Phi for All

That glib toss-off tells me he meant what we're all afraid he meant. He's used that style of delivery for bombshells before. This shouldn't be protected under free speech. He might as well be running his finger across his throat after saying, "Well, there's one way to stop her".

There are people I know who don't care about other people at all. Should I love them more than my dog? I don't. I judge every creature by their actions. I love the ones who's actions make my life better.

! Moderator Note Off-topic hijack regarding sound waves and headphone volume split off into the Trash. The topic here is "heading into grade 10" and the "volume of a jar"! I'm blaming English for this one.

Do you think there would be any broad inherent differences in creatures adapted to hydrogen worlds, something that would preclude anything we'd recognize as life?

I think the Community Status Update is to let the membership know if there are major things happening to you that may affect your posting somehow. Like you're getting married, or changing jobs, or going on vacation. It's not really a discussion, and it's not your blog either. Using it to post ideas you don't want challenged is cowardly. And I can't imagine anyone who is abusing their CSU would appreciate a bunch of negative responses to something in their profile. We don't have any rules on this. It seems more like a breach of decorum, trying to be sneaky about supporting your most outlandish ideas.

Can we substitute "well-educated" for "attractive"? That way we don't have to wait for generational changes, we can solve more problems, and work with the population we already have. You just have to put up with some folks who don't fit your ideal of "attractive". To me, smart and rational is sexy as hell.

I think the primate connection is too close for some. To them, it seems somehow demeaning and absurd. I've had better luck reminding these people that everything with a backbone probably shares ancestry with a fish no bigger than your thumbnail. That seems to set a more level playing field, and hopefully encourages more interest in evolution.

! Moderator Note I'm posting your abstract here for all to see. Part of our rules state that members aren't required to leave this site to participate in discussions. Please be aware that this is NOT a conspiracy site. You will be required to support your ideas with science. Also, this isn't Science News, it's more of an extraordinary claim. I'm going to move this to Speculations. Please take a look at the special rules to follow in this section.

Is there a scale that can be used to measure efficiency at using and dissipating heat, such that an obvious division is evident between animate and inanimate objects? "The smell of burning latex told me the condom was unlikely to provide further protection..."

As you say, it's what I imagine death to be like, which can't be scary since I'd hardly be anguishing about it. It's comforting to me to imagine it that way. A universal cessation, waiting for the next time I need to "open my eyes" (if that ever happens - I won't be wondering when). The one that still unsettles me a bit to think about is the pre-op anesthesia they use when they need you semi-mobile and tractable. Just like the general, I remember nothing of it. I'm told I was quite witty and endearing (my strategy for surviving any medical visit - "be worth saving"), my timing was excellent, and doctors, nurses, and my wife were all smiling as they had me lie down on the table. And I remember nothing of it! Did I just "phone it in", sort of respond on auto-pilot, or was I fairly cognizant but lacking any kind of memory storage? It's like a blackout after drinking too much, there's just nothing there to retrieve. It really gives you the feeling someone else was using your body while you were away.

He's playing the "the election is rigged card" early enough that he's clearly thinking failure is a possibility. I just don't think he's going to get much traction about the debate schedule objections. His base REALLY wants to see him call Hillary a cunt on national television. They won't care if she makes better points, shows more leadership and understanding of the demands of the job, and they certainly won't care if she brings up every crazy thing he's said. They want blood in the water. But I think Trump knows his base won't win the election for him. I think he's worried about losing too many people if Hillary makes him look like an idiot. And I just don't see much hope for him debating Hillary Clinton on issues. There's too much he doesn't know and he's also unwilling to spend the time and effort to correct that. His knowledge of government is even more superficial than he is. Kneejerk reactions coupled with ignorance is a losing formula, and I think the debates will highlight this, if Hillary can keep her cool and not try to out-trump the Donald.

This is exactly what I thought of when I read about the Goliath paper ajb mentioned. I love this analysis! It's obviously an error in translation. They probably meant David's projectile broke the speed of sound. I'm pretty sure the Hebrew word for "sling" is very similar to the Hebrew word for "rail gun".

Are fashion designers clothes-minded?

The best comedy requires sacrifice. Mine just needs sympathy.

! Moderator Note Joshmoe, I've hidden several off-topic posts. Our #1 rule here is civility. If you can't take some ribbing about necromancy, please say nothing. That would be preferable to homophobic sniping, which always seems inappropriate. No need to respond to this note in thread, but you can Report it if you disagree. Can we get back to the topic, please?

Right, I know for a fact you're really silver screen legend Sean Bean (nobody's ever seen you both in the same room). I love your work, btw, and I'm sick of your characters getting killed off before all the good stuff happens.

SimonFunnell has been banned for abusive behavior, an overall lack of trust, and his inability to apply science to any of his discussions. Since this is a science discussion forum, it would be wrong of us to hold him back from his other, unquestionably more productive pursuits.

This happens to some extent, but I think you're leaving out that many of these individuals are secretly hoping someone with better science skills (usually maths) will take up their idea and run with it, fleshing it out into a predictive model the individual could later point to and claim, "That was MY idea originally!" They also often simply hope others will get as excited about an idea as they are, and don't understand why a few mistakes in some science fundamentals means they have to scrap or improve their idea in order to generate that excitement ("OK sure, that part of my idea violates the principles of physics and reality, I see that now, but what do you think of the rest?"). You're right, it's a misunderstanding of the process, and one that probably leads to thinking scientists are all these negative things. I've witnessed a LOT of patience coming from our membership too. So many of our best minds sharing their knowledge, while simultaneously being told they're arrogant and dismissive by someone who came here looking for the best minds, and now regrets getting the rigor he asked for.

He was just asking a question, no need to be insulting.

! Moderator Note Moved from Modern and Theoretical Physics to Religion.

Even by the scales of a questionable test, this is an average score. Far from any imagined borders near "challenged" and "deficient". You're shading this heavily towards negative. It's like saying you almost failed an exam because you got a C. What's challenging you is not your intelligence. You put your thoughts together rationally enough, but your perspective is overly negative. I know life is tough, but you have to maintain enough of a positive out-look to stay out-looking. Being too negative means missing out on signals for opportunities to get what you want. Moshe: "God, I've never asked you for anything else, but I pray to you every week for a year to win the lottery. And every week, someone else wins! Why are you so cruel to me, God? Why do you hate me so?" God: "Moshe, my boy, you gotta meet me halfway on this one. BUY A LOTTERY TICKET!"

We don't have a standard procedure for selecting our experts. If we appointed everyone who deserved it, staff would outnumber regular members on most days. We'll talk about Markus though, thanks. We're very grateful for so many great minds to choose from, and we don't thank you all enough for being so free with your time and knowledge. Thanks ∞.

A good skeptic follows up on the parts they're skeptical of, and learns enough to accept or reject. They should never sit on their skepticism; that's what leads to hand-waving, and arguments from incredulity. And accusations of close-mindedness. You're tweeting that, right?

The perpetual skeptic is a bad thing, and I think many of the same people who accuse scientists of being arrogant are perpetual skeptics. They remain skeptical even when shown evidence that should settle the basis for their skepticism.

The ivory tower intellectual who imprisons himself symbolically with his adherence to what his books teach him, and is eventually rescued by the common sense of the headstrong protagonist is a common character in literature. Intuitive meets hidebound, hidebound is skeptical, intuitive wins out, hidebound is no longer skeptical.