MigL

Since most have chosen to ignore the video I posted, I will try to explain the important point made in the video. Given the choice between feeding their family, keeping them in good health, and raising them out of poverty, over 1 Billion Chinese people ( interesting story about Xi Jinping ) and another 1 Billion Indian people, will do whatever they need to do, even if it means spewing CO2 into the atmosphere 24/7. Climate change is the least of their concerns; number 1 would be "where is the next meal coming from?" Until that problem is addressed, the 1.6% reduction and 2% reduction coming from the elimination of fossil fuel energies from Canada and the UK are meaningless. But I guess poor people trying to feed their families and survive are 'sharks' to Peterkin.

Could he be D Trump's long lost brother |

Then you missed the important part which comes after the 'woke' put downs. Open your mind. If you don't understand other people's motivation, you will never get along with them, or convince them to your way of thinking. And this problem won't be solved by only the 'woke' people doing their part; it needs the efforts of everyone.

This is the reason why emission targets will continue to be missed by most countries along with some put downs of 'woke' culture. All I ask is that you actually watch it before you neg rep me, as I would be very interested in your opinion, and ways to work around the problems of trying to reach emission targets.

I drink red wine with fish. Oh, the horror !

First time I got drunk and threw up, I was 5 years old; on cherries preserved in alcohol. Wine and beer ( and occasionally liquors ) was always available to me, if I so chose, and sometimes, as a child, breakfast consisted of sucking a raw egg out of its shell, followed by a 'shot' of Marsala ( a fortified wine ). I felt no need to abuse drink, as it was available f I wanted it, and didn't go out and get 'stupid' when I reached drinking age. I appreciate wines that I like ( not 'good' as that is subjective ), refreshing lagers brewed in the German tradition ( no matter where thy're from ), not warm beers that you have to chew, and I like brandies/cognacs, but will partake of smooth sctches ( not peaty ), bourbons and good sipping tequilas, if the occasion arises. Add that to your anecdotal evidence Dim.

No, biology cannot. But the gun the American is carrying can. They would have known you weren't Canadian as soon as you answered, unless your answer was "Yes. I'm sorry."

Heeey! I happen to like Merlot. Very drinkable wth a plate of pasta for a Sunday afternoon lunch with the family.

Is that because of quantity, or quality? I tend to like full bodied reds, but ones aged in oak barrels, like Cab Sauv, tend to give me headaches, if I drink more than half a bottle. I find Amarone, made from partially dried Valpolicella grapes, to be good, without the headaches when I over indulge.

This is more to do with the 'instability' that DrmDoc mentioned, rather than strictly racism. The biggest motivator seems to be fear. Someone like INow, or Ken, are very worried about climate change and global warming. It will not cause the extinction of the human race, but it has the potential to massively change how we live our lives. Others, like a redneck MAGA supporters, are worried about immigration, because immigrants will take the manual labor jobs and they'll have to re-train or be unemployed. Either way, it is a massive change to how they live their lives. fear of change seems to be the common denominator.

I don't think group size matters and there is no 'critical mass'. We are hardwired to perceive differences as possible threats; most animals, like us, do so. Far better to recognize that this is a part of our nature, and we can like, or dislike, whatever, or whoever, we choose. ( we can even choose to change our likes and dislikes, as most are fairly fluid ) It is acting on those likes and dislikes that needs to be controlled by good laws. For example, I might like cocaine, and that is fine, but I cannot use or buy according to laws. Similarly, I might not like black people, and that should be fine too, but I cannot discriminate against them when renting an apartment; and we probably need better laws against that sort of thing.

Spoken like a person who did not see the value of investing time and effort to learn some Physics. Which then brings us to your second question ...

Usually the cost. Drink what you like. I can buy a nice bottle of Argentinian, Chilean, Spanish, French, Italian or South African wine for as cheap as Can$ 10-12 per 750 ml bottle. Yet a bottle produced in the Niagara Region ( 5 Km away )will cost me Can$ 16-18 per 750 ml bottle. And is nowhere near as good.

8 / 8 And it's Domesday book. A little history knowledge goes a long way.

I think ... I believe .... I remember when science used to start off with "I observe ...".

That isn't logical. At some point in the past there was no 'before', nor a 'next'.

I see ... You're making salad.

That statement was for clarification. My previous post indicated that the deBroglie wavelength is inversely proportional to the particle's momentum. IOW, observer dependent.

Might be COVID induced fever making him delusional ...

Pliz answer the question I asked ...

The 'rest' frame of the particle is the one where the particle is at rest.

OK Then can you explain who, or what, was conscious 13.8 Billion years ago, before atoms were able to form ?

That deBroglie relation is observer dependent. The velocity, as well as the wavelength, change depending on the relative velocity of the observer. Alternatively, the 'rest' wavelength is measured in the particle's rest frame, which, unlike photons, can be at rest. Relativity is another thing you cannot simply wish away.

How would we know what the properties of space-time actually are ? Is it flat, curved or inside-out ? Remember, I'm in the camp that claims Physics does not tell us what 'reality is, only how it behaves ( see Physics and 'Reality' thread ). All we can say for sure, is that the mathematical model, including geometric curvature, makes extremely accurate predictions about gravity, and how test masses behave when affected by it. Anyone who claims to know more about the actual 'reality' is simply confused and deluding themselves.

Hamiltonian formulation is essentially an energy equation. ( except when co-ordinates are time dependent ) And sure enough, energy is also frame dependent. Seems you just can't get away from this frame dependency thing, Martillo.