StringJunky

Some words have specific meanings within given specialisms that are well understood, like in evolutionary biology, and you don't get to change them.

If you can measure it, it's real.

They are wavicles.

The idea of something being 'solid' is a property of our macro-world i.e. the big stuff larger than atoms and molecules. It's the repulsive effect between the outer electrons of each atom (like charges repel) that gives us this feeling of something being solid and impenetrable. When we look more microscopically, at the components of atoms, they become composed of fields with various properties that have no sense of substance we can associate in our macro-world; they are, in effect, materially empty space. If you look at it like this, space pervades continuously through all things. You aren't far wrong.

The people that are likely to be caned are most likely the ones who have lived a life of parental corporal punishment/physical abuse anyway, so it will likely be ineffective because they are already desensitised to that kind of punishment.

Ah OK.

Does it matter?

Yeah, I gradually realised when I imagined zoning in microscopically into some solid object and realised you end up with nothing but fields, which are not substantial. The notion of material is a macroscopic idea, I think, where collective fields repel each other and create the idea of 'solid'.

If it''s measurable, it's physical (but it''s not a substance). Length is physical but not a substance.

Yes, I think a superbrain has a greater neural density rather than outright size; rather like the evolution of computers.

.... To be detained at the leisure of the US justice system. If his past cohorts are heading that way, I think it's reasonable to think that he will too.

No, blurring just means you've moved the focal point of your eyes wrt to some object or plane. With Magic Eye you put your focal point passed the plane of the image.

Magic Eye pictures rely on voluntarily blurring vision.

The important point is that the NHS won't say "Go away until you've got some money". The delay is not caused by an institutional policy to do so but by practical limitations and availability of the necessary resources. The US is the richest nation in the world and Daedalus is going through this shit; great advert for the American health model... not.

It is based on an incorrect supposition, isn't it? The thread can't go anywhere useful.

He's set up a strawman thread.

Maths is the language of science and if you want to talk to scientists and have them listen to you, you need to speak in that language. The beauty of it is, is that it is clear, concise and universally understood by those in that community. Science is mostly a quantitative subject and it's rather inefficient to to talk numbers in words.

?

I think it's referring to hands-on regulation.

Me too!

I found this which you might find interesting on where our centre-right stands relative to the Republican and Dems: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/how-conservative-would-uk-conservatives-be-us/312573/

Really, what it's saying then is that everybody is responsible for the problem and its solution. We Westerners can't say "The third world are having too many kids" and place the blame entirely on them.

That's interesting, so, reducing the overall population and then making those that were poor more affluent actually will make the pollution problem worse?

My guess is sputum/phlegm.