pgrmdave

I can tell you must be really popular with women.

I'm about 20 years shy of 50, and I hope that when I'm 50 I'm brave enough to start a new career.

Last I checked, MRI machines don't disable the human body. Or even come close.

Sure - it's such an impossibly young field that almost anything even remotely related to it will be useful. Much like you can be a programmer without ever having studied computer science, you can try to start working on full-dive VR with almost any sort of degree. The key is to pursue it when you're outside of school and to understand that right now there's not likely to be any easy path and funding will be a problem. It's possible you'll need a day job to pay the bills while you work on full-dive stuff in all your spare time, or that you'll be continually trying to find investors to help keep food on your table while you work on it. Schooling is probably the least important consideration when it comes to the technology. Another path would be to simply try to earn as much money as you possibly can, but live as frugally as you can, and *be* one of the investors in it.

It's much, much faster and better to learn from others mistakes. Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that. Perpetual motion isn't just "thought to be wrong" but "in violation of basic mathematics". It's roughly as fruitless as trying to prove that 1 + 0 = 2.

It actually matters quite a bit. It's not political bs, it's economics. What matters isn't energy in vs. energy out but costs in vs. profits out. If it takes a billion dollars to build and produces only $100,000 a year in profits that's not good enough - that's a yield of less than 1%. It has to produce a minimum of 3% just to meet inflation.

This is getting more expensive by the sentence. You want to construct something that's a third of a mile square and three quarters of a mile deep? That's a volume of 16 trillion cubic feet, nearly 34 times the size of the next largest building by volume (Boeing Everett Factory). I'm not dismissing your ideas out of hand, I'm looking at what you're saying and suggesting that while it's certainly possible, the economics don't seem to work out. If I'm an investor with a few million/billion/trillion to put somewhere, this is unlikely to be in my top 100.

The the IT/Software Engineering is the school to go to, definitely :-)

Which aspect are you most interested in? Any of those schools will be useful to your longterm career hopes, there is no best. But by choosing something you're excited about, you're more likely to learn more and do better.

50%. There are four scenarios of the initial order of the sweets: RB RB RB BR BR RB BR BRAfter throwing away the sweet on the right, that leave us with: R R R B B R B BThat leaves us with four equally likely scenarios (so 25% chance of each), of which we need to choose one sweet (so a 50% chance of each) which leaves us with: 25% chance overall, 50% chance of R, 50% chance of R 25% chance overall, 50% chance of R, 50% chance of B 25% chance overall, 50% chance of B, 50% chance of R 25% chance overall, 50% chance of B, 50% chance of BMathematically, that can be reduced to the following: 0.25 * (0.5R + 0.5R) + 0.25 * (0.5R + 0.5B) + 0.25 * (0.5B + 0.5R) + 0.25 * (0.5B + 0.5B) = 0.25 * R + 0.125 * R + 0.125 * B + 0.125 * B + 0.125 * R + 0.25 *B = 0.25 * R + 0.125 * R + 0.125 * R + 0.125 * B + 0.125 * B + 0.25 *B = 0.25 * R + 0.25 * R + 0.25 * B + 0.25 * B = 0.5 * R + 0.5 * B So, a 50% chance of a blue sweet.

Yes, you can, if the light is following the curve of the sphere. If the lines that light travels in are curved, and that curvature ends up being spherical, then the view of an observer goes round in a sphere (or, rather, a more complicated, 4-dimensional, version of a sphere).

Is this the application? http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013172884A4?cl=en Kind of neat that you have a patent application, do you plan on building it or licensing the use of it? Or do you expect to be able to sell it to power generating entities?

There are a number of ways they could have jurisdiction - it's possible that as a requirement to doing any business within the United States certain laws have to be followed (the most likely case). It's also possible that some of the money went through their New York branch (unlikely though).

What NotBrad said, but we're not years away - we're probably decades away. The people who will be working on something like this that's releasable to the public are likely either infants right now or aren't born yet. The best that individuals can do right now is to get degrees in medical science, electrical/software engineering, biotechnology, etc. in order to help chip away a small part of the problem now.

Science is pretty unstubborn - if you can make more accurate predictions than we currently can, or you can make equally accurate predictions in a simpler way, then scientists will listen. If you have a theory about Truth but it doesn't actually produce a model that can be used to make accurate and consistent predictions then it's not particularly interesting. What falsifiable predictions does your theory make that are different than current models make?