Leaderboard

What @rathorebc is referring to is the notion that alloy compositions have discrete value percentages of the individual components, similar to the high-resolution mass example I posted earlier, where the molecular formula can be obtained because the number of atoms of each type in the molecule is discrete (an integer). But to be successful, the density measurements of the alloy and of the individual components of the alloy needs to be very accurate.

Hi all, The above is the title of Chapter 1/20 regarding my very basic but complex idea. In it's very basic form, I see an edge of one item meeting the edge of another item and inbetween these 2 edges is a resonation flux formed from SQEP kinetic energy. I see SQEP's as the very very smallest anything can be before it tries to become 'nothing'. Item 1 & item 2 Breaking down item 1 SQEP's at it's edge and also doing the same to the item 2, this might create a merger between the 2 items where both item 1 and item 2 SQEP's become entwined. Not 50% item 1 and not 50% item 2 but instead graduating from both items and going in both (and all?) directions between them and creating from item 1 to item 2 - Item 1 99.9% / Item 2 0.01% SQEP's all the way through until eventually it becomes item 1 0.01 / Item 2 99.9% and vice versa and possible in their millions? billions? trillions? The SQEP's are created directly to die but the kinetic energy from their creation carries on with the QH (quantum hair) data from all SQEP's as 'nothing' (or so I have read) cannot exist and SQEP's are so small that they are one step away from being 'nothing'. This kinetic energies created, create a resonance flux. All beit very breif and small The Phase flux contains all kinetic energy created by the SQEP's between these 2 items. Item 1 SQEPKRF1 - Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Resonance Flux 1. Item 2 SQEPKRF2 - Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Resonance Flux 2. Item 1/Item 2 SQEPKPRF - Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Phase Resonance Flux I see these SQEPKRF's in the same way people shed their skin. Always happening, all the time items are next to each other. The space between to 2 edges is now phased or merged with each others SQEP's at all times while these 2 items are next to each other. As soon as one is moved, the SQEPKPRF would change to fit the new 'double' or 'pairing' of whatever they then ended up next to edge to edge. So now think about the room you are in and how many edges are meeting each other & the SQEPKRF + SQEPKPRF being created. Quite mind blowing? I see these fluxes as being everywhere all the time, wherever they are, as EVERYTHING in the universe has an edge. More mind blowing? I'll stop there as I have maybe already written too much, so I apologise in advance if I have. Like I said before, I'm not a scientist and this is the easiest way to me, for me to describe it. Please go easy on me if you reply, I won't neccessarily understand your terminolgy for something like this. I have no idea if it true and I have 20 chapters regarding what this can do , might have done and might continue to do, that I wrote recently that I am dying to have clever people like yourselves read and and tell me if I'm right, a little bit right or just plain imaginative. Thank you for reading and for any answers you might reply with. The SQEP's could actually be SQEPEPEPEP.... I don't know how small things can get but perhaps they are Sub QuantumEcho Particle Echo Particle Echo Particles or even more?

Sorry to say your system sounds totalitarian and one in which only a small elite can vote - and only this elite determines specific metrics for vaguely defined qualities like intelligence or compassion. Also, are you aware that a lot of innovation comes from people who earn more than 2 million dollars and then can invest their earnings in new startups and R&D? Many of the tech devices we are using to have this chat come from entrepreneurs who could reinvest their profits. BTW, if you start a thread you need to read and reply to all the feedback you are getting.

I think expertise in the various civil services is an interesting point- it is somewhat independent of the democratic process as those folks are generally not elected, but competence can be a big factor in the success of these institutions. That being said, they are a vulnerable to what I call an administrative mindset, where the administrative process takes precedence over the actual mission. And oftentimes elected folks further undermine it by hiring folks that are ideologically aligned, which can contrast with the mission of the service. Trump is a current example, but clearly not the only one. Intelligence and compassion is very intangible not a great criterion and arguably running for office and being in office requires more people skills than anything else. In the end, you are not working at the problems themselves, you are a decision-maker and if you are good in your job, you have assembled of team that bring all the right qualifications.

