studiot

I can't begin to understand why my efforts to help are described as annoying. If I missed the point of the sentence Then please explain it to me.

Relevant to what?

I totally missed this. What I mean is that the methods is flawed for this understanding due to facts that were ignored. I meant that people believe in it due to the numbers always working. Im dont think the numbers are wrong. I think the initial understanding is where mistakes were made. I am still no wiser as to wht this has to do with my offering ( I only made one so it should be simple to identify it) No facts were ignored. No understanding was offered and no members of SF were trampled during it's production. They were a table of actual measurements. Nothing more, nothing less. They were the best available in 2003. Since then there have been more and better measurments with new spacecraft, but they have not markedly changed results for the purpose of your proposal. I don't think anyone has shown that Venus has suddenly grown an enormous magnetic field. Yet Venus possesses a substantial atmosphere. If you wish to widen this discussion to a comparative study of planetary properties, as it appears from posts after I went to bed, I don't object. But I suggest you get hold of the book my table came from as there is much useful background information in it, including colour diagrams of the different distortions of the magnetic fields of the planets. The Cambridge Guide to the Solar System Kenneth Lang (Tufts University Mass) Cambridge University Press. Finally Moontanman (I think) said somewhere that the msource of magnetism of the planets is well known. Perhaps its source is, but the magnetospheres of the planets is a far cry from being fully understood. Its relationship with the atmosphere is even less understood. In the last few years, there has been very significant work on the Aurora which is a glorious demonstration of this relationship. Much of this work is still only in research papers but there is a 2016 book Aurora by Plasma Physicist, Melanie Windridge Which details much of this.

This scientific method of yours came up with the answer of phenomenon. That is not a scientific answer. All of you believe because the numbers hold up. Well I don't understand this comment, sorry.

In the days when we had an engineering industry, one of the first things an apprentice would make would be as scraper out of an old file. These days files are often case (surface) hardened so grinding of the teeth removes all the suitable hard steel.

As you will. And thank you for giving me the opportunity to make post #50 in this thread, where I want to claim a record for my thread. We have reached a half century without anyone falling out, despite some disagreement.

Nice to know that those with greater depth of knowledge of these matters than mine have my back.

Any sign of Anne here? You say you want to make a knife. The important thing is to get the blade or at least the edge hard enough to take an edge. The harder the steel the more brittle it is in general. So quality tools and equipment are subject to particular heat treatments during their manufacture. Are you prepared for this?

Well perhaps things have improved, I'm glad to see that.

Be aware that wtf was refering to the rationals (symbol Q) not the integers or natural numbers, (symbols Z and N respectively). Although the rationals are countable they are also dense, which the integers and naturals are not.

Hi again to both of you. So when they went to rescue Mrs Smith from her rooftop in the hight of floods. Why did they need to be encumbered with automatic weapons? Was she really such a threat? If they went out to say Haiti or Indonesia or somewhere and had to roll their sleeves up and work alongside the relief agencies pulling people out of the wreckage, I bet I would see them on TV with their guns slung over their shoulders. Peacekeepers in Bosnia were not so well armed (though they needed them there)

Yes that was the theory when the Tories got in. But since then we have had Offcom and OffGen reorganised, with new toothless regualtors created. We have had many changes to the Building regulations, again with new regulators (some under Offgem Or is it one f I'm not sure? I know they wasted nearly £10k of my money) And as a regular listener to You and Yours I am often hearing of similar stories with other regulators that usually don't concern me, mostly in the financial sector.

Sorry to both of you. My mistake. However the question, if their main activity is disaster relief, what do they need guns for still remains?

But you did make an unfair comparison concerning curfews. Depends if the disaster relief is helping or shooting people.

So here is your introduction to the Scientific Method. You have thrown out (postulated) some unsubstantiated claims about a relationship between planetary atmospheres and any magnetic field that plant might have. So what does a Scientist do? He goes and finds out some facts and figures and looks at them to see if the agree with or disagree with his postulate (hypothesis). So I will start this process off with a recent table of magnetic information (2003 Tufts University / Cambridge University) Note Mars and Venus are dealt with in the footnotes. I will then leave you to obtain corresponding atmospheric data to link up with these figures.

True, but then the magnetic field of every planet is unique. Do you have any evidence to support this claim? Perhaps now is a good time to introduce you to the Scientific Method

The C & A act refers to specific named individuals (sometimes there may be more than one) not indiscriminately to whole communities. The last time that was done was in the Irish troubles and took long debate in Parliament. But curfews was only one example that sprang to mind remembering the recent storms in the US. We also have nothing equivalent to the national guard ot each state of the US. Can't agree with you there. Ove ther entrance to the County Distirct Hospital are inscribed the words Built With Public Subscriptions. What taxes built the great Quaker companies of our past and their towns and cities - Cadbury's, Frys, Clarks, ? What taxes sent the Pilgrim Fathers to found America?

No the problem I have is that it feels more like I am negotiating Brexit with the intransigent EU than having a discussion about Mathematics. Success in Mathematics is about following the rules exactly (whilst hoping those rules ahve been properly set up in the first place) Not only are you not following them, you have been hiding that fact.

Don't be fooled. The Irish boom is not as rosy as it looks/looked even a couple of years ago. And Eire is being taken to the European Court for billions of euros of back (EU) taxes or fines for 'illegal' subsidy methods. But I agree that Big Business, particularly international Big Business, can (and therefore does) get away with far too much.

Be fair, some such claims, but are you perfectly evolved ? But also some that could be agreed with if only Reg would acknowledge that others are also able to offer valid and worthwhile contributions. It is the extreme position he takes of I am all right and you are all wrong that is the problem.

You seem to have gathered the gist of my thread very well. +1 I am frequently suprised how often officials in the US are reported on our news ordering people about in a manner not acceptable over here, (eg imposing curfews), considering the US constitution and reputation as 'the Land of the Free'.

Thank you all though it would be better to say that There exists an (a+b)>ω since some (a+b)<ω well no, (ω -1 ) is not defined. and you are moving on to multiplication of non finite quantities, before finishing with finite ones. It is not good enough to suggest that The point everyone is trying to make to you (yes everyone, not just me) is that the conventional statement c = a + b , a, b in N guarantees that there exists a unique c, and that c is also in N This is an integral part and parcel of the properties of conventional binary operation called addition and cannot be removed any more than any other part of it. Yours does not do this for some c as we have just agreed.

It's perfectly on topic here. I welcome contributions the broaden horizons around the topic. Especially when most folks seem to want to chew the chicken. The article I posted was about avoiding taxes on manufactured motor cars.

Since you have been reading the local rules perhaps it is time for me to ask (again) for responses to my very polite points concerning the alleged paradoxes you raised.

So the set of all sums (a+b)>ω is not finite. Of what use is an arithmetic that omits such a large number of possible sums?