While I would say yea, lets do this to catch the fucking knobs that I constantly see texting and driving, I am 100% certain people are going to be falsely accused because how are they going to verify that it was not a hands-free call or text? This is going going to end well.
The law these days has become nothing but an automatically guilty upon accusation without due process cliche. We cannot have the innocent suffering just to catch the assholes, despite the fact that the world at large has a mostly guilty until proven innocent bias!
They manage to find out enough information to make money don't they? Every single call can be traced... if they wanted to trace them. The key is that there is no motivation to do so. It is just easier to allow robo-calls and collect money from a subscriber.
Every system could implement a technology that when a person receives a robo-call they hang up and immediately dial... say Start or Pound 666... nice number for that shit, and it immediately drops an electronic note to the phone company that the last number that called was a robo. It all goes into a database and now they have at least the exit phone number attached to a business, whether that number is VoIP or Traditional is meaningless. That number itself like an IP address is registered to a business and then you go to that business and tell them... if you keep letting your telephony infrastructure make/forward robocalls we fine you into oblivion or force the telephone company to cut your phone/internet.
The problem is actually very easy to solve, the problem is political and businesses do not want to lose the revenue robo-calls generate. There really are lots of ways to solve this problem. But it will never be resolved because leaders don't actually care about citizens, they just care about your votes. We all can't be William Webster.
TLDR: A model is proof of nothing, have seen more than enough of them not predict any actual phenomenon and requiring me to disprove something that is not proven is not a good way to discuss Sciences.
"Firstly, we have no evidence that it's not possible to fold space to make wormholes,"
It becomes dishonest to require that I prove a negative for my arguments to have merit.
"but we do have a pile of evidence that it might be possible, in the form of the mathematical models that keep getting tested and shown to actually match the way the real universe behaves."
Keep in mind evidence is not proof of anything, and scientists constantly misunderstand the evidence themselves. Scientists are constantly arguing and the old saying... "science progresses one funeral at a time" has meaning for this reason. We treat science too much like a church once a model has been introduced and because someone cannot disprove something someone cannot even prove yet we get really bent out of shape when someone says... uh no, I am not going to believe that.
I think the idea of science is really cool, but I really dislike the level of hubris science continues to have about our reality. As an engineer, I constantly run into problems that architects constantly create because their "math" says it works. Well, that model worked because it is in a closed system that does not account for other models that will be interacting with that model. In reality it fails in implementation because well... the math only looked like it worked.
That said... I am still not saying such phenomenon cannot exist... that is not something I have the knowledge to predict... I am just saying that "their" model of what they say is possible is what is not correct because it fails a check with other things we do already know like reality... or at least things we "think we know". And that is why I called it a fantasy. This scientist is off wasting time on Steps 2 and 3 to a problem without solving the problem of Step 1... finding and getting close enough to a wormhole to even test the merit of such a hypothesis. And I tend to think they do this for a good reason... harder to disprove something that cannot even be tested and is negatively moving perceptions of science in the wrong direction in my opinion.
Yes, if we do find a way to create and use wormholes you bet it will be a heck of a day for history. But it sure is convenient that we have not witnessed any "natural" wormholes wrecking any portions of the galaxy though... right? I know space is big, but we should have enough view to check for such things.
Meritocracy is NOT the problem. The problem is what kind of controls are in place to ensure that Meritocracy continues to exist when those in power begin to find way to abuse the system. This argument goes to everything in existence.
Every system is fine so long as it is run by benevolent actors... any malevolent actors will cause damage... be it meritocracy or otherwise. The ONLY system that is the best system is one that creates controls for the "ocracy" to overcome the inherent corruption that humans will bring as they institutionalize the practice being used. This argument is at the core of our very political beings and everyone is missing that key important factor in favor of their political dogma..
Any "ocracy" you create will work well when it is run by benevolent actors. any "ocracy" you create will fail when it is run by malevolent actors. You must always count on a malevolent actor gaining a position of power and controls must be in place to treat that as a certainty, otherwise the system fails because there will be no control to remove malevolent actors without resorting to methods that are likely considered chaos.
Meritocracy is fine, the problem is when a person merits their way to the top and stops being meritorious of that position and finds a way to remain at the top despite no longer meriting this. So really the problem is closer too... how to start being a Meritocracy and STAYING a meritocracy.
"Light may NOT âoespeed upâ or âoeslow downâ it always travels the speed of light."
That statement makes you sound ignorant or COY in a vain attempt to entrap me. The speed of light is different based on the medium in which is is moving, meaning in laymans terms... it DOES speed up and slow down. Here watch this helpful YouTube video from FermiLab https://www.youtube.com/watch?... you are in need of an education.
"Likewise, relatively and the time dilation effects have been experientially proven."
