Cap'n Refsmmat

Although if you know the salt for the hash you're trying to break, you can compute millions of possible hashes a second with decent hardware. There is some dedicated software for this purpose if you search around for brute-forcing of hashes.

p = 0.50 does not mean you have a 50% chance of being correct. It means that for any case where you're wrong, you have a 50% chance of claiming you're right. Combine that with a statistical power (odds of finding a relationship that does, in fact, exist) of 50% and you have a recipe for disaster. Consider a test of 1000 drugs to see which ones have an effect on a certain tumor. Suppose 100 of the drugs do. I do a study to find out which. Of the 900 that don't, I get a p < 0.50 result for 450. Of the 100 that do have an effect, I get a p < 0.50 result for 50. Hence I get 500 total "hits", of which only 10% are real. Those aren't good odds.

It also exactly describes the linear algebra course I took two semesters ago, which was explicitly designed for engineers and scientists. Only the math majors took the "matrix theory" course that taught the details.

I'd argue that above deep mathematical understanding, scientists in difficult fields need the ability to engage in debate with others of differing opinions without resorting to insult or personal attack, particularly when your opponent is attempting to be civil. DrRocket: Escalation and insults will persuade nobody in a debate. I'd like for this to stop now, so the thread can get back on topic, please.

That is not what I said. I said it is meaningless to speak of the "entities," because they are not observable. They may well exist, but science cannot characterize them, and opacity to experimentation means it does not matter what they "are."

Every Bible translation I just checked (from King James to New International Version) says "at the right hand of God," but this is not entirely surprising -- the Bible does not explicitly refer to or explain the Trinity. It is a later theological creation to explain references to the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son of God in the New Testament. Given the frequent references to "son of God" in the Gospels, I don't see why it is implausible for a son to sit next to his Father, who happens to be God.

There's an entire variety of diet problems (iron deficiency, vitamin C deficiency, folic acid deficiency, and probably more) that can cause brittle nails. You should see a doctor, who can perform a blood test to determine the source of the problem. You live in a country with socialized medicine, so I don't see why you are so reluctant to simply see a doctor.

As swansont likes to say, time is what clocks measure, so variability in clocks is variability in time. Anything beyond that, such as the material properties of "time" or what it "is," is not directly observable and cannot be known through empirical observations, so it has no place in science. Labeling what we observe "time" does not have to imply it has material properties. It just has a name.

Pontius Pilate had a reputation as a ruthless governor; it's an open question why he would defer to the opinion of the Jews when he could execute or release whomever he wished.

That's the very definition of the multiple-hypothesis problem. If you test thousands of hypotheses (thousands of different tests) and get a hit on one of them, it's not very likely to be a breakthrough. Suppose you're going for p < 0.05 and you test 1000 hypotheses through 1000 different tests on your data. None of the hypotheses are true. By definition, you'll get around 50 p < 0.05 results, despite none of the hypotheses being true.

Here's the story: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1593893,00.html http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1704299,00.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talpiot_Tomb

In the time he was alive, there were a couple dozen other dudes who did similar things. Roving magician and prophet was not an uncommon trade. You can see evidence of this in Acts, where Paul enters the Temple and causes a disturbance. The official who arrives asks, "Aren't you the Egyptian who started a revolt?" Paul has to explain who he is. The writings of Josephus do indeed record a guy called "the Egyptian" who acted like a prophet and eventually caused a small revolt against the Romans. Jesus caused no revolt and surrounded himself with mostly illiterate disciples, so the lack of portraits isn't entirely surprising.

Yes. Christianity is drawn from Judaism, and Islam draws from both. However, Islam began some six hundred years after Jesus, so what they knew of Jesus was from the gospels and writings circulating at the time, not any eyewitness accounts.

Yes, both Josephus and Tacitus mention the existence of Jesus in their history books, although unlikely that either knew Jesus personally. The earliest extant records come from Paul's letters, which came perhaps twenty years after Jesus's death, although Paul mentions very few details about Jesus's life apart from his death and resurrection.

You can also find what I hope is an intuitive explanation of the meaning of differentiation here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/29473-introduction-to-calculus-differentiation/

I'd suggest either of the networking books first, and then tackle Wireshark. You'll want to understand networks first.

Best practice would just be to give the link to the page you found the quote on. Alternately, give the link without the quote -- people can follow the link if they want to read it.

This is not Science News, unless you convince God to take the rest of us along to see it as well.

These sorts of books: http://www.amazon.co.../dp/1593272669/ http://www.amazon.co.../dp/0136079679/ http://www.amazon.co.../dp/0201633469/ I can't give a personal review because I've learned most of my networking from practical experience running this server. Perhaps there are some other members that can recommend their favorite books?

If you're going to copy something off an external website, please provide a link to the original source. Copying extended portions of a website is copyright infringement. Otherwise, I think a good book on networking would suffice. There are also several books on the use of Wireshark which may be useful.

I think that's a misrepresentation of the Biblical stories. Doubting Thomas did not doubt Christ's divinity, he doubted that the other disciples had seen him resurrected. He could not trust their eyewitness testimony on such an important matter. Likewise, Peter's denials of Christ were because he wanted to stay out of trouble. He was not asked "is this man God?", he was asked "you aren't one of this man's disciples too, are you?" His denial kept him out of trouble. There's not much about sleepiness in the Gospel accounts.

There is no contradiction. The existence of wing-like structures does not mean the animal has evolved the behavior necessary to try to fly using them. Perhaps a tree-dwelling animal uses them as extra hands, and then as a parachute when falling from the tree, but has not yet evolved the behavior to try jumping off of things to fly.

I think you'll find that he's named "PhDwannabe" because he's halfway through the process of getting one, not because he is mentally incompetent. Perhaps you should not jump to conclusions so quickly. A "mod" is a moderator on this site, who enforces the rules in discussions.

I'm fairly certain they're not the same person. I've also already directed markearthling to the right bit of TalkOrigins, as well as other resources. Being dismissive isn't conducive to convincing anyone, incidentally...

The issue is not your viewpoint on evolution. The issue is your insistence on insulting other participants in the discussion. You are free to go on doubting evolution, but you are not free to insult SFN members while doing so. Your tenure here will be rather short if you do not improve your attitude.