We’re discussing posts, i.e. things posted here, not papers. Papers have a lot more citations, but they are generally much longer and narrower in scope and in greater depth. As to the quoted bit, I think the prior knowledge we assume is heavily dependent on the question being asked. If it’s on an introductory topic, very little should be assumed. Advanced topics suggest more prior knowledge can be assumed. And the OP can always clarify.

Dystopian and Utopian works of fiction typically rely on both satire *and* parody to achieve their aims. Aldous Huxley quite clearly explained in the interview that Brave New World began as a parody of Men as Gods by H.G. Wells. He didn’t specifically say that it was satirical as well, for the simple reason that he didn’t feel the need to explain something so blindingly obvious to two experienced literary critics. As you seem to be struggling with this topic, here are some notes: - Dystopia is from the Greek δυς Τόπος meaning a “bad place”. It’s an antonym of Utopia which was coined in 1516 by Sir Thomas More, and came from the Greek ού Τόπος meaning “not a (real) place", because More’s novel described an imaginary island society in the New World with near perfect qualities . - Thomas More’s Utopia (which was written in Latin not English) is cast in the form of an epistolary exchange between More and other scholars who discuss reports about the customs and lifestyle of this strange island nation somewhere in the new world - customs which incidentally include institutionalised slavery. The entire content of Utopia is perceived as being intrinsically satirical in intent by most literary critics e.g: - This satirical fictional tradition continues in works like Gullivers Travels (1726) by Jonathan Swift set in the fictional land of Lilliput, and Erewhon (1872) by Samuel Butler which was written as a satire on Victorian society - and one of the first to explore ideas of artificial intelligence. (Do I need to explain that Erewhon is an anagram of ’Nowhere’ spelled backwards ?). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erewhon - Modern dystopian fiction is said to start with:The Time Machine (1895) a novella by H.G Wells, a short story called The Machine Stops (1909) by E.M. Forster which predicts a type of internet, and continued with a trilogy of classic dystopian novels - Brave New World (1932) by Aldous Huxley, 1984 (1949) by George Orwell, and Fahrenheit 451 (1953) by Ray Bradbury. Other dystopian novels such as A Clockwork Orange (1962) by Antony Burgess, and Blade Runner (1968 aka ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep’) by Philip K. Dick have of course continued to be written to this very day. You haven't made any valid points that I could address. You don't seem to be familiar with this book or the genre.

Free science lessons! They are pretty short too, he simplifies it so well. Though he speaks very monotone to mostly get the point across

Yes, I am aware. But I did also mention Reed Richard’s as dem and Victor von Doom as rep. Both of whom are still alive. Doom is dictator of his own country. You could argue this disqualifies him as President. But because he got more votes elections work based on math and science. I know you would argue for President Richard’s. He is just as smart and seems to be more professional. If he is corrupted then he is hiding it. But I would argue that even though he believes in his policies they may not be what the U.S. needs. This is the same guy that stole a rocket ship to beat the Soviets into space. He lost the election because people didn’t believe his policies were possible. And some of his policies were in conflict with other countries. Doom was blunt. Build up the country that voted for him. Strong military less wars. Reed is equally brilliant but he couldn’t convince the voters that solving the World’s problems is worth not being able to afford a house. WOZ invents the circuits but Jobs is the vision. Jobs leads like a tyrant but he gets things done. WOZ is friendly and benevolent. Can he lead better than Jobs?

So as long as your young daughter isn't aware (and thus won't be hurt) it is alright for anyone who wishes to watch her take a shower. And as long as nobody sees and he doesn't get hurt, a caretaker can sexually assault the comatose patient in his care. And as long as she doesn't know, I can break into a woman's apartment and sleep in her bed when she is out of town. And a million others...