Phi for All

My healthcare system is hideously expensive, but this process helps cut costs. It's more economical to have one place where they do the scanning, where everyone with those needs goes to save having to make every doctor buy and fit the equipment in their offices.

I think the movie version of learning something that requires physical prowess is complete BS. Even if you could somehow "download" the information you need to be a kung fu expert, you need the muscle memory as well, and the toughened hands and feet necessary to hit and kick without damaging yourself. I don't think there's anything that can be done for that except hard work. So it's probably the same way with straight information about a subject. At a certain point, you can have all the data required to know maths, but you still need the application experience to convert the data into usable information, imo.

I should know better by now, but is there any chance something someone says could be useful to you, or are you going to remain imperviously negative? Because historically, when you post threads like this, you reject everything everyone says, and then it looks like you don't really want any help. Can you let us know ahead of time, is this just a rant, or did you want anything productive to come of it?

! Moderator Note HEY! This thread is in the Physics section, so it better start making some sense REAL SOON. Please focus on clarity and understanding, people. No need to go offtopic by responding to this note.

Many conservatives would claim they'd do it differently, but in the end, the leadership they elect does EXACTLY the same thing (sometimes with good legislation too; if it has bipartisan support, kill it before it helps anybody). And they let them do it. and must approve of it, because they keep electing them and letting them do what they please, over and over again.

I'm never sure if the misunderstandings are purposeful, or just so deeply entrenched that you can't uncover the reasons for the misunderstandings. Most of waitforufo's arguments are really outdated misconceptions, but he's convinced when you say it that way that you're just spinning things. He never bothers to stick around and listen to the fact that Reagan made up the Black Welfare Queen, in an attempt to discredit welfare spending. This is a FACT, but he'll never hear it, never even consider that his detractors might have even one ounce of evidence that Reagan was a racist pig who left a whole generation of Americans at the mercy of powerful banks and mega-corporations interested only in taking away a little bit more money from People who could ill afford it. This is who Trump appeals to also. And I think waitforufo is secretly glad he'll be "forced" to vote for Trump if he gets the party's nomination. His hands will be tied, after all. Completely blameless, you see.

It's probably the Trump factor. He wants to bully the whole schoolyard now, and it helps him when everybody picks up a handful.

"We know from studies"? Can you link us to one please, so we're all discussing the same phenomenon? Since rest breaks wouldn't really lessen the time spent sitting by very much (you'd need to add in 2-3 hours worth of breaks - nobody has time for that), I assume you're talking about a way to remain standing when you'd normally be sitting. I've seen some expensive work stations that feature more of a kneeling position. I'm intrigued, but not enough so far to try one out in a store. Also, at least in the US, the younger the child is, the more standing up and running around is in the daily plan for most teachers. As they get older, and the study and subjects get more complex, they tend to spend more time at a desk, like their adult counterparts.

Reasonable conservatives, the oxymoron we're ALL looking for! I don't know a single Republican of any stripe right now that thinks Hillary Clinton deserves more than a stake to which she should be tied and burned. The ones I've talked to freely admit she'll get less done than Obama with the degenerate Congress they've proudly set up. I think the best she'll be able to do with Republicans is keep them home on election day, since they won't want to pull the lever on her or Trump.

Smart business people would understand the reasoning behind "My pool cost me $50,000, but we can build one for the rest of the whole community for about 10 times that with tax dollars". The fact that many of the wealthy want to cut those types of programs leads one to believe it's instead done out of spite, or even jealousy. The community pool is bigger than their private pool! Why should the non-job-creators get to frolic in a swimming pool like they were rich or something? Trump says he pays as little tax as he can because he doesn't like what's done with the money. I think he sees this as his chance to throw away what the People need, in favor of spending the money on things that will benefit him and his. Maybe then he'll feel better about paying his taxes.

Similar to my Republican litmus test, where if the lips are un-stiff enough to be moving, they're lying.

Dimensions aren't places you can "pass through". They're part of a coordinate system we use to specify a point in spacetime. M Theory isn't exactly at the top of the charts right now either, as far as any string theory goes. Most patterns of the type you mention, seemingly blending science and religion, are just coincidence. Tree of Life = Witten's String Theory is a real stretch, too far for this analogy to hold much. The mind/universe/computer coding/computing/rendering stuff is just wishful thinking. The mind doesn't work like a computer, the universe isn't a printer. I find the idea of "balance" to be overemphasized when people try to reconcile science and religion. If the universe were truly balanced, there would be no matter. Balanced matter and antimatter would annihilate each other totally. Instead, an unbalanced, extra particle of matter makes us possible. I have big problems with your (or anyone's) concept to omnipotence, but that's not really relevant. Most of the rest seems like opinion, and I have no comments on that.

! Moderator Note Title changed from "Physiological" to "Psychological" Test on Politicians.

