MigL

At this point, I think D. Trump could make the policies of Mother Theresa look bad.

Yes, John, there is a difference between the PROVEN, immoral acts of B. Clinton, and the ALLEGED illegal acts of D. Trump. ( please note the emphasis ) P.S. Did I point out the emphasized words ? P.P.S. In case you missed it, none of D. Trump's offenses have been proven, its all accusations and innuendo, so far ( not that I wouldn't put it past the Jackass ). And you know what they say about unproven accusations and innuendo levelled against H. Clinton ( see Swansont, what's good for the gander is good for the goose ). B. Clinton's immoral acts, on the other hand are proven by a DNA stained blue dress, which will probably never get dry-cleaned

I think the Republicans will have a little ( actually quite a bit ) of re-building to do after D. Trump is given the heave-ho in the election. The division within the party between the idiots who still support D. Trump and the others who are loudly ( and sensibly ) talking of dumping him, won't be healed quietly nor quickly. The only problem with replacing him is, with which other idiot ? With the exception of a few, the party of Lincoln deserves better than its current membership.

The point is that there's a tawdriness to this election that hasn't been seen before. Its not about who is more capable of being president ( we all know who that is ), its become about which candidate is willing to sink lower and dish more dirt about the opponent. Frankly, as your Canadian neighbour, I feel embarrassed for you guys.

Witten's eternal inflation postulates Bib Bangs originating anywhere in the universe due to Quantum fluctuations, the energy/time HUP, and the zero net energy universe. These new universes could spring up anywhere and be separated by 'domain walls', where symmetry breaks occur differently and lead to differing physical laws. One indicator of this actually happening would be monopole creation at these boundaries. No-one has found any monopoles yet.

IIRC it was before the new Hampshire primary that the first scandal for B. Clinton dropped, iNow, not after he became president. He lost that primary, but then 'came back'. The Clinton strategy then ( and now ), seems to be one of questioning the motives and credibility of the accusers. And although I don't recall Bill making disparaging remarks about women, do you think it shows any respect for a man of his power to have a young girl 40 yrs his junior, provide him with under-desk sexual services ? I do however recall Hillary laying the blame on the women for her husbands misdeeds, she called them failures with no qualifications. Is that respectful of women ? She stuck with him because he is the path to her presidency. I'm not suggesting equivalence, and there's no question as to who is more capable of running the country, but as human beings they are both lacking. D. Trump thinks he deserves power and can do whatever he wants, while H. Clinton will do whatever it takes to get power There is no doubt in my mind that H. Clinton will win the election, and she is the better candidate, but I feel sorry for my American neighbors having to pick between those two lame candidates. One is downright scary, and the fact that he has come so far is even more scary. And while I trust her to run the government efficiently enough, I wouldn't put anything past her. She has proved that she can get down and dirty in the mud. Makes me wish B. Obama could run a third term.

Why do we want you to stick around ? Because we've gotten used to you. This forum is a community of friends. I've disagreed with and probably pissed off quite a few people, yet I respect and would buy a drink for any one of these guys if I ran into them. ( have to hurry and delete my address from my profile, if Ophiolite looks me up, I have to buy him that expensive, single malt crap )

Sure swansont, but when he WAS president, most Liberal/Democrats had no problem at all excusing Bill Clinton's behavior, arguing that his private life and attitude towards women had no bearing on his presidency, that it was all a 'massive right wing conspiracy', that women, young women, were attracted to his power and threw themselves at him, etc, etc. Seems a little hypocritical for those same people to now argue that Donald Trump's behavior and attitude towards women is not presidential. And as I said, CharonY, there is physical proof that the most powerful man on earth ( at the time ) took advantage of a young impressionable girl ( a few years out of her teens ). There is no evidence ( yet ) that D Trump has done any of the things he claims or is accused of doing. Or is it OK to draw conclusions from innuendo in D. Trump's case, but not in H. Clinton's ( @ u swansont ) This presidential ( and I use the term loosely ) race has become a contest to dig up the most dirt on the opponent. One candidate was always an idiot, and the other is starting to look more and more like one every day. And the Republicans are imploding and fracturing, while the Democrats have proved they can be just as deceitful. Its become a race to the bottom.

Exactly, stringy. Space-time 'acts' like its curved. So GR models it with mathematical curvature of the co-ordinate system..

