Slashdot Mirror
US Can't Meet The "Grand Challenges" of Physics
BlueSky writes "A new report paints a troubling picture of the state of physics research in the US, which the authors believe has dire consequences for the competitiveness of the US. 'The report identifies six key questions that will represent the grand challenges that materials science will face over the coming decade, the ones most likely to produce the next revolution. But it also raises fears that those challenges will be met by researchers outside of the US. It highlights the fact that government funding has not kept up with the rising costs of research at the same time that the corporate-funded research lab system has collapsed. As a result, US scientific productivity has stagnated at a time when funding and output are booming overseas.'"
According to Bob Jones, Satan is already running the Catholic church. But that didn't stop John McCain going there for a pander to the virulently racist wing of the Republican party.
The three front runners for the GOP nomination are a guy who panders to anti-Catholic bigots, a guy who panders to supporters of terrorism by attending IRA fundraisers and flip-flip Mitt.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Of course there is no difference between the person who plants the bomb and a person like Rudy Giuliani who helps the IRA raise funds.
Of course according to Rudy appologists he never actually raised money for the IRA, he was raising money for NORAID which claims to be a humanitarian organization - just like the front groups that collect money for Hamas.
In 1994 Rudy gave Gerry Adams, the leader of the IRA a 'humanitarian' award, the Crystal Apple. 18 months later Gerry had a bomb planted in a Birmingham shopping mall.
Just imagine what Giuliani's state visit to the UK would be like:
Queen Eliabeth II: And what do you do when you are not out raising money to slaughter my cabinet?Sure the IRA have since become inactive. 9/11 gave them no choice. After 9/11 there was no way that fools like Rudy could continue to hide behind the 'NORAID' nonsense, they knew they were really buying bombs all along of course. After 9/11 the US fundraising was permanently shut down.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Sure the IRA have since become inactive. 9/11 gave them no choice. After 9/11 there was no way that fools like Rudy could continue to hide behind the 'NORAID' nonsense, they knew they were really buying bombs all along of course. After 9/11 the US fundraising was permanently shut down.
You're saying that the IRA stopped fighting for their idea of freedom because some Islamic radicals flew aeroplanes into New York skyscrapers? Wow. Just wow.
Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
If the Iraq war hadn't happened, the money still wouldn't have been spent on research, instead you'd have lower inflation.
Deleted
Come on mods. There is nothing "Interesting" about this post. Did a search for "nsd51" just like the last guy. This is a pure bullshit "troll". There is nothing of substance here. Just another zealot Bush hater. Obviously the mods agree that Bush is the root of a lot of evil. I don't care what anyone "feels" about Bush or any other leader, but back up your ideas with support. Show everyone you are focusing on facts and intellect and not how you "feel". I'm not referring to the "troll" here, I'm referring to the moderation.
We all have opinions here. The key is to try to sort those out and focus on pure facts. Supported reputable facts have value. Opinions aren't valuable for very much except maybe the nightly news channel polls.
Fresh horses and more whiskey for my men.
Perhaps I should have clarified. I am not discounting the use of Occam's Razor simply because it is philosophy, but rather because it is philosophy which is not directly part of the foundations of science. The mere fact that it is useful does not make it part of science proper. Even if it is absolutely right, it still remains not part of science.
A simpler theory might nonetheless be wrong. It might explain all of the available data perfectly, and be simpler than any other theory which did the same, but turn out, upon the addition of more data, to be quite wrong, whereas one of the less simple theories remains intact. You would tell me that the simpler theory was unequivocally the better one (at least at the time), even though it turned out to have essentially no truth value. This leads me to believe that you are using a metric for theory "goodness" which is not based upon the truth value of the theory. I am afraid that I cannot see the utility of such a metric, as science is a search for truth, in the end. Either that, or the original formulation of the Razor is simply wrong, and therefore should be avoided unless you know you are using it in a limited case in which it is not wrong.
You have misunderstood me badly, sir. I did not, never have, and never will claim that young earth creationism is an equivalent to big bang theory (or other scientific theories of cosmology). However, I stand by my statement that science itself cannot distinguish between the two, precisely because young earth creationism is non-science. Philosophy which is not part of the foundations of science offers any number of ready tools to distinguish between the two, the most common, useful, and probably true of which is Occam's Razor. But, if all you start with are the smallest number of statements needed to have science (the philosophical foundations of science), combined with the available data on the universe, then you will find that you are unable to deduce either big bang theory or young earth creationism, and neither are you able to exclude either of those two. From a logical standpoint, the truth of big band theory and young earth creationism is undecidable given only science and available data. However, since I do hold a large number of statements which are outside the foundations of science to be true, I can distinguish between young earth creationism and big band theory. I think that young earth creationism is fairly dumb. But I don't claim that I think that because of science; to do so would be to lie.
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.