Straight up strawman argument... I never said time dilation is not real or unproven. I said "time" is not proven or real. The best measuring device we have for time is an "atomic clock" that "counts" the number of transitions an electron makes. For example a caesium atomic clocks electron must transition 9,192,631,770 times for it to be equivalent to 1 second of time. When things move... this includes subatomic particles, they too must overcome inertia. The overcoming of that inertia creates lag... so when you make atoms move fast the harder it is for the electrons to overcome enertia in the direction they are traveling causing the clock to slow down, since it is counting the transitions. It is effectively the same as mucking up gears in a clock with peanut butter to slow the gears down. Movement increases resistance because movement increases relativistic mass and electrons are not immune from this. Don't you remember e=mc2?
So yes, time dilation is real, but is not proof that time itself as a force or entity of any kind exists, that is fantasy.
"LIGO was one of the most successful experiments of our lifetimes and is bullet proof validation of general relativity."
Big fan of general relativity, but you seem to actually NOT be or you would not have made your ignorant statments. Why are you attempting to make it appear as though I disagree with it? Do you need to resort to dishonesty to disagree with what I am saying?
"While itâ(TM)s possible to go through life assuming you know better than the rest of humanity, all while depending on them for survival, itâ(TM)s not a good look."
Can you explain how this accusation is not reflective or your own hubris? Arguments like this are actually quite exceptionally dishonest. We are only talking about increasing the strength of light beams using black holes and time being a concept and not a force like gravity. This hardly approaches the accusation that I claim to know better than the rest of humanity. And you have exactly zero knowledge of what my survival capabilities are. But I am beginning to understand how intelligent you are based on this exchange... and talk about not being "a good look".
Lol... you say I am the one failing to understand? I am not the one making the claim that it is possible to "fold" 3-dimensional space like paper and then trying to pass it off as not being "Science Fantasy" They call that SciFi (Science Fiction) for a reason! Perhaps you need to look up the word Fiction and what it means?
Stupid ignorance like yours being taken seriously is what harms people's opinions of science! You need to be getting back to that party... reality does not seem to be your speed.
Yes, YOU will definitely be having some laws over your head, while those in a position of power still have that low bar for entry you think you are preventing. You have a vast amount of ignorance. Laws are not there to stop or prevent crime. They are there to punish people that violate the law and cannot afford to pay the piper or stupid enough to publicly flaunt their positions of power. Like Shkreli... his only mistake was running his pie hole. Had he only kept a low profile he would still be filthy stinking rich and NOT being punished by your idea of "government". I have personally seen people steal police cars and get less punishment than someone jay-walking. Was in court that day. I think you have no idea of what you are talking about.
This makes the assumption that space-faring civilizations exist, to which we have no evidence of. That said, if such a phenomenon were possible you are likely correct about the gravitational lensing aspect. The turbulence would very likely do a great job of mangling any beam of energy we send its way and turn it in a giant galactic light bulb.
Considering this, if that were likely the other question becomes... why are they not already galactic light bulbs? We see stars from great distances... should there not already be collectively enough energy for this effect to already naturally occur around the event horizons of black holes? And yet it does not that we can observe. We also theorize that plenty of Hawking Radiation is a by product of black holes as well... that might be better... if it actually exists, can be detected by our instruments, or even used as a form of propulsion for that matter. But at least it would already be turned into the "on" position without us doing anything other than finding their streams.
The proletariat will forever be ruled because they ask to be ruled. They do not understand that the creation of governments of man is the creation of bourgeois itself. Any attempt to enlighten them is visited with derision and accusations of anarchy.
Anarchy and Government are not polar opposites, they can quite readily be had together or apart, neither cares about the presence of the other and often times a bend too far in either of their directions strengthen the desire for the other.
The folks espousing the idea of democracy are specifically seeking oppression the most under the false idea that people actually agree with them. A lot of people do not realize that most people are just there and going with the flow to avoid being harmed by the hive mind. You step out of line too much and could be mobbed by a bunch of "anarchists" telling you to follow their laws that you never voted for or was even asked for... they like to call it "social justice"... the very platform of Anarchy itself masquerading as "Justice".
It never ceases to amaze me at the amount of fantasy physics that occur in science. Take the classic "wormhole" concept where they fold a piece of paper and put pencil through it to imitate space being folded by phenomenon so that great distances can be traveled with little effort. It is entirely bunk, just like time, everyone knows it, but because they are enamored by the fantasy of it, they agree to it as a concept. Well here is a real physics check, collapsing that much volume (space is not actually empty) into a small space like that would become a black hole... and then you have your next problem... getting whatever mechanism that caused the collapse to un-collapse it, considering the nature of that phenomenon. Good luck with that madness. Same problem here... to drive a laser powerful enough to do what they are talking about likely means having enough power to accomplish the task in other ways. not to mention a few other important factors. Space is moving, things are bending, we cannot see what is on the other side, we cannot effectively predict where we will be when the beam comes back around... and finally... light is still too slow for that kind of effective use because of relativity. The light itself may speed up or slow down but our usage of it will drastically reduce its effectiveness, unless some other new technology like the EM drive were to be discovered. Right now.. its a bleeding fantasy.
