joigus

I've often wondered whether he's from Cheshire rather than Gloucestershire. I think religions are born (were born) rather in the wolf way that iNow describes and Dimreepr would have them be. But as soon as a place becomes densely populated, the temptation for some individuals to get hold of it and use it as a tool of power is just too tempting much to overlook. There are strong hints of that going on at Stonehenge, Göbekli Tepe, the first Mesopotamian cities, like Eridu, even before the Abrahamic religions were set in motion. Human sacrifice and storage and management of surpluses go hand in hand in the archaeological record. And I don't think that's a coincidence. Edit: Another very interesting place in Jordan, now disappeared under a dam: Jerf-el-Ahmar. Goes back not very long after the end of the last Ice Age. There is evidence of human sacrifice and the existence of storage of agricultural surpluses. Priestly figures of power that somehow appear out of nowhere, wearing official gear, are very common already in pre-agricultural societies. Even in aboriginal Australia at some point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradshaw_rock_paintings They all wear funny hats and wield weapons or symbols of power of some kind --sceptre, mace, or similar--.

Interesting. Thank you. Although this is not a "base", "digits", and "place-holding" system AFAICS. I mean, not based on powers of the base for place holding, but on addition of the digit, so to speak. But very interesting anyway.

The evaluation or products --or fractions, for that matter-- does not depend on the base. Take, eg., \( 7\times3=21 \). In binary, the numbers \( 7 \) and \( 3 \) are written, \[7={\color{red}1}\times2^{2}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{1}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{0}={\color{red}1{\color{red}1{\color{red}1}}}\] \[3={\color{red}0}\times2^{2}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{1}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{0}={\color{red}0{\color{red}1{\color{red}1}}}\] You can even reproduce the algorithm for multiplication that you learnt at school, you only have to remember that, in binary, \( 1+1 \) gives zero, and carries \( 1 \). Then, \[\begin{array}{cccccc} & & & {\color{red}0} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1}\\ & & \times & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1}\\ & & & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & {\color{green}1} & {\color{green}0} & {\color{green}1} & {\color{green}0} & {\color{green}1} \end{array}\] Input numbers are in red, intermediate calculations are in black, and output is in green. Sure enough, it gives you \( 10101 \) which, in binary, is \( 21 \), \[{\color{red}1}\times2^{4}+{\color{red}0}\times2^{3}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{2}+{\color{red}0}\times2^{1}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{0}=16+4+1=21\] Floating-point numbers are floating-point numbers in any base. For example, \( \frac{1}{2} \) is \( 0.5 \) in decimal. In binary, eg, the only peculiarity is that they are expanded in terms of, \[\frac{1}{2}=0.1\] \[\frac{1}{2^{2}}=0.25\] \[\frac{1}{2^{3}}=0.125\] etc. Here's a trick with which you can convince yourself that decimal numbers in base 10 are decimal numbers in base 2 too: https://indepth.dev/posts/1019/the-simple-math-behind-decimal-binary-conversion-algorithms By successively multiplying by \( 2 \) and extracting the integer part as a sum of ones you can in principle get the whole series of floating-point digits (zeroes and ones). You must distinguish digits --(\( 0 \) and \( 1 \) in binary, \( 0 \), \( 1 \), \( 2 \), \( 3 \), \( 4 \), \( 7 \), \( 8 \), \( 9 \), in decimal, or \( 0 \), \( 1 \), \( 2 \), \( 3 \), \( 4 \), \( 7 \), \( 8 \), \( 9 \), \( a \), \( b \), \( c \), \( d \), \( e \), \( f \) in hexadecimal--. from the base powers -- \( 1=2^0 \), \( 2=2^1 \) etc. in binary; \( 1=10^0 \), \(10=10^1 \), etc., in decimal, and so on. You can use the same trick for hexadecimal base with the help of the page I gave you and the multiplication