h a l f b a k e r y"It would work, if you can find alternatives to each of the steps involved in this process."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
what do you want to put in there? |
|
| |
Well this idea could go in there for a start. |
|
| |
Science:Geology:Optical Devices:Toast:Bagles: extra
crunchy |
|
| |
//what do you want to put in there?// Fossils, of
course. To confound atheistical paleontologists. |
|
| |
That would be palaeontology. |
|
| |
Stuff from 'Strata' - aha! I've got one. |
|
| |
We need a science:cosmological engineering
category. That will
take care of everything. After all, what are we more
concerned with: understanding how something
works or harnessing it for unprecedented
consequence? |
|
| |
[19thly] Good catch. Yes, I specifically had in mind
the boot in
the coal measure. |
|
| |
If you build a better category, halfbaked ideas will beat a path to its door. |
|
| |
There's a category "home: pest control: trap" which is generically OK, but there really should be a category, "Halfbakery: Mousetrap: Better" |
|
| |
// We need a science:cosmological engineering category.
// |
|
| |
I second that. It's even been practised since Neolithic
times:
[link] |
|
| |
However, I'd say we also need a cosmic engineering
category. AIUI, while
cosmological engineering attempts to affect or control
the cosmos itself,
cosmic engineering [link] merely affects or controls
smaller things in reaction
to or anticipation of cosmic behaviors. Conflation and
inflation probably don't go
well together. |
|
| |