Phi for All

Obviously in these times nobody should be leaving living things alone in parked cars for any amount of time. And I think they've taken care of the main problem, entering your scorching hot car, with remote car starters. You can start your engine and air conditioning (or heater) from the home or office, before you get in. It's a retrofit system most car toy stores have. Perhaps Osbaldiston works for the Department of Redundancy Department?

If you carry it, it can't increase your "cutout" too much (imagine the cartoon guy who goes through a wall so fast it leaves a cutout of his shape). Soft bags do this pretty well, and let you adjust for balance easier, where rigid ones don't. Rigid bags stick out oddly and aren't as adaptive in close settings. But a rigid bag would stand up better if you set it down. They're much easier to find things in, and you could easily rig it with a battery LED light. Bags have always been a trade-off between these two things. The empty space to fill with stuff is the utilitarian part, and you have to decide if portability or ease of access is next most important. If it's more important to find your stuff, perhaps you should look at a wheeled rigid bag with lots of interior and exterior pockets.

A literary agent I know claims you cut your readership in half for every equation you put in your book.

I've never done work I didn't love, ever, so I've never had a bad job. I've worked for bad people though.

You can't separate energy from matter, it's a property of matter, like color or shape or mass. You can change the properties, but you can't separate them from the matter they're a property of. Can you separate the density of a piece of iron from the iron itself?

Science does. Lambda Cold Dark Matter model. Popular science reporting is your culprit. They often use analogy and sensationalism that people take too far.

! Moderator Note This is a mainstream science section. No more unsupported, off-topic guesswork, please. The topic is in the title.

! Moderator Note Your joke posts are, in general, becoming a waste of time and resources.

! Moderator Note Promises of supportive evidence are insufficient to support any meaningful discussion of this topic. It's not fair to members who give freely of their time if you won't rise to the level of rigor they're trying to help you reach. Once again I'm going to remind you that there are places on the web that welcome wacky guesswork and forays into the nonsensical and absurd, and this is definitely not one of them. If you aren't prepared to discuss science within the system of rigor the site owners have developed, then your threads will be closed. This is the part where you step up your game and discuss science by our rules, or you go find somewhere that appreciates your ideas as they are. Thread closed.

! Moderator Note Moved to Evolution, Morphology, and Exobiology. The Lounge isn't a place to hide rigor-free arguments.

Mine usually aren't typos, but are little annoying mistakes in precision. One that bugged me (I think it was here) was when I wrote "... burning up the oxygen" instead of "... using up the oxygen". I knew what I meant, but it was still written wrong. Wrongly. Wrongily.

Unfortunately, some of the business games he's playing require a lot more time. This renegotiation of treaties and accords simply to address bottom line monetary discrepancies is costing us orders of magnitude more power than the money can ever represent. A seat at the head of the table is priceless in terms of determining policy, and Russia, France, Germany, and China to name a few are happy to provide much needed leadership in the vacuum Trump has created. And at home, he seems happy to tie up Congress with privatized air traffic control because sabotaging healthcare isn't going so well either. His presidency seems tailored towards removing or reducing US influence globally. He's ignorant and ill-suited in too many ways to perform the job. This has been pointed out to him by many experts who understand these things, but he doubles and triples down on it, which tells me the ignorance is willful and unlikely to change while he's alive.

I think you give imagination too much credit (many people who don't know math want imagination to be more powerful). When you can think in math like Einstein (and most physicists and mathematicians), and when you have lots of prior work to build on, insights happen and critical thinking helps put them on firmer footing. Logic is a mathematical tool.

! Moderator Note Speculations should go in that section. This is a mainstream science section, and students expect mainstream answers that might help them get good grades. If you have no evidence to support a Speculation, you shouldn't post it anywhere on SFN. For that you should find a site with owners who support unscientific guesswork. There are a LOT of them. Thread closed.

It should be. It probably would have tanked anybody else, but the bar is set so low now that only extremism will have any effect. I honestly think his true base would forgive him for treason if he explained it as a deal too good to pass up, something that made him very wealthy personally. Ironically, the message in all this is that the skillsets for running the government and running a real estate business don't overlap in ways that benefit the country as a whole. Trump's experience in business has not translated to the office at all, imo.

Or, considering we all know what expertise brings to the table, perhaps we could structure politics so there's not so much personal advantage gained. It's out of proportion with the rest of society, and causes some of our worst abuses.

Comey strikes me as a person who learns first, decides what the right thing to do is, and then gets passionate about that, which I wish more people would do. The more unclear the question, the more careful and precise he was about answering it. But over the question of the integrity of the bureau, he's made his decision and you can hear the emotion in his voice. I can understand how a man like that was torn about the right thing to do just before the election.

That was an enormous disappointment for me. I had hoped McCain would be more on point about Trump, but the bits about Clinton sounded like he was catering to the worst of the GOP base that wants to continue stomping on her career because they're sure she's guilty of something. Integrity -1.

If they haven't seen you, you can do anything you want. You only have to pretend if they've seen you, and trust me, there's a difference between glancing around and glancing away. They will know you're pretending. It's a recognition in your eyes the other person can spot (you've seen other people pretend not to see you, and you knew right away, didn't you?). If you're an adult, you don't need to pretend anymore. If you don't have the time or desire to stop and chat, maybe they don't either. In any case, you can always say something like, "Hey, [insert Your First Name & Your Last Name], we met at [insert Place Name]. I have to keep moving, but it's good to see you again." You don't have to linger or take up much time or effort, and if they seem like they want to chat you simply reiterate your need to keep moving. Crazy schedule, juggling contest, people understand that sort of thing.

! Moderator Note One thread per topic, please.

! Moderator Note Can we clarify any further questions and make our points without all the sniping? Scientific discussion requires rigor on both sides, but can do without personal judgements and harmful language. Let's learn something here.

I treat it the same way I treat drinking alcohol, or stamp collecting, or following sports teams. I'm around people who do these things without me all day long, and we get along just fine as long as they don't try to engage me in those activities. I know those things are important to others, and I know they wouldn't benefit me. Some things I've learned are outright detrimental to me but others can handle them. Other things I've learned take up far more time than they're worth (to me), and still other things that I've done just because it was expected of me. Religion happens to fall into all three categories for me.

It seems manipulated, doesn't it? You need some powerful crazy spin to keep the flow of the heart disease economy going.

It's not logic being used, it's critical thinking, it's a reasoned approach to explain what's going on in reality. I think philosophy crosses the border into why, which is outside science's jurisdiction of what/where/when/how. And as soon as you start asking why, I don't think you're doing science anymore. Would it still be science if it allowed for all the guesswork involved in why? But I also think that since science deals with the natural, religion would have to account for all its supernatural components before one could even consider the two compatible. But would it still be religion if it didn't deal with the supernatural?

1. Expired warranties.