Leaderboard

That's not what MigL claimed though. He was suggesting that iNow was unfairly dismissing valid claims of Democratic/Progressive mis-steps. You'll need to show not that iNow said "false equivalency" but that he did it simply as a dismissal of a valid criticism. @MigL - I know you did not mention me specifically as someone who was dismissive of comments regarding poor 'Progressive' behavior but if you think I am guilty I'd honestly like to hear so. I don't think I am but of course it is sometimes difficult see ones own flaws.

Or how about "Bernie at 20,000 ft" ( This one was suggested by my Wife)

A rheostat is a variable resistor. It controls how much current is delivered to a load. The adjustment is made by moving a slider along to change resistance. A simple example is like this: Light dimmers are an example, as is the heat adjustment knob for an electric range top burner. A bridge rectifier uses diodes, which are arranged in in a manner to convert alternating current (current that alternates its direction flow rapidly) to direct current ( current the flows only in one direction. A diagram would look like this: D1-D4 are diodes. They act like one-way valves for electricity, letting it flow one way through them and stopping it from flowing the other. The arrangement of the diodes is such that no matter what direction the current in flowing from the source, it only flows one direction through RL. If the source current is in one direction it passes from point A through D1 to point D then to the left through RL to point C, through D3 to point B, and then back to the source When the source current reverses direction, it flows from point B through D4 to point D, then to the left through RL to point C, Then through D2 point A before returning to the source. So, no matter what the direction the current flows from the source it flows through RL from right to left. If it helps, think of the wires as streets and the ones with diodes are one-way streets, It doesn't matter whether a car enters through A or B, it has to travel from right to left through RL. Thus rheostats control the amount of current, and bridge rectifiers control the direction of current.

Am I wrong in thinking that the American revolution could not have taken place without violence? From the little I know of it violence was definitely involved. This violence seemed to begin against the legitimate authorities. Does this mean you disapprove of the manner in which the revolution took place? I'm not trying to trap you, or trip you up. I am genuinely puzzled and seek clarification. Just to anticipate possible questions, I believe there are times when violence is justified. I haven't decided whether such justification exists, on either side, in the USA today. I merely note I don't place an eternal embargo on violence.

Oh, but that's not because it's much worse than I pointed out. It's because it's bound to get worse if you make a notational blunder of that magnitude. If you want to discuss anything in terms of a 2-index tensor being diagonal in a certain point --o perhaps everywhere?, the OP didn't tell us--, you could arrange to distinguish this by using Latin capital letters, e.g., \[A^{BB}=\frac{\partial x^{B}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\mu}}\frac{\partial x^{B}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\nu}}\bar{A}^{\mu\nu}\] Meaning, \[A^{00}=\frac{\partial x^{0}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\mu}}\frac{\partial x^{0}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\nu}}\bar{A}^{\mu\nu}\] \[A^{11}=\frac{\partial x^{1}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\mu}}\frac{\partial x^{1}}{\partial\bar{x}^{\nu}}\bar{A}^{\mu\nu}\] etc. So it can be done, but not the way the OP is doing it. Not that it's very useful to consider tensors as objects that are or aren't diagonal in any invariant geometrical sense, as they are objects referred to two different bases. Absolutely. When I'm doing maths and I get to such surprising results as "the whole of tensor algebra/calculus is bonkers, because all tensors are null" --or something like that, I'm not completely sure if that's the point--, I try to retrace my steps and, sure enough, I can spot a silly mistake. The last thing that would cross my mind is to highlight the "result" and announce to the world, "hey, I've found an enigma".

All you have done is repeat what you had already stated, you did not actually address any of the points raised.

Again, this essentially comes down to the difference between topology and geometry. When we say the universe is spatially infinite, what we actually mean by this are three things: 1. Spacetime has no boundary 2. For any arbitrary pair of (spatial) points {A,B}, there exists another pair of points {C,D} the spatial separation of which is greater than that of {A,B}. 3. Spacetime is singly connected Herein, (2) actually implies (1), but I’m listing them separately for added clarity. These three conditions are true at all times t>0, including immediately after the BB, and at the present time; so this does not change, and it - roughly - represents an aspect of the global topology of the universe. On the other hand, when we say that the universe was singular at the BB, what we mean is that as t -> 0, the separation between any pair of arbitrarily chosen spatial points will tend towards zero; and it means that no geodesics can be extended beyond the hyperslice t=0, without them extending into the future again (so this is a bit like a “pole” in spacetime). It does not really mean - at the danger of straying into the disciplines of metaphysics and philosophy here - that only a single point existed; the spacetime manifold was already there in some sense, but there was no notion of “separation between events” yet. So it’s the geometry that was singular, but not necessarily the topology. Of course, this is the purely classical picture, it does not account for any quantum effects (which will likely change the story quite radically).

