DSLR's cutting-edge capabilities are nice, but no longer needed?

On May 21, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/21/2015 1:25 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On May 21, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/21/2015 11:09 AM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 5/20/15 PDT 6:45 AM, PeterN wrote:

And how many monkeys would it take to type your above paragraph in
one
day. (lets use a typing rate of sisty five words per minute.

An infinite number of monkeys would produce all the great works and all
the gibberish in short order. But there's not an infinite number of
anything. The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

Absolutely true. Thought I said something like that before.

…and if the monkeys were gibbons, then you would have gibbon grown,
graphic, gibberish.

--
Your gibbon premise is wrong. Gibbons are apes, not monkeys.

Next you will be saying that apes can’t type.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 5/21/2015 2:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On May 21, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/21/2015 1:25 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On May 21, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/21/2015 11:09 AM, John McWilliams wrote:
On 5/20/15 PDT 6:45 AM, PeterN wrote:

And how many monkeys would it take to type your above paragraph in
one
day. (lets use a typing rate of sisty five words per minute.

An infinite number of monkeys would produce all the great works and all
the gibberish in short order. But there's not an infinite number of
anything. The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

Absolutely true. Thought I said something like that before.

…and if the monkeys were gibbons, then you would have gibbon grown,
graphic, gibberish.

--
Your gibbon premise is wrong. Gibbons are apes, not monkeys.

Next you will be saying that apes can’t type.


They definitly can be typed.


--
PeterN

On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

You can't actually prove that, only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

In article , John McWilliams wrote:

PeterN:
And how many monkeys would it take to type your above paragraph in
one day. (lets use a typing rate of sisty five words per minute.

An infinite number of monkeys would produce all the great works and
all the gibberish in short order. But there's not an infinite
number of anything. The universe may be expanding, but it's not
infinite. Yes, a lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

Logically, infinitely is the only way the universe *could* exist.

--
Sandman

On 5/22/2015 1:58 AM, Me wrote:
On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

You can't actually prove that, only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

How do you prove a nagative?

--
PeterN

On May 22, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/22/2015 1:58 AM, Me wrote:
On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!
You can't actually prove that, only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

How do you prove a nagative?

Aren’t you supposed to be getting your eye-ball polished today?

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 5/22/2015 4:09 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On May 22, 2015, PeterN wrote
(in ):

On 5/22/2015 1:58 AM, Me wrote:
On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!
You can't actually prove that, only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

How do you prove a nagative?

Aren’t you supposed to be getting your eye-ball polished today?


Thanks for asking. It was done. I have vision in my right eye, thoug as
expected, it is blurry. Doc says I don't need the dark glasses indoors,
but need to wear that plastic shield.


--
PeterN

On 5/22/2015 4:23 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 15:42:13 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/22/2015 1:58 AM, Me wrote:
On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

You can't actually prove that, only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

How do you prove a nagative?

Is a "nagative" a backseat driver you are related to?


relayted.

--
PeterN

On 5/22/15 PDT 6:58 AM, Sandman wrote:
In article , John McWilliams wrote:

PeterN:
And how many monkeys would it take to type your above paragraph in
one day. (lets use a typing rate of sisty five words per minute.

An infinite number of monkeys would produce all the great works and
all the gibberish in short order. But there's not an infinite
number of anything. The universe may be expanding, but it's not
infinite. Yes, a lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

Logically, infinitely is the only way the universe *could* exist.

By your logic, apparently.

When I figure out how matter was created in the first place, I will post
here.....

On 5/21/15 PDT 10:58 PM, Me wrote:
On 22/05/2015 3:09 a.m., John McWilliams wrote:
The universe may be expanding, but it's not infinite. Yes, a
lot more than we can grasp, but not infinite!

You can't actually prove that,

Now you've hurt my feelings!

only conjecture that it probably is with
theory and by extrapolating observation - which could all be wrong.
Just because it seems to be true from our perspective and place and
time, doesn't mean that's the way it is.

Yes, I agree with that statement.