Instead of calling it spacetime, it should be called Space and Energy. Time is nothing more than a conceptual tool we use to facilitate the measurement of Space and Energy as it changes in the reality we are able to grasp and observe.
That everyone is breaking anyways, especially if you are wealthy or have power or connections to power. It is always a gas to see folks like you pretend that someone else's idea would never work while looking as your own idea already not working.
There is only 1 law... and that is of the jungle. The rich and powerful just like to hold the threat of anarchy over your head to get you to agree to anarchy anyways. You can be murdered by your government and how many of your fellow citizens will care enough to do anything about that? Not even your own family will do anything, except sue and get some money... your murder would benefit them.
What the poster is really trying to tell you that this just like the war on drugs will set us back more than it would wind up benefiting us. So yes, go ahead and law it all away... you only lose to powerful people getting you to fear your own shadow and preventing you from not being able to do anything while they still get to do everything. Sadly it works all too well.
APGW is too much of a cash cow for Political leaders to sacrifice power over. The solution can only allowed to be a political one, it can never be an economic or technological one.
The proposal should go forward if for nothing else than to learn more, regardless of whether the technology/research is useful or not... used or not. Everyone nay saying it likely feels threatened because they are only driven by fear and ignorance. Seriously what is it going to hurt to research it? Other than your personal politics?
the research could actually go towards helping prove that APGW is real, rather than just a theory. It may also help identify better metrics so we can make an accurate prediction as well... since we know they have only failed in all of their models.
These things have been done before, and it is hardly irrational to want to take steps to prevent them from happening again.
Additionally, I know how to use fear to get you and many like you to dig a grave, get into it, pull the dirt over your faces, and even talk great things about me the entire time it is happening.
You see, the only thing that stops things like this from happening is because it takes a lot of time to find out which fears works best to trigger these responses. Take a look at 9/11 and how the world collectively lost it's fucking marbles just because a few terrorists got lucky? The knee-jerk reaction to all of that was only to create more injustice. Never let a bad situation go to waste and there is always a terrible problem around the corner that will occur and give people ammunition to do entire stupid things out of their irrational fears.
It's not a matter of if... its a matter of when! It's just going to happen whether you like it or not... I am just wanting to make it less frequent and you want to make it more frequent.
No, I just don't lie to people like you and tell them, this is all perfectly safe and this will not hurt a bit.
Everything has a risk, vaccinations are the same thing. The entire Medical industry is about weighing the pro's and con's of the medicines they give people.
Right now the information indicates that risks of not getting vaccinated outweigh the risks of getting vaccinated. The fear is stepping into the arena when you fear a bad outcome.
Sure I fear the risk of vaccinations... but I fear things like measles more... and since morons like you are out there I am double or triple motivated to do what I can to protect my children from those like you.
What is the objective of calling them and treating them like SCUM?
I may not be an antivaxxer but I also understand fear. It is an irrational beast and you just like them have irrational fears that make you do stupid stuff too. In fact most people have them. Just because that irrational fear is over vaccines does not make it better or worse than peoples fears of disease, terrorists, crime, fire, or any other fear you can come up with.
I bet you are more understanding with other fears, why have you decided to be less understanding on this one? AND to the point where you feel the need to underplay peoples totally legitimate concerns? Drugs are not safe... https://www.acsh.org/news/2017...
When people have a reason to mistrust institutions then those fears become overriding factors and when you run around offering things that are not true and using well I was not talking about exceptions for those cases then wind up hurting more than helping because they are only going to put you in the mindless zombie group that just believes anything they are told.
Anti-Vaxxers are hardly the only group of people causing us risks because of their ignorance. Lets be less like buttheads and instead just point out the facts as we know them.
It's not really paranoia. There is always an ebb and flow to government corruption. This year nothing happened, next year there is controversy where someone lied to the government got things done. How many times does government get to murder people before you stop worshiping them? How many Mao's, Hitler's, Stalin's, Pol Pot's, Maduro's, Ill's, and Trump's do you need to see in government to figure out that government is not something you can trust and that government does not care about you as an individual?
Governments, Businesses, and other groups are more than happy to turn you into a slime pool the moment it serves their needs, wants, or desires.
Why is is paranoid to want to take steps from preventing something that HAS ACTUALLY happened? Perhaps you are the on missing a few fries from their happy meal?
