MigL

I would like to see a moderator say "No, you cannot talk about whatever you please; Answer the question." And if they continue with their talking points that have nothing to do with the posed question " So, you refuse to answer the question ? Let's move on." So that the audience understands the situation. Would have loved to see K Harris have a Biden moment, and tell M Pence "Just shut up, man !"

Nice historical perspective. Thanks Studiot.

That article postulates the passage of highly energetic particles through the Earth ( from the other side ). Not originating from a fantasy inner Earth, and escaping through polar gaps.

Just finished watching the vice-Presidential debate. Moderation ( trying to keep M Pence from abusing set time limits ) was even more ineffective than last time. And why don't politicians ever answer the questions that are actually asked ?

Electoral College or not, INow, if enough voters actually get up off their asses, take an interest in the future of their country, and get out their vote, I don't think even a stacked Supreme Court will side with D Trump. No more of this 50% of voters stay home. All 170 million eligible voters need to make their voice and opinion heard, and vote !

You're gonna have to re-phrase that. I haven't a clue what you mean to say.

Sorry MSC. I mistakenly quoted your reply to Pussstmpy. ( I just fell off my nit-picky high horse )

Don't you mean rots in the dirt ( or a mausoleum ), Phi ? I thought you didn't believe in God, Heaven or Hell. Or, is it true strong emotions bring out the Religiousness in people . I was confused by the statement about the stimulus package also. I didn't think any money had made its way out to people yet, because of 'playing politics'. ( although I seem to have heard some corporations and D Trump's rich buddies have gotten some )

It IS currently inhabitable and will remain so for some time, as it means 'suitable to live in'. You probably meant uninhabitable ( unsuitable to live in ). I think most understood what you meant, but I'm feeling nit-picky today.

The link to proper acceleration, and differences from coordinate acceleration, was, unfortunately, split off to the hijack thread. Here it is again ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_acceleration It is easily understandable at first, but does get quite mathematical later on.

Just how big Black Holes can get. Massive enough to affect galaxies in a cluster. And possible effects of Dark Matter in their creation. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topstories/monster-black-hole-is-caught-feeding-off-galaxies-trapped-in-its-spider-s-web/ar-BB19LywO?ocid=msedgntp

There are two concepts that need to be distinguished. Proper acceleration is relative to a free-fall or inertial reference, while co-ordinate acceleration is based on the choice of co-ordinate system. They are equivalent in an inertial frame in flat ( no gravity ) space-time. The moon, being in free-fall ( orbit is a 'fall' ), is not considered to be accelerating in GR, while you, standing on the Earth's surface, are being accelerated 'up' at 1g by the surface. This link may dispel some of the above confusion... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_acceleration

The thing about accelerated frames of reference is that there is an inertia change, so you can always tell when you are in one. You accelerating away from the universe is only equivalent to the universe accelerating away from you if you subscribe to a Machian viewpoint. ( see Ernest Mach and the 'Newton's pail" thought experiment ) They could very well not be equivalent. Try accelerating the universe and let me know how you make out

Is there any other kind ?

When did the Bible become 'the word of God' ? It is simply an imperfect interpretation by men, sometimes centuries later, of events. Religions ( most ) have constantly changed through the ages; so has the interpretation. I am not a believer, myself, but don't look down on believers. Science is based on facts and observations. Religion relies on an entirely different thought process; it does not require explanations or experimental observations. It relies on FAITH. Science does NOT.

For science that interests me Gravitation by Misner, Thorne, Wheeler ( not exactly introductory, but my favourite ) For modern military aviation ( Aerospace Eng ) Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach by Raymer ( does not include Stealth ) For computer hardware MaximumPC magazine (before that Micro Cornucopia and BYTE ) For history the list could be huge depending on time period The Decline and fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon ( sets the standard ) All except Gibbon are available in paperback, so I consider them ( or at least parts of ) introductory. And incidentally, my field is Chemical Technology, but I just read ( and sometimes write ) SOPs for that, and they are proprietary information.

Dang ! I thought this was my year. I was sure I'd be getting the Physics prize, and D Trump, the Peace prize.

And you have never disappointed. Looking forward to continuing the discussion.

In Canada we have a public Health System, and privately owned roads. The 407 toll hiway that crosses the Greater Toronto area is owned by a Spanish company ( probably Joigus ), and just like our Health Care System there are rules that company must abide by. Our Health care is run by individual Provinces, and all differ subtly, but they must abide by the rules set by the Federal Government. Clear rules, for all to follow, are sometimes a good thing.

Sorry, edited my post to add content. I most certainly did not mean support as in charity. I have given examples of emotional support that Religion gives the believer in previous posts. But then you'd have to actually read the whole thread to find out where people like Zapatos and I stand on the issue. Incidentally CV is Latin fo Curriculum Vitae, or 'course of life' literal translation. Otherwise known as an elaborate Resume, which typically means 'Summary' of relevant education and work history.

Neither is Religion mandatory, Joigus. Most of us on this forum chose to abandon Religion. I grew up Roman Catholic, and received the sacraments of Baptism, First Communion and Confirmation; I've managed to avoid Matrimony and I'm hoping to put off Last Rites as long as possible. My parents were not very religious, and I soon found that I didn't need Religion; I had a strong family for a support system whenever I was troubled. The fact that I personally don't need the support that Religion gives some people, does not give me the right to deprive them of whatever support the Church may give them. Live and let live, seems to be a fitting motto in quite a few situations. Mine is Dirty Harry getting ready to shoot someone. Does that make me a murderer ??? ( the rest of your post is nonsense also )

What a difference 35 years make ... 1982 2016 Now that Jimmy showed me how its done. Thanks Jimmy, you're a saint. ( how does Benedict Cumberbatch always manage to look so damn cool ! @ 56 sec in the 2016 video )

I don't fear Religion. There is no thought police, and people will think and believe whatever they wish. I fear people who use Religion to instill fear in others for their own ends.

That list you presented, Joigus, along with many other reasons you left out, are why you ( and many of us also ) have no need for Religion, and see it as something that has caused more harm than good. And it is easy for us to be so rational when our life isn't falling apart But what about the parents with a sick child, who is going to die from cancer ? If religion ( and 'false' hope ) gives them reason to keep going and not lose their minds, who are we to take that comfort away. That is one example of many I could give you. If people 'believe' there is a higher purpose, even one they are not aware of, they are more inclined to keep trying in the face of adversity. Hope, even false hope, inspires and drives people. For us, we realize it's just a 'crutch' to lean on, but none of us know if we'll need one also when we're in their shoes. ( and I hope you never have to find out )

If Religion is what makes you feel good about yourself, should we question that, or consider it psychological abuse ? How is it different from a person who feels they are one gender trapped inside the opposite gender ? The scientific markers and evidence are there that you are one particular gender, yet that person 'feels' better about themself as the opposite gender. And, as a society, we've decided that that's OK, and beneficial to express and act ( sex reassignment surgery ) on those feelings. Why is Religion then, with all scientific evidence against it also, psychological abuse that people need 'help' and 'advice' with ?