This election is making the US a joke. Who gives a damn about e-mails, Russian hackers, stupid insensitive locker room talk, goofy hair and finger size ? When are the issues going to be discussed ? I've said numerous times that I would cast my vote for H. Clinton, and D. Trump is a buffoon, and I'll add that I think Bill Clinton was a good president. But I find it somewhat hypocritical, that those people who defended Bill's oval office antics as having nothing to do with the Presidency, are now outraged by Donald's private ( he thought ) remarks. I still remember Gary Hart's presidential ambitions being dashed in 88 because of a picture. yet a few years later, rumors about Bill's indiscretions were already circulating. And I don't recall Hillary speaking out against Bill, or contacting her divorce lawyer, as that would ruin his presidential ambitions; instead she chose to blame the women involved, saying they were failed chorus line girls with no resume to fall back on ( seems Donald isn't the only one who disrespects women ). And by the time Bill became president, all of a sudden, his indiscretions were all part of a 'right wing conspiracy', and all his supporters claimed his private life had no bearing on the presidency anyway. We now seem to have swung back to puritanical ways, since all the people who were ready to excuse Bill, are now shocked, not by what Donald does, but by what he says. Apparently its OK to be 'serviced' under the desk by an intern 40 yrs younger while smoking a 'dipped' cigar, than to fantasize about shooting a woman a 'grip'. And speaking of grips, some of you guys should get one, since Donald just spoke about it, there is no evidence he actually did it. Bill actually did it, and there's a DNA stained dress to prove it. How's that old saying go... " don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house "

Or, to put it in a way that guys understand... Cars always look more shiny when they're wet.

As I said, maybe 'density' isn't the appropriate word to use. But if the separation of the co=ordinate system which is space-time is altered in some areas as compared to others, somewhat like if the ruling on graph paper was closer together in some areas compared to others, what would we call it

All models allow you to do is make certain predictions ( within limits ). That is their purpose. But a model is NOT 'reality' ( whatever that may be ). And there is certainly no one-to-one correspondence between every/all aspects of the model and the 'reality'. It takes a little thinking to consider only the corresponding aspects between model and 'reality' so as to be able to make valid predictions and draw valid conclusions. The non-corresponding aspects lead to non-sensical results, such as infinities, 'fabric' of space-time, and what pulls down the rubber sheet in the analogy.

That is one of the difficulties. The use of words and definitions which aren't meant to be used for such concepts. The 'density' of space-time is the density , or spacing if you will, of a co-ordinate system. It is like taking a sheet of graph paper and changing the spacing of the grid lines. That 'something' is a mathematical concept , and as such, it doesn't need to be anything or live anywhere. It just needs to be measurable.

All models are, by necessity, incomplete. GR may be the best mathematical model we have, but it also has some 'misrepresentations', as it gives non-sensical results at certain limits. Newtonian gravity is even more crude. Analogies are simply non-mathematical models; And even more crude ! And, just like GR, they only make sense when applied in their areas of validity.

Looks like your 'gentle welcome' was not appreciated nor reciprocated, Ophiolite.

I would be of the opinion that it is the freedom we enjoy in our democracy, that places power in the hands of the people and not the government, which makes it easy for influential people ( rich , famous, etc. ) to take advantage of that power to their own ends. ( I guess you've gotta take the good with the bad ) That's how a buffoon came close to becoming the President of the most powerful country on Earth, before imploding due to his stupidity. He's got nothing to lose. He'll be going after H. Clinton with all the rumours and innuendos about Bill's extramarital activities. Her best bet is to quickly change the channel, and stick to the issues. He'll come across as an immature high-school kid talking 'gossip', and she'll be seen as even more presidential than the last time.

My first exposure to symmetry groups, and application of Fourier transforms, was in a third year, half course on x-ray crystallography. Arguably solid state physics, but the boundary between physics and chemistry is not well defined in a lot of areas. These guys ( and girls ) play rough, AJB.

Remember all the flack H. Clinton took when she called a selection of voters 'a basket of...' ? Well D. Trump has possibly NOT paid taxes over the last 18 yrs, and his excuse is because he's 'smart'. ( actually genius according to R. Giuliani ) He's implying that all the voters who do pay taxes are, therefore 'stupid'. You couldn't make up the stuff of this election !

And here I thought you'd re-started this old thread to tell us you had a girlfriend, and had decided to quit talking on-line to us losers !

A dog's temperament is influenced much more by training than breeding. But 'pit-bulls' have gained a 'reputation, and now every 'arsehole' and 'yob' ( you Brits are ruining the English language ) wants one to prove how 'tough' they are. They are the guard dog of choice for most drug dealers and other low-lives here in Canada. I don't think those types of people are training them to be gentle and play with babies. But what do I know, I'm a cat person.

As others have already pointed out, and I'm repeating ( just to be annoying ). A sudden cataclysmic event can become an extinction event, but a gradual, drawn-out event is simply an evolutionary forcing. I remember reading a science fiction story about intelligent, evolved dinosaurs, but for the life of me, can't recall title or author. ( damned old age ! )

Hey, don't knock The Daily Mail. Where else would we get our updates of what Kim Kardashian is doing every minute of the day.

Because 'beginning' is a measure of time. ( not length, width or height )

Unconscious people do not 'float'; they fall to the ground.