NS, I need help on a project. +K for good ideas!

It is my firm belief that I was born, and always will be, mildly homosexual.

Physics. Physics is everything. Write an essay that explains walking to class in terms of physics and everything that it entails.

About three things I was absolutely positive: First, Edward was a vampire. Second, there was a part of him–and I didn’t know how dominant that part might be–that thirsted for my blood. And third, I was unconditionally and irrevocably in love with him.

Study all the muscles used in masturbation

its only gay if the balls touch or you look him in the eyes. just make sure you say "no homo" and everything else is fair game.

yes i agree with him, some things are better left just appreciated how are minds perceive them initially. We shouldn't waste so much time dissecting the inner details of something and instead should just chill and enjoy it while we can.

I would take a different approach to this essay. I would say that if you are describing an instance, such as piece of music, you must direct to you attention to your audience. It is very possible, as Einstein said, to describe a piece of music in terms of sound and waves, but it doesn't serve justice to the quality of music or the time put into composing. It would only make sense to describe the piece using terms relating to the music world that I know not much about.

Don't use this.

Word, this, but it depends on how you look at it. You could argue it two different ways:

If you agree with Einstein: There are "emergent properties" (google it) for everything. You could describe a symphony in terms of sound waves, but then to all except the creator/translator it would seem no different than the sound produced by a bunch of babies banging on shit. There's something to be said for the essence, life, and/or soul of the music.

If you disagree with Einstein: Einstein's statement depends on the fact that most humans, Einstein included, currently cannot process the significance of a symphony described as mathematical sound waves. This is not a problem of the description; it is a problem of the communication medium. If you agree with Einstein then you are saying that humans are limited to a certain type of communication. If you disagree, then you are opening the floor to the possibility of the evolution of communication. Think about it: one day, maybe all of humanity will understand and be able to appreciate the significance and differences in mathematical sound waves. It sounds far fetched now, but is it impossible?

This disagreeing argument is more one of semantics, but hey, English teachers love that shit, that's what critical reading's all about. Good luck!

haha quality post right thur.

Physics cannot be used to describe/measure emotion, which is what music is made to evoke. The feeling you get from listening to a great classical composition can never be explained by formulas and equations.

Again, that is assuming a fixed communication medium. It is not impossible to imagine an audience ooohing, ahhhing, sighing, and groaning - just like they would in response to a symphony - upon viewing the equations to the equivalent wave patterns on a projector. Music is a means of communication, and communication evolves. Therefore you cannot say that the feeling evoked by music can never be replicated by math or physics, because that feeling is the product of a communication.

Science has to do more with the physical world, art such as Beethoven has to do more with anthropology.

this just about sums it up

buuuuuut.....

you'll probably get a better grade if you write something different...play devil's advocate and disagree with the almighty genius.  as long as the paper is clear, well written, and you back up your arguments with something substantive, you should do fine.

i guess emotions and satisfaction and stuff can technically be scientifically explained but no matter how well you explain it scientifically, there's really no way to capture what it actually is.