table, \[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc} {\color{teal}\times} & {\color{red}0} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}2} & {\color{red}3} & {\color{red}4} & {\color{red}5} & {\color{red}6} & {\color{red}7} & {\color{red}8} & {\color{red}9} & {\color{red}a} & {\color{red}b} & {\color{red}c} & {\color{red}d} & {\color{red}e} & {\color{red}f} & {\color{red}1{\color{red}0}}\\ {\color{red}0} & {\color{purple}0} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ {\color{red}1} & 0 & {\color{purple}1} & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & a & b & c & d & e & f & 10\\ {\color{red}2} & 0 & 2 & {\color{purple}4} & 6 & 8 & a & c & e & g & 12 & 14 & 16 & 18 & 1a & 1c & 1e & 20\\ {\color{red}3} & 0 & 3 & 6 & {\color{purple}9} & c & f & 12 & 15 & 18 & 1b & 1e & 21 & 24 & 27 & 2a & 2d & 30\\ {\color{red}4} & 0 & 4 & 8 & c & {\color{purple}g} & 14 & 18 & 1c & 20 & 24 & 28 & 2c & 30 & 34 & 38 & 3c & 40\\ {\color{red}5} & 0 & 5 & a & f & 14 & {\color{purple}1{\color{purple}9}} & 1e & 23 & 28 & 2d & 32 & 37 & 3c & 41 & 46 & 4b & 50\\ {\color{red}6} & 0 & 6 & c & 12 & 18 & 1e & {\color{purple}2{\color{purple}4}} & 2a & 30 & 36 & 3c & 42 & 48 & 4e & 54 & 5a & 60\\ {\color{red}7} & 0 & 7 & e & 15 & 1c & 23 & 2a & {\color{purple}3{\color{purple}1}} & 38 & 3f & 46 & 4d & 54 & 5b & 62 & 69 & 70\\ {\color{red}8} & 0 & 8 & g & 18 & 20 & 28 & 30 & 38 & {\color{purple}4{\color{purple}0}} & 48 & 50 & 58 & 60 & 68 & 70 & 76 & 80\\ {\color{red}9} & 0 & 9 & 12 & 1b & 24 & 2d & 36 & 3f & 48 & {\color{purple}5{\color{purple}1}} & 5a & 63 & 6c & 75 & 7e & 87 & 90\\ {\color{red}a} & 0 & a & 14 & 1e & 28 & 32 & 3c & 46 & 50 & 5a & {\color{purple}6{\color{purple}4}} & 6e & 78 & 82 & 8c & 96 & a0\\ {\color{red}b} & 0 & b & 16 & 21 & 2c & 37 & 42 & 4d & 58 & 63 & 6e & {\color{purple}7{\color{purple}9}} & 84 & 8f & 9a & a5 & b0\\ {\color{red}c} & 0 & c & 18 & 24 & 30 & 3c & 48 & 54 & 60 & 6c & 78 & 84 & {\color{purple}9{\color{purple}0}} & 9c & a8 & b4 & c0\\ {\color{red}d} & 0 & d & 1a & 27 & 34 & 41 & 4e & 5b & 68 & 75 & 82 & 8f & 9c & {\color{purple}a{\color{purple}9}} & b6 & c3 & d0\\ {\color{red}e} & 0 & e & 1c & 2a & 38 & 46 & 54 & 62 & 70 & 7e & 8c & 9a & a8 & b6 & {\color{purple}c{\color{purple}4}} & d2 & e0\\ {\color{red}f} & 0 & f & 1e & 2d & 3c & 4b & 5a & 69 & 76 & 87 & 96 & a5 & b4 & c3 & d2 & {\color{purple}e{\color{purple}1}} & f0\\ {\color{red}1{\color{red}0}} & 0 & 10 & 20 & 30 & 40 & 50 & 60 & 70 & 80 & 90 & a0 & b0 & c0 & d0 & e0 & f0 & {\color{purple}1{\color{purple}0{\color{purple}0}}} \end{array}\] In any base you must use as many digits as your base (always a positive integer different from one). In hexadecimal you can only use \(0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,a,b,c,d,e,f\). Some properties of real numbers are counter-intuitive, and you seem to have lots of problems with them. For example: two different real numbers can never "touch each other" (be just next to each other with no other real number in between). This property you are grappling with is not one of those counter-intuitive properties. Swansont, MigL, and Studiot are doing a great job of explaining. I've tried to add auxiliary explanations that you're free to ignore if you find they don't help you. And, as @studiot said, be careful to distinguish pure numbers from physical quantities. Physical scalars are a different thing. They carry units. So they are subject to transformation laws. Only ratios of scalars are pure numbers. As a final exercise, let's write \( \frac{1}{5} \) in binary: \[\frac{1}{5}=0.2\] \[2\times0.2={\color{red}0}+{\color{red}0}.4\] \[2\times0.4={\color{red}0}+{\color{red}0}.8\] \[2\times0.8={\color{red}1}+0.6\] \[2\times1.6={\color{red}1}+{\color{red}1}+0.2\] etc. You keep going. The numbers in red are the binary digits of your fractional number. You get, \[\frac{1}{5}=0.001100110011...\:\textrm{(base two)}\] Which means, \[\frac{1}{5}={\color{red}0}\times\frac{1}{2}+{\color{red}0}\times\frac{1}{2^{2}}+{\color{red}1}\times\frac{1}{2^{3}}+{\color{red}1}\times\frac{1}{2^{4}}+{\color{red}0}\times\frac{1}{2^{5}}+{\color{red}0}\times\frac{1}{2^{6}}+\cdots\]

