michel123456

You don't want to know what I figure.

? Hi ASG. It wouldn'be a bad idea to introduce yourself here in this other thread. That would maybe help us understand the meaning of this post of yours. I say maybe...

Surprisingly there is still people today (in 2013) interested in the questions you don't have and building models. Look here. I am fascinated. http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?Button=post-2000+Formulations

Interesting comment, you should start a thread on this. IMHO there are a lot of weird things in a periodic table. ----------------- (edit) As i see it, the table with its gaps is evidently a kind of projection of some "multidimensional object" upon a rectangular plane surface. Like a map of the world under a Goode Homolosine projection. It may be that it is not possible to make an accurate projection of the "object" without obtaining some distortions or gaps. This below alternative table shows the problem, at least to me who understands nothing about chemistry but understands something about graphical representations: Personally, I like the Physicist's Periodic Table of Timothy Stowe in the link below. http://jeries.rihani.com/symmetry/index6.html

First January 2013: all 2012 Doomsday theories are definitely debunked.

Not sure. Thinking more about this

Mister Dimitris Christoulas made an entry in the Greek Wikipedia suiciding in public in Athens. In 2011 some 926 tried or succeeded silently (to be compared to the 677 of 2009 and to the 670 of the first half 2012). No numbers available yet for 2013. RIP. http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%91%CF%81%CF%87%CE%B5%CE%AF%CE%BF:Location_of_suicide_of_Dimitris_Christoul.JPG Hum, that was on the 4th of April 2012, time passes by too quickly...

What I am trying to do? Yes it could be about distance but not only. Basically the concept is that a negative, instead of being simply a loss of something like a debt, can also be considered as a real opposite, something that is of opposite nature.There will be a notation issue. In my thought, mathematical operations entirely on the positive part do not change. Operations entirely on the negative part are absolutely the same as in the positive part: you can forget the minus sign everywhere and simply put back the minus on the result. It is an exact mirror. Where it becomes a mess is when you make operations accross the mirror, mixing opposites. Let's go back at the "warriors" analogy. Say you are in Alexander's camp (the positive part). There you have 1,2,3 warriors. You can make "operations" upon your army (the set of positive numbers), like adding warriors or substracting warriors (either paying for more mercenaries, or sending you warriors back home). That's all conventional using pos. and neg. numbers as usual. But you cannot make operations simply upon opposite Darius warriors (the set of negative numbers-here comes the notation issue). You cannot pay Darius warriors nor you can send them home. They have another "nature" of opposite value. Operations accross zero are not that simple. For example, if you want to reduce Darius warriors, you must engage a fight. (sorry for the analogy, I haven't found anything better so far) Say you put together +1 and -1. You have a fight of 2 warriors who have both the same value. At the end, you get 2 warriors dead and thus no warrior at all, that is equal to zero. Mathematics are saved. But a fight has occured, war has happened. It is not the same thing as having no soldier in Alexander & Darius army. Alexander army has an infinte set of warriors ans so has Darius army. The total makes 2 (opposite) armies, not zero. Of course if they engage fight (making a mathematical operation) the sum might be zero. When +1 and -1 meet, there is war and operation has a cost: 2 men will die. So I wondered how one could show this cost in a mathematical way. For example on a graph, zero would be a vertical axis, and the +1-1 operation could be represented as a rotation of the numbers upon the vertical axis, meeting at the vertical of zero at height 1. One could then say that the operation +1-1 gives a result of zero at level 1. Am I getting into trouble?

Reviews of the most important events of 2013 in the News I follow talk a lot about people (the Pope, the new King a.s.o.) while some other news look like they have disappeared. The intention of this thread is to make a revival of forgotten news. Like the Chelyabinsk meteorite on 15th February 2013.

In Euclidian geometry, a line is infinite. A segment (a line with a cut) is also infinite. Time linear is baffling because time alone does not exist. The thing that "exists" is spacetime. Space does not exist alone and Time does not exist alone. The above statement is not less baffling but at least it explains that space could not be there without time. If indeed space was sooo small at the Big Bang, then time was soo small too,wathever it means( if that makes any sense). And if space is considered as part of the physical reality, then space is not an illusion and as a matter of consequence time is not an illusion too.