I don't get this at all, MigL. Are you saying that overtone claimed it was easy to maintain these movements? I know he didn't, so it seems like you're claiming we shouldn't have tried because there were obstacles. Are you claiming that? This seems like a bizarre tack to take. "Things weren't perfect under those presidents, so that 'movement' stuff they did doesn't count". That's the way this comes off.

And there's a big difference between conservatives in these elections, and the liberals. The conservatives think helping young people who've had little experience is "enabling". Liberals call it an investment in People. Trump's investments aren't in People.

Don't focus on the circus. That's what money does to elections. It's a magician's distraction technique. Focus on the issues. How do you feel about your fellow Americans? Do you think they have rights that have eroded over the last 60 years or so, or do we have too many rights? Is there a candidate who represents the way you feel about the issues? It's less about how that candidate looks (or should be) and more about whether you can trust them to do the things they promise they'll do. Politics is important because it's the best way for you to stand up and be counted for something important to you on many levels, local, regional, national. Whether you think handguns shouldn't be allowed in your local museums, or you think it's wrong for corporations to gain the benefits of both a legal corporate charter AND protection as citizens of the US (which conflict heavily, btw, and is one reason why you hear that Citizens United MUST be overturned), politics is the way to make it happen. It's the process by which you will invest yourself in your country, and hopefully nudge it closer towards being the country you're proud of.

fd

I sometimes feel like you're humor impervious. Your tendency to overanalyze costs you a lot here.

! Moderator Note Please calm down. Calls for clarity on a science site are NOT "issues", nor are they shit-stirring. Accuracy in discussion is required in science. This thread has been successful so far. Let's keep it up, and keep it accurate. No need to respond unless you want to Report this modnote.

Great point. I'm disappointed in the media outlet's manipulation, based on what businesses they also own, for political gains that have little to do with the will of the People. Between ignoring their job to inform in favor of profits, and the conflict of interest in owning media that can bury your other companies indiscretions, AND the fact that it was Bill Clinton who made it possible in 1996 with the Telecommunications Act (so Hillary is unlikely to change anything there), they are definitely as much a part of the problem as banking and our foreign policy.

Whoa, tl;dr

Right, I've said this. I want opinions on how this might be accomplished. How can the Sanders Movement best approach the folks who might jump from Trump when the ballots are actually marked? I've shown a bit of evidence that shows many of his supporters are aligned with Sanders message, only they're dazzled by the Donald's overarching press coverage. If you think he has no chance at all, I'd rather hear from those who have some suggestions that might give him a chance. Seats are available in Congress that could give him a clearer path. If the Movement can assure that Sanders can get nominated, win, AND help enough Dems overturn those seats, I think Sanders can look like the most reasonable choice to many Trumpets and lots of Hillarites. But how can he reach emotionally based voters with sober, reasonable, evidence-based arguments when all they want to do is scream?

The Sanders Movement would need five seats in the Senate to gain control there. The Dems have 10 seats to defend, while the Republicans have 24 seats, and many of those are freshman senators, and some are in states Obama won in 2012. The Senate is winnable realistically. The House is different, but this also isn't 2014. A presidential election, accompanied by a strong Sanders movement, could potentially unseat enough of the constipation masquerading as Constitution. But this is where the Republicans are strong, via redistricting and other maneuvers designed to thwart fair representation. An overwhelming response by Democratic voters is needed, imo, to overcome the shady tactics. I'm becoming more hopeful The Movement might just fix most of our problems. They say that the one characteristics Trump supporters have in common is a lack of a college degree that has left them farther down the ladder than they may deserve, and here's Bernie offering to fix that at no cost to the average Trump supporter. If they ever realize this, do you think they would help fix Congress too?

So true. But 30 years before Marilyn, it was all about the skinny, flat flapper girls. It certainly could. And there's no weirdness in that. By the time a woman is showing her pregnancy, she's usually gone through all the trauma of learning she's pregnant, the morning sickness, the fatigue, and all the things that reduce sexual drive. When she's far enough along to show appreciably (and I do appreciate it), she's probably also more ready to have more sex. And some doctors think sex can be used to help contractions in a woman who is overdue. A hormone present in the cervix during the final stages of birth is also present in semen. The mechanism is still uncertain though.

This isn't a would-you-vote-for-him thread. Or a Hillary vs Bernie thread. I'd like to discuss what The Sanders Movement would need to do to achieve the real change Sen. Sanders wants. Because it seems obvious that just being nominated, or even elected, just won't be enough. Some experts and polls think Bernie Sanders has a chance to beat any of the Republicans should he get the nomination. If he does, he admits himself he wants a movement on ideas, rather than a personality contest for candidates. So what do you think his movement needs, not only to get him the nomination, but to help him also gain the Presidency, and reduce the amount of obstructionists in Congress?