forget the exact intrest rate but its very low.
And i'm going for Accounting. They have a 4.2% unemployment rate. I'm not really that worried.
Why? The title had "men" in it? And you already have a school with a women's lacross team? But no men's lacross? This does seem to be a serious violation but forgive me for feeling that there is more to it
Do you want a paper? Its also covered in qantum physics as well. Its a quick google search if you just want the basis of it.
Here is a scientific paper though its rather heavy and if you don't have a strong physics background you might struggle with it. But there is your "legitimate research". This particular paper works specifically with tiny tiny tiny particals smaller than atoms specifally.
Here is Another and this one specifically talks about Time symetry. Obviously they both are theoretical physics but real legitimate physics none the less. You'll have to download the version if you wanna see it. It may be for just my computor but I can't view the PDF without downloading it.
This one was done as a Thesis for a Ph.D student and it works with advanced waves. It is to be noted that its a Ph.D in Cognitive Psychology but he seems to ahve a good grasp of the physics as well. This one may intrest you most due to it being directly related to our "perception" rather than just Micro particals and time symmetry.
Though again all of them are fairly heavy but the last one seems to be the lightest if your not reall adept in your physics.
The second paper specifically that I linked to you talks about time symetry which is where the idea that the future is just as important as the past. But this idea that we can go backwards in time doesn't require it to be possible as the regression of time for all practical purposes IS impossible for us.
However you seem to be under the notion that we "move" through time. We don't "move" through time in the same way that we move across the room. We to a degree can control the way we move however we cannot control or accurately "sense" our movement through time. The basic reality and assumption I have been arguing from has been that we exist. Reguardless of when we exist. And the idea that we "move" through time at all seems to be wrong. But rather we can only precieve the past. It has something to do with causality and how information travels (if it travels at all). Information doesn't necessarily follow the laws of physics at all. Information is very unknown to physicists and our understanding of it is miniscule.
But for example we know that it isn't bound by the speed of light. It cares not for distance and for whatever reason it may care for the direction of time. The idea of seeing into the future is all about reciving information from the future. Either way the perception is what causes us to "view" ourselves moving through time. But if the universe simply "exists" then we don't move through time. Your experience of moving through time is smiply the transmition of information and its state at any given point.
All of it rather moot actually is not my main point of why in a god crafted universe we don't have free will.
[/quote]
Here is a paper on it. Its not a terribly new idea. Well I suppose it is but not within the past decade or anything. The Higgs Boson experiments are newer.
But the general gist of it is that the observation of the present affected the past. Or the future observation in the future affects the present. It has to do with "reality" and how our reality is formed. To get to "now" we have to have gone through the "past" or at least have had causality bring us to the present state but not only that the future has to be observed.
This paper also touches in some things I haven't brought up which is that the future and the past DON'T exist. Only the present exists and the past only exists by what information or recorded observations that are kept in the present. Its also possible that the future is what locks our reality into place as it follows the same line. Or that we are at a single spot in time could be an illusion and in reality we are in several spots in time at once.
Again all of this last paragraph is moot in terms of the debate and is on the even trippier side of quantum mechanics.
EDIT:
Sure. Feel free to tell me your personal anecdote. However please keep in mind that there are several exceptionts to rules for both men and women when it comes to sexism. Though if there is a major policy in place that has resulted in your mishap I would like to know it. I don't deny that any could or do exist but that overal as a whole there is not a massive degeneration of mens rights.
Legacy burn DOES use him. I use him as a 4x in my legacy burn. Some legacy burn players don't use him but thats for consistancy choices. he can be very powerful but he isnt' consistant.
Indeed. However they have viable solutions. Things like extended work leave and flexible hours. Feminists have also fought for these same rights for MEN.
What do we do for boys hyped up on testosterone? Drug them? Give them a double standard with punishments if the act was deemed "stupid"? I don't see necessarily how we can do anything about it aside from teaching self control which usually isn't the school's job anyway.
Gotcha? Really? Well try to be a little more destinct. And also read my posts before jumping in and maknig a fool of yourself. I said HISTORICALLY. Take note again. I said HISTORICALLY. Which differs in general definition than CURRENT, MODERN or NOW.
HISTORICALLY women have been opressed. CURRENTLY they have rights equal to men. Society in western culture is getting better. Several other non-western societies still suffer from a great deal of sexism and opression of females.