Leaderboard

Well thank you, I'm flattered as I don't deserve such special reatment. Anyway, You too have a good holiday but above all, Stay Safe. Too many in the UK are currently putting their 'right to a good hioliday' above the safety of themselves. This is their choice and perhaps their right but the trouble is that all rights come with responsibilities and they are also affecting the safety of other people by doing this.

If I want to read a book, I expect an engaging plot, with interesting protagonists. The story needs to pull me in, such that I become part of that world. Your 'book' does none of that, so I stopped reading after the first paragraph. If I want to read a scientific paper, an introduction will explain the general aim/goal of the paper, It will have references and a peer review, so that I know if it interests me, is based on accepted science, and is valid science. But I certainly don't come here to read scientific papers, although people do link them. When I want to have a discussion, I expect a clear well-laid out argument, which starts off with a general summary. After reading that, I can decide if I'm interested and whether I want to participate. I should not have to read 20-30 pages before I know if there's anything worth discussing, or even any actual science. As your post currently stands, yes, an 'anti-gravity' drive does defy the laws of Physics, because 'anti-gravity' is not possible within the framework of accepted Physics. That is in the title of your epic work, and basically as far as I read. If by 'anti-gravity' you don't actually mean repulsive gravity, I suggest a much simpler presentation of your ideas that gets right to the point. I don't have that much time to waste. Another thing. If your post wasn't so long/bad, I wouldn't have had to write all this. So you still managed to waste my time.

! Moderator Note And Phi didn't accuse you of saying it. Phi gave you an out for the strawman you appeared to be making, and you've chosen not to take the graceful approach of clarifying what you meant, in a way that eliminates the strawman. Instead, we have this. ! Moderator Note This is a response that absolves you of any wrongdoing; you've decided that the answer is that someone is mad at you and it's their fault that there is a disagreement, rather than the possibility that you had misinterpreted or misread something, or were just wrong about something. This approach leaves a lot to be desired.

Ok. I'll lose the flowers. Do I keep dysentery, diphtheria, TB, and polio? As you said, that's just the way you see it. We have diets (or the possibility of having them) rich in different essential minerals, complete package of aminoacids, vitamins, etc., and the amazing possibilities of GM food. The fact is much more people in the world have access to a diet that's far more complete than that of the ancients --no matter where they lived-- than ever before. Quite a different thing is the matter of dietary habits. There is a cultural factor there. If people choose to daily intake far too much sugar, or palm oil, it's largely a cultural issue. 10'000 y.a. people stuffed themselves with hydrocarbons, and they died in their thousands due to combination of poor diet combined with miserable existence conditions. The Romans drank lead diluted in sapa, to sweeten wine and several dishes, which resulted in big swathes of the population being lead-poisoned and becoming sterile, or die prematurely. Nice picture.

The design is simple. And yet you not share it What is “apparent weight”? You mention it but don’t immediately explain. This sounds more like you’re talking about structures being treated as point objects, not closed systems.What do you mean by a closed system? Further, what is the deviation from an evenly operating force? Let’s say it’s a 10,000km orbit and a 1m structure. Or give a general formula, if you prefer.

Your description does not match the code provided so I can't really comment. Or maybe the crucial parts are somewhere in the code not shared? I can't tell. From the code posted above the following dialog seems possible: Input: "Professor ABC is not replying to my email!" Bot response: "Don’t worry" It looks unintentionally humorous to me. (The output generation you have provided stops on "," as far as I can tell) That is a large, complicated and interesting question. Answering the question would require many pages, I'll have to provide something short that allows for a discussion. Hardcoding a limited user input will not work in a real situation. I would use more powerful preprocessing; selecting a proper framework depends on many parameters not in the scope for this thread. I would use my experience to look at the architecture and overall design and not only parts of the coding.

You should use the list.append() method to append an item to the list. https://www.w3schools.com/python/ref_list_append.asp list[index] = "data" assigns "data" at the specified index of the list. It must exists in the first place. Some programming languages allows appendage of element by list[] = "data", but it's not Python. You don't need to have a 'cnt' variable at all. It's equal to len(list) (the length of the list). No, you did not. You misunderstood problem (which was clearly stated in your error message i.e. "IndexError: list assignment index out of range "), and used inappropriate for this problem workaround... You *should* be dynamically appending elements at the end of the list..

! Moderator Note The company's website doesn't do this? This sounds like you're trying to advertise for them.

