physica

The thing is that you're bypassing the main point Ophiolite made which is that your understanding of science is limited. Discussion is great but can be a double edged sword which can lead to cyclic discussion and frustration. The Dunning-Kruger effect demonstrates this well. I am coming into my third year of physics, quantum mechanics is very hard (i'm reading my third year material over the summer holidays to give myself a chance). when I was 18 I was formulating ideas about the world all the time. Now I certainly don't feel qualified to come up with ideas of my own and I know a ton more than what I did back then. We look at this thread and others you're involved in, there are streams and streams of your thoughts. Reading a few books will not lead to fruitful discussion. If you are talking more than or equal to the amount that you are reading then that is a worrying sign. Scientists who make reputable contributions to science take years to come up with an idea because you have to understand the background material very well. In contrast in the last 5 months I've lost count of how many ideas you've come up with. You're clearly enthusiastic. Channel that enthusiasm in the right way. Trust me your mind will be blown with what's already discovered and you will be stunned by the mathematical beauty and elegance that describes it. A good philosophy I have is that if you think you can add to the knowledge base of an area then you haven't read enough. If there is no more to be read then you can begin your own work.

so we've gone off tangent here. So far people can describe the paradox lingually but this is far from a solution. Hopefully we have got over the notion that thinking a solution to the fact that an infinite amount of processes has a finite outcome is excessive is not a reasonable response.

Prometheus's point still stands. Sepsis is an arbitrary classification. In the department I work we use it to communicate that the patient is clinically unstable and need iv antibiotics quickly. If the infection had spread to another area in the body but they were clinically fine, young and walking around I would get grilled for describing the patient to another specialty as septic as they would stop what they were doing and come down to assess. There is a lot of prioritizing in clinical practice. the term sepsis is simply used to help that.

Learn how to read, in the quote that you quote me in I say that no one isn't taking the observation as fact. Once again a whole point founded on a misunderstanding from your point of view, again you will brush over it, I now you dance around the subject of supplying a lingual solution without maths, classic example of someone who is stumped but not willing to admit it.

I was just shocked at the reply, it's beyond retarded. Stating: There is. I just gave it. The mathematics concurs that Achillies will overtake the tortoise.. Is using maths. It's like saying yeah John cleared the driveway but because I said it that means i did it. also stating: Problem logically solved taking the observation as a fact. The rest is waffle. Is beyond moronic. No one isn't taking the observation as fact. Logically understanding the observation is science, just taking it as fact and leaving it at that isn't science. You haven't answered a single question, just waffled. If you want clarification of a bossing just look at what I've done to you..... are you not embarrassed by your posts? You've shown lack of basic verbal reasoning and when you've been called out on your waffle you result to it happens therefore who cares about the logic. I'm very confused as to why you're on a science forum, I suggest a cult or fundamentalist religion group when you say stuff like: Except the waffle then.

Cuba has 42,000 workers in international collaborations in 103 different countries, of whom more than 30,000 are health personnel, including no fewer than 19,000 physicians. Cuba provides more medical personnel to the developing world than all the G8 countries combined, although this comparison does not take into account G8 development aid spent on developing world healthcare. The Cuban missions have had substantial positive local impact on the populations served. It is widely believed that medical workers are Cuba's most important export commodity. This country knows how to churn out hard working disciplined doctors who will work for a small wage. No one will be able to create a flood in a year and rushing something like that would just spell disaster but opening up trade boarders on this front and setting up training schemes where they advise us on managing training and recruitment. People don't die because doctors don't know what they're doing. Problem solving in medicine is noway near as complex as the hard sciences, patients die or become unnecessarily ill because they are no assessed on time, it costs too much or they wait in a bed for 24 hours with a perforated bowel or a certain specialty just is't there. In 5 to 10 years time you will generate a flood of doctors and nurse who will compete, actually work hard to stay in the profession.

We do have a stack. This is anecdotal as I can't find studies on this but two of our consultants dropped out of physics because it was too hard, one of our senior regs couldn't get into grad school in maths because his grades were too low and one of our shos got a 2.2 in maths not cutting the mustard for grad school. This is why I said it describes about 30% of my department. Again the intelligence is debatable. Yes you get smart doctors but there are a lot that can survive blindly following guidelines and googling every 2 minutes. As for the flooding, train more and open medical trade with Cuba. They have highly disciplined doctors who will work a lot harder for a lot less money. Cuba trains their doctors to high standards and treats them like we treat our military (they don't even have much of a say in what country they get stationed in) because it uses them as a commodity, it will send a load of doctors in exchange for money or goods. Philippines also trains more nurses than it needs.

