MigL

OK, so his interpretation of results may be corrupted by his conflict of interest. Now I'm not aware of his research myself, but peer review would take into account his methodology. As for the data, unless falsified in some way, it should stand alone, shouldn't it ? And if not falsified, it should be repeatable by others.

If the individual members of a society don't want to provide some things to some people, how can the government go against the people's wishes and do so anyway ? It is then a non-representative government, Greg H. What exactly is 'natural law', Hans ? General welfare of its own people swansont, or of the whole world ? Sometimes the two are at odds.

It didn't fail because of an error in the modeling. It failed because its crap. Do you realize how far away the stars that make up the constallations are ? A causal connection ( back and forth influence ) probably requires longer than your lifetime.

How would an elementary virtual particle get ripped apart ? What would be the resultant constituents ? The reason objects get 'ripped apart' when they cross the event horizon is due to tidal forces. In effect, for small black holes or when approaching the center ( singularity ? ), the gravity differential between the object's feet and head is soooo large that 'spaghettification' results. An elementary particle like an electron or a quark, is thought to be ( very close to ) dimensionless. So where is the gravitational differential ??? And why would they gain mass as 'they accelerate further past the horizon'.

The branching tree is a flowchart of the evolutionary timelines of the universes. It has nothing to do with the topology of the universe(s).

This is similar to some ideas about quantized time. Where each instant in time, or Cauchy surface, does not evolve or transform to the next Cauchy surface, but rather tunnels to the next instant.

First Science Forum I've been on where people quote Shakespeare.

How far would you extend that overtone ? Consider the many cases of German war criminals. They may have been brutal guards at Prison Camps during the war. left their home country to come to the US/Canada after the war, worked at a GM plant for 30+ yrs and raised a family. They live a normal, constructive life for 50 yrs, yet if their past is found out, they are prosecuted in their old age. They have obviously left their past behind, learned to live with other people of differing lifestyles and ideologies and changed their ways. What are you thoughts ? Is prosecution necessary or not ?

Exactly Ten oz, The US administrations all knew S. Hussein had WMD before the first Gulf war, and also afterwards; he used them on that small southern Iraqi village ( whose name escapes me at the moment ) against the ( US inspired ) uprising. Yet, as you say, he was left in power. Obviously then, WMDs were not a justification for continuing or going to war. They were, however, an easily swallowed excuse for GWB's 'master' plan of transforming the whole region into Western style democracies. I'm not saying this was a good strategy or well-thought-out plan. It was certainly ambitious but definitely in need of a reality check. And reality has come back to bite the US ( along with the rest of the region if not the World ) in the ass. Edit: As for places like Pakistan, I agree with you they are even more radicalized. The nuclear weapons are a game changer however. Iraq can be attacked with conventional forces, but Pakistan would have no qualms about using its nuclear arsenal if attacked conventionally. They can no longer be strong-armed by force. Just like North Korea, they can now do what they ( the leaders ) want, and all we can do is appease them, as direct confrontation would risk, at least, unilateral nuclear detonations in heavily populated areas.

Say you live in a village, in the lands bordered by the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, about 55-60 hundred yrs ago, and the population has grown enough that a government is needed to run and oversee this now city/state, what should be the purpose of such a government ? What should it be tasked with ? What should be the extent of its power ? Lets leave out any religious influence that would have been manifest in ancient people so as to make it easier to compare with present day governments. How has government and the expectations we have of said government changed through the ages ? Has it become more or less intrusive on people's lives ? Has it gotten too big/powerful or does it need to assume even more responsibility ? What exactly, does a group of people need from their government ? How has it changed over the ages ? And are we headed in the right direction ? All of your thoughts/opinions are greatly appreciated.

I think the American administration acually expected to find WMDs in Iraq. Because they ( or previous administrations/allies ) had probably sold WMDs to them. They were surprised to find that S. Hussein had actually destroyed them. More than likely they were looking for a Middle eastern country that could be easily/quickly converted to Western style democracy and serve as a catalyst for the rest of the region. Iraq, because of its secularism and high education level of the populace, probably seemed like the most likely candidate. Unfortunately, it has become a spectacular failure, and seems to have pushed the whole region into the opposite direction.

Always, and I mean ALWAYS, lie to a woman when she asks you if she looks fat in that dress !

