Leaderboard

Do you agree that if I find even a single one then your comment is false?

Space and time are distinct in that the metric of spacetime has oppositely signed coefficients for the space and time components. The existence of an invariant speed of light (though not necessarily light itself) is a manifestation of this distinction.

We are actually orbiting the galaxy's center of gravity. The SMBH near the center of the galaxy is exerting less gravitational pull on you than a car in your driveway.

I think you might be glamorizing it a bit more. There is something to say regarding better representation. But, in recent times, wedge issues are also immensely successful in disruption these processes. Take the rise of the far-right, for example. They do echo the US situation, while having a very distinct political system. The mixed economic model is probably as a whole better in many areas, especially for folks not swimming money. But there are also distinct issues there. I think in some areas there are clear advantages, but I don't think that they are necessarily to the political system, but based on what folks mange to agree on. Sure bi-partisan system encourages taking sides, but populations are not necessarily passive receivers. The immigrant-averse stance permeating much of the European population is quite at odds with many parties and which has fueled the success of the far-right. They also happen to be more aligned with the GOP, potentially due to the right-wing networks which have sprung up with suspected funding from Russia. Ultimately it is an interplay between system and sentiments in the population. And they often cross-feed each other. If folks did not had the simmering resentments, Trump and the GOP would not be able to profit from them. But once they did, they managed to shift the Overton window to more acceptance of previously considered extreme sentiments. That in terms gave an opening for even more radical changes and so on.

Not answering is not enough. I use filters provided by the site's software to avoid seeing such bs on my screen. The site's organization provides clear separation of different forums. By violating this separation, you piss in my yard.

Black list not only had four times as much spring onion, but also additional onion puree that the white list lacked. That's your cuprit. Both high in fructans, which are fermentable oligosaccharides that are intensely gas producing. Severe bloat is just another way to say "I need to stroll around for a while, farting nonstop."

It only takes generations when one of those generations is unwilling to change. Pick any three major progressive changes and if you can avoid the obstructionists, things will move quickly. Offhand, I'd allow ranked-choice voting, just so we can break with the two parties that only represent corporations, and get some actual citizen representation going. I'd also nationalize something major, like food production, so healthy food was a right rather than something you have to earn. And my fave right now is to expand the USPS to compete with Amazon, including a vendor portal so small businesses aren't smothered. People who have no food insecurities and access to the means to prosperity aren't as likely to have lots of kids. Same goes for folks who are better educated, so a focus there can only help with overpopulation. We really need to stop supporting the industries that spend money to spin fear because we spend more when we're afraid and frustrated.

Well, that's what you say now. It isn't what you said that prompted iNow's request for more information. Wouldn't it have been easier to say "Upon further consideration I'm modifying my position on how to apply litter penalties" instead of hoping no one would notice when you moved the goalposts?

Nah. At least that might be mildly interesting

Lady Chatterly and Mickey Mouse enter the public domain this year and all you get is this column.... https://archive.is/DvUSQ (paywall free screenshot of Alexandra Petri column in the Washington Post)

The consensus is that you’re the troll living under it.

You fail to understand what science does, it seems. It is not an abstract exercise in logic. It applies logic, sure, but it does so, crucially, to observations of nature. If those observations cannot all be reconciled by the application of existing theories, developed logically as they are, that suggests - logically - there must be missing observations that might resolve the contradiction. That is quite a normal state of affairs in science, because it is an unfinished enterprise of discovery. It does not follow there is a defect in logic, just that there is missing data for logic to be applied to.

