MigL

Her Father Dick, too. It seems his former boss, G W Bush, is not endorsing D Trump either. And in the two previous elections, did not vote for either candidate, going so far as writing in Condoleeza Rice in the last election. George W. Bush will not make a presidential endorsement (axios.com)

The 'multiverse' is not mainstream science; it is a Marvel Cinematic Universe concept. H Everett's Many Worlds Interpretation is nor mainstream science either; it is an interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Whereas the Copenhagen Interpretation asserts that wave function collapse leads to only one of differing realities of varying probabilities, and the cat has different probabilities of being alive or dead ( in the box with the radioactive trigger to release the Cyanide ), the Many Worlds asserts that wave function collapse leads to two distinct objective realities, one in which the cat is alive, and the other with a dead cat. Interpret it any way you want; only the math is real.

I imagine L Smolin and C Rovelli are a lot more disappointed than any of us.

He's right; an AI is targeting him specifically. I wouldn't be surprised if the next step is for SKYNET to send Terminators back through time to assassinate him. He must be the future leader in our fight against the machines. ( J Cameron couldn't make this stuff up 😄 )

Way to go, Joigus. When Super String Theory failed to meet requirements, I had some hope Loop Quantum Gravity might still come through. Now you've dashed those hopes also ... Seriously, it was my understanding, and it's mentioned in your link also. that SoL dependence on frequency was a characteristic of some flavors of LQG, not all. Just exactly how large is the 'LQG landscape' ? Surely it isn't as large as that of String Theory ?

Ergodicity, pressure, temperature, chemical equilibrium, planetary formation, ecosystems, degenerative syndromes, differential cell development, protein synthesis, chaperonin-regulated protein function, embyonic development, feedback mechanisms, viral population dynamics, animal behaviour, population equilibria... and all that. IOW, everything except the raw summary of the fundamental laws of Nature. None of these things can be seen in the raw equations of physics. They appear somewhere along the huge buildup of complexity from the elementary particle to swarms of billions and billions of them. But it's not like: "Now!, the adding of one particle has made it because..." It's gradual, rather. Scaling effects. A single neuron has singular purpose. If you put enough neurons together you get a mind which gives a person multiple purposes. If you put enough persons together you get mob mentality, with a singular purpose again.

People who don't learn from history ... Strange how 'traditional' NAZIs hated and opposed Communist Russia, while the 'new improved' version seems to admire Russia's style.

Apparently, a while back, D Trump was un favor af Florida's Amendment 4, which aims to limit Government interference with regard to abortion rights. He must have had some push-back from his base because he's now changed his mind and opposes it. That 'whore' ( my apologies to prostitutes for the unfortunate comparison ) will say and do anything to get elected.

I 'winced' was the descriptor I used; don't mix this one up also. But there may be white Christian members. I also explained why I don't fit those descriptors, while Swansot IS an atomic Physicist. ( sorry to keep dragging you into this Swansont, but you walked in the door as Phi and I were having a 'domestic disturbance', possibly due to past history ) Make any further comments you wish; I'm going back to the OP.

The story by C Stephenson - Leiningen Versus The Ants comes to mind ...

Sorry for your loss; hasn't been an easy year for you. No apologies are needed in my case. I've gotten used to you, and I actually find it quite refreshing that you allow your personality to come through the screens of text. Sometimes you get the impression that some are not the people their posts would indicate, instead you actually allow people to get to know you.

I fit the two categories almost as well as you. But he wouldn't have made the post at the top of this page to you.

In the case of 1 dimension any 'graph' would consist of a point; not very useful. In the case of 3 dimensions, while we can construct a 'graph', it is quite difficult to extract exact information from it, and various methods of representing the 3rd dimension have varying degrees of success. Anything of higher dimensionality than 3 is impossible to represent graphically and accurately. A 2dimensional graph is what any 12 year old is familiar with, and can represent information to arbitrary accuracy. It is the only truly accurate graphical representation of the information. Am I mistaken in my opinion that a graph is a visual representation of information ?

Except he didn't use it as a 'compound descriptor', but as three separate descriptors. As evidenced by And I said it didn't bother me. So, no, it isn't at all. We are not discussing my attitudes, but those of tour fellow citizens. Lets try to stay focused.

