Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/26/21 in all areas

  1. Inflation and expansion are not the same thing. Inflation is an accelerated expansion (i.e. it's a particular form of expansion) Having no central point is associated with expansion in general, not just with inflation. No, not so much. As above, changing scales is a feature of expansion, not just inflation. A meter isn't worth any less owing to expansion. Remember that expansion is only apparent where systems are not gravitationally bound to each other.
    3 points
  2. So maybe there's no "one size fits all" approach is the take-away here. Some cancers must be cutout with a scalpel without any delay. Others are amenable to treatment and care... more like wounds that will heal with sutures than something to be extracted and discarded. As always, the devil is in the details... what are the thresholds / who decides? Who watches the watchers?
    2 points
  3. I really want to know where exactly I went wrong with my WAG. So I separated my points so anyone can easily address them and enlighten me to what is true and what is WAG. Please be specific and not just ridicule me as a WAG. 1 Our big bang may either be finite in size or infinite in size. 2 All we know about "the universe" comes from our view of OUR big bang (observable universe 92 LY across). 3 There could be other big bangs or even a multiverse of branching bangs. 4 We call our view of OUR big bang "THE universe" but our observable universe is only local and tells us little about what is beyond. 5 So it seems like what we witness (big bang expansion) is finite, because the difference between finite and infinite, IS INFINITE. 6 Infinity is a tall order. Even though it COULD be infinite in size, more likely it is finite in size. There could be a region trillions or quadrillions or googols of light years away where there is simply no matter or energy from OUR big bang. That would be the rapidly expanding edge of our big bang.
    1 point
  4. And so much more expertise and resources available with which to do it, if the jails aren't full of people who can't afford bail and fines for minor infractions. But the 1% shouldn't determine what "justice" is.
    1 point
  5. Which I all agree with you on, but non of this replaces punishment. It just reduces the amount that has to be dealt. Punishment is for that which has already been committed, not for that which might. Prevention of all crime though ideal is unrealistic. Even if we achieve a 99% success rate investing in and using every prevention method possible, there is still 1% that has to be dealt with.
    1 point
  6. It was just a descriptive to differentiate from an explosion. In inflation, there is no central point of expansion.
    1 point
  7. OK, the future in English. The perfect tense refers to a completed action (verb) A completed action is over and done with and often cannot be repeated. For example I have eaten the apple happened in the past so is past perfect. But say in the present I hold an apple. Obviously I have yet to complete eating it, or even perhaps to start eating it. So in the present I eat the apple or since this takes time, I am eating the apple which is the imperfect tense. But say I do not, which in 2 hours into the eat the apple until my lunchbreak, which is 2 hours into the future. So I say that, "At lunch, I will eat my apple." Which is the unspecific or simple future. or I can say, "At lunch, I will be eating my apple." Which is the future imperfect. or I can say, "After lunch, I will have eaten my apple" Which is the future perfect. That is further into the future following the completion of eating of my apple. I cannot refer to something that will happen in the future whilst I will be eating my apple - I must use the future imperfect for that. So Once I have eaten my apple my lunch will be completed. Perfect While I am eating my apple my lunch will be interrupted. Imperfect
    1 point
  8. Here is an interesting take from the viewpoint of the Afghan forces https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/25/opinion/afghanistan-taliban-army.html The author (Commander in the Afghan National Army) counters the narrative of the Afghan unwillingness to fight. The author highlights three factors resulting in the collapse: The article is worth a read and provides an interesting perspective.
    1 point
  9. I am the law! Kidding aside, not practical or possible absent chips in brains and constant monitoring in a Minority Report / 3 pre-cogs in a vat kinda way. Of course prison and punishment are desirable to some, but it’s bc they tend to want retribution and state sanctioned retaliation… security theater in a kabuki style to assuage their fears and insecurities. Punishment and prison are not pursued in a deep seated desire for societal improvement or improved wellbeing for the population at large.
    1 point
  10. Decades of research in the field of psychology. I also went into more detail all those years ago, but that’s the gist. If behavioral change and societal improvement are the objective, then punishment is the wrong project plan / wrong strategy to use in achieving it. And that feedback is immediate. It’s a reflex. In crime, however, the punishment comes weeks or even months later so the association in our minds is lost. If you stole a bike and got collared right there at the bike rack, that’s one thing. But if you stole a bike then got arrested at your front door 3 weeks later, that’s something else entirely when viewed in terms of learning. You don’t give the rat in your experiment cocaine 3 days after solving the maze for the same reasons. The feedback must be immediate for the association to form strongly enough to alter behavior. Punishment teaches us not to get caught. It doesn’t so much teach us to avoid the criminal act entirely.
    1 point
  11. The issue is that mainly all we have got is philosophically and/or politically [and possibly religious] motivated banter and grand plans and ideas, as opposed to a minute sample of actual cases of extreme crimes of violence, both here and in the torture thread. I reiterate a position I put previously, that was incrediously dismissed...a position imo of reality, sympathy, and logic...A perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, to expect sympathy, should at least show some remorse and/or regret for what he has done. That in no way though dismisses the necessity of appropriate punishment. How can any perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, expect for example, any consideration of parole, a suspended sentence, or house arrest? It is in a word, inconceivable to accept that.
    -1 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.