>____________>
Yes, I know how to feed myself, but fuck it! Today is the day I walk down to the store in a ruffled shirt, vest, and pants that fit for the first time in ages and get them to hand over the white bread and non-fat milk! Yes, that's right, dressed like a man from the 1860s named Laurie! Tro! Lolololololololo!
Yes, I am regretting going on the silly nutrition rant now.
It's more than possible I've been misinformed, but the consensus among my extended family has always been to eat some kind of meat, vegetable, and carbohydrate for dinner.
So that's what I've always been told is the healthy thing to do. Although I'm pretty sure that was always accompanied by something like "eat up, you're a growing boy". So the protein thing may just have been an ongoing campaign to get me to eat like a bodybuilder.
On the subject of milk, I didn't say it didn't contain a lot of protein it's just I've been told that milk is difficult to digest, and that the same issues that cause constipation also cause a lot of it to go through you unabsorbed. I've also been told that cheese is better for this (although it contains less healthy stuff, and more cholesterol).
Honestly, I'm not sure how trustworthy this information is. There's a lot of people involved in health care in my family, but that's really no guarantee.
The information on sugar and carbohydrates comes from my mother. She works in nursing and says that the focus on keeping a patients strength up, is carbohydrates, sugars, and some starch. And that in the short term, it's what's really important to survive.
Besides, doesn't quantum entanglement already travel faster than the speed of light?
Travelling without moving.
sighOk, avoiding the whole issue of influences, the questionability of depicting particles as golf balls and... probably anything else that would get brought up. What I was trying to get at, is that I've always said that the speed of light probably isn't the be all and end all of everything else.
My response to "nothing can go faster than the speed of light" has always been "why do you assume that?" Our basis for that conclusion has always been "it seems to work out that way" (and of course, that goes for just about everything else too).
I don't know if you've noticed, but the universe is a pretty frigging complicated place. I've noticed a lot of physicists seem to jump to conclusions based on flimsy evidence, and sometimes come up with extremely elaborate theories that have, basically, all the evidence of your average conspiracy theory (where do you think the xkcd meme of "string theorists are idiots" comes from?).
So when someone says, "My god! An aspect of our reality doesn't always behave according to a rule we had assumed was always applicable." I say, "Whoop de frigging do."
This just doesn't strike me as being a revelation much bigger than all the others we've had this year, or the year before that, or the year before that.
But this really belongs in the new thread that popped up.