There is no 'graphing' involved. You need n variables to describe the position of a point, in orthogonal n-dimensional space.

I don't know of anyone who says that. So who, exactly, are 'they' ?

In my opinion, 'everything' is hyperbole.

The blank spaces between the lines are just that, Phi. Don't read anything in them. I made my position clear. I am darker ( in the summer ) than most light skinned black people, and I am certainly not ( Roman Catholic ) Christian, although I do share some of their values. What I 'winced' at was the broad brush you used to paint two other groups the same color as Nationalists. Not all whites are Nationalists. Nor are all Christians. And in case you still don't get it, I'm not a Nationalist. ( In fact I' m not even from your nation; although I have visited often 🙂 )

The Bible and other Religious scriptures are not just moral guidelines, they are also a means of control, to empower the rulers ( religious or otherwise ) and control immoral ancients who survived by strength and weapons. The killing of offspring is not a moral guideline, but a means of control through a suggested punishment; same with the concept of heaven and hell. People forget that these scriptures were written thousands of years ago, and reflect values of their times; notice the big difference in tone between old and new testaments. The old preaches 'an eye for an eye'. the new offers 'turn the other cheek' instead. By all means, take the moral guidelines in the Bible that suggest you lead a good life that is compassionate and caring for others; disregard the rest as time reflecting nonsense.

No. Starfleet's Prime Directive forbids that. And it is also just silly. More than 90% of members involved in this discussion don't even know what the terms in that equation mean ( myself included ); what use would it be to a primitive race ? If you meant 'fundamental difference between', then philosophy would tell you not to ask a dumb question like previous one, as it is useless. Of course. QM is probablistic; it makes amazingly accurate predictions. Or are you asking whether a ToE might resolve the probabilistic aspects ?

Time certainly slowed don while I was reading this thread. Almost came to a stand-still on the second page, with one poster doing the equivalent of "I know you are, but what am I ?"

I was in no way offended by Phi's comment, as I mostly feel the same way. However, I suppose a small subconscious part of this non-believer still feels I belong to the 'white Christian' demographic. I suppose I still consider my values as 'Christian', although I don't believe everyone needs to share those values, or be punished for having different values. ( as long as those values aren't harmful to others ) I would imagine there are a lot of non-believers who feel the same.

I think you also misunderstood mine. It shouldn't matter whether visible or not; superficial differences should not be relevant, or have any importance. That being said, I also don't want my right to like, or dislike, people based on personal preference, to be taken away. I may not like the way you comb your hair, or the color of your skin ( very pale people freak me out ), But I will not show or communicate that dislike because you are a thinking, feeling person, and in that way we are alike; even though I don't have many faults for others to dislike ( 😄 ) I'm sure you could come up with some.

Interesting magazine Joigus; thanks. A much more relevant article from that same magazine Whatever happened to the theory of everything? | symmetry magazine

I don't believe I mentioned anything about assimilation into the societal 'norm'. We are not Borg, we are people, with individualities, different looks, different beliefs and different yearnings. But in a lot of ways we are all alike; people who experience hurt and pain if treated unfairly or discriminated against. Even a white ( not so much, it's summer ) guy like me winces when Phi puts down white Christian nationalists, even though I lost any interest in my childhood Christian upbringing long ago. What makes us the same is that we are all thinking, feeling people. If we all remembered that we wouldn't notice the superficial differences. My point being that if people didn't judge others based on those attributes, others would not be facing those 'special problems'. You are trying to rectify the problem after the fact. Unfortunately there's nothing you or I can do to alleviate the suffering of slaves 200 yrs ago, or that women were chattel, to be traded ( never mind equal wages ), or that the God I believe in told me to kill all non-believers. All I can do is live as best as possible, right now, considering everyone else a thinking and feeling human being, so as to minimize those 'special problems' we currently face, and moving forward. And that is not an argument against Restitution; any problems currently faced by people should be helped in whatever way possible, but lets not pretend it alleviates the suffering of slaves, or women, centuries ago ( except in your own conscience )