"You cannot think." I am not the one spreading lies that were so quickly disproven.
"This information does not support not getting vaccinated." For the people with known allergies to the drugs involved it does.
The problem here is that you are just plain wrong and cannot accept it and you are using my discussion of "rare" situations to make it appear as though I am talking about the general situation and I am not.
I support getting vaccines, I vaccinate my children, but making equally stupid statements like yours are just as much of a lie as the anti-vaxxers. And do you know what that means? You are fueling their misinformation by making it easy to prove you are lying too!
You are counter productive and since you won't think you are not intelligent enough to figure it out.
Vaccines are not safe, but because the benefits they offer outweigh their risks, its a good idea to get vaccinated, but it does not mean there are no contraindications. For those unlucky enough for a vaccination to not take or have an allergy, they must rely on the principle of herd immunity to be protected.
But that is still a straw-man argument. The problem NOT just about how long a bulb runs and how much energy it saves operating for the end consumer only. Once again, since you seem to be too thick to understand. There is a cost to the materials those LED's need. Do those "technically" offset the cost of the energy & waste we have to consider? Or are you okay with destroying the environment just to shave a few pennies off your home lighting bill?
I am not against LED's I still buy them myself, but no one here knows the full costs of these things, and I would like to know that because hanging up my hat and accepting what is being said when my experience with LED's has NOT been reflective of what the MFG packages say I can expected from their bulbs!
Look at the article. They had to show cost savings over 23 years to see a large number. Do you know what they call this? Statistical Padding, where things are done to improve statistical numbers despite them not really being of help to the whole team wining.
Because LED lights cost more to make, tolerance for failures is lower. And bulbs are not always on so the failure rates of those that turn bulbs on/off at higher frequencies may also be an issue.
I guess your "confirmation bias" switch is set to the on position?
That or you did not even bother to check or just assumed that none existed, which is typical of an ignorant person.
If facts will not change your mind how do you expect to become informed? the LED component itself is not the only thing that can fail.
I have personally had 25% of my LED lights fail far too soon, from 4 different mfg's in 3 locations, but my information is purely anecdotal, just like yours is.
Just need to make vaccinations mandatory and with the amount of citizen tracking and information we have we can selectively sterilize any group we want.
Hopefully we will start with the group that does want government mandated vaccinations.
We can selectively control entire groups through medication. Heck once DNA editing is in effect we can edit those folks. Heck if we find a way to modify our DNA to live much longer lives we can introduce accidental deaths for those no longer desired by authorities.
Thankfully the side effects are rare in most cases, and the risks of not getting vaccinated are higher than getting vaccinated.
If vaccines were totally safe they would be sold over the counter available for anyone to pick up instead of keeping them locked behind doctors and regulations. Your should have just stopped at your first post, you were doing good until now.
Actually yes, it really is "facebook settles science"
In fact it has always been this way and you see that clearly from the "there is a scientific consensus" people. A consensus does not make anything fact or fiction. Heck since science is more often wrong than right and the fact that most studies cannot be reproduced, it makes it very bad to stifle any information, no matter how obscene it sounds.
My favorite goto argument for this is that once upon a time "everyone thought the earth was flat, the center of the universe, and that the sun orbited earth." AND they often wanted to kill, or harm, or jail anyone that said otherwise! These kinds of people still exist, and you know who they are when they start trash talking anyone that does not agree with every little thing they say.
You do realize that the efficiency of the end product is not the ONLY important factor here right? Materials have energy costs themselves. Are you factoring the cost to mine those hydrocarbons? How about the cost to fabricate them? You are just one individual, some folks have really bad experiences with LEDs not performing as expected and so those actually increase the energy and waste required to have more efficient bulbs. How about the damage done to the environment of metal and class incandescent bulbs vs plastic hydrocarbon LEDs? I do see the articles talking about how much chemical waste is now in the environment from these things, are you not concerned about that if you can just get something more efficient?
We need to know the true cost to make these claims. If I have to expend 10 times the energy and waste risk just to gain even a several fold increase in efficiency... it is possible we are still not actually saving anything. But we are isolated from that information because finding out the true cost is not so easy.
Take the growing corn for ethanol, it looks like that actually had a negative offset in the end. Wasting energy just to win an efficiency race is a bad idea.
Slashdot Mirror
While I would say yea, lets do this to catch the fucking knobs that I constantly see texting and driving, I am 100% certain people are going to be falsely accused because how are they going to verify that it was not a hands-free call or text? This is going going to end well.
The law these days has become nothing but an automatically guilty upon accusation without due process cliche. We cannot have the innocent suffering just to catch the assholes, despite the fact that the world at large has a mostly guilty until proven innocent bias!