2.2 for a standard degree is 50%, the application test is a multiple choice test on A level sciences and verbal reasoning. The main point is that the academic credentials are not that important. It's more about if you fail to chase things up and following guidelines etc, that's why there's an interview. So let's get a case study to emphasize it. Let's say someone is studying physics and gets a 2.2 (50%) in their degree and they want a graduate qualification within the next 4 years. They would not get in to graduate physics with a 2.2 but they could settle for medicine. That describes about 30% of the people in my department.

ok so we have st Georges (2.2 (50%) in any degree for 4 years) For those in the USA st Georges is in London and one of the oldest med schools in the UK http://www.sgul.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/mbbs4/entry-requirements http://www.sgul.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/mbbs4/course-structure we have Nottingham (2.2 (50%) in any degree for 4 years) http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/ugstudy/courses/medicine/graduate-entry-medicine.aspx we have Kings college London (2.1 (60%) in any degree, 2.2 (50% for 4 years) with masters for 4 years) This college even allows nurses with a pass in a nursing diploma (a diploma is if they we not smart enough to pass the nursing degree. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/prospectus/undergraduate/medicine-graduate-professional-entry-programme/entryrequirements we have Swansea (2.1 (60%) in any degree, 2.2 (50% for 4 years) with masters for 4 years) http://www.swansea.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/medicine/mbbchgraduateentrymedicine/#entry-requirements=is-expanded These med schools haven't been closed down so I'm guessing that they're graduating safe doctors Both systems can be improved by flooding the market. There isn't enough competition and availability. The medical advancements in the USA are amazing, it's the cost and the availability that's the issue. If you think poor people should subsidize rich people's private healthcare (as we use NHS facilities for our private practice here) then by all means push for a government system. If you want to see real development reduce the regulation and flood the market. Maybe then it won't be like pulling teeth to get junior doctors to actually earn their pay packet. Again you need to flood the market.

these patterns can be described by the mathematics of the golden ratio which correlates with ionic and covalent bond ratios which is why they have that structure. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-6955-0_12 You should have learn't by now that just saying how something looks without really knowing anything about it is complete trash

Your skimming my main points. Malpractice is usually down to someone not chasing something up or listening to someone or not following guidelines, not because they were not smart enough to do it. It's because it really isn't hard to follow guidelines. That's why art grads with 50% can be treating patients within 4 years of enrolling. Google is also a major help. Also you're more likely to get people who actually want to do the job as opposed to the cash it will give them. Clever people don't always run to the pay check, there's plenty of maths and physics academics that are testament to that. Helping people is a good enough hook. Plus you don't need smart people in medicine. Go to an academic department in medicine now and I can tell you they are far from smart. I work in emergency. A private supplier is a lot easier than people think it is. Look at Bulgaria. They have competing ambulance firms which to respond quickly because the first one on the scene gets the patient. It is not very complex to make a simple law that caps prices that ambulances charge. Fear of this is simply a symptom of people who don't work in the field, they think that managing healthcare is insanely complex and thus don't trust it unless it has a huge government stamp on it. I tell you many of the paramedics often think that it's a waste of time picking up most of the patients they deliver. In terms of prosecuting Shipman I agree but the internet and rep gets more advanced as the years go on. If a doctor has terrible mortality stats you won't choose to go to that doctor as opposed to the NHS where you have little choice. A flat huge wage attracts doctor who are in it for money. Now you will still get people in it for money but at least they will work for it.

That's the interesting thing, the patient that died was also a private patient. This issue isn't private vs NHS, It's centralized vs independent. I'm saying that there's plent wrong with the NHS and a system like this isn't going to help the USA. Government created monopolies like the medical care in the UK create an untouchable clinician culture. The delusion that surrounds this case illustrates that clinicians in the UK think it's an injustice. Clinical negligence is overlooked in the UK far too often that the royal college of surgeons stands by this guy, the biggest serial killer in the world to date is a UK doctor and a 5th of the NHS budget is spent of compensation for patients. Even if it was a NHS patient who died (which it wasn't) surgeons on the UK make more than enough to live on. He wasn't exactly doing private work so he could eat this week and make rent. People shouldn't die because of his greed. The public shouldn't be bullied into giving more money to pander to his greed. The only solution to a healthcare system (private or not) is to flood the market. We seem to moan about monopolies in other markets but when it comes to healthcare we don't seem to mind. I've worked with surgeons who own a series of properties, drive mercs and still complain about how much they're getting paid. With government created monopolies and excessive regulation we develop a ungrateful brat culture in the medical profession. In the UK and the USA the medical profession has been very clever. It has vastly exaggerated the difficulty of practicing medicine and scared the public into thinking that you need to be a complete genius to be a doctor and that malpractice is because someone doesn't know what they are doing. The excessive regulation greatly restricts the recruitment resulting in only a handful of people being able to practice a particular field of medicine. Because of this they can charge though the nose. When you actually lift the vale and go through the process yourself you realise that the training is very ad hoc, lots of memory tests, not really understanding anything but saying this approach kinda works, tons of multiple choice exams and plenty of seniors who actually failed physics or maths and switched to medicine because it was easier. Then you start working and you realise that malpractice happens because someone didn't follow the guidelines or didn't bother to chase something up or didn't listen to someone, not because they weren't smart enough to carry out the task. I'm going to repeat my main point, you need to flood the market. Developing a trash institution like the NHS will only move the healthcare back in the USA. Their clinical practice is way more advanced than here in the UK. What they need is a competitive market as opposed to a few people who know that they are the only ones who can provide that service. If they got serious competition they would then have to lower prices and improve delivery so they wouldn't lose their customers.

