beecee

I've stood beside many persons belonging to a minority, and I was never despised or insulted for it personally. I've also as I noted in previous post, stood up to halfwits that have expressed their irrational feelings towards some of those in those "despised minorities" but If I elaborated on that methodology, you may pretentiously label me a violent person. Oh yeah and of course, I have also been heavily invested in worthwhile changes for the community, among them being equal pay for equal work.

Sure society will change, and let's all hope for the better in all those changes. Perhaps as probably in my case, we may have to wait until all us old farts die off. (I remember some quote along those lines with regards to science) I have an Irish mate who tells the best Irish jokes you can hope to hear. There are still plenty of blonde jokes doing the rounds. I still address all people I meet as mate (if male) or love (if female) and have been simarly addressed in return. Sometimes we need to laugh at ourselves, sometimes at others (we are familiar with). I see that sometimes as a rest from the troubled times we find ourselves in. I have never, nor would I ever call a woman "sugar tits" or remark about how good her legs looked...and if I did, I would expect a strong deserved rebuke. Who sets those standards of mine? Dunno, they just seem polite, respectful and reasonable to me. Yet nothing annoys me more then when I see people being shunned and brutalized, or ostracized within my group and even beyond. In fact I have on occasion gone out of my way to stop brutalization/s on more then one occassion. That was with a methodology that one or two here may class as with violent means, and probably all pretentiously admonish me for such violence, but yet ( as in a case with my Son I relayed in another thread) it worked, and to this day 40 years later, they ( my Son and his adversary) remain the best of friends. What I'm trying to say, and from what I see, at least what one other is trying to say, is that sometimes PC can be taken too far, as per the earlier examples I gave. Let me though again reiterate that if any person, male or female, objected to me calling them "love" or "mate" I would immediately cease and move on, and in some cases, avoid that person altogether in the future. One of the leaders of the woman's movement many years ago is now saying something similar.....https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement The woman,s rights movement have justifiably achieved much, and in some areas and societies, can and will achieve much more, but there are also excesses and sometimes down right criminality with regards to "metoo" movement, when vindictivness is the driving force. There are all sorts of people in society, some desirable qualities, some with undesirable qualities. It would be great to have a perfect santized society where only good prevails, but we all know that won't happen. I see myself as a supporter of the woman's movement and also PC in general......I want the Harvey Weinstein's and the Jeffrey Epstein's of this world, locked up and eliminated from general society...I see the Jordan Peterson's of this world as simply courting conflict and emotion and being a provocateur, but those types all exist and the effects they have need to be justifiably and reasonably countered with justifiable movements such as the original woman's rights movement, and the reasonable PC movement. I will not use the word "brigade" anymore, as it does have underlying connotations.

But a singularity need not throw up infinities such as infinite densities and curvature, simply the region where our known laws of physics and GR break down or are not applicable. Perfectly flat would indicate no error bars. Is that even possible? Remembering that any straight line ( say out to the limits of our observable universe) could still be just the arc of a much much larger curvature. I still don't believe the question has yet been entirely settled. Yes, to the highlighted part. Like confirming the GUT, or a TOE? and whether GR or QT will reign supreme?

Yep, I also on a now defunct forum, remember an Astronomer, saying that in the event of a validated QGT, it will more then likely encompass also that which we know as the BB.