Thank you. I'll add some more from Wikipedia, for completion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteora

Similar situation where monks decided to build their monasteries, the meteora in Greece. The natural beauty enhanced by baffling human creativity. Meteora net lift, 1908 by Frédéric Boissonnas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frédéric_Boissonnas

The tepuis (tepuyes in Spanish) from Venezuela, Brazil, Guyana and Colombia. Karst topography is awesome almost beyond words or concepts. But not beyond belief, because it's there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tepui Because the first continents had no plant cover to protect them from erosion, for eons upon eons sediments formed over vast regions, which later became exposed to more selective wearing down, sculpting canyons, plateaus, grottos, and seemingly bottomless chasms. That's what a blind, unconstrained by intention, relentless force can do. No thinking is necessary, if given enough time. Gigantic pillars carved out of the depositions of a long-lost world, where once big dinosaurs roamed, and tiny mammals scurried around, waiting for their moment to arrive, these monuments are silent, patient witnesses to the existence of Gondwana. No human-made temple is remotely comparable to this. No religious feeling can echo in our minds what the first people coming from the Bering Strait must have felt when they first saw this more than 15'000 years ago. Picture from: https://hananpacha1.wordpress.com/2017/07/07/tepuy/ (In Spanish.)

! Moderator Note Two things here. No more slurs against groups, that's against our rules, and you won't get another warning. Second, if you aren't going to listen to the evidence of those refuting what you claim, you aren't discussing anything, you're preaching, and that's also against our rules. Discussion means there is a possibility someone will hear evidence that could change their mind. Preaching/soapboxing means you're trying to teach us your way no matter what, and that's better done with a blog. Thread closed. If you start a similar thread, please make sure you're willing to learn like everyone else involved.

You assume too much. Shi'a and Sunni Muslims disagree about 'the roots': Who are the rightful heirs of Mohammed, and whether Al Bukhari was right about him and his doings, and probably many more things. I'm sure you know much more about it than most of us here do. It's a 'sources' problem (both about the authenticity of books and/or translations, and about the line of authority) very much like what was for Christians several hundred years ago in Europe between the many Protestant offshoots, and Catholics, and Jews. That led to unimaginable bloodshed between Christians and Jews. We know. Actually, we know much better than you guys do. We've killed each other, we've hated each other for so many more years. Most of us seem to have taken home the lesson. You, unfortunately, haven't. That's a very big part of the problem, guys. A part of your community seems unable to take home some lessons from your brethren religions that are much older than yours. Jewish and Christians being at each other's throats for centuries. You're still obsessed with a couple of lines in a several-centuries-old book. That's, allow me to say, pathetic. Both in the most ludicrous sense, and in the most tragic one. Take a look at Mandaeans, Yasidis, etc., and how they've become victims of unspeakable violence in recent years in the Middle East, just because they follow the rituals that their ancestors did. Probably with the same amount of doubt that you do yours. But also take a look at how some Muslims brothers die at the hands of each other because of a difference of opinion. And ask yourself: Is the interpretation of some lines on an ancient book worth the suffering that we see in the world? The suffering of a child is not worth ten thousand lines of a holy book.

Okay, I will read that as an exercise in objective reading.

I know. It's a theory. Theories are stated as fact. That's science. It's an explanation, right? Not an answer. No, it's just that a theory to me goes like this: "it seems..." But science people (pardon if I seem to use a slur) say it like this: "such is the case." That bothers me somewhat; actually a lot. But I can't abandon science because regardless, I always say, science (in its purity) is one very useful way of looking at nature.

You're right. I'm one of those opponents to everything we humans make more complex than is necessary; I'd rather everyone stay close to home and get around on mules when they had to. Yeah, pretty radical. And I hated trig and calculus. Barely passed.

I can't afford too thorough a scientific study. I'm a strong believer that you may only, always ever have a partial set of all the relevant facts; which necessitates (for example a mother's) intuitive judgment.

Yeah? Well look in the mirror. To me you look like a toad.

I didn't say you sucked? Okay, I can see that you're still angry with me and not in the frame of mind to discuss these things without an attitude. Maybe you should try and chill out a little and stop holding a grudge you have no business having in the first place. You didn't get called a liar and an asshole so you can stop pretending like you are the one owed an apology. I should be the one holding a grudge, yet here I am still trying to have a conversation with you despite the passive aggression you throw my way. I'm asking you, how does anyone form an intellectual argument first when emotion is always the motivator? This is my last comment until after the holidays. Figure out if you want to treat me with basic respect by then, if not we probably shouldn't bother discussing anything with each other. I really can't be bothered with people who hold grudges and talk down to people they aren't even prepared to try and understand.