We have to stop thinking that a centralised healthcare system is all bells and whistles. Here in the UK the competition is virtually non existent so the innovation here is mostly trash. Take heart disease prevention for example. Inflammation seems to be the underlying process to heart attacks with the inflammation oxidizing the cholesterol. The USA developed the high sensitivity CRP test to be used as opposed to cholesterol levels to assess people risk of developing a heart attack. 10 years later and the NHS still doesn't even recognize it. The depressing thing is that the NHS uses it in it's cardiac research to maintain international appearances but try getting a patient on hs CRP tests to prevent a heart attack in the UK and it just wont happen so we're about 10 years behind on that front. American clinical practice is the envy of the world, there medical technology innovation is second to non. The issue is with excessive regulation, you have that you have a monopoly and then you have people charging what they want. Cuba has world class doctors highly disciplined doctors. They train them very well because they are the country's commodity. They have more doctors working abroad than the world health organisation. They trade doctors services with countries for oil and other products. Open the door to them and you will flood the market with doctors willing to work a lot harder for a lot less. Not so long ago there was a NHS scandal commonly known as the mid staff scandal where patients were left in corridors and nurses were allocated trolleys in the corridor, only after many needless deaths was the trust investigated, the depressing thing is that the managers implicated in that trust didn't get touched and some even got promoted. People moan about the power that huge corporations have and how they can throw this power around and hurt people. What do you think a centralized healthcare system does? Working in the NHS is like working in a religious order. This year a 5th of the NHS budget is set asside for patients claiming for abuse etc due to medical scandals. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10189204/Jaw-dropping-rise-in-NHS-claims-after-scandals.html To show the delusion that's in the medical profession in the UK there is a great recent court case of a surgeon David Sellu. He left a patient with a perforated bowel for 24 hours whilst he did private surgery on other patients and a private clinic. When he operated on that patient 24 hours after he knew they had a perforated bowel (no evidence that he checked on them for 24 hours) they died. He got 4 years for manslaughter. The link to the judge's opinion is below: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/judgments/r-v-sellu-sentencing-remarks/ However, medical professionals in the UK practice with such impunity that doctors and nurses here think that it's a travesty he got sentenced and wrote to the judge saying that he's a nice guy. Here's the support website that they created with the royal college of surgeons statement that it was unacceptable that he got jail: http://davidsellu.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Presidents-article.pdf http://davidsellu.org.uk/supporters/ With this attitude it's not surprising that biggest serial killer the world has ever seen is a British doctor called Harold Shipman who is estimated to have killed 150 patients before getting captured, some as young as 41. I've worked in the NHS and I have taken a huge financial blow to retrain and study physics because the NHS is trash. If you have half a brain cell working in it is so depressing. Trust me you do not want a centralized healthcare system, it will do what it wants and if anyone gets held to account for what they do the doctors and nurses will act as if you've committed war crimes.

ok but one correction, the royal college of anaesthetics uses negative marking but the others don't and if a anaesthetics trainee got questions wrong in that exam then they need their head examining. I've seen many anaesthetic registrars revising PV=NRT for that. Considering that this is GCSE gas laws I don't think it's harsh to negatively mark. Multiple choice seems the most logical as there are so many doctors to examine, however, I maintain that overregulation and government created monopolies are the main problems for any healthcare system. Standards are not so high that we need reams of regulation, all this does is create monopolies so urgent care GPs can sleep for most of the night, get paid £100 an hour to do it and then complain that they don't get paid enough.

