Leaderboard

I actually did that. Finding issues in your device took a few seconds but from there I assumed your idea to be correct. Then I looked at the big picture; what profound consequences would your idea have on the current states of physics and the universe as we know it. The result of that outside the box thinking was that your claims seems incompatible with the universe and our models. That was the quick part and no math was used. My struggle now is to find a suitable explanation that fits your current level of understanding and/or helps raising understanding of physics to a required level. My first attempt at that was to look at the whole system and to use a simple formula; F=ma, unfortunately that seems to have failed to add clarity. You miss the big picture. Conservation of momentum (linear and angular) always holds. And when the device is from the outside you start with zero momentum p=0 and at a later time there is p>0. You need to explain the new physics that allows that. The big picture is that we already know that the current laws of physics makes your proposed device impossible. No amount of details about the device will ever change that. You need to present the new physics that supports the claims and allows total momentum to not be conserved. Compare to Einstein if you wish; Special relativity is not derived from within Newtonian physics. SR has separate postulates and applies to scenarios outside the applicability of Newton's laws. But Newton is a good approximation at low relative velocities. It sounds like you have a postulate something like "Total momentum is not conserved"?

Also likely a major part of his game plan... distract. Notice how everyone is talking about what a fuster cluck this debate was instead of covid deaths, his failure to pay taxes, his fraudulent funneling of money to his kids, him being a failed businessman, their hypocritical and rushed lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court, continued Russian election meddling, etc...

If they can be 66 for their second term, why couldn't they be 66 for their first, and not seek a second term? Why is that the standard for respectful/good manners, but interruption and talking over the other isn't?

I gather he was emailing supporters to claim victory before the end.

If one views the way the U.S electoral system operates as Tweedism the debate spoke to the angriest among a narrow demographic. The majority of voters, their hopes & interests, were ignored.

It was on too late for me. I read the AP News reeport just now. He ran true to type then. He epitomizes the saying: never argue with an an idiot because he'll beat you down with experience.

Why the moderator does not have a fifty cent microphone-off switch for who is not supposed to talk that moment ?

When someone tells me they’re a Christian, I ask: Classic Jesus, or Republican Jesus?

Thanks for the feedback. Just in case some other member or visitor happens to find this topic: frankly, I would never consider using your solution. As a comparison, here is an alternative version of creating an 8x8 zero filled array and printing it. import numpy as np a = np.zeros([8, 8], dtype = int) for t in a: print(*t) Note: Im not going to go through all issues, but your code (still) produces identical output regardless of the parameter value; calling Board(1) or Board(8) does not matter, it creates and prints an 8x8 matrix.

Hopefully in groups and periods