Not arguing Marcus, and perhaps I have mistunderstood.......What I think I do understand well, is that the further we go back, approaching that Planck/quantum era, the less certain we can be...but again, to be able to give reasonable descriptions at that time frame is pretty damn incredible! https://web.njit.edu/~gary/202/Lecture26.html "The amazing fact is that we can trace the Big Bang back to its earliest moments, at least as far back as 10-10 s, and possibly as far back as 10-43 s! This is an incredibly short time, and we can truthfully say that we can trace the evolution of the universe back to the first instant of creation. In so doing, we are probing not just the very earliest universe, but also the highest energy particle physics, so that particle physicists and astronomers are working on two aspects of the same puzzle" Eras of the Big Bang The eras of the universe, from the time of the Big Bang, are listed below. We will discuss each in turn. Planck Era (All four known forces are unified.) GUT (Grand Unified Theory) Era (Gravity "freezes out" and becomes distinct.) Electroweak Era (The nuclear strong force "freezes out" and becomes distinct.) Particle Era (particles begin to form) Era of Nucleosynthesis (nuclear fusion creates Helium, and tiny amount of heavier elements) Era of Nuclei (electrons are not yet bound to nuclei) Era of Atoms (electrons recombine to form neutral atoms, and the first stars are born) Era of Galaxies (Galaxies begin to form, leading up to the present) The earliest eras were very short lasting, and very high energy. The first few eras are when the laws of physics were considerably different than they are know, but we can still predict some of the behavior. Let's look at each era in more detail: Planck Era The Planck Era is prior to 10-43 s after the Big Bang, when we believe that the four basic forces of nature, 1) gravity, 2) nuclear strong force, 3) nuclear weak force, and 4) electromagnetic force were combined into a single "super" force. The idea is somewhat like the different phases of water (ice, liquid, and vapor), which are all aspects of the same thing. You can imagine that at certain pressure and temperature there might be conditions in which these three phases of water become a single phase, no longer distinct. Physicists believe that we will eventually find a theory that succeeds in combining all four of these fundamental forces, but at present there is no such theory. (We have names for such a theory, however: supersymmetry, superstrings, or supergravity.) So we really do not know what the universe was like in the Planck Era. Some superstring theories call for spacetime to have 11 dimensions during this time. GUT Era The GUT Era is when three of the four fundamental forces are combined, but gravity has become distinct. There are a class of theories called Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) that attempt to describe all forces except gravity in a single framework. The leading type are so-called string theories, and some are partially successful, but there are further details to be worked out. Theorists would say that in the GUT Era the gravity force "froze out" of the universe. The GUT Era lasted from 10-43 s to 10-38 s. Near the end of this era, grand unified theories predict that the universe cooled to the point that the nuclear strong force began to freeze out, leaving three fundamental forces: gravity, the strong force, and the still combined electroweak force. This "phase transition" released a huge amount of energy, causing space to undergo a rapid inflation. In a mere 10-36 s, pieces of our universe the size of an atomic nucleus might have grown to the size of our solar system. We will later discuss observations of the universe that seem to require such extreme inflation. Note that this inflation is very very large compared to the speed of light, but again, space itself is what is expanding, so it does not have to obey the speed limit of the speed of light." ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The BBT, as others have said, is a theory of the evolution of the universe/space/time from a hot dense state at T+10-43 seconds. Before that we can only speculate. But there is reasonable scientifically based speculation. The best of those imo involves the BB "erupting" from a quantum foam. At that instant the four known forces were united into one superforce. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superforce As the universe expanded and temperatures and pressures started to drop, the superforce started to decouple, gravity being the first. This created phase transitions and false vacuums, the excesses of energy went into creating our very first fundamental particles, via E=Mc2. From there it was plain sailing to the stages that we see today. This reasonable speculation is best looked at with taking the quantum foam as existing for eternity, or in fact, the quantum foam, being actually nothing...or at least as close to nothing that can exist. Obviously that means redefining nothing. See "A Universe from Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss.

That would denote a centre, would it not? So obviously invalid.

The Police have a job to do, a thankless job in many respects and are obviously our first line of defence against criminality, and one we all depend on and call first when in trouble. *shrug* Pretty obvious I would think. Absolutely!! To make my position more clear, I understand that what one says can offend, whether that offence was meant or not. And in all my real life examples, and many others with regards to casual speech and references such as "love", not once has there been any sign of objection in anyway whatsoever. In fact in near all cases, the same casual banter and references is returned. If there was any offence, then I would apologise, cease with the offending banter, and move on. if I totally disagreed with any need for any offence by that person, I would probably again move on after apologising, and avoid as much as possible, contact with that person again.

Political agitators, or protestors, same thing. Recognising them by their actions, certainly, much as a plain clothed policeman/woman is recognised by their specific actions. The point I'm making is that these political agitators and protestors, take the spotlight off the legitimate protest, and gives the far right something to focus on and use in their propaganda. Likewise the unreasonable aspects of political correctness gives the same loonies ammunition to focus on that extreme crap, instead of the legitimate and reasonable political correctness that aims to eliminate racist undertones, sexual exclusion and discimination. I see an important difference in commenting on a man's or a woman's attire, eg: "Lovely dress Mary! or Nice Jacket Bob" to commenting that you like Mary's legs or any of her other atrributes, or that Bob has big thighs or his other attributes..

Well let's start off with the lyrics objected to in the song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3sFeQGNeo or the demanded use of non gendered terms when speaking like "partner" as per my previous example...or maybe innocently asking a person where he or she is from...something I often do, as I love guessing where a person comes from, based on their accents. By the way, I have never yet experienced any objection when asking that question.

My mistake. Not all political correctness is unreasonable, and some I fully support. The unreasonable brigade I put in the same pidgeon hole as the "professional protestors" that infiltrated the recent protest march by the CMFEU in Melbourne. You know, people that protest and act indignant just for the sake of it. And before you reply, I have taken part in a few genuine protests and marches in my time, and I personally saw these "professional protestors" infiltrating a genuine cause.

