joigus

Oh, sorry. I forgot: Yes.

Thanks for smudging a perfectly clear concept.

I'm not a comedian, but I play one on scienceforums.net

You completely missed Huxley's meaning. Now why doesn't that surprise me. When a new theory is born implying a shift in the way we think about certain problems, most people are still so comfortable with the previous one that they contemplate the new ideas as "heresy." When the new theory finally becomes well established, people grow used to it, to the point that it becomes a common tool. Most of the scientific community accommodates to a new comfort zone. To the point that what previously was a heresy becomes now a "superstition." The words "heresy" and "superstition" are not to be taken literally, of course. That's called a simile (if, e.g., you use the word "like" or "as") or a metaphor (if you identify the analogous terms.)

Consider a frame-shift mutation. This kind of mutation is surely always deleterious. The individual dies even before it's born. So it's not like a person winning the lottery. Come to think of it, genetic material is some kind of template that uses the individual as a clever editing technique. I'm sorry if it sounds bleak, but that's the way it seems to be. But, OTOH too, not all mutations are deleterious. There are several molecular mechanisms of hedging you bets, or trying to have your cake and eat it too. I would say that anywhere along the molecular mechanisms of replication, transcription, and translation; whenever you see redundancy, there is at least the possibility of hedging your bets. If you have a series of codons that give rise to synthesis of, eg, an essential enzyme; and you have this sequence repeated over and over, consider the possibilities: you will always have the essential enzyme synthesized, buy you will have copies of it, like when you have copies of a text from a previous template, so that you can work on them to produce several alternative versions, but never lose your backup. Another mechanism of trying combinatorics is eukaryotic splicing, in which the organism tries several alternative "cut and paste" possibilities in between transcription and translation. Paraphrasing Sir Humphrey Appleby in Yes, Minister: "Really, minister, the possibilities are endless" (when you have huge redundancy in your nucleic acids)

I didn't mean it in that sense. "Entertain" as in, "The Bradfords always entertained lavishly at Christmas." You forgot your camouflage then.

This Wiley Miller cartoon summarizes it pretty well: https://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur @Phi for All can no longer say I owe the community in jokes. I've posted three today and debated on a physics thread that is itself a joke.

“Sixty is the worst age to be,” said the 60-year-old man. “You always feel like you have to pee and most of the time you stand there and nothing comes out.” “Ah, that’s nothing,” said the 70-year-old. “When you’re seventy, you don’t have a bowel movement any more. You take laxatives, eat bran, sit on the toilet all day and nothing’ comes out!” “Actually,” said the 80-year -old, “Eighty is the worst age of all.” “Do you have trouble peeing, too?” asked the 60-year old. “No, I pee every morning at 6:00. I pee like a racehorse on a flat rock; no problem at all.” “So, do you have a problem with your bowel movement?” “No, I have one every morning at 6:30.” Exasperated, the 60-year-old said, “You pee every morning at 6:00 and crap every morning at 6:30. So what’s so bad about being 80?” “I don’t wake up until 7:00.” ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A store that sells husbands has just opened in New York City,… Where a woman may go to choose a husband. Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates. You may visit the store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the attributes of the men increase as the shopper ascends the flights. There is, however, a catch… You may choose any man from a particular floor, or you may choose to go up a floor,.. But you cannot go back down except to exit the building! So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband… On the first floor the sign on the door reads: Floor 1 – These men all have jobs, and will love their wife. She then goes to the second floor,… The second floor sign reads: Floor 2 – These men all have jobs, will love their wife, and love kids. She thinks for a while, and then goes to the third floor,… The third floor sign reads: Floor 3 – These men all have jobs, will love their wife, love kids, and are extremely good looking. “Wow,” she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going. She goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads: Floor 4 – These men all have jobs, will love their wife, love kids, are drop-dead good-looking and help with the housework. “Oh, mercy me!” she exclaims, “I can hardly stand it!” Still, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads: Floor 5 – These men all have jobs, will love their wife, love kids, are drop-dead gorgeous, help with the housework, and are excellent in bed. She is so tempted to stay,… But she goes to the sixth floor and the sign reads: Floor 6 – You are visitor no. 43,630,912 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store. Watch your step as you exit the building, and have a nice day!

The similarities are uncanny. But I don't think he is.

Oh, boy. You are so mathematically illiterate this is gonna take some time... Edit: Ok. I'm sorry. I take it back. So what's your problem. You have a magic trick to divide 0 by 0? There is a "magic" trick, but you haven't set up the problem properly. Seems like you're clueless. Are you clueless about these things? When t goes to zero (in the denominator), the numerator goes to zero for at least three reasons: the integration range shrinks to zero, the integrand goes to v(0), which is zero, the v factor outside the integral is zero. So it's zero divided by zero. Your eq. has nothing to do with dropping a ball. It's a different eq. of motion. I can't disprove your derivation for the very simple reason that you haven't shown any. Edit: You don't know what hyperbolic motion is, do you? Otherwise you couldn't possibly be asking such dumb questions. Why don't you just ask?

We'll always be there for you. Next time I falter, I'm sure you'll be there for me too. That's a question for BJ and Yusef.

Brilliance and intelligence are no antidotes against the primitive equipment that's inside our brain. When our basal ganglia are speaking, our brilliance tends to be suppressed. Propositional calculus or C programming are no use against brutal, primitive aggression. If people harbour these primitive reactions when their life is not at risk, that's another matter. OTOH, knowledge or brilliance don't necessarily provide you with wisdom. So I think I at least partially see your point, although I'm not as surprised as you are. And I fail to see how this all bears any relationship with the concept of being re-born as a dog. Furthermore, justice, like religion, is human-made, not natural or divine.

This would be perfectly reasonable were it not for the fact that we are given a finite amount of time. So we must be selective to an extent with what we listen to. Where one sets the filter is a personal decision, though.

You're quite right, MigL, but, for some reason, religious types (some of them) are in the habit of approaching communities of scientifically-minded people and pestering them with their non-arguments --they know how annoying they are, let's face it. You or I wouldn't dream of entering a church or a mosque and start forcing everybody there to listen about the wonders of the big bang theory, or evolution. It's a different thing when you're entertaining them, so to speak. Somewhere inside of me there's a faint hope that a thinking person lives inside that brain, buried under many layers of millennia-old of spoon-fed myth. And that person is desperately crying out to be shown an exit. Maybe it's just one in a thousand. The rest, sometimes I think they're like special ops infiltrating enemy territory.

That's a nice one.

I use procrastination, rather than predestination, when it comes to matters of belief.

More comments: In special relativity it doesn't make sense to talk about a constant force. It's a constant 4-force what plays the role of a "constant push." In those conditions, velocity doesn't grow indefinitely; it tends to a limit, the speed of light in vacuum. It's called hyperbolic motion. Also, you should clarify whether you mean coordinate time or proper time.

Wait a minute. That's right. What derivation?

That was me.

Back to lemurs, then. As all primates use tools.

🤣

Then it definitely isn't "the optimal description of Nature." The equation is also dimensionally inconsistent. Then you have an indetermination of the kind \( 0/0 \). It still has nothing to do with \( E = mc^2 \). Solving it is not difficult, but it makes no physical sense.

Nice video. Is that a Brooklyn accent?

The devil is in the details. Show us some, please.

🤣 Happy Festivus.