geordief

How are you defining "its innate identity"? The gender that infants recognize in themselves at around 2 years as per iNow's quoted link?

Sorry to waste your time. I was hoping this might ring a bell with (knowledgeable) others here . As it happens an extremely short google search brings up this bbc video which I may well have heard in passing and misinterpreted It actually focuses on the parents rather than the children and their unconscious biases https://youtu.be/nWu44AqF0iI And makes a contrary point to the one I imagined. I still cannot say whether there have been experiments to show young infants choosing their own roles via choice of toys or otherwise -but quite possibly not.

I think I have heard the young infants, when presented with a choice of toys will (presumably w/o cues) tend to choose cars etc rather than dolls depending on the genetalia they have. Have I described these experiments correctly and ,if so what might that tell us? (Do we choose our group at the outset of our lives or do parents who try to prevent early gender assignments have a point ?) Apologies that I do not have any references as this is just something I picked up on the TV.

I am asking whether there are any models of individual or group behaviour that are experimentally more successful than others in predicting future outcomes. Not so much what are the ranges of theories but whether any of them have been shown to be effective in their domain of applicability. By the way is "the psychic space" a real term ?I just made it up and it seemed to make sense to me but I have no idea if it makes sense to (or is used by) anyone else.

Ah yes,maybe more mundane than I thought.

What if the frames relative motion varies between zero and c?(so not a Hafele-Keating experiment) Would there be any particular interpretation to the results of such an experiment? (I mean ,we know what those measurements would be,I think and there would be no need to perform the experiment but would that flesh out our understanding of how time works at all?)

Have there been systematic attempts to identify psychological parameters so as to predict behaviour at the individual or group level? If so,is there a list of these parameters and how successful have predictions based on them been? (I don't mean astrological signs😏 )

The ratio of the passage through time btw frames changes as the relative motion btw the frames changes (if i does) That is the measurement I am wondering if it is academic or of some practical consequence.

I agree .What about a property of time that changes with time? (Ps you said there might be a point in this measurement.What might that point be?Just academic or could there be any utility?)

Is there any point to comparing the passage of times between different frames of reference? That would give numbers varying from zero to infinity. Could that represent a "speed of time"? I don't think (as per what I have heard) that space and time are equivalent but they do seem very close (and the signs in the spacetime interval could be reversed)

That is very interesting(to say the least)

I see what you mean ,but actually I had in mind the initial moment when entanglement occurs . Not "touching",I suppose but total "closeness" maybe?

Are all objects modeled as properties of fields? If so ,can we say they "touch" when they are entangled?

Well,I was brought up in England at the time was it was being decriminalised.At school my French teacher used ( it was said) to get treatment for this.(he did organize "tea parties" for us pupils and we used to mock him for this (and those who accepted the invitation). But we did mock every single teacher we thought we could get away with doing so. Teaching in our class was almost a paramilitary exercise. This was (still is?) a time when after my sister was dumped by her boyfriend my brother's friend suggested we go around and beat him up.

I think we all have a "repulsion/attraction" to the "other" I think that must be an instinct that goes back to the beginning of our species(maybe all species) I remember my very first encounter with the idea of homosexuality.It was ,as must be more than common a conversation between adolescent friends about a story one of us had heard. I found it incredible that such people existed and the conversation turned into banter as to whether we were "one of them" A horrifying idea since how could you know? (obviously you denied it) It was the possible ostracisation that gave it its force. Ironic since I quite soon come to like the idea of being other and learned to look down on those I thought were conformist (esp the bourgeois which "thankfully" I was not even though I still assumed I was middle class -again ,ironically I wasn't) I think one cannot.

@Genady does it look like those people who have a wish to learn from the educators (and by their own initiative) are ,with current trends less likely to be successful academically than has been the case in the past? Have the lazy ,disinterested students amongst us been given a "get out of jail card" and a passport to prime position in the jobs market ? Or will the degrees that will be issued in future come with a warning that they may not be particularly representative of the bearers' actual worth(quote function playing up ?)

Found in England on an archaeological site. A lollipop.lady with an unusual hair style? https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-64426061

Just came across this (at 30 mins 28 sec) where Guth says that "inflation crates mass". If true ,does the created mass create particles?

Nobody likes squid?

Does the shadow only exist on its border (where things do happen)? If you try to observe the interior of the shadow, doesn't it disappear(if it is a total shadow)?

To be fair,I was claiming that something has to happen at those "points" If someone moves across the room there is no shortage of points where things are happening A practically infinite number.But the starting and ending point need ,in my mind to be the site of a real event and not part of a mathematical model Those mathematical points do exist ,but are of a different nature (I am not claiming proof of any kind ,just that it is how I like to see those things)

1 you don't(need to) 2 ditto But I do accept that unless there are consequences to my "claim" then it is just an "article of faith" and part of my hard drive. It is easy I think to show that your argument has all the advantages of consequential weight.

@MigL I said the above earlier in the thread. If that was the case would that mean particles could be continuous throughout a finite system? Does that clarify what you are asking from me or do I have a foot in both camps?

OK.That is just the way I see things.

I am getting boxed in but I could respond by saying that your two fingers are pointing at something that (if it did exist) no longer does. Plus on grounds of accuracy we would need to be talking about two lasers and they would have to be produced until they met -where if we saw that intersection (which we wouldn't) that point would again be in the past and probably inaccurate anyway. Do you not like (or just accept as a valid pov) my assumption (maybe an act of faith) that points need to be a site of interaction to be called points?(otherwise they could be called something like "meta points")