Oh, base 1. What a great idea.

\[\begin{array}{cccccc} & & & {\color{red}0} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1}\\ & & \times & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}1}\\ & & & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & 0 & 1 & 1\\ & {\color{green}1} & {\color{green}0} & {\color{green}1} & {\color{green}0} & {\color{green}1} \end{array}\]

Look out for crawling thinkers. More than a million dollars are at stake.

Test on hexadecimal multiplication table with matrix & colours. \[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc} {\color{teal}\times} & {\color{red}0} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}2} & {\color{red}3} & {\color{red}4} & {\color{red}5} & {\color{red}6} & {\color{red}7} & {\color{red}8} & {\color{red}9} & {\color{red}a} & {\color{red}b} & {\color{red}c} & {\color{red}d} & {\color{red}e} & {\color{red}f} & {\color{red}10}\\ {\color{red}0} & {\color{purple}0} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ {\color{red}1} & 0 & {\color{purple}1} & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & a & b & c & d & e & f & 10\\ {\color{red}2} & 0 & 2 & {\color{purple}4} & 6 & 8 & a & c & e & g & 12 & 14 & 16 & 18 & 1a & 1c & 1e & 20\\ {\color{red}3} & 0 & 3 & 6 & {\color{purple}9} & c & f & 12 & 15 & 18 & 1b & 1e & 21 & 24 & 27 & 2a & 2d & 30\\ {\color{red}4} & 0 & 4 & 8 & c & {\color{purple}g} & 14 & 18 & 1c & 20 & 24 & 28 & 2c & 30 & 34 & 38 & 3c & 40\\ {\color{red}5} & 0 & 5 & a & f & 14 & {\color{purple}19} & 1e & 23 & 28 & 2d & 32 & 37 & 3c & 41 & 46 & 4b & 50\\ {\color{red}6} & 0 & 6 & c & 12 & 18 & 1e & {\color{purple}24} & 2a & 30 & 36 & 3c & 42 & 48 & 4e & 54 & 5a & 60\\ {\color{red}7} & 0 & 7 & e & 15 & 1c & 23 & 2a & {\color{purple}31} & 38 & 3f & 46 & 4d & 54 & 5b & 62 & 69 & 70\\ {\color{red}8} & 0 & 8 & g & 18 & 20 & 28 & 30 & 38 & {\color{purple}40} & 48 & 50 & 58 & 60 & 68 & 70 & 76 & 80\\ {\color{red}9} & 0 & 9 & 12 & 1b & 24 & 2d & 36 & 3f & 48 & {\color{purple}51} & 5a & 63 & 6c & 75 & 7e & 87 & 90\\ {\color{red}a} & 0 & a & 14 & 1e & 28 & 32 & 3c & 46 & 50 & 5a & {\color{purple}64} & 6e & 78 & 82 & 8c & 96 & a0\\ {\color{red}b} & 0 & b & 16 & 21 & 2c & 37 & 42 & 4d & 58 & 63 & 6e & {\color{purple}79} & 84 & 8f & 9a & a5 & b0\\ {\color{red}c} & 0 & c & 18 & 24 & 30 & 3c & 48 & 54 & 60 & 6c & 78 & 84 & {\color{purple}90} & 9c & a8 & b4 & c0\\ {\color{red}d} & 0 & d & 1a & 27 & 34 & 41 & 4e & 5b & 68 & 75 & 82 & 8f & 9c & {\color{purple}a9} & b6 & c3 & d0\\ {\color{red}e} & 0 & e & 1c & 2a & 38 & 46 & 54 & 62 & 70 & 7e & 8c & 9a & a8 & b6 & {\color{purple}c4} & d2 & e0\\ {\color{red}f} & 0 & f & 1e & 2d & 3c & 4b & 5a & 69 & 76 & 87 & 96 & a5 & b4 & c3 & d2 & {\color{purple}e1} & f0\\ {\color{red}10} & 0 & 10 & 20 & 30 & 40 & 50 & 60 & 70 & 80 & 90 & a0 & b0 & c0 & d0 & e0 & f0 & {\color{purple}100} \end{array}\] \[\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc} {\color{teal}\times} & {\color{red}0} & {\color{red}1} & {\color{red}2} & {\color{red}3} & {\color{red}4} & {\color{red}5} & {\color{red}6} & {\color{red}7} & {\color{red}8} & {\color{red}9} & {\color{red}a} & {\color{red}b} & {\color{red}c} & {\color{red}d} & {\color{red}e} & {\color{red}f} & {\color{red}1\color{red}0}\\ {\color{red}0} & {\color{purple}0} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\ {\color{red}1} & 0 & {\color{purple}1} & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & a & b & c & d & e & f & 10\\ {\color{red}2} & 0 & 2 & {\color{purple}4} & 6 & 8 & a & c & e & g & 12 & 14 & 16 & 18 & 1a & 1c & 1e & 20\\ {\color{red}3} & 0 & 3 & 6 & {\color{purple}9} & c & f & 12 & 15 & 18 & 1b & 1e & 21 & 24 & 27 & 2a & 2d & 30\\ {\color{red}4} & 0 & 4 & 8 & c & {\color{purple}g} & 14 & 18 & 1c & 20 & 24 & 28 & 2c & 30 & 34 & 38 & 3c & 40\\ {\color{red}5} & 0 & 5 & a & f & 14 & {\color{purple}1\color{purple}9} & 1e & 23 & 28 & 2d & 32 & 37 & 3c & 41 & 46 & 4b & 50\\ {\color{red}6} & 0 & 6 & c & 12 & 18 & 1e & {\color{purple}2\color{purple}4} & 2a & 30 & 36 & 3c & 42 & 48 & 4e & 54 & 5a & 60\\ {\color{red}7} & 0 & 7 & e & 15 & 1c & 23 & 2a & {\color{purple}3\color{purple}1} & 38 & 3f & 46 & 4d & 54 & 5b & 62 & 69 & 70\\ {\color{red}8} & 0 & 8 & g & 18 & 20 & 28 & 30 & 38 & {\color{purple}4\color{purple}0} & 48 & 50 & 58 & 60 & 68 & 70 & 76 & 80\\ {\color{red}9} & 0 & 9 & 12 & 1b & 24 & 2d & 36 & 3f & 48 & {\color{purple}5\color{purple}1} & 5a & 63 & 6c & 75 & 7e & 87 & 90\\ {\color{red}a} & 0 & a & 14 & 1e & 28 & 32 & 3c & 46 & 50 & 5a & {\color{purple}6\color{purple}4} & 6e & 78 & 82 & 8c & 96 & a0\\ {\color{red}b} & 0 & b & 16 & 21 & 2c & 37 & 42 & 4d & 58 & 63 & 6e & {\color{purple}7\color{purple}9} & 84 & 8f & 9a & a5 & b0\\ {\color{red}c} & 0 & c & 18 & 24 & 30 & 3c & 48 & 54 & 60 & 6c & 78 & 84 & {\color{purple}9\color{purple}0} & 9c & a8 & b4 & c0\\ {\color{red}d} & 0 & d & 1a & 27 & 34 & 41 & 4e & 5b & 68 & 75 & 82 & 8f & 9c & {\color{purple}a\color{purple}9} & b6 & c3 & d0\\ {\color{red}e} & 0 & e & 1c & 2a & 38 & 46 & 54 & 62 & 70 & 7e & 8c & 9a & a8 & b6 & {\color{purple}c\color{purple}4} & d2 & e0\\ {\color{red}f} & 0 & f & 1e & 2d & 3c & 4b & 5a & 69 & 76 & 87 & 96 & a5 & b4 & c3 & d2 & {\color{purple}e\color{purple}1} & f0\\ {\color{red}1\color{red}0} & 0 & 10 & 20 & 30 & 40 & 50 & 60 & 70 & 80 & 90 & a0 & b0 & c0 & d0 & e0 & f0 & {\color{purple}1\color{purple}0\color{purple}0} \end{array}\]

\[7={\color{red}1}\times2^{2}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{1}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{0}={\color{red}111}\] \[7={\color{red}1}\times2^{2}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{1}+{\color{red}1}\times2^{0}={\color{red}1}{\color{red}1}{\color{red}1}\]

