StringJunky

Except your own. You dont know what you don't know. Your posts are a great example of this.

He should be struck off.

They probably learn empirically even in the absence of their parents. They'll see worms on the ground on wet days and realise they are food and they'll see semi-buried worms and so on... This is what Delboy's on bout:

It's only 6 hours since the OP wrote. as of your post. It's F-ked anyway, Everyone's answering it.

How about reading what HyperV wrote? Duh!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ej_X2_SggQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iG78guV3f0

Deleted Behaviour. Define the structure or form of a photon or electron. They are excitations in a field. I should have said physics describes behaviour.

But is it just a template with co-ordinates that can alter their position depending on the phenomena and energies present?

Yes! LOL! The wackier the association the more memorable it'll be.

Engage as many of the five senses at the same time as you can when learning; write, speak, hear yourself.

At least he looked like a president and acted like one. I get the same feeling seeing Trump as president as I might feel if Mickey Mouse was in the hot seat.

Boredom.

He's probably asking ontologically. What everybody has described, one way or the other, is the best he's going to get, isn't it? Mistermack: science descibes how things behave, not what they are.

I agree, it's not something you want to learn the hard way.

It's even worse when you consider Russia has a population less than half of the US; 143.5m v 318m.

OK. Ta.

Then that's describing a field just as an empty map; space with co-ordinates

I appreciate it's likely not all-encompassing but is my definition generally correct? By my definition, the wood and plastic objects are not part of the field; they are invisible wrt the field. Am I wrong?

Absolutely. I smile wryly at those who want to live forever.

A field describes what is happening between interacting objects.

It's my guess that it has always been so and we in the West have advanced beyond it, more or less. I think it's just you - and me too - getting older and seeing everything with clearer eyes and getting new information. It looks, to you, that things are getting worse when, in reality, you are just gradually becoming aware of the true depth and breadth of our inhumanity to each other, as a species, which has been happening all through man's history.

It's sad to think that most of the world is like this. It's the same in China. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/world/2016/05/02/china-domestic/ An echo of your words:

As much as I agree with it, in spirit, I don't think it's the right thing to do. He is the legitimate President of the United States. Any dischord or protest must be by the American people. Anything else would be disrespect for their political process and democratically elected leader. The Queen will not be a pawn or figurehead in any political protest; she is apolitical. The petition is a dead duck. As much as people may despise Trump, due political process and everything that goes with it must be allowed to proceed. It's time for our stiff upper lip and "...hanging on in quiet desperation".

This little fact I've just pulled from the the intro to BBC video news cast makes it all the more puzzling and bizarre: That's not far off one an hour.

Warfarin anyone? Botox Whatever medicinal effects it may have, it does not support your recreational use of it, which, I think, is your ulterior motivation for banging on about it... and other people as well.