EdEarl

These references may be what you need. Resonant Loop Antenna LC Circuits

I do not argue often. But, many of my posts have links to elsewhere, including Wiki.

Such things may help some, but I was so traumatized at that age that I needed years of therapy, which did not happen. Rather, I suffered throughout elementary and high school. I have grown out of it, and continue to do so. There is no substitute for a happy childhood, and drug addicted or poor parents who struggle for necessities and endure poor health care are less likely to produce happy children than people who have the necessities and good health care. The situation is more complicated and difficult to manage than I can understand. But, I am sure there is no one simple thing that will cure all.

Python is a very good language; though, not one I used professionally. Since retiring, I have no passion for the craft, and my skills have rusted. The presenter in the video is awesome, and the techniques shown are powerful. I worked with other programmers, usually numbering more than 50. In that environment, few will understand the metaprogramming, including managers. The last place I worked, a director gave me a project three times, which was impossible, because he was instructing me to remove code that did not exist. The third time, he became angry, and yelled at me for being too ignorant to find code that he believed existed. He asked other programmers (ones he thought smarter and more knowledgeable than me) to find the code. After a couple of weeks, he said. OK, I was wrong the code does not exist. That was in a COBOL shop, which means code is almost trivial and repeated (boring) many times. About 90% of those programmers had not used COBOL functions! From my experience, I believe use of metaprogramming is invaluable to minimizing the amount of code, but very few of the programmers I worked with were capable of doing it. And, managers do not want to do things they cannot understand. Thus, I am not convinced that the power and elegance of Python will become common in large programming shops.

Why do you want a job in computer science? When I was young, I wanted to program and know everything possible about computers, and the first person to give me a job, noticed I was spending all my spare time programming and offered me a job without my asking. Employers look for people who already know how to do the job they have to offer, and they are offering fewer continuing education opportunities to their employees. People who want to continue being employed, must continue their education with their own resources rather than expect help from employers. If you don't care about your skills, who will? Sounds like me, after programming for 30+ years and becoming bored with programming. If you are passionate about learning and doing anything, programming, art, music, whatever, you would learn more and more about it and get better and better at it. When you are an expert, or nearly an expert at something, you are much more likely to find a way to earn a living doing it. But, most of all you will be happy doing what you like, which is better than wasting your time doing a job that you do not like.

Friction steals motion, little by little, and prevents perpetual motion, except in superconductors, which allow electricity to flow forever. But, there is only a finite amount of electricity in a superconducting circuit, and using it steals the electrons and stops the flow. Similarly, if you start something moving in space, where there is no friction, using any of its energy will steal the motion and stop it. Thus, there is no machine that can produce energy forever for free.

My father was an alcoholic, and my brother is an alcoholic and drug addict (in remission). I am not. Chances are more than 50/50 that a person born into a family with one addict will also be an addict. My brother and father said that one drink/narcotic made them want to be drunk/high and stay drunk/high. I like a drink sometimes, but rarely drink enough to get drunk, and narcotics are disgusting (I know because I have taken them for pain, especially after a back operation). My body reacts differently to alcohol and drugs than my father and brother. My childhood was scarred by abuse, poverty and divorce, yet I am not an addict. On the other hand, some people who have normal childhoods become addicts. The idea that escapism is the motivation for addiction seems to miss the mark, which is partly due to body chemistry.

It seems to be a step in the right direction for CO2 production and the economy. Unfortunately the reason for reduced CO2 is less heating required due to a warm winter.

There aren't experts in every subject, and using Wikipedia requires knowledge of key words to find things. Thus, many people ask questions either because they have not looked into Wikipedia or they have looked but have not found what they need and want. Thus, a few experts and some wanna-be helpers like me can answer a wide variety of questions. Experts often focus on a very narrowly defined subject, which means you may not find the one you want on SFN.

See: Scientists Believe Humans Will One Day Colonize the Universe Is interstellar travel possible? and search for other threads on this forum.

There are meta languages that process functions as other languages process data. They simplify functions via optimization and constant folding but do not use variables for storing data values. I think the brain does meta language processing, but does it differently than functional programming languages.

A hackers missile can be fired from anywhere in the world, crash through glass walls, strike the jugular, and drain a pint or two of green blood. No one is safe when violence is commonplace, and friends like Bernard Madoff promise great rewards and steal savings at the same time.

Lust in lion males leads to killing all the previous pride leader's offspring when new male take over a pride.