Is there any case where you would consider employing violence against the State justified? You have blacks being killed for no reason in their own homes by the 'lawful authorities' on the one hand and a group wanting to overturn a democratic election and hang a fellow conservative on the other.

If you had stopped there, I would have given you a +1 also. Unfortunately you misguidedly went on about 'whataboutism', when some of you guys are the biggest offenders. Anytime JC or I ( and a few others ) mention mis-steps by American progressives/Democrats, your first answer ( as well as Swansont, Phi, and a few others ) is always "But the Republicans do much much worse; they can't even be compared. So why are you even bringing it up ?" If you can't think of the times you've done this, I can post numerous examples/quotes. If that is your attitude, it is going to be a boring 4 years in the Politics Forum. Everytime someone criticized the new Government, your first response will be "But D Trump did much worse during his Presidency." And then I'm told I have biases

Having taught math successfully in Junior High and High school I though I would have a lot of great examples for you-- but on further reflection realized my best ones were not something that could be generalized. I had the greatest success when I could connect the math lesson to the students' experiences. For example, in my rural area the vast majority of the students have experience with guns and many also have reloaders in their families (people who make their own ammunition). When I first tried to teach statistics I got blank looks from many students, So that weekend I took my test equipment out to the rifle range and measured velocities of 10 rounds of ammo I had built. On Monday I put the data up on the screen and asked the students if the load I had developed was consistent enough for hunting. This lead to a successful lengthy discussion and the development of the idea of mean and standard deviation. The lesson I learned and applied from then on is this: The goal is not so much to make the students think differently, but rather to create a use for the math knowledge in a way that connects to their experiences. I can think back to lots of examples of good teaching tricks, but realize they are were specific to a certain student or group of students. Not much help to what you want.

OK so I will try to discuss communication of Mathematics, rather than principle of Mathematics. I can't see where you have mentioned any basic Maths, computer code is hardly basic if it is indeed Maths at all. However I beg to disagree with your outright rejection of History. Perhaps your experience of History at school was of the sort "History is a list of dates of battles, deaths and treaties to be learned by heart and regurgitated for the examiner". History actually offers many lessons for those that care to peer into them. Not the least being concerning computer code. Coding languages have a very short lifetime; I have seen them come and go and stopped bothering to learn the new fashion decades ago now so I have little idea of the meaning of your example. The last serious program I wrote was PFortran TRIP (Trigonometric Intersection Program). British schools went through a phase of demanding that every child learn 'programming'. This mean resources were wasted on teaching first, different versions of BASIC, then PASCAL, then some early scripting. None of which are current today. History also tells us that the basic mathematical operation of counting is at least as old as writing, probably much older. Now schools used to teach using the old fashioned balance scales. Good schools would actually get the pupils to set up pretend shops acting as customers and shoperkeeps. They would weigh out amounts of materials, say potatoes or sand and also practice with pretend money. This allowed a method of counting by the custemr presenting say a half crown coin and the shopkeeper saying That's one and fivepence and then making up the one and fivepence to half a crown with coins to provide the change. Instant communication of arithmetic and fractions. For those who were a dunce at school arithmetic there was the joke, you say you can't do maths but you can still instantly recognise that you need a treble eighteen, double top and single nineteen to finish in a darts match when you are on 113! Would these be the sorts of examples you are looking for ?

Neutrinos take away ~10MeV from a typical fission of U-235

We can all agree that violence on either side is wrong and should be avoided. What we seemingly cannot agree upon is why so many feel the need to engage in whataboutism and mention a protest in favor of following our laws done in Portland with an insurrection on our democracy itself trying to dismantle our laws in Washington DC. Whether intentionally or not, this suggests an equivalence between the events which is false and which only distracts us from dealing with each separately, appropriately, and in accordance with our laws. Person A: Climate change is a major problem. Person B: What about covid?! That’s a problem, too. Me: Both are. They’re not equivalent. They’re not mutually exclusive. We must deal with both at once. Walk and chew bubble gum. Simply replace climate and covid with DC and Portland. This isn’t exactly rocket science.

All is clear. Many thanks, Markus.

