Severian

A subforum dedicted to "logic/rational/evidence" may lead to the impression that logic/rational/evidence are not welcome in the rest of the site.

Hades: Since your link in the OP doesn't work, do you have any evidence for this assertion? And should you really be surprised that you are mistaken for a satanist if you use the username 'Hades'? I think the population finds atheists threatening, not because of what they believe, but because they are perceived to be attacking the views of religious people. I imagine the same is true for other groups too, e.g. muslims are unpopular not because if what they believe, but because they are perceived to be attacking the US way of life.

I had actually typed a response saying exactly this, but then didn't post it because it seemed a little anally retentive.

Since you quoted me, this looks like it is directed at me. For the record, I am not a mod, so the decision to close P&R had nothing to do with me, although I do support the decision.

I don't think so. There was some discussion about making it only for politics topics related to science though (which I would welcome), but your guess is as good as mine whether or not this will happen.

It has been brought to a head recently by all the lunatics like Linde carping on about the anthropic principle. The anthropic principle is really really devisive in physics and a lot of physicists will not stand back and let it become accepted science. However, the 'backlash' against string theory, has been a little misrepresented - the backlash is not really against the real string theorists, it is against people like Linde and Susskind. There is still a tremendous respect out there for Ed Witten and his ilk, who have done marvelous work on strings over the years. And string theory is still the favourite theory for the Planck scale. Also, there is a bit of an atlantic divide on this. The US has really over invested in string theory to the detriment of collider phenomenology (and I think the resentment this caused among other physicists in the US is the real cause of all the acrimony). But in Europe, there is a much more balanced field, paying much more attention to collider phenomenology than the US does. In Europe we are quite happy to continue with a modest investment in strings while making a strong investment in phenomenology, actually testing theories in the laboratory, and would like to see the US become much more European in its particle physics outlook.

Firefox 1.5.0.6

Hmm. It seems cured now. I am not aware that I did anything - I tried switching java off and then back on again, but I am not sure if this was the problem or not... Thanks anyway. All's well that ends well.

Since the mass is usually calculated using gravity, it would include all of the objects on the surface too. However, I am sure that all the objects on the surface are such a small fraction of the total mass that they are pretty much negligible.

The WYSIWYG option - I will try changing it.

It sounds like MS, but MS should show up in an MRI.

If it helps, directly quoting you (with the quote button), typing this line, and hitting submit produces this. Edit: hmm... I now tried to upload a screenshot, but none of the buttons in the post box are working.

For example, I am leaving a blank line between this and this I needed to type <br><br> after it to skip a line.

We can always hope. A tachyon would be rather bad, since its presence would indicate an unstable vacuum.

I am finding the forum is bahaving oddly. When I click 'quote' to quote a post I often am seeing what looks like html, eg. < br /> without the spaces. I am also finding that my posts don't format correctly unless I include html in them. Has something changed recently?

So the predictions of QCD, the running of alpha_s, the W and Z bosons, the top quark, the gyromagnetic ratios of the electron and muon, the rho parameter, and countless predictions of cross-sections and widths have all been rubbish, have they? The problem in the last 30 years has been that the theory has been too good. We have been unable to find any (or very little) deviation from it because it predicts the right answers almost every time!

There used to be a jazz player called Higgs Boson, but his webpage (http://www.higgsboson.com) seems dead now.

I agree. With a completely uniform infinite (spatially) mass distribution, there would be no collapse with any classical model (Newtonian or GR). However, there is always going to be some anisotropy, so even in the classical case, a small fluctuation will create a collapse. (In other words, the infinite extent isotropic mass distribution is an unstable fixed point.) And as soon as you have quantum flucuations, you are going to have a collapse.

And do you agree with this stance, or disagree?

Since this thread seems to have very little direction, let me ask a question. Would it be better or worse for world peace in the long term, if the state of Israel ceased to exist?

Mine are exactly the same length. No odd hair growths though...

I agree with Dave. If Brown is labour leader at the next election, I don't have a clue who I would be voting for. It is a very depressing state of affairs.

I use mine to reflect my mood.

Thanks for the suggestions.

There has been one in the loos in the Newton Institue for years.