The fluid stops providing lift to the airfoil when either the airfoil stops being thrust forward through the fluid or the fluid stops being thrust past the airfoil ( equivalent ). At this point the airfoil still has the gravitational potential that was being overcome by the lift ( dynamic ? ) potential previously, and translates this into kinetic energy downward. Note that now another source of energy has been removed. That is the thrust of the airfoil or fluid. Note also that a 'falling' airfoil glides ( a well designed glider can move 15-20 times farther horizontally than it does vertically ) as it descends

Overtone seems to display the same hatred towards those with a different world-view, as those he accuses of having towards other demographics ( Reagan, GWB, Limbaugh, Coulter, Cheney, 1/3 of the House, some of us on this forum, etc. ) He calls them ignorant, bigoted and crazy. I guess that makes him a 'conservative'. Doesn't matter, I still like him and respect his right to an opinion.

Somewhat off topic, but it was asked... The range of forces propagated by bosons of a particular mass is dictated by Quantum Field Theory. It is a consequence of the Uncertainty Principle and Special Relativity. The HUP tells us that you need particles of a certain momentum to influence physical processes at a specific distance, and SR relates that momentum to a specific mass. Massive bosons >> short range Lighter bosons >> longer range Massless bosons >> infinite range

If the Higgs field is not uniform, but has different values, then it has direction ( higher energy to lower ) and becomes a vector field. By definition a scalar field has no direction. The inflation which results from the slow roll down the 'Mexican hat' potential is a global effect. That is why the universe looks the same in all directions and is expanding equally in all directions. If the slow roll had been ( or is ) different for different areas of the universe, it would look and expand differently in different directions.

Most nuclear detonations would be in free fall. They are delivered by ICBM where the B stands for ballistic, ie unguided, falling missile or warhead. And are detonated at a height above the ground to maximize coverage, ie while still in free fall. There is nothing to refute as you haven't stated WHY a nuclear explosion would ( or ever could ) create a black hole. By definition any explosion reduces energy ( and mass ) density, and so would be less likely to form a black hole. Black holes would be produced by IMplosions or gravitational collapse, only if the mass/energy density exceeds a certain limit within a corresponding radius such that an event horizon ( escape velocity greater than c ) is produced.

Any elementary text on aerodynamics of flight has a an analysis of the forces involved. one of these forces is drag and it has several components. Even in the case where we consider frictionless surfaces, and so eliminate form-drag, if lift is produced there is always drag-due-to-lift produced. A flat horizontal plate that produces no lift will not produce any drag-due-to-lift as it doesn't affect the fluid in that way. This drag-due-to-lift is produced whether the airfoil rises or not. The constrained airfoil produces the exact same lift, and associated drag-due-to-lift as the rising airfoil. It is in effect the energy analysis that you are doing which is incorrect Zet. If we consider the vertical forces only, you have a force of lift and a force of gravity. If the airfoil is producing lift, that is the NET difference between the two forces, one acting upward and one downward. That means, as the airfoil RISES ( kinetic ) its net potential DECREASES. Unless constrained, an object will always trade off potential for kinetic energy and move when subjected to a force. As studiot has repeated many times, you cannot just 'isolate' gravitational potential in your energy analysis and then wonder why it doesn't add up.

Hope you find as much pleasure as possible in the time you have left with your family and friends. I'm sure I speak for everyone, we may get pretty adversarial in our discussions, but we're all friends here. We're glad to have had you share your opinions with us, and hope you stick around for a while yet.

Its not the cause that makes them wingnuts. Al gore and Neil Young are telling us "Do as I say, not as I do". I expect that from priests. And Bono should have stayed in Ireland and paid his fair share of taxes, to support social programs to help the needy. A former liberal Prime Minister of Canada who is a Billionaire and owns Canada Steamship Lines should register his boats in Canada and pay the proper taxes, not in Liberia. Affluent and liberal anti-vaxxers in states like Oregon and Colorado, should not deny the science and should get their kids vaccinated before a serious epidemic. All the self-professed liberals who reject Gentically Modified foods should realise that the science is sound and the only way to feed a world with ever-increasing population. And as I said earlier, and someone else posted in the other 'insane' topic, the number of liberal evolution deniers is also signoficant. No one group is without its anti-science platform. You brought up an interesting point earlier about Republicans moving even further right so as to move the 'confortable middle' position that many Americans want to occupy, that much more conservative. It is certainly an idea worth discussing.