Have you sat these medical exams? They are multiple choice. My girlfriend is a GP, she sat her registrar exam in front of a computer alongside people taking their theory driving test. The MRCP is a regurgitation of medical memory tested via multiple choice. My supervisor for one rotation was a medical professor in gastroentrology. He had a phd and multiple publications but he was stumped at the concept of distribution and was always calculating means. There's a reason why st georges, nottingham, swansea, exeter and other med schools accept a 50% pass in an art degree as acceptable for a 4 year degree in medicine, it's because it requires very little scientific acumen. We only train the amount we can employ, if we let in multiple people who couldn't hack the medical training or job we'd be graduating a very small amount of doctors. The system in the US isn't perfect and it's no example of a free market. It's very highly regulated (which is my main grype). If we want an improved healthcare system we need to flood the market. Medical courses are popular, Art graduates can do them in 4 years, make them self funded and train more than we need. Then I won't have to see patients that aren't really an emergency in A and E because the gp who's earning £100 an hour in the urgent care centre isn't assessing them, red streaming them across and sleeping for most of the night. Instead he will be working for his money because they're will be more people getting ready to take his job if he doesn't do it.

Does the NHS work in the UK? I've worked in the emergency room for 4 years and I can tell you corruption here is rife. I've lost count of how many consultants use NHS resources for their private practice. Working class cannot afford to go private but the tax they pay helps wealthy people have cheaper private healthcare, is that fair? Also the NHS lies on its stats. It claims to be one of the most cost effective healthcare systems in the world. However, what it fails to tell people is that most of its doctors are training for 10 years or more. They still get a good wage but it's paid through the education budget because it's technically training. Therefore the government can boast about how much they spend on education and how effective the health service is. We also have spoilt brat syndrome. I've worked with many German doctors who fly over to the UK do an agency shift and then fly back to Germany. Discounting the cost of the flight they still make more than if they did an extra shift in their own country, however, us UK clinicians are always moaning about how little we're paid even though our french doctors across the water are on half the wages we are. Also there's no cash incentive. Trying to get someone to actually do their job in a UK hospital is very hard. Because there is no free market you can be completely incompetent and treat your patient like complete trash and you'll still be in a job. This security only aids the spoilt brat syndrome. I have met many doctors and nurses who think they're complete gods and are always telling patients that they are wasting their time etc. Nearly 2 thirds in a poll think that the NHS delivers poor service and is failing. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-94561/Public-unhappy-NHS--poll.html Also it's government money so corruption is on a whole new level. There was a scandal earlier on in the year where NHS managers were taking out half a million pound redundancy payouts each and then getting employed by another NHS hospital within 2 months. The most depressing thing is that nothing happened because the regulation is so poor that what they were doing wasn't against the rules. I agree we should flood the market. Overregulation creates a monopoly, we should trade with Cuba and take advantage of their world class doctors who will work a lot harder for a lot less. However, the medical profession in the UK is too selfish. We claim that Cuba isn't up to our standards yet anyone who gets over 50% in any degree (no science needed) can become a doctor in 4 years here. I've met many doctors who failed their physics of maths degrees pick medicine because they couldn't get into grad school. Still we have arbitrarily stick regulations to inhibit any true competition and bully the public into giving us their hard earned cash (this is why I'm switching to physics).

This is not an experiment. This is someone wondering in the woods and connecting dots in their own head. An experiment needs to be repeatable in turn expecting the same results every time for the theory to have any credibility. Also the "result" found in this so called experiment doesn't determine any intent so I don't know how this can be used to state that something isn't accidental. To state that something isn't accidental you have to prove that something intentionally forced that outcome. Come on guys this is basic stuff. Tar and Mike you should take on board what Acme and Ophiolite are saying, although they have been steamrolling they have been more than patient and reasonable with you, extend the courtesy. Also check out this video:

you need to post over a certain amount before you can start voting down. At face value this may seem annoying but it's to stop people opening multiple accounts and targeting someone and flooding their rep into the negative.