I believe it because I can gather evidence to support my statement. I TRUST what I said, rather than have FAITH in it. I said, "...you can't deny there are many people who attribute things they don't understand to their gods". Haven't you ever heard about how the Christians persecuted early scientists like Galileo for claiming the Earth revolved around the sun, because the Bible claims in Psalms that the god set the Earth on its foundations so it can't be moved? The Bible claims rabbits have split hooves in Deuteronomy, and that all flying insects walk on all fours in Leviticus, so it's NOT just my belief what others think. I have evidence. Surely you see that? I assume this is that weak macro vs micro argument creationists always bring out. Well, you're forgetting all the time involved (can I also assume you also believe your god is fooling everyone about the age of the Earth?). Small changes each generation over tens of thousands of generation produces speciation. You really should study before ridiculing. I'm not sure if it's a language barrier, or a reasoning barrier, or just you trying to obfuscate because you have no good arguments, but this response is just weird. I gave you a scenario about my imaginary neighbors, I told you what they were thinking because they told me. I was asking you what you would do if faced with that situation in real life. You answered it, briefly, when you said you would tell them the truth. Ever since then, you've avoided answering further. I just wanted to show you how people can be wrong in their religious beliefs, like all of us can be wrong. The difference is, science uses information we can TRUST, so we don't get caught in a process where we just blindly believe things we can't support.

The short of it is that quantum computing solves time complexity (as contrasted to computability, except this one very specific impractical case that was found) which means problems that were previously impossible for ordinary computers only because it would take too long for them to solve would now be able to be solved within a practical time frame. Quantum operations enable what's effectively a massive increase in parallelism, giving huge speedups when they could be made to solve those problems. The answer would be "perhaps certain varieties of them, but it won't just wipe out RSA in one fell swoop." Also, there's a big catch. You'd need a "sufficiently powerful" quantum computer to do it, and it's not going to be easy to build one. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/05/30/65724/how-a-quantum-computer-could-break-2048-bit-rsa-encryption-in-8-hours/

Theoretically a small enough BH, one about 0.75% of the mass of the Earth or smaller, should radiate above 2.7 and if not "fed" by more than the CMBR should evaporate and disappear.

What follows is that fewer humans = less extinctions. You can argue if you like about how we behave, but human nature isn't going to change, whereas the numbers HAVE changed, and can be addressed. We certainly ARE too many for the planet, given the current and past behaviour, that's the point. You can daydream about behaviour changing, I'd rather tackle the numbers problem. That actually has a chance of working.

Well, since there's no fixed objective threshold for overpopulation, I can only answer for myself, which I did. When we are causing mass extinctions, I think we are too many.

Well I think it most certainly is . But if you think the only important species is humans, then maybe it's not. Maybe I'm odd, but I value other species, and hate to see animals like Gorillas reduced to a few thousand, while we are nearly 8 billion.

I don't assume that. I think the human population is underutilized, mismanaged, and kept barely above slavery in many parts of the world. I think the outrage of overpopulation is being manufactured by those who hoard resources and demean the labor of people. Rather than giving the resource hoarders more control over our reproduction, I'd like to try more cooperation and less competition, and try to distribute resources more efficiently and effectively for a larger percentage of the population. No more food rotting on docks because there's no profit in getting it to starving people, which will make them healthier and more able to continue their own prosperity. I'd like to start a cycle like that, because we know where the "overpopulation" cycle leads.

I would like it if it was evidence that could change your mind, not me or anyone else. since joining the forum, my mind has changed somewhat on things. the physics group in one of the forums changed my mind on qm and the observer effect. They did it with facts, knowledge and math.

I don't even have to compose replies now, I just have to copy pasta previous ones because apparently they got read but not absorbed:

Jesus you’re foolish sometimes for what appears to be an otherwise intelligent individual. They’re already working on it and we should see more in about a year… but the underlying principles have been laid out for several years already. https://newsroom.ibm.com/2022-11-09-IBM-Unveils-400-Qubit-Plus-Quantum-Processor-and-Next-Generation-IBM-Quantum-System-Two

I expect you, the person above confidently asserting that ZERO religious claims are scientific ones, to acknowledge how sharing even a single one that is would confirm your statement is false.

Ask those guys at IBM "hey, have you guys ever thought of hooking up multiple units?" Are YOU serious? If you are, go and remind them of your revolutionary technique....... Hooking multiple units up in series. Edit: uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh yeah let me give INow a small hint... How are multi-unit setup alleviate energy limitations instead of making it WORSE by introducing overheads? Good grief.......

You didn’t understand my question, or if you did I don’t understand your answer Simplified: what is the wealth threshold for paying $1M vs $100?

99% of their wealth for the fine They can afford it

At what graduated wealth thresholds are you recommending the snowflakes will progressively melt?