But I've agreed many times that there are conservative wingnuts Ten oz. I just assert that there are also liberal ones. That doesn't however, justify me calling ALL liberals insane, does it ?

Valid point swansont, but of course I vote for the politician who best represents me and my world view. I have and continue to vote Liberal and Conservative, as I see fit Keeping in mind that the Canadian system is different, am I glad Obama won the last election ? Of course ! Would it have been a tighter race, or even a different finish, in the previous election had McCain gone for substance over appearance, and selected someone like Condolizza Rice as his running mate ? I don't know, but had I been American, he would have probably gotten my vote, at the time. Hidsight and the direction of the Republican party may have now changed my mind, but if they had won the election, the party may now be on a totally different course ( with a lot less radicals ). We look at all previous presidents with the benefit of hind sight, and I've always said the realities of office are different than the campaign. No president wants to be remembered as a bad person, or the person that screwed up, but life and circumstances happen. It could be argued that even Nixon was a good president ( I remember the kitchen photo where he's poking N. Khruschef in the chest, arguing for our way of life vs. the Communist system ), unfortunately, he got cought. The darling of the left, JFK, never did get cought, but he was certainly no angel. But back to what I was trying to say... How would all of you, self professed liberals, like it if I asserted that all of you hold the same values as the loony, left wingnuts that infest Hollywood and Celebrityville. People like Bono, who has long argued we should forgive African debt, as their poverty will only fuel radicalism and extremism. Yet he leaves Ireland so he doesn't have to pay the high taxes on his fortune. Because of course, Ireland has no radical extremists. Or people like James Cameron who makes a thinly disguised and simplistic propaganda film like Avatar, in which he espouse that we should all commune with nature against capitalism and violence. And Al Gore, who lib celebrities fall all over themselves to award a Nobel prize to. I would bet Cameron's and Gore's carbon footprint combined, would be just slightly smaller than a small country. Or someone like Neal Young ( singer/songwriter ) who thinks his home country is destroying the world by developing the western oilsands, yet is perfectly fine with buying Middle East oil, where countries like Iran burn enough natural gas, as a byproduct of oil extraction, to provide a small country's power needs. Enabling violence aside, does that not release CO2 ? And any other celebrity who believes that being famous makes them an expert on everything, and their opinion more valid/valuable than common people. Are these the values you hold ? Should I characterize you as having those values because you ( as do I ) agree with some other liberal values ? I don't think so. Just like I don't think we should characterize all who hold some conservative values as insane. But that's just my opinion, and obviously I'm outvoted, so I always say I'm going to stop contributing to this ( and the other ) topic. But just like the mob... "Everytime I try to get out, they pull me back in !"

Maybe the biggest problem is the many and varied definitions of 'Conservative' values and 'liberal' values. If I state that i hold some conservative values, do you naturally assume that I believe the world is 6000 yrs old ? That I don't believe global warming is happening ? That I favour oppressing minorities and damn the social consequences ? I won't wade into supply side economics as I'm still not 100 % convinced nor well enough versed on the subject, and as for bombing creating extremist groups, what other people have had more bombs dropped on them than the Germans, Japonese and Vietnamese ? Where are their extremists ? I personally don't appreciate having those values attributed to me, and I would imagine that there are quite a few liberals who believe in Creation or are GW dismissers ( less than conservatives but still a sizeable number ), But, oh no, we can't generalize about Liberals ! I think there is some intolerance of other's views in both Conservative AND Liberal camps, but once you define Conservative values as all those evil things, then it becomes easy to consider ALL Conservatives as evil/ self serving/intolerant and of course insane. And I must admit that I find it rich, Phi for All, that you would admonish me for using the phrase " suffer fools gladly' or 'call aspade, a spade' in another thread, because it, and I quote, " assumes automatically that your judgment is true ", yet you think labelling an opposing viewpoint insane, doesn't.

Sorry Phi, I didn't realize my statement could be taken as dismissive of the intelligence of the members. If anyone else took it that way, I apologize. I hold everyone in this discussion in high regard. Yes, even overtone ( he finally admitted its possible to be sane and conservative ). I meant to say that I know we can do better and discuss issues with the facts, not by putting down ideas or their originators.

You keep repeating that Math is not applicable to the real world, but all the examples you present are problems of definition. If you define the problem correctly, with the appropriate boundary conditions ( where model is applicable ), the Math fits and works perfectly.