Wow, this issue may cause an endless discussion, and could spark numerous other threads. Over the past half century my socioeconomic position has swung like a pendulum as history played on news videos. My position now is not idealistic and based on many facets of human nature. Basically the needs of people are varied, and when people are satisfied they are less likely to be violent. Reducing violence is my primary objective, and I believe, a goal shared by most people. How can that objective be accomplished? There are both social and economic reasons for violence. The social reasons should not be discussed in this thread. The economic reasons may be discussed in this thread, because the OP, the Capitalist ethos, opens the door. People who are either dissatisfied or desperate may resort to violence, especially people who are desperate for the necessities of food, clothing, shelter and medical care. I will discuss dissatisfaction later, but first I shall describe violence which includes but is not limited to physical violence. Violence to a person's body for economic gain includes any kind of physical assault including murder. However, violence is not limited to physical assault, it includes causing stress and other mental anguish. Thus, it includes robbery, embezzlement, extortion, fraud, shoplifting, vandalism, and verbal abuse. A person who is happy is less likely to be curse and otherwise be violent than one who is dissatisfied or desperate. Moreover, a person who suffers from another being violent will usually experience at least momentary dissatisfaction and may act out (i.e., do something that is violent to another person). Thus, violence creates violence, and the world is currently a living example of that phenomenon, which the history records through war and peace. Unfortunately, peace means a time without war or a time of reduced violence, not a time of no violence. People are dissatisfied for many reasons. Sadists are satisfied by hurting people; masochists by hurting themselves. Some people are satisfied to be followers, and some must be leaders. Some must collect, and some must give. Some need gold, and some need none. But, we all need food, clothing, shelter, and health care, and are more likely to be violent if deprived of those things. Thusly, my socioeconomic and political philosophy is constructed. To reduce violence, it is necessary to give everyone the hope they can satisfy their needs, and give everyone food, clothing, shelter and health care. Reducing the number of people who are satisfied increases violence, and a society can exist with some level of violence. We will debate the level of economic violence we are willing to endure in this thread. The socially minded are in favor of reducing violence through social engineering. The capitalists are willing to endure higher levels of violence to satisfy their need to increase their wealth. The power hungry are willing to endure higher levels of violence to subjugate unwilling people. In other words, whenever satisfying the needs of one person makes another dissatisfied, violence from the dissatisfied person is more likely, and that means violence increases in populations. I do not consider this struggle as a "class struggle" but as many individual struggles. They are natural and inevitable. It might be possible to study data from the internet that statistically characterizes people according to their dissatisfaction level, and calculates an optimal socioeconomic-political position for various personality types that would minimize violence (i.e., maximize personal satisfaction). It might be published like horoscopes, and might be called a horrorscope by those who disparage science. In any case, I see the capitalist ethos as a natural struggle for some people to satisfy themselves regardless of hurting others. Furthermore, that mode of operation may make them less safe. They may maximize their safety from violence, if they modify their behavior to help others satisfy their needs, because we are each safer when we are all free of violence. There are many unknowns, for example, I don't know if thrill seekers are prevalent enough to overwhelm safety seekers.

If there is no upper limit imposed by other forces, gravity seems to impose the minimum size of a neutron star, whose structure seems inconsistent with an atom because neutron stars contain electrons.

Science without engineering is philosophy. Philosophy is rigorous common sense. For example, in natural philosophy observe, exclude magic, and explain. Explanations describe the known and the unknown. An unknown may be unknowable or not. The steps are clearly obvious, except for exclude magic, because magic can play subtle tricks to confuse our observations and explanations. Philosophers also observe the process of philosophy and explain it. The things observed are challenging, they include the small, the large, the infinite, and the eternal.

Hi kindheart, a scientist, nihilist! Hi Chris. Welcome to SFN.

I find it hard to watch two men kiss because it makes me think of kissing a man, which makes me feel uncomfortable. Yet, I accept that two men can love and be in love, and have good friendships with gay guys.

Quasars vary in distance from the Earth, see the following: list of quasars redshift

We do not do homework. You have not shown any work; thus, I cannot help if you do not try.

Trying to write an abstract for a dialogue would be like trying to write an abstract for a research paper before the research is complete.

WWLabRat, I absolutely agree that science education in communities before university level is poor. It is tragic that religious groups are attacking science education in the US and making it worse. Regardless of its quality, what about the system is teaching gender bias? If there are teachers teaches such a bias, then parents have the right to complain to the school system, and have the teacher censured and perhaps fired.

It might be a good idea, but it would be a huge effort for moderators to edit all the abstracts. However, threads are rarely monologues in which the OP knows what will be posted. An abstract is a summary of a paper or concept, but with dialogues one person cannot summarize what will be said. Moreover, editors of the abstracts, the moderators, would forever be introducing their ideas into original posts, which seems undemocratic. While it would be nice for everyone to make a clear and concise opening statement, not everyone has the skill to do so. Currently, those statements are clarified by questions and comments from other members. The process is chaotic. Sometimes the intent of the post is clarified, and sometimes it is not. But, it does not overload the moderators, and is democratic. Do we really need a change as suggested?

It is unclear how one encourages people to become scientists, except by educating them about science and letting them decide to make a career move, perhaps with advice from a career counselor. IMO everyone should get a basic education in science, as part of their elementary and high school education. Beyond that, it is their choice.

And me.