$1,000,000 a pop for those special snowflakes.

Are you seriously unable to think of even one single alternative reason this hasn’t been demonstrated yet as of right now today?

I don't acknowledge every claim there is, including ones made by those "scientologists." Again, none that I'm aware of.

I don't think scientologist claims count. Otherwise, I'd have to count absolutely everything any random person made. I was waiting for iNow to ask for an example, but since he's not asking for one, I'll ask him for one instead. Uhhh ok got the "no sir I don't like it" Mr. Horse minus one, I mean heck he could've at least given one example

They screwed up, and making supernatural claims. Calling it "scientific claim" doesn't make it one.

How is it that you do not know that 85% of the mass and energy for gravity to exist as a universal force is missing and as such unseen possibly nonexistent dark matter was invented to balance the gravitational equations. I chose the term enigma for this. What do you call the missing 85% of the universe?

Then you can tell us where dark matter is. Nope you can't do that, because the moment dark matter is located it ceases to be dark. This is the enigma

If some similar changes occurres to the large group of living creatures, for example living in the different parts of the world, how would you estimate these changes? And if they can't communicate? If these are animals? And trees? And I insist that changes are similar. If something happens to the group, happens to 1 also. You forget about individuality. Here is your question. And it's not about religion or faith. I read, that God gives a task to a man, but doesn't decide it for him, or her.

How about no "goalpost" at all and say "I'll let the gummit figure out how to apply the financial penalty, since mere financial disincentive is what I offered in the first place"? I buy the bonsai, you peeps can prune it

2 + 2 = 4, no theory involved as this is easily proven. So math is never theory, it either works or it fails which makes it wrong not a theory which is why dark matter was invented as without the missing mass the math fails, and the universe can't be proven. As for black holes they once claimed that nothing could escape, now they say different, Hawking clearly admitted what he believed was his mistake, Einstein made a similar mistake that Hubble forced him to admit as well. Sorry for mixing ideas but it's all related and part of the same Universal enigma.

Apparently I have been given a "Moderator Note" for 'preaching. To preach is to EARNESTLY ADVOCATE for whatever the cause is. I find this to be discrimination on SCIENCE found. Regardless of what or where it comes from, if it is proven, it should be considered Science still. Anyone to mention the GOD particle should be considered religious then, and we know this isn't the case. Consequences should be given to primitive thinking people simply wanting their ears itched by what their primitive professors taught them. They are all bound to the culture they face. The Science I spoke of is beyond our very culture, beyond our very selves.

First I have to "declare" that my quest here in this thread is the issue of what time is. -Not how we count it or how it works. This quest is on the agenda of modern physics (as well as the issue of what space is). Therefore I'm continuing in this modern approach of physics. If ppl not want to deal with this, one doesn't have to. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do we have another way of measuring/ counting time? -No we don't..!! (And writing "counting" time points on this only manner.) So, there are discrepancies in the Newtonian and the GR/ SR/ QM ways of describing time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ One proof of what I am implying is if we ask ChatGPT, for example: What is time in reality? And ChatGPT will answer that science are figuring on this enigma, and there are ongoing projects/ studies of what time in reality is. Excerpt from ChatGPT: Q: Does science know or understand what time is in reality? A: The nature of time is a profound and complex question in both philosophy and physics. While our scientific understanding of time has evolved significantly, there are still aspects that remain open to interpretation and investigation. Despite the progress made in understanding time, there are unresolved questions, particularly at the intersection of quantum mechanics and gravity. The quest for a unified theory of physics, such as a theory of quantum gravity, aims to provide a more complete understanding of the nature of time and its relationship with other fundamental aspects of the universe. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The GR, SR and QM math makes it true. Still, your issue is relevant. These fields of physics are purely governed from corresponding formulas and math, which lately have been stuck - because of the lack of understanding or misconception of space and time. Maybe we have the stuck reason exactly here. Time is in its pure entity-form not coherent with space in its true form. Space and time are not essentially not the same. Though the involved math separate on these basic two entities. Ppl doesn't.

2+2=4 except when examining the universe and 2+2=0.6 with 85% of the expected mass and energy missing. Which has theoretical physicist saying this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYAG9dAfy8U