(My emphasis) Real thinkers don't crawl; they glide. They also share knowledge. They are good listeners and readers of other people's ideas, as well as communicators of their own. (My emphasis) Oh boy, the box again. Real thinkers know the way back home, to the safety of the trusty box, and always keep handy the key to it, because it's where everything makes sense. And no matter how far away from the box they might venture, they never lose sight of the box's entrances, and have a good mental picture of its rooms and corridors. When they're back home, they meet people who live in the box, and they're quite capable of talking about box-related, domestic matters. But during their outings, they find people of all sorts, some of them are lost, barefoot, exhausted, paranoid about every little sound in the forest, following no line of bread crumbs, unable to find their bearings.

Because one country can be worked into one unit of awareness and political action. If that country happens to have 1.5 billion people --or thereabouts-- in it and a concerted action can be taken so that they all --or most-- do their part of the deal, the situation will improve considerably. It's not like the ice of Greenland is gonna say: "Wait a minute, don't melt just yet; that CO2 is Chinese!" China is not only very highly populated. It's very densely populated as well, when compared to, eg., Russia and Canada.

This is a very bad start. Photons don't need to be propelled. The rest of the sentence does not make any sense. Second sentence is badly, badly wrong. This belongs in Speculations. It is a speculation, and a awful one at that. It doesn't stand together. Let alone against physical reality.

I've read with utmost interest all your comments, and I have to say that, to me, trying to judge the matter of suicide under the scope of ethics is hopeless, pretty much like looking at a compass needle on one of Earth's magnetic poles. The needle goes round and round in circles. Just declaring some action right or wrong in the abstract doesn't do it for me, while the regular dilemma punishment vs rehabilitation doesn't even begin to get a handle on the problem. Ethics, I would say, is about mending your ways or making you responsible for something you did. These concepts don't seem to apply here at all. I tend to think all concepts have a limit of applicability. To me suicide is not within the realm of ethics. It may be for those around, but not for the person who commits suicide.

What do you mean in friendlier terms?

Your OP is too long-worded, flooded with rhetoric and purely stylistic literary figures, and has several important misnomers/misconceptions, or allegedly novel concepts without explanation in it, which makes it kind of difficult to address as a scientific paper. That doesn't mean you're necessarily off your rocker. By skimming through your PDFs, I come to the conclusion that what you're trying to do there is to concoct a transfer orbit based on exploiting energy exchanges from the spinning of the satellite to the orbital degrees of freedom; or more in general, from the internal energy of the system to the CoM gravitational energy. You mention a "compression force" that sounds remarkably like a tidal force.* It's not impossible to extract elastic energy, energy from friction, or other kinds of internal energies and transfer it to the orbital DOF. It is known that tidal forces are throwing off the Moon from the Earth's attraction the order of 10 cm per year. Also the Earth is spinning more and more slowly due to these exchanges. Given that the Earth-Moon system requires masses of astronomical order only to induce a minute kinematic change that needs laser telemetry to detect, my submission is that, even if your idea were based on a correct intuition --it is impossible to know as it stands, at least for me--, the orders of magnitude would be ridiculously unacceptable. Does any of this give you pause? You would need an end-of-the-notepad, rather than a back-of-the-envelope calculation. And I suggest to drop the anti-gravity there. You haven't mentioned anything that remotely suggests anti-gravity. * Using standard names is important. People get really annoyed if they have to spend, say an hour or two, going through a preprint, only to discover that this brand new thing is good-old-reliable tidal force. Summoning Iron Man and co does not make it any better, although I assume you're just trying to be helpful.

I haven't said I agree. I don't. When I posed this question to my teacher back then it was precisely because he was making an argument that suicide is a sin, and it's wrong --he was a Catholic priest. That's why I jumped "then it should be punishable by law --both human and divine-- for those people who aren't successful, wouldn't it?" He said, "that's an interesting question, but we don't have time for it." That's why I would try to bring it to the context of action and reaction. Right or wrong are pretty much just tags to me.