They manage to find out enough information to make money don't they? Every single call can be traced... if they wanted to trace them. The key is that there is no motivation to do so. It is just easier to allow robo-calls and collect money from a subscriber.
Every system could implement a technology that when a person receives a robo-call they hang up and immediately dial... say Start or Pound 666... nice number for that shit, and it immediately drops an electronic note to the phone company that the last number that called was a robo. It all goes into a database and now they have at least the exit phone number attached to a business, whether that number is VoIP or Traditional is meaningless. That number itself like an IP address is registered to a business and then you go to that business and tell them... if you keep letting your telephony infrastructure make/forward robocalls we fine you into oblivion or force the telephone company to cut your phone/internet.
The problem is actually very easy to solve, the problem is political and businesses do not want to lose the revenue robo-calls generate. There really are lots of ways to solve this problem. But it will never be resolved because leaders don't actually care about citizens, they just care about your votes. We all can't be William Webster.
TLDR: A model is proof of nothing, have seen more than enough of them not predict any actual phenomenon and requiring me to disprove something that is not proven is not a good way to discuss Sciences.
"Firstly, we have no evidence that it's not possible to fold space to make wormholes,"
It becomes dishonest to require that I prove a negative for my arguments to have merit.
"but we do have a pile of evidence that it might be possible, in the form of the mathematical models that keep getting tested and shown to actually match the way the real universe behaves."
Keep in mind evidence is not proof of anything, and scientists constantly misunderstand the evidence themselves. Scientists are constantly arguing and the old saying... "science progresses one funeral at a time" has meaning for this reason. We treat science too much like a church once a model has been introduced and because someone cannot disprove something someone cannot even prove yet we get really bent out of shape when someone says... uh no, I am not going to believe that.
I think the idea of science is really cool, but I really dislike the level of hubris science continues to have about our reality. As an engineer, I constantly run into problems that architects constantly create because their "math" says it works. Well, that model worked because it is in a closed system that does not account for other models that will be interacting with that model. In reality it fails in implementation because well... the math only looked like it worked.
That said... I am still not saying such phenomenon cannot exist... that is not something I have the knowledge to predict... I am just saying that "their" model of what they say is possible is what is not correct because it fails a check with other things we do already know like reality... or at least things we "think we know". And that is why I called it a fantasy. This scientist is off wasting time on Steps 2 and 3 to a problem without solving the problem of Step 1... finding and getting close enough to a wormhole to even test the merit of such a hypothesis. And I tend to think they do this for a good reason... harder to disprove something that cannot even be tested and is negatively moving perceptions of science in the wrong direction in my opinion.
Yes, if we do find a way to create and use wormholes you bet it will be a heck of a day for history. But it sure is convenient that we have not witnessed any "natural" wormholes wrecking any portions of the galaxy though... right? I know space is big, but we should have enough view to check for such things.
Meritocracy is NOT the problem. The problem is what kind of controls are in place to ensure that Meritocracy continues to exist when those in power begin to find way to abuse the system. This argument goes to everything in existence.
Every system is fine so long as it is run by benevolent actors... any malevolent actors will cause damage... be it meritocracy or otherwise. The ONLY system that is the best system is one that creates controls for the "ocracy" to overcome the inherent corruption that humans will bring as they institutionalize the practice being used. This argument is at the core of our very political beings and everyone is missing that key important factor in favor of their political dogma..
Any "ocracy" you create will work well when it is run by benevolent actors. any "ocracy" you create will fail when it is run by malevolent actors. You must always count on a malevolent actor gaining a position of power and controls must be in place to treat that as a certainty, otherwise the system fails because there will be no control to remove malevolent actors without resorting to methods that are likely considered chaos.
Meritocracy is fine, the problem is when a person merits their way to the top and stops being meritorious of that position and finds a way to remain at the top despite no longer meriting this. So really the problem is closer too... how to start being a Meritocracy and STAYING a meritocracy.
"Light may NOT âoespeed upâ or âoeslow downâ it always travels the speed of light."
That statement makes you sound ignorant or COY in a vain attempt to entrap me. The speed of light is different based on the medium in which is is moving, meaning in laymans terms... it DOES speed up and slow down. Here watch this helpful YouTube video from FermiLab https://www.youtube.com/watch?... you are in need of an education.
"Likewise, relatively and the time dilation effects have been experientially proven."
Straight up strawman argument... I never said time dilation is not real or unproven. I said "time" is not proven or real. The best measuring device we have for time is an "atomic clock" that "counts" the number of transitions an electron makes. For example a caesium atomic clocks electron must transition 9,192,631,770 times for it to be equivalent to 1 second of time. When things move... this includes subatomic particles, they too must overcome inertia. The overcoming of that inertia creates lag... so when you make atoms move fast the harder it is for the electrons to overcome enertia in the direction they are traveling causing the clock to slow down, since it is counting the transitions. It is effectively the same as mucking up gears in a clock with peanut butter to slow the gears down. Movement increases resistance because movement increases relativistic mass and electrons are not immune from this. Don't you remember e=mc2?
