Intrigued

Planetary migration is, by now, pretty well established. This applies, as you suggest, to the movement of the gas/ice giants in our system. (IIRC one giant was likely expelled from the early system.) I have several papers on the subject and will look for the most recent/relevant and post links, likely tomorrow.

Yes. I was agreeing with you and giving you a compliment.

Of course not, but you are thinking logically. Evidence and observation suggest you are, in the population at large, in a minority.

It occurs to me that the explanation is as follows: An almost universal tendency of humans is to lie. Lying tends to increase in proportion to the severity of the consequences of not lying. Lying is related to concealing information. These tests, necessarily, conceal information. Therefore the scenario is one in which there is concealed information and a perceived incentive to conceal findings possibly prejudicial to the individual in the test. Therefore, "Somethings going on here and I don't like it". Your error Strange is that you are expecting people to act logically, when most will simply adopt the faux logic outlined above.

Yourself.

We are not using it to explain how molecules form, we are using it as a word to that avoids us having to use several words. It's how language works. It's a classifier. Saying that an elephant is an animal, tells us nothing if we choose to ignore (as you are doing for emergence) to that this places elephants in a specific group. Emergent properties are a specific group of properties. That's all there is to it. It's a convenient way of facilitating discussion, however it only works if the all the participants understand the language. You've decided that calling something an animal tells us nothing.

A typical fifth columnist position desgined to lull us into a false sense of security until the invasion fleet arrives!

In the absence of emergence there would be no meaningful structures or entities in the universe, just scattered clumps of hydrogen and helium gas. Emergence is thus evolution in the broad sense, though it incorporates aspects of biological evolution. Emergence is another way of saying "Here's something new!". I suggest novelty and evolution are important and meaningful.

I suppose I should thank you for adding to my vocabulary, but then I would have to condemn you in equal measure for using such an ugly word, when "informative" would have served as well and been more readily recognised.

I agree. I was not arguing for his proposal, but seeking to ensure we addressed his proposal and not a strawman version arising from his (accidental) misuse of terms.

But I also mentioned patents. It is - pun intended - patently clear to me that whether through translation error or misunderstanding of terminology Saa is using the term copyright, as Sensei suggests, to cover intellectual property. Strange and you appear determined to be critical of a strawman rather than help Saa clarify the idea he was actually trying to present. Full marks to Saa for persisting.

First, as Phi noted earlier, there could be translation issues in Saa's post. Second, Saa has agreed with my interpretation of his concepts.

As I pointed out on in my earlier post, Saa is not talking about authors, sensuo stricto, as the writers of books, but authors as the producers of ideas, inventions and discoveries.

It is still difficult to confidently understand what you have written. Does the following come close to your idea? Scientists and engineers do not invent things, or "create" discoveries, they reveal what was already inherently present. Consequently their work is a revelation to which they are not entitled reap all the benefits. Thus all authors are entitled to only a proportion of patents and copyrights. The benefits should be spread between a "support" of nature and the protection of this new system and a portion to the "author".

The ability to experience fear, worry and anxiety is a vital survival trait. Worry alerts us to potential problems; anxiety is a message from our subconscious that the problem is almost certainly real; fear is confirmation and the preparation of the body to deal with the problem, by fight or flight. Alcohol allows a temporary change of perspective on reality, in the same way a ten mile run, a walk through the Louvre, or the contemplation of mitochondrial biochemistry does. Temproary changes of perspective enhance, rather than cloud reality. Faith, in contrast, is the ultimate means of hiding from reality. Faith is the most effective way of rejecting evidence. Faith allows one, like Carrol's queen, to " believe as many as six impossible things before breakfast" yet to do so without his charm. Faith allows one walk off a cliff, confident one will be unharmed. Faith allows one to immolate oneself and forty innocent fellow humans, confident one will awake in Paradise with a harem of virgins.