If I would hazard a guess, it would be that not all the PC brigade are all on the same page, and many would balk at some of the extent that some think we should go to. Who decides what the limit is? Good question. Perhaps its all in the "intent" of the spoken word that need be considered more. Let me give an example with two probable outcomes. I meet a new friend and am having a few drinks with him...During our common everyday banter I ask him, "how is your wife, I hope she is fine" He replies, "I'm gay, he is fine" I immediately say "Oh OK, sorry about that" He laughs and says..."That's OK, just an innocent mistake" Then we both laugh it off and continue drinking. A real, true to life example I may add, in which I made the mistaken assumption, and he understanding that there was no ill intent, accepted it and laughed it off.

I don't summarily dismiss anyone's objection/s. Even if that objection is totally invalid, I would probably shrug my shoulders and move on, muttering perhaps under my breath. If the bank teller in a previous example I gave, had of objected in any way whatsoever, looks, speech, body language, or whatever, I would have apologised and moved on. If the female shop assistant had of objected to being called love, I would again have offered an apology and moved on. There are lines in the sand...I would never call an indigenous Aussie a Boong...the equivelent in calling a Black American a nigger. I have a heap of indigenous friends in actual fact, as I live in a suburb next door to a recognised indigenous settlement. And no, in actual fact I have never said anything out of the ordinary about a female manager being emotional, at least no more then a emotional male manager. Yes, you have a point in certain situations, the same as iNow had a point with his pupil/teacher relationship and interactions. But it does not change the fact/s that there are reasonable sensible limitations on sensitivity. I'm pretty sure we could examine with a fine tooth comb, the words of most songs and find something potentially objectionable to someone, but I'm just as sure, it would normally go over both your's and my heads. I doubt there are any really extreme undesirable and offensive people that I have conversed with on this forum on such matters, just those with views both left and right of the political centre...some I agree with, others I don't. I certainly as I have made known, object to the subject of the thread, J Peterson and see his views in many cases to be extreme with a minor exception or two.

Ahh gracias senor! I was once in Panama for six days, both Panama City and Cristobel. Welcome to the forum.

There certainly is a line in the sand which people should not cross, but sometimes....take the following for example....https://www.salon.com/2018/12/19/william-shatner-says-metoo-has-become-hysterical-changed-the-way-he-interacts-with-fans_partner/ extracts from Shatner.... "The “Star Trek” icon started the conversation by addressing his social media postsurging Christmas radio stations to play “Baby It’s Cold Outside” on the airwaves. The song was temporarily pulled by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation over complaints about its suggestive lyrics". Those of you too young to remember the song, here it is.. .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTNheCEUP_A Shatner went on to say......."Shatner prefaced his #MeToo remarks but calling out the positive side of the anti-harassment movement. “I think it’s great that these hidden forces are exposed and not to be allowed and women have equal rights,” the actor said. “I’ve got three daughters [aged 60, 57 and 54], I’m all for that.” {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ How many songs do we ban?, this.... "Island Girl" by Elton John, or perhaps "Ebony and Ivory" by Paul McCartney, or the King's Kissin' Cousins? I hate rap, heavy metal crap [yeah I know tastes in music are subjective] but don't we have lyrics in songs such as rap about the "F" word, and killing cops and such? Should any of that stuff be ever aloud? Isn't that simply distastful, and bordering on manic evil expressions? Other music re drugs etc are in the same category, and yet some PC extremists talk about PC with regards to the lyrics in for example, Elvis' jailhouse rock...remember the lyrics...went something like this....“ “Number forty-seven said to number three: "You're the cutest jailbird I ever did see. I sure would be delighted with your company, Come on and do the Jailhouse Rock with me." Some of the PC brigade today may see that as a gay love song.... Perhaps the PC brigade may have to wait until old farts like myself die off, but then again, I have a sneaking suspicion many of our normal younger folk, would also cringe at some of the extremes of PC.

Are you Japanese? Why I'm asking is you mention that is your preference to represent in sport, but do not mention where you are from. BTW, I also find Japan a beautiful country with equal beautiful people that absolutely go out of their way to assist a poor dumb tourist like myself. I'm an Aussie also, born and bred.

And 90 years old! I want some of what he has. Incredible!