I think this is a very interesting question. This is far from my area of expertise, but what I can say from my own thinking is that it'd better be phrased in a way that has a practical content, like, e.g., 1) Should a failed attempt of suicide be punishable by law? 2) Should a successful suicide be subject to investigation, with similar intent than in other police investigations, with the purpose of bringing to account those responsible for the situation that put the person on the brink? Some people may have suicidal tendencies without much help from others; other people may be just pushed to them by abuse or extreme injustice. It is possible to conceive situations in which the differences can be discerned, and action be taken. When I was 16 I posed question number 1) to a philosophy teacher who unfortunately dismissed it on the grounds that we didn't have time to deal with it. Ever since this question popped up in my mind I've thought about it, but I haven't quite made up my mind about it.

Ok. I'll lose the flowers. Do I keep dysentery, diphtheria, TB, and polio? As you said, that's just the way you see it. We have diets (or the possibility of having them) rich in different essential minerals, complete package of aminoacids, vitamins, etc., and the amazing possibilities of GM food. The fact is much more people in the world have access to a diet that's far more complete than that of the ancients --no matter where they lived-- than ever before. Quite a different thing is the matter of dietary habits. There is a cultural factor there. If people choose to daily intake far too much sugar, or palm oil, it's largely a cultural issue. 10'000 y.a. people stuffed themselves with hydrocarbons, and they died in their thousands due to combination of poor diet combined with miserable existence conditions. The Romans drank lead diluted in sapa, to sweeten wine and several dishes, which resulted in big swathes of the population being lead-poisoned and becoming sterile, or die prematurely. Nice picture.

Don't forget half your children dying of dysentery, diphtheria, TB, and a long etc., was part of the equation in that misleadingly pictured "paradise of yore." It's a nice mental exercise to imagine your family living next to crystal-clear waters, teeming with fish, provided with timber for the winter, and the children rejoicing in the sunny Spring morning with flower garlands on their heads. That's not what the past was like. Would you say "welcome back" to polio? And this is just an example off the top of my head.

Thank you. I'll add some more from Wikipedia, for completion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteora

The tepuis (tepuyes in Spanish) from Venezuela, Brazil, Guyana and Colombia. Karst topography is awesome almost beyond words or concepts. But not beyond belief, because it's there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tepui Because the first continents had no plant cover to protect them from erosion, for eons upon eons sediments formed over vast regions, which later became exposed to more selective wearing down, sculpting canyons, plateaus, grottos, and seemingly bottomless chasms. That's what a blind, unconstrained by intention, relentless force can do. No thinking is necessary, if given enough time. Gigantic pillars carved out of the depositions of a long-lost world, where once big dinosaurs roamed, and tiny mammals scurried around, waiting for their moment to arrive, these monuments are silent, patient witnesses to the existence of Gondwana. No human-made temple is remotely comparable to this. No religious feeling can echo in our minds what the first people coming from the Bering Strait must have felt when they first saw this more than 15'000 years ago. Picture from: https://hananpacha1.wordpress.com/2017/07/07/tepuy/ (In Spanish.)

The first time that the word "mediate" appeared was because you mentioned it, misquoting me --again. I've been proofreading texts for over ten years, so I know and appreciate how important it is to edit your text and make corrections. I can only imagine it's just because you're just as sloppy editing your texts as you are about your intellectual propositions that you repeatedly stumble into the same pitfalls. The Romans said verba volant, scripta manent. It's there for everybody to see, both what you've said and what I've said. If I've ever said something imprecise, I'm quite ready to apologize. Intellectual dishonesty --mine, or yours-- is for the mods to ponder, not for you. Your accusations of dishonesty, or stupidity, are moot. The last line of text is unique by definition. It is logically impossible to clarify something further than "the last" in an ordered list. It's an ordering superlative. Do you at least understand this? You have a problem with basic logic. I can't --nobody can-- clarify further than "the biggest rectangle", or "the oldest person in the room".

Will you just read what I said instead of answering to the last line of text? I refuse to write it once again just because you're sloppy and don't care about the argument at all. Same with the 17 balls of jello, all my answers are there. And other users tried to help you along. Only by skimming over what I was saying, they immediately understood. I've had many déjà vu moments with you: Some of my students with very low attention span. They have an excuse, because their minds are forming. Is yours?

They also mentioned some "sources", which have been announced but never made explicit.

Oh, well.

The problem is not in the pronoun. You can use any pronoun you want. Your concept of letting someone think is what's abhorrent.