So yes, time dilation is real, but is not proof that time itself as a force or entity of any kind exists, that is fantasy.
"LIGO was one of the most successful experiments of our lifetimes and is bullet proof validation of general relativity."
Big fan of general relativity, but you seem to actually NOT be or you would not have made your ignorant statments. Why are you attempting to make it appear as though I disagree with it? Do you need to resort to dishonesty to disagree with what I am saying?
"While itâ(TM)s possible to go through life assuming you know better than the rest of humanity, all while depending on them for survival, itâ(TM)s not a good look."
Can you explain how this accusation is not reflective or your own hubris? Arguments like this are actually quite exceptionally dishonest. We are only talking about increasing the strength of light beams using black holes and time being a concept and not a force like gravity. This hardly approaches the accusation that I claim to know better than the rest of humanity. And you have exactly zero knowledge of what my survival capabilities are. But I am beginning to understand how intelligent you are based on this exchange... and talk about not being "a good look".
"Folding space, or paper, is not compressing it."
Lol... you say I am the one failing to understand? I am not the one making the claim that it is possible to "fold" 3-dimensional space like paper and then trying to pass it off as not being "Science Fantasy" They call that SciFi (Science Fiction) for a reason! Perhaps you need to look up the word Fiction and what it means?
Stupid ignorance like yours being taken seriously is what harms people's opinions of science! You need to be getting back to that party... reality does not seem to be your speed.
Nice strawman argument...
Yes, YOU will definitely be having some laws over your head, while those in a position of power still have that low bar for entry you think you are preventing. You have a vast amount of ignorance. Laws are not there to stop or prevent crime. They are there to punish people that violate the law and cannot afford to pay the piper or stupid enough to publicly flaunt their positions of power. Like Shkreli... his only mistake was running his pie hole. Had he only kept a low profile he would still be filthy stinking rich and NOT being punished by your idea of "government". I have personally seen people steal police cars and get less punishment than someone jay-walking. Was in court that day. I think you have no idea of what you are talking about.
This makes the assumption that space-faring civilizations exist, to which we have no evidence of. That said, if such a phenomenon were possible you are likely correct about the gravitational lensing aspect. The turbulence would very likely do a great job of mangling any beam of energy we send its way and turn it in a giant galactic light bulb.
Considering this, if that were likely the other question becomes... why are they not already galactic light bulbs? We see stars from great distances... should there not already be collectively enough energy for this effect to already naturally occur around the event horizons of black holes? And yet it does not that we can observe. We also theorize that plenty of Hawking Radiation is a by product of black holes as well... that might be better... if it actually exists, can be detected by our instruments, or even used as a form of propulsion for that matter. But at least it would already be turned into the "on" position without us doing anything other than finding their streams.
The proletariat will forever be ruled because they ask to be ruled. They do not understand that the creation of governments of man is the creation of bourgeois itself. Any attempt to enlighten them is visited with derision and accusations of anarchy.
Anarchy and Government are not polar opposites, they can quite readily be had together or apart, neither cares about the presence of the other and often times a bend too far in either of their directions strengthen the desire for the other.
The folks espousing the idea of democracy are specifically seeking oppression the most under the false idea that people actually agree with them. A lot of people do not realize that most people are just there and going with the flow to avoid being harmed by the hive mind. You step out of line too much and could be mobbed by a bunch of "anarchists" telling you to follow their laws that you never voted for or was even asked for... they like to call it "social justice"... the very platform of Anarchy itself masquerading as "Justice".
It never ceases to amaze me at the amount of fantasy physics that occur in science. Take the classic "wormhole" concept where they fold a piece of paper and put pencil through it to imitate space being folded by phenomenon so that great distances can be traveled with little effort. It is entirely bunk, just like time, everyone knows it, but because they are enamored by the fantasy of it, they agree to it as a concept. Well here is a real physics check, collapsing that much volume (space is not actually empty) into a small space like that would become a black hole... and then you have your next problem... getting whatever mechanism that caused the collapse to un-collapse it, considering the nature of that phenomenon. Good luck with that madness. Same problem here... to drive a laser powerful enough to do what they are talking about likely means having enough power to accomplish the task in other ways. not to mention a few other important factors. Space is moving, things are bending, we cannot see what is on the other side, we cannot effectively predict where we will be when the beam comes back around... and finally... light is still too slow for that kind of effective use because of relativity. The light itself may speed up or slow down but our usage of it will drastically reduce its effectiveness, unless some other new technology like the EM drive were to be discovered. Right now.. its a bleeding fantasy.
