Slashdot Mirror

I can't truely speak for the whole nation, but in this little corner (Newfoundland) the situation is much the same. I haven't heard of people being actively asked/told not to take mathematics, but I know that the majority of people (~55%) of students entering MUN (Memorial University of Newfoundland - largest university in the region) fail the standard Math Placement Test and are therefore either required to do creditless math courses in order to continue with any other math/science courses or do a degree which does not require any math credits.

So we have a lot of B.A.s around here.

And now for a joke I'm going to get modded flamebait for: What did the B.A. say to the B.Sc.? Do you want fries with that?

Amusingly my experience is the exact opposite. I loved the fact that math was a strictly intellectual exercise - everything was connected, big patterns and to some degree the fact that it was all useless only added to its charm. When I got to degree level and picked up a Physics course I was dismayed to find practical applications for these things.

Hence my focus moved towards the aptly named "Pure Mathematics" and away from the layman's math, aptly name "Mechanics".

Yes, the second part is a joke, but the sentiment is true.

I'm not so sure; the lines A1C and BD are not strictly perpendicular, rather they are orthogonal. If we had coordinates we could construct the dot product of the 2 vectors and it should be equal to zero. They may also be perpendicular, but I believe the assertion that lines must intersect to be perpendicular is correct.

However you can contruct the two lines on a plane using A1C as the x-axis and transpose BD onto that plane in order to get two intersecting lines.

Disclaimer: Linear algebra was a long time ago, so I may be mistaken.

Ahh, non-Euclidean geometry. I remember it well.

I still have visions of Poincare discs when I sleep.

"These lines are just parallel . . . they're ULTRAparallel!"

God, why did I do mathematics?

THIS IS A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT ONLY. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME OR ANY PLACE ELSE FOR THAT MATTER.

Set a sizable nuclear bomb to go off in, say an hour plus or minus a random 10 minutes. Make sure no one else is observing the device. Leave the room and go about 100 yards away where you can't observe the device. Relax in the assurance that "reality" doesn't exist if you aren't observing it. Stay there for at least 75 minutes; and kiss your ass good by anytime between fifty to seventy minutes as the reality of a nuclear explosion makes itself real while you are not observing it.

For a hypothesis to be a hypothesis it must be falsifiable. I strongly suspect that the above test falsifies the "quantum mechanical" nonsense of the article. It's too bad that such supposed educated scientists can't falsify their own theories with such simple tests provided by common sense "reality".

Best to do this in the desert so as to minimize the damage. Oh yeah, let the physicists who proposed the hypothesis in the article be the one(s) to conduct the above experiment in person in the room above. I bet they won't carry it out as they know very well that they'd be toast for a fraction of a second before they disintegrate. At least their sense of preserving their own life would be "proof" of the falsehood of their hypothesis.

The point is that the "explanations" of Quantum Mechanics don't carry over into the larger world. Stop the silly metaphors which are easily falsifiable.
---
Also see my other posting on this: Nonsense QM explainations.

Perception, Nonsense, Flaws and Human Beings:

As like most articles and books on Quantum Mechanics (QM) it's difficult to really know what the heck the physicists are actually talking about because it makes no sense. Human language is likely the fault here. Mathematics may enable someone to comprehend with some ability to connect to what they are saying. For me it's all incomprehensible drivel and the ravings of a mad man, err, mad men who propose it.

Another problem with this sort of article on QM is how those of us predisposed to non-reality connected beliefs such as belief or faith in God(s), ghosts, magic, superstitions, and all other silliness of the belief-stricken tend to interpret such articles. A good example is the very silly and goofy "new-age" nonsense of the film "What the Bleep do we know" which twists the ideas of QM till it's just funny yet a truly sad comment on humans and how "well" (in a sarcastic sense) equipped we are too deal with the "real reality" (or as the author of that article might prefer, the "real unreality").

Anyway there is a distinction between what is real verses what is fantasy and how what is real is somehow connected with the "real reality" and what is fantasy is simply connected to a thought in your brain - the difference between these two distinguished notions is crucial in that what is real has a connection to the universe, and while the "thoughts" of fantasy (e.g. God) you have might be real the actual universe simply doesn't care about it and goes on about it's godless accidental meandering way.

The reality we perceive is just that, the reality we perceive. The properties of a ball, such as "round", "bouncy" or "red" are real in perception. Perception is a different realty than QM for sure. The QM universe is the universe we live in (from what we can tell). However, it's a big stretch to think that "red bouncy balls" don't bounce on a "hard" flat surface oriented perpendicular to the N dimensional curvature of gravity of the Earth.

Too many of the QM explanations allow for leprechauns to pop into existence one moment and then, after taking your wallet with $200 leave you with the $100 of gold you asked for as they pop away into non-existence. (By the way, that's a rule of leprechauns, always make a profit.)

Anyway the QM rules which operate at the levels "below" the resolution

Do you know why those Japanese guys showed up at the house to play? Because there's no chance of anyone figuring out how to play with someone else over WiiConnect24.

Seriously, I have a 360 and a Wii. 360; plug in an Ethernet cord, choose a Gamertag, online with a Silver account. Slightly more to Gold, but nothing that a competent person can't manage. Wii; once you manage to get the thing online (which requires WiFi unless you pony up for an adapter - therefore needs WPA keys - nothing for the /. crowd, but most people have no idea what this shit is) you have to trade 15? digit friend codes for EACH GAME.

Seriously though, it's ridiculous.

I agree totally with your second post. Nothing disputed whatsoever.

Worldwide that was indeed the case, but NA was still Nintendoland.

Quick, without using Google, what does VHS stand for?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

My advice?

Get a new investment banker.

No, he meant the Republic of China. Click the so kindly provided link and learn about countries that exist outside the 48 contiguous states.

Yes, despite what you've been taught, they do exist.