Consulting more people in decision making is more beneficial than one strong leader calling the shots. So you've come up with a weak point that people don't like the current president. Are the people in the USA starving on mass like in North Korea? In North Korea only national armed forces have motor vehicles. When south Africa had a strong leader that made strong decisions it went from a country that was one of the biggest exporters in the world to a starving nation because of the strong decision to take the farms of the experienced farmers and give them to people who had no experience in running farms. Now let's look at the strong leader Putin. Moscow is now one of the most expensive places to live in the world and according to Putin if your income is as much as 10 dollars a day you are not in poverty. Because he has has lowered the standards of what constitutes poverty he now boasts that he's halved the amount of poor people. Russian doctors are on 2 dollars an hour (factory workers earn $3.75 an hour). Life expectancy for Russian men is 59. Combining that with the increase in alcoholism, starvation and increase in death whilst giving birth the United Nations predicts that the population could fall by 30% by the middle of the century. The Russian central bank closed down in december 2013. The thing is Dekan it takes strength to admit when you're wrong. Continuing to make irrational decisions and refusing to back down when you control the military is not a sign of strength. Your philosophy is seriously messed up, over simplistic and majorly inconsistent. Your point is that you bet people don't like their president in the USA and then you make an example of a leader who is driving a country into starvation and decline..... hhhmmm starvation and death, including torture if I say the wrong thing or not liking the person who's currently elected. The first option is a foolish one

Faraday was documenting a force that he had observed that hadn't been mathematically described yet. It would be nothing short of retarded to regress back and not use that maths to look into electromagnetism now. Science is like geography. Someone discovering a new island has claim to document it without knowing too much about it, however, it's just plain arrogance to visit that island 100 years after it's discovery to find new places on it whilst refusing to read or understand any of the maps drawn up about the island.

Instead of waffling you need to show me the lingual solution. Just repeating that it's a seeming contradiction is just pathetic, it adds nothing. There hasn't been a satisfactory one yet, if you have one I suggest you get it published, you'll be on a fast track in an academic post. in order to logically state that Achilles can overtake the tortoise you have to say that he reaches where the tortoise is. By that time the tortoise would have moved. He then has to reach that point. The gap becomes infinity small. Thus taking an infinite amount of steps. Now your observation tells you that Achilles overtakes the tortoise. Therefore an infinite amount of steps can be carried out in a finite amount of time. Maths shows us how this can logically happen, however, the lingual approach fails to explain why a infinite amount of steps can be done in a finite amount of time. I don't think I can make this any more simpler for you but I will try. observation: Achilles overtakes the tortoise secondary observation: Achilles has to reach the point where the tortoise was in order to overtake it Third observation: The tortoise has moved by the time Achilles has reached the point so Achilles has to get to that point extrapolation of logic: Because the points can become infinitely small there are an infinite amount of steps to overtaking the tortoise math: This is proved logical by calculus Lingual: There isn't a solution to this yet (after 100s of years and many great minds attempting) as it is not logical to state that a infinite amount of steps can be done in a finite amount of time Now it is very simple for you. To avoid waffle and cyclic conversation just contest the bold statements. If it is easier, make you statements under each heading.

He observed the effect of gravity but then he described it with maths (this is a standard process for mathematical modelling). He didn't go to the universities and said: I've got this theory right something is pulling it down yeah. Newton made one of the biggest contributions to maths. He pioneered the mathematical descriptions of forces. People who usually try and denounce maths in physics are usually too stupid or lazy to learn it. Now our maths and knowledge of physics has advanced any science claiming to be physics without maths is simply trash. You'd have to be very arrogant to ignore all the years of mathematical proof in physics and think you've come up with something new.

Dekan you should realise that the argument that something is natural has very little scope. If we take this reasoning we can say it's more natural to die of an infection than take antibiotics or that's it's more natural to sleep on the floor than in a bed. Yes in nature usually the strongest is the leader but civilisation and societies strive to go against nature as nature is fairly cruel and uncaring. If a civilisation strives to be close to nature you may as well not bother with the society and let them throw the dice in the air and see how they land. People who live in places where they don't get to choose their leader usually put their lives on the line to correct this. You may think that it would be good not to choose our leader but seriously tell us what are the benefits to this? Sure we get corruption in democracy but it isn't as bad as a leader who knows he/she doesn't have to answer to his/her people because he/she is strong.

Units are very important. T They keep you on track. As for imaginary numbers if you want another example for them being used in physics without the heavy concepts of quantum mechanics bogging you down look at the link below. This link shows you how euler's identity is used in differential equations to make sense of imaginary numbers in systems. They can even pop up when calculating an oscillating particle between 2 springs. If you're not sure on what differential equations are they are equations that map change in a system. They can describe the position or speed of a particle in a system. They can also be used in population dynamics or anything that has rates of change but don't worry too much about differential equations yet if you haven't looked into them. This link is to show the practical application of imaginary numbers to wet the appetite. http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/Classes/DE/ComplexRoots.aspx As a side note I think it's great that you are taking the time to learn the maths behind the system.I appreciate that a negative rep can be discouraging. It takes real will power to dust yourself off and work towards understanding the maths. For this I've given your last post a positive point.