Instead of calling it spacetime, it should be called Space and Energy. Time is nothing more than a conceptual tool we use to facilitate the measurement of Space and Energy as it changes in the reality we are able to grasp and observe.
" We'll have laws instead."
That everyone is breaking anyways, especially if you are wealthy or have power or connections to power. It is always a gas to see folks like you pretend that someone else's idea would never work while looking as your own idea already not working.
There is only 1 law... and that is of the jungle. The rich and powerful just like to hold the threat of anarchy over your head to get you to agree to anarchy anyways. You can be murdered by your government and how many of your fellow citizens will care enough to do anything about that? Not even your own family will do anything, except sue and get some money... your murder would benefit them.
What the poster is really trying to tell you that this just like the war on drugs will set us back more than it would wind up benefiting us. So yes, go ahead and law it all away... you only lose to powerful people getting you to fear your own shadow and preventing you from not being able to do anything while they still get to do everything. Sadly it works all too well.
APGW is too much of a cash cow for Political leaders to sacrifice power over. The solution can only allowed to be a political one, it can never be an economic or technological one.
The proposal should go forward if for nothing else than to learn more, regardless of whether the technology/research is useful or not... used or not. Everyone nay saying it likely feels threatened because they are only driven by fear and ignorance. Seriously what is it going to hurt to research it? Other than your personal politics?
the research could actually go towards helping prove that APGW is real, rather than just a theory. It may also help identify better metrics so we can make an accurate prediction as well... since we know they have only failed in all of their models.
You mean you have no connection to reality?
These things have been done before, and it is hardly irrational to want to take steps to prevent them from happening again.
Additionally, I know how to use fear to get you and many like you to dig a grave, get into it, pull the dirt over your faces, and even talk great things about me the entire time it is happening.
You see, the only thing that stops things like this from happening is because it takes a lot of time to find out which fears works best to trigger these responses. Take a look at 9/11 and how the world collectively lost it's fucking marbles just because a few terrorists got lucky? The knee-jerk reaction to all of that was only to create more injustice. Never let a bad situation go to waste and there is always a terrible problem around the corner that will occur and give people ammunition to do entire stupid things out of their irrational fears.
It's not a matter of if... its a matter of when! It's just going to happen whether you like it or not... I am just wanting to make it less frequent and you want to make it more frequent.
No, I just don't lie to people like you and tell them, this is all perfectly safe and this will not hurt a bit.
Everything has a risk, vaccinations are the same thing. The entire Medical industry is about weighing the pro's and con's of the medicines they give people.
Right now the information indicates that risks of not getting vaccinated outweigh the risks of getting vaccinated. The fear is stepping into the arena when you fear a bad outcome.
Sure I fear the risk of vaccinations... but I fear things like measles more... and since morons like you are out there I am double or triple motivated to do what I can to protect my children from those like you.
What is the objective of calling them and treating them like SCUM?
I may not be an antivaxxer but I also understand fear. It is an irrational beast and you just like them have irrational fears that make you do stupid stuff too. In fact most people have them. Just because that irrational fear is over vaccines does not make it better or worse than peoples fears of disease, terrorists, crime, fire, or any other fear you can come up with.
I bet you are more understanding with other fears, why have you decided to be less understanding on this one? AND to the point where you feel the need to underplay peoples totally legitimate concerns? Drugs are not safe...
https://www.acsh.org/news/2017...
When people have a reason to mistrust institutions then those fears become overriding factors and when you run around offering things that are not true and using well I was not talking about exceptions for those cases then wind up hurting more than helping because they are only going to put you in the mindless zombie group that just believes anything they are told.
Anti-Vaxxers are hardly the only group of people causing us risks because of their ignorance. Lets be less like buttheads and instead just point out the facts as we know them.
Wait... you act like this stuff has never happened before. I guess you do not read history. So do tell, what am I being paranoid about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/t...
It's not really paranoia. There is always an ebb and flow to government corruption. This year nothing happened, next year there is controversy where someone lied to the government got things done. How many times does government get to murder people before you stop worshiping them? How many Mao's, Hitler's, Stalin's, Pol Pot's, Maduro's, Ill's, and Trump's do you need to see in government to figure out that government is not something you can trust and that government does not care about you as an individual?
Governments, Businesses, and other groups are more than happy to turn you into a slime pool the moment it serves their needs, wants, or desires.
Why is is paranoid to want to take steps from preventing something that HAS ACTUALLY happened? Perhaps you are the on missing a few fries from their happy meal?
The moron is you. I am not an anti-vaxxer. It is just your ignorance and bigotry that makes you think that.
I fully support people in general getting vaccinations.
"You cannot think." I am not the one spreading lies that were so quickly disproven.
"This information does not support not getting vaccinated."