Good point re teacher/student issue. Your post makes a lot of sense....Certainly far more sense then the extremist feminazi that tried bullying me into submission! Your teacher student one is valid certainly. Relating another example I was involved in. Last Summer with our extreme bushfires, the Mrs was having real problems with her asthma and breathing...so much so that I called the ambulance, two paramedics, one female one male. They brough great comfort to myself and the troubled Mrs with remarks like don't worry sweety, breath deep honey and similar. They were both 30ish, we are both in our 70's. When I was a boy in the 50's schooling, Australia had a big immigration program, with many migrants from war torn Europe. A lot of them opened grocery stores, fish n chip shops etc and worked their arse off to succeed in their new chosen country. That didn't stop many of us locals [including us school kids] from derisively and insultingly, with malice, calling them wogs, and greasy dagoes. Words that today are unnacceptable in general society.

Was that Hawking or Carl Sagan?

Interesting debate. All the examples given by iNow in the above post, would be deemed as insulting in most civilised societies. Calling a female "sugar tits" because she has a great bosom, is rather innapropriate and a comment on a person's physical form or attributes, or lack thereof. We could based on that example be also able to comment on another person's disability. Which would likewise be innapropriate and cruel to boot. The same goes for your other examples. I believe an important aspect of one's speech and another's feelings is intent. I've had a mate I hadn't seen for 12 months or so, call out to me, "Hey beecee you old bastard, where have you been?" It [calling me bastard] was used as a term of endearment, and no second thoughts by me ever entertained anything different to what I knew was the "intent" In saying that, I also agree with Intoscience's comments below.... I have given an example of PC being taken to far earlier with regards to a crazy edict being brought down by the firm I once worked for, saying we were not to call manhole covers by that name anymore. Some other everyday examples, of which I myself use near everyday, is everyday banter with people, both people you know, and strangers also. Let me explain...I was a while back having trouble paying for some renovations to a builder in transferring the money to his bank account. I approached the female bank teller for advice, and she explained it fully to me and which I was deeply appreciative for. I said to her, "thanks love, you're a bloody angel!".....she replied, "glad to be of assistance sweetie" or words to that effect, and laughed heartedly. She was around 45ish years of age. Many times I have approached shop assistants and asked if a female, "excuse me love, where is the extra virgin olive oil [or whatever]? Or if a bloke, "excuse me mate, where do you hide the paper towles? The British version of the game show "The Chase" hosted by the very funny Bradley Walsh and one I prefer over the Aussie edition, often has Bradley addressing female contestants as "darling" or love...many, many many other examples, way too many to list!! The reason I raised all this is because I was told it was wrong, sexist and innapropriate by a person I see as a radical extremist and feminazi. It is not any of those things, but simply examples that I am involved with every day of my life...it is nothing more than casual everyday banter, that has no intent of sexism or any impropriety whatsoever. A year or so ago, my next door neighbour asked me to look after her dog...she called me love...no offence was taken on my part, in fact It was never given a second thought, no sinister motive was afoot on her part, it was nothing more then examples of everyday banter between everyday people, with zero intent of sinister motives, or insulting behaviour. My final example...I was waiting at a crossing to cross the road, and was just about to cross against the "don't walk" sign, when I noticed two police behind me, a male and a female. I turned and said, "gee lucky i saw you there, I was about to cross" The female office replied with a big cheesy grin, "and I was ready to grab you by the collar sweetie." I hate misogyny sexism, misandry, and disrespect, but I also hate the efforts sometimes of society in trying to eliminate undesirable traits, just going way too far, as can be shown by PC being taken too far and normal everyday banter.

That doesn't change the fact that science still is pushing, the need for some deity to explain what we see around us further and further into oblivion. Traditional customs and traditions die hard.

Thanks... and a mistake I pesonally make many times. I have learnt something.

Is there room for any God" Really? I mean more and more we see science pushing any necessity for any God, further and further into oblivion.

The norm where I come from, is we all [students] address each other by our first names. I distinctly remember that same informal manner when Charlie came out here to school at Timbertop...you know Charlie? Liz's and the Greek's first born child? Charlie often said it was the best and most enjoyable part of his education. Any "priveliged student" from any culture can either like it or lump it.

The crew offshore in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch achieved our largest ocean plastic catch to date in a single extraction with System 002 on September 22nd 2021. This load amounts to 3.8 tons and concludes the last short test of the campaign. The next weeks will see the crew putting the system to longer tests, potentially harvesting significantly more. While we look forward to bigger catches, the reactions of the crew members as the deck gets filled with trash are already an indication of how close we are to proving the capacity and efficiency of our latest system. To learn more and support the cleanup, visit: https://bit.ly/3leiT33 Another interesting video with more actual detail and reasons...... No questions, just makes one think......and think some more.....