The line of numbers goes like this, from negatives to positives through zero: .....-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 ...... The symbols are mirrored around zero. They are "opposite" The negative numbers are less than zero. And minus 3 is evidently a lesser value than +3 Because the arrow of small to big goes from left to right small...................0......................BIG > from-small-to-big does not change direction. but the symbols of the line are mirrored. Minus 3 is the "opposite" of +3, but that is only a symbolic feature. .....-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 ...... Though mathematical operations keep the small/big arrow going from left to right, no matter you are in the left or right part of the line. It is like an elevator going from level -3 to level +3. All levels are levels: a flat platform on which you walk. Under this concept, the position of number zero is simply conventional. One can change the position of zero and use a simple transformation to go from one system to the other. .....-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 ...... .....-4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 ...... Now, what if one made a new concept, where numbers are not like levels, but are like "warriors". Say on the positive part would be the warriors of Alexander The Great, and on the negative part the warriors of Darius: they would be really "opposite" minus 3 then should mean 3 units opposite to +3 units. And the small-to-big arrow would be like this < BIG................. small0small......................BIG > That would be in agreement with the symbols. There would be nothing smaller than zero. Minus 3 would be bigger than minus 2. And minus 3 would not be a less value than +3 Is it possible to build mathematics upon this last concept?

Sure. Also you get hair on your genitals. Grey.

I have the feeling I am not good at entertaining a conversation lately.

IMHO there are no advantages, it is a waste of time.(1) The military work entirely on schedules. Organizations, companies, jobs, a lot of things work on schedule inevitably. It is very constraining, very annoying. But useful. Your parents want you to become disciplined and creating a schedule for yourself is supposed making you want to follow it. Because if you make a schedule that you do not follow that is really a waste of time. edit (1) It is a waste of time because the time spent in making a schedule could be used in doing something useful. I suspect you are not spending all of your available time doing useful activities.

Hum, have I killed this thread? Please introduce yourself, have a look at the previous 148 pages.

Puberty makes a change. Money Neural loss. Experience. Sex. Food & drink.. Knowing the world, deception when you realize you have not enough money from dad & mom to live decently and you are condemned to work for all your life. Deception when you realize you will never understand the world (see above "neural loss"), deception when you realize you will never change it (see above "experience"), deception most generally as long as you continue aging (see above "sex"). Thanks to humanity you can forget all that and have a good time here eating and drinking if you are lucky enough and if that's allowed to you.

You have been bitten, you should know. In short: Stephen Serjeant is a Spider Scientist. He bites whatever is not a spider. In long: scientist, writers, journalists, laymen in general like to describe Science as it was a monument like the Great Pyramid, the Pantheon or for most educated ones, Newton's Cenotaph. The "edifice of science" gives the false image of an huge building with strong basis, grasped on the ground, a temple. Which is certainly not the case. It is almost exactly the contrary. The "edifice of science" is build on a small set of axioms. The work and the dream of all scientists is to be able to reduce the set of axioms without crumbling the whole edifice. And the ultimate goal of science would be to rely on only one axiom or even better no axiom at all. The analogy of such a situation is not an architectural masterpiece, but a nest hanging from a tree. That would be the best. At this moment, the 'edifice of science" is hanging from multiple axioms coming from different sides of the "real world", it looks like a spiderweb. In this web, many scientists are working to make the structure stronger and wider. A few out of them, from time to time, find a new "trick" and cut away some strings without making the whole thing collapse. Anyway it is not allowed to collapse. Now maybe I made this poetic, but the OP is simply about the fact that if you want to enter the edifice and you are not a spider, you will be bitten. It is not that you cannot build your own edifice, sure you can. Of course it will not look as big and ugly as the one that exists by now.

The "edifice of science" It is a pyramid with its summit down and its basis up. When you enter it, if you can, there is a labyrinth of dark corridors, a lot of closed doors, some open doors that open to rooms with no floor, wells with no staircases, and very few rooms with a seat hanging from the ceiling where you can take a rest. It is dirty, old, with almost no windows, only a few holes that connect to specific points of the outside world. A better analogy would be "spiderweb of science", a structure hanging from several points that you stick to and containing a monster in its center ready to eat you.

(emphasis done by me) Yes of course it is. That's what medicine struggles to do. If people is starving to death on Earth today, that is not because Mother Earth has not the capacity to feed them, it is because humans are mean, stupid, inhumans most of the time.

Where are the taxes? If they are in "others" then people are cheating. If they are not concerned as "expenditures", then the whole picture gives a wrong impression.

In order to curb poverty the first step is to make it a goal to achieve. At this time I am not aware of any government who's goal is to curb poverty. On the contrary, many policies are creating poverty where there was none. And also another point: getting a job is not enough to curb poverty: there are millions (maby billions) of people over the world who have a job and are struggling to survive day by day. The idea that a job will give you enough income to live over the poverty level is an occidental privilege. (edit) Even in occident (Europe & USA) the history of the last centuries tells us that you can have a job and be miserable at the same time.

Good work Ed. Well done. Welcome everybody.

I don't know if money can buy happiness but I can assure you that without money you feel miserable, not happy. I also get the feeling that some medias want lay people to believe that money is not that important, at the same time when governing people have a lust for money.

Action at a distance is spooky anyway, even under Newtonian mechanics.