For the people with known allergies to the drugs involved it does.
The problem here is that you are just plain wrong and cannot accept it and you are using my discussion of "rare" situations to make it appear as though I am talking about the general situation and I am not.
I support getting vaccines, I vaccinate my children, but making equally stupid statements like yours are just as much of a lie as the anti-vaxxers. And do you know what that means? You are fueling their misinformation by making it easy to prove you are lying too!
You are counter productive and since you won't think you are not intelligent enough to figure it out.
Vaccines are not safe, but because the benefits they offer outweigh their risks, its a good idea to get vaccinated, but it does not mean there are no contraindications. For those unlucky enough for a vaccination to not take or have an allergy, they must rely on the principle of herd immunity to be protected.
Yes, we can all make up stories as well.
But that is still a straw-man argument. The problem NOT just about how long a bulb runs and how much energy it saves operating for the end consumer only. Once again, since you seem to be too thick to understand. There is a cost to the materials those LED's need. Do those "technically" offset the cost of the energy & waste we have to consider? Or are you okay with destroying the environment just to shave a few pennies off your home lighting bill?
I am not against LED's I still buy them myself, but no one here knows the full costs of these things, and I would like to know that because hanging up my hat and accepting what is being said when my experience with LED's has NOT been reflective of what the MFG packages say I can expected from their bulbs!
https://www.thesimpledollar.co...
Look at the article. They had to show cost savings over 23 years to see a large number. Do you know what they call this? Statistical Padding, where things are done to improve statistical numbers despite them not really being of help to the whole team wining.
Because LED lights cost more to make, tolerance for failures is lower. And bulbs are not always on so the failure rates of those that turn bulbs on/off at higher frequencies may also be an issue.
"That sounds like a load of utter bullshit."
https://www.photonics.com/Arti...
https://www.eenewseurope.com/n...
https://www.ledsmagazine.com/a...
I guess your "confirmation bias" switch is set to the on position?
That or you did not even bother to check or just assumed that none existed, which is typical of an ignorant person.
If facts will not change your mind how do you expect to become informed? the LED component itself is not the only thing that can fail.
I have personally had 25% of my LED lights fail far too soon, from 4 different mfg's in 3 locations, but my information is purely anecdotal, just like yours is.
This would make a great way to do Eugenics.
Just need to make vaccinations mandatory and with the amount of citizen tracking and information we have we can selectively sterilize any group we want.
Hopefully we will start with the group that does want government mandated vaccinations.
We can selectively control entire groups through medication. Heck once DNA editing is in effect we can edit those folks. Heck if we find a way to modify our DNA to live much longer lives we can introduce accidental deaths for those no longer desired by authorities.
We can really go somewhere with this.
"There is no information that would support not getting vaccinated against the measles."
A statement of pure ignorance. Here even the CDC would like to call you out on that.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/v...
Thankfully the side effects are rare in most cases, and the risks of not getting vaccinated are higher than getting vaccinated.
If vaccines were totally safe they would be sold over the counter available for anyone to pick up instead of keeping them locked behind doctors and regulations. Your should have just stopped at your first post, you were doing good until now.
Actually yes, it really is "facebook settles science"
In fact it has always been this way and you see that clearly from the "there is a scientific consensus" people. A consensus does not make anything fact or fiction. Heck since science is more often wrong than right and the fact that most studies cannot be reproduced, it makes it very bad to stifle any information, no matter how obscene it sounds.
My favorite goto argument for this is that once upon a time "everyone thought the earth was flat, the center of the universe, and that the sun orbited earth." AND they often wanted to kill, or harm, or jail anyone that said otherwise! These kinds of people still exist, and you know who they are when they start trash talking anyone that does not agree with every little thing they say.
This is the real objective. It has always been the objective.
Authorities or people in positions of power have always said, we need to take your liberty/rights away under the guise of protecting you.
You seem to have missed the point of my post.
You do realize that the efficiency of the end product is not the ONLY important factor here right? Materials have energy costs themselves. Are you factoring the cost to mine those hydrocarbons? How about the cost to fabricate them? You are just one individual, some folks have really bad experiences with LEDs not performing as expected and so those actually increase the energy and waste required to have more efficient bulbs. How about the damage done to the environment of metal and class incandescent bulbs vs plastic hydrocarbon LEDs? I do see the articles talking about how much chemical waste is now in the environment from these things, are you not concerned about that if you can just get something more efficient?
We need to know the true cost to make these claims. If I have to expend 10 times the energy and waste risk just to gain even a several fold increase in efficiency... it is possible we are still not actually saving anything. But we are isolated from that information because finding out the true cost is not so easy.
Take the growing corn for ethanol, it looks like that actually had a negative offset in the end. Wasting energy just to win an efficiency race is a bad idea.