Leaderboard

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-56016031 Interestingly there are a couple of photos about the use of solar power in the list and also several other environmental science subjects.

Introduction The ASD is an acronym for Adaptive Semi-Determinism, which will be defined and explained starting on next section. I made threads or topics regarding the ASD thing on other sites in past, but nearly have forgotten all about it until today. The reason for this topic is that I noticed there is no concrete case (eg. Being complete) of unified theory of everything (ToE) of everything to define and explain everything or even each individual sentient being for that matter due to qualia or freewill. For any action such as an act of smoking a cigarette overrides the logic reasoning, thus existence of freewill. Yet, we can be influenced by our genes effected by consumable food, drink, communication, environment, history, belief, etc – thus freewill is in question. The existence of contradiction between these two things, but how do both mutually work out apart from each other and / or even altogether as demonstrated on daily basis? The answer could be ASD. ASD - Definition ASD stands for Adaptive Semi-Determinism. It bridges both determinism and in-determinism concepts, to solve the duality problem or multi-concepts that are mutually incompatible with each other. The ASD is a concept, a non-material structure and function. It is not there but “is there” when things meet or have a form of relationship with each other. It “solves” and / or “resolves” things as per situational dependent, making these “appropriated” as these are (eg. particle/wave duality). ASD – “Mechanism” Law: Adaptive semi-determine between a and b or more toward equilibrium. When either a or b or more is less or greater than the sum of both or more, a change undergo between both or more until equilibrium is reached. Since if the ASD is true then that means some things while asding can be perceived to be good, bad, or neutral as situational dependent. ASD – Reason why behind ASD “Mechanism” Primary answer: Coherent actualization. ASD – Examples Equalizer. Differentiation. Equilibrium of human body, solar systems, galaxies, etc. How can ASD be useful (eg. Being applicable)? Snipped quote from ToE wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything “To resolve the incompatibility, a theoretical framework revealing a deeper underlying reality, unifying gravity with the other three interactions, must be discovered to harmoniously integrate the realms of general relativity and quantum mechanics into a seamless whole: the TOE is a single theory that, in principle, is capable of describing all phenomena in the universe.” A further understanding of ASD could potentially solve / resolve the incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics, not just that but also could be useful in other fields such as philosophy, psychology, etc. Other Thoughts The ASD just seems to make sense at least to me. I just thought I’d share it because it might be helpful, if not then its better than nothing.

How is that a paradox? You expect a certain behavior based on assumption(s). If the system doesn't behave as expected it's not because theres a paradox, it's because your assumptions about the system behavior are wrong.

Since this was originally posted two months ago: We have aBaCl2(aq)+bK2SO4(aq)→nBaSO4↓+mKCl(aq) Looking at that I see that there are "a" Ba atoms on the left and "n" Ba atoms on the right so we must have a= n. I see that there are "2a" Cl atoms on the left and "m" Cl atoms on the right so we must have 2a= m. Is that there are "2b" K atoms on the left and "m" K atoms on the right so we must have 2b= m. Finally I see that there are "b" SO4 ions on the left and "n" SO4 ions on the right so we must have b= n. That is, we have the four equations a= n, 2a= m, 2b= m and b= n. That is four equations in the four unknowns, a, b, m, and n. One difficult is that when the number of equations is equal to the number of unknowns there is typically a unique solution. But it is obvious that a= b= m= n= 0 is solution while we want non-zero values! If there is not a unique solution we can try to solve for all but one unknown in terms of that one. Let's try to solve for b, m, and n in terms of a. We have immediately that n= a and m= 2a. 2b= m= 2a so b= a and n= b= a. So if we arbitrarily take a= 1, b= 1, m= 2, and n= 1. We have BaCl2(aq)+K2SO4(aq)→ BaSO4↓+2KCl(aq)

Except what you're saying is, it's infinite because it's infinite (I'm duty bound to point that out). 😉 Seems to me that infinite is just another way to say "I don't know". I think a more interesting question would be, can a paradox exist in nature? Then the answer to my question is yes, but only in people.

That you are wrong.

Hi again. Thanks for explaining your requirements. Sadly, I'm not an expert on higher order logic and it seems unlikely I'll have time to become familiar with it over the next few months. So I'll be bowing out of this conversation. Sorry I couldn't help. Best wishes to you, bye for now.

I would put into consideration a different contribution made by Hubble prior to his Law. In 1924 he discovered Cepheid variable stars in Andromeda, which he was able to use to show that Andromeda was far outside our own galaxy, and not a part of it. While there had been debate about this., his observations were the first to provide exidence that the cosmos was much more vast than previously suspected and extended well beyond the Milky way.

Einstein and General Relativity showing how mass/energy density warp, curve, twist spacetime. Person? Carl Sagan who personally sparked my interest in cosmology but sadly too late to really do much about it except learn. As he said Cosmology/astronomy is a humbling and character building experience...from that unforgetable description entitled "Pale Blue Dot"

Personally I have nothing against religious people, or religion for that matter. In a vast majority of cases in this day and age, I believe people use it and practise it, more as a comfort entity then anything else, and as a wall against the scientifically based conclusion that death is it...it is final and the end. That worries many people imo, and religion gives them that inner warm fuzzy feeling that upon their death, they will be magically transported to heaven or its equivalent. There are many good decent religious people in this world that mean well, and truly practise the basis of their religion. My Mrs is one of them. She was born in Fiji, now a naturalized Aussie, and like almost all Fijians, have a strong religious connection, based on Christianity or Hindi for Indian Fijians. She also puts up with me. But basically, we tolerate our differences and have been together for 42 years now, and both our first marriages. My only beef against religious people are the one's that come to science forums such as this and others, preaching their fire and brimstone, and attempting to belittle science. I have seen the video in the opening post, and while I like both those esteemed scientists, Carl Sagan imo had a far more subtle approach to people of a religious leaning. But that's a personal taste. I don't particularly see myself as an Atheist, more a student of reasonability and scientific application, that simply sees any God as a mythical entity constructed to bring comfort to an individual, and as a companion to their ignorance of science and the scientific explanation.

The universe is finite. This follows from the law of conservation of energy (once the stars must burn all the hydrogen), as well as from the second law of thermodynamics. And then, either our universe is part of something larger (the multiverse), or we must accept the existence of God. Which point of view is closer to you personally?

Must be rather nice to see that the Dems never do that type of towing the party line...