swansont

You have yet to present evidence of anyone getting robbed online. You can’t claim it happens without evidence.

! Moderator Note We prefer it if you post the ideas (it’s more accessible and easier to quote portions to give feedback), and at least an abstract (a summary that highlights the idea and important results).

My takes is that a certain group didn’t like her, and they sorted through the negative descriptions to come up with a justification why. This happens a lot, when one side decries the other for something, but are mum when their side engages in the same behavior. But 40% (or more) weren’t going to vote for her regardless, because they would never vote for a democrat, and all of this is moot in regard to those voters. Nothing was going to sway them.

Has this actually ever been quantified? The literal definition includes depriving someone of the right to vote. But it’s not like this wasn’t known about him before the election. Without actual data to show how many people this applies to, it sounds just like the rural voter/“real American” issue, and being used as a narrative tp cover up racist backlash and misogyny.

Not important. I doubt a lot of 2016 Trump voters engaged in BLM protests, and I think even more people were literally disenfranchised in the 2016 election. And the ones who were motivated by sincerely expecting the swamp to be drained weren’t the ones that were called deplorables.

People who voted the other way (or wanted to) were not disenfranchised? People have literally been disenfranchised, and it’s primarily not people who voted for Trump. Or dissatisfied with the status quo? I think the BLM protests dump a whole lot of cold water on the idea that it’s just Trump supporters who want long-standing practices to change. - - - Anyway, back on the topic of rural voters There’s a quasi-romantic notion that there are a whole host of them, and there quite literally aren’t. The rural population of the US is under 15%. Why should they be listened to with any greater weight than any other group of similar size (or larger)? https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/05/22/demographic-and-economic-trends-in-urban-suburban-and-rural-communities/ (and since rural population is predominantly white, many politicians use this as a racist dog whistle)

What a lame cop-out. You are not entitled to your own facts.

But spacetime came later. This may be the situation now, but that wasn’t the historical path.

When dealing in facts, faith isn’t the issue. Having faith the moon is made of cheese carries no weight in a discussion of the moon’s actual composition. Which requires the presentation of evidence. Not faith.

I think the “I’m doing it on my own” denial is an ingredient. They get help but since it’s not that obvious, they assume it’s not there. Why are urban dwellers not considered “common folk”? “Common” means there are a lot of them.

Such maps can be used in a misleading fashion, as land does not vote in elections, people do. OTOH, the population centers probably pay more in taxes, because there are more people to pay them. We already know that the states that tend to pay significantly less in taxes to the federal government than they receive in government spending are mostly red (there are exceptions of course)

"When consumers have to go get something for dinner or immediate use, it's Wal-Mart. That's where they shop from day to day. No sensible American will contest that." I see you've now qualified this with "most" Do you have numbers to back this claim up?

Didn't happen with me, but I work for the government, and it was a postdoc position, in physics. They started the process to hire me permanently soon after I started the temp position. While it is a danger, I would think that if you do a decent job they'd want to retain you, since having open positions and training up new people has costs associated with it. Unless the job you are doing is specific to starting up a new lab, instead of working in the lab after it starts up. IOW, if they're paying you to tighten hose clamps, then yeah, they may not see value in keeping you around after the clamps are tightened. But if you're setting up equipment and as a result you are one of the one who knows how to run it, then they'd be foolish to let you go. Probation is likely a way to evaluate your work behavior, without any entanglements associated with firing you. They just don't renew/offer you a permanent job. In our research group everyone hired has a one- or two-year evaluation period, where the bosses can decide not to retain you if things don't work out. I also know people who are contractors on annual contracts. As long as there is money to pay them and the work is of sufficient quality these people are retained, because it takes so long to hire new people.

What three birds? Do you mean the three black spots below the dark blue line? They are in a different location in your two images.

I've been to a Walmart perhaps twice in my life, and that was years ago, and when I was away from home. The convenient department store for me is a Target. There is also a Marshall's and a TJ Maxx. Does not having a Walmart nearby, and/or not wanting to shop at one make me "not sensible"?

A literal monopoly has 100% of the market share. They are the sole supplier. In practice it's less https://www.justice.gov/atr/competition-and-monopoly-single-firm-conduct-under-section-2-sherman-act-chapter-2 With Walmart and Amazon each having less than 10%, I'm not seeing where the monopoly talk comes from. (that's not to say they haven't engaged in anti-competetive acts, or don't dominate certain niches at a much higher market share)

Planck's and deBroglie's work would be in their papers on these topics. In addition, Schrödinger developed the wave equation. AFAIK, these basics were proposed, not derived. Subsequent work was derived, but not these building blocks.

At this point, we don’t know that their solution brings anything new to the game. What they’ve done is come up with the same answer we already have.

One question that leaps to mind is that they claim this is about waves vs particles, which is QM, but their approach is a GR problem, which is classical. And they don’t give any details about how they solved the problems, beyond “energy fragment” GR uses energy, so this isn’t particularly illuminating

You keep asking, in multiple threads that all overlap Answered here https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/123871-did-issac-newton-know-about-numeral-systems/?tab=comments#comment-1162468

I don’t even know what it means to “build a cooridinent (sic) system out of thin air” (or a “base numeral system”) or how a base is a “map”

Or discuss, or evaluate.

No, it’s really not.

To paraphrase Josh Billings, the problem here isn’t what you don’t know, it’s what you know that just ain’t so.

! Moderator Note This is not news. It’s a description of what might or might not be mentioned in an article. Moved. Are you proposing to explain and defend this idea? Because the article contains insufficient detail to meet the standard of speculations.