We ALL wish you had his eloquence, Dim

I demonstrated the concept of subtraction to my children by eating their French fries. It worked quite well, and served the parallel purpose of being an education in social interaction with people more powerful,than you... that life isn’t always fair. Sorry... yours is a weird OP

I am not blaming you! Why do you think that? You misunderstood me whole time. Since not I am expert in Physics: I asked, if there is anything remotely, which can be done to avoid this. So now you are saying, you don't feel comfortable answering this. I didn't mean su..... I meant, anything except that which can be done. So that mean there is nothing you know of? I am of course glad for answering other questions. Which alone doesn't answer fully my question.

To avoid the Eternal Return! I guess you should read 1st post, but it is very depressive, you probably don't want to!

Oh and now I am posting on other forums too? Only account I have on scienceforums - is this account. I registered since 2018 and I don't exactly post much here as you can see... Maybe I asked once/twice on chemicalforums about something and maybe I created account on scienceforums.com. I don't think I ever used it. And site said: account with this name not found! Now who is paranoid? Woah someone else had same thought, it must be one person. Because thought is just wrong. Because I have Phd in physics and you don't therefore everything you say is wrong... Instead trying to have a constructive discussion... I must say you are so arrogant! It is like in high school in here. I posted in other thread and one guy disagreed. So he went to my other thread instantly, while that topic was on top months... And from long discussion, he cherry picks one thing, which wasn't even incorrect. And catches me by my word... Seemed personal... Because science is largely social and about seeming reputation, instead of getting to truth. You find in history many brilliant people, which were arrogant and didn't care about truth! Only about their ego... Like Newton... https://medium.com/@mtobis/who-decides-what-is-true-b6d9057489cd BTW free will is illusion you did nothing... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer E.g. Inflation was criticized by co-author: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/09/28/is-the-inflationary-universe-a-scientific-theory-not-anymore/?sh=581a72acb45e He and other scientists called others uncritical believers! MigL: said: it will be heat death, while it is a most accepted theory. We don't know that on 100% !!! Now who is not logical? Some astrophysicists - Ethan Siegel no-one heard about said: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/10/08/no-roger-penrose-we-see-no-evidence-of-a-universe-before-the-big-bang/?sh=34d676bd7a0f About which no one heard about BTW... Why would he even say this? Penrose can do what the heck he wants... And science should be not about mass opinion, but about finding the truth and logic and critical thinking, divergent thinking etc. Same science is not engaging in proof... So why would he have to stick to Inflation? If he thinks, there is a better explanation, or perhaps little variety wouldn't hurt. Who knows... Einstein: I am extremely logical person, while I don't have Phd from physics (never claimed so BTW). I see how things are! That is not to say I know everything, but I never claimed I do! I know enough, that I know: I don't know anything... But we simply don't know, if Eternal Return is true or not... Someone else tells me that fear is behind my claims and it is not logical, while he didn't even read what I was saying... BTW I have Asperger, I don't include emotions into my thinking: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4532317/#:~:text=In typical individuals%2C alexithymia was,fear%2C disgust%2C and anger. As example: You are coping hard right now, perhaps even without realizing it... There are multiple studies, which linked positive illusions to well being and depression to seeing things more clearly. Even while depression can make people see the opposite. Depends on a person and situation! https://aeon.co/essays/the-voice-of-sadness-is-censored-as-sick-what-if-its-sane Also logical fallacy would be, just because I am much less knowledgeable at some areas, then you. Like it would mean, that a fact is not a fact... You are exactly type of people, which try to shun some argument based on something like that. I don't have to know everything about physics and still can be right in this case. Two things aren't exclusive. You don't need to be Einstein in physics, to know something from physics is x way. I bet people from other areas of science found out something from your area, you didn't know about... You see: I don't give crap" about being true, or ego, or anything. Only about finding the truth! I didn't claim anything, except: that Eternal Return may be possible and we don't know that for a fact, that it is possible, or it is not!!! And that's literally it. And see how you acted? You showed your true colors... You don't have to worry, I won't be posting here anyways, since it is just bunch of charlatans here... I don't agree, you bring out random accusations, or say it is fear. Instead of constructive discussion... I don't really even care. But seeing this simply leaves sore feeling in my mouth. And then people say: people with ASD are anti-social. But we see things closer to how they truly are and don't come to definitive conclusions, if we don't know it is true, or not... And because we understand human behavior in a theory and see what people do to each other... Not to say I blame you about every single thing. But part of scientific community is really like that! So maybe listen to your fellow scientists, if they bring out a controversial theory, because at the end of a day, who cares if in scientific circles it is deemed correct/incorrect. Many people, which were slandered, showed to be correct later...

It is not a correct point.General perspectives cannot be violated in the special cases.Why don't you go through my last post in this discussion?