But did they even know someone was stealing from them, or who was doing it? Just because the players knew what was going on doesn't mean the characters did.
Er, I love Old Boy myself. But how on earth would you classify it as a comedy? (Though I must admit the dude jumping to his death through the car while holding onto his pet poodle as the main character just smiles and walks away did make me chuckle).
You want equality? When may men have the right to bodily integrity? Or are you suggesting women should enjoy living with mutilated genitals as well for equality?
For the record, just about any feminist I've heard give an opinion on the subject has been against male circumcision as well.
It's impossible to tell whether or not an answer is "fallacy ridden garbage" if you don't bother to listen to it in the first place. Sure the answer could be crap, but if you don't bother evaluating it objectively just because you're assuming the established thinking is always crap then you aren't thinking critically.
You can find a selection of pretty good movies they offer here. I ended up watching Dredd and was blown away - something I wouldn't have done if not for word of mouth. (So you're trying to tell me someone made another movie on Judge Dredd that's actually good?) And of course, sometimes the movies you at first don't recognize end up being the ones you love the most.
Perhaps for his encore he'll move on to posting jokes about airplanes and twin towers for real giggles.
"I have to leave early tonight, I have to fly out to L.A. I couldn't get a direct flight, I have to make a stop at the Empire State Building." -Gilbert Gottfried
How can we tell them how to build it better, when we cant even achieve what they did 4000+ years ago? lol
But my point is it may be the only thing preventing us from achieving the same is an unwillingness to be blatantly immoral (not to mention finding a compelling reason to build one in the first place). If that's the case then, yeah, we might very well have grounds for telling the a better way to do the same thing. You never know. *shrug*
Electrons interfere with themselves, because the fluctuation (which is the electron) exists in the full region between the source and screen. The interference pattern is the same no matter how slowly (in terms of electron rate) you fire the electrons, so build up is not a concern.
And this is an important point. I'm not a physicist, but one thing that helped me understand this better is to consider firing a single electron (for example) at the two slits one at the time. It could be at the rate of one per minute, one hour or whatever.
Every electron that makes it through to the screen behind the two slits will hit it at a single point. Nothing unusual there. However, if you make a histogram on the screen based on how frequently each spot gets hit by an electron you'll see the interference pattern you'd expect from a wave being split in two from the two slits. So each electron is a wave that travels through both slits, not one or the other.
If there is true consensus about global warming, then science should be inviting opposing thought - not trying to stifle the discussion like a dictator.
But what if the opposing "thought" you're inviting is simply a bunch of specious reasoning debunked a long time ago? Repeated over and over. To the point that you realize that the ones doing the arguing have no interest whatsoever in any kind of objective truth. How long should you be inviting it then? How long do you pretend they deserve respect?
...and we are indeed the first who will learn a lot of lessons as we swarm across the galaxy once we figure out how to get off this damn rock.
You know, I've heard this attitude many times before, and I just don't get it. The Earth is beautiful. We've evolved to see it as beautiful, and yet people still aren't able to enjoy they great things they have right here. Protip: if you can't be happy here on Earth then you're incapable of finding happiness no matter where you go.
It's true that the GP is just representing one interpretation. Just thought I'd throw out my favorite "interpretation", (objective collapse theory) as it doesn't seem to get much love. No multiple worlds. No living-dead cats.
Also, instead of thinking of things being fundamentally composed of objects that are sort of both waves and particles I find it easier to picture them all as waves that only occasionally act as particles under the right conditions. This seems counter-intuitive since most of the world we experience is a result of these interactions that make them appear as particles. But it makes it a lot easier when picturing how things work with QFT and the difference between virtual and non-virtual "particles".
Actually, this experiment makes a pretty good case that special and general relativity are a demonstrated facts. Unless there's some philosophical hair-splitting in the definitions I missed.
Slashdot Mirror
But did they even know someone was stealing from them, or who was doing it? Just because the players knew what was going on doesn't mean the characters did.
Er, I love Old Boy myself. But how on earth would you classify it as a comedy? (Though I must admit the dude jumping to his death through the car while holding onto his pet poodle as the main character just smiles and walks away did make me chuckle).
For the record, just about any feminist I've heard give an opinion on the subject has been against male circumcision as well.
Maybe they're the more sane ones after all.
It's impossible to tell whether or not an answer is "fallacy ridden garbage" if you don't bother to listen to it in the first place. Sure the answer could be crap, but if you don't bother evaluating it objectively just because you're assuming the established thinking is always crap then you aren't thinking critically.
Sure. But the problem is that far too many people who question established institutions or doctrines refuse to listen when they get answers.
This.
Just adding my own simple, non-calculus solution, to the mix.
When the radius of the earth is r we have...
Length of string around earth = 2*pi*r
Length of string around earth and poodle evenly = 2*pi(r + poodle)
Subtract former from the latter and it's 2*pi*r + 2*pi*poodle - 2*pi*r, so just 2*pi*poodle more.
You can find a selection of pretty good movies they offer here. I ended up watching Dredd and was blown away - something I wouldn't have done if not for word of mouth. (So you're trying to tell me someone made another movie on Judge Dredd that's actually good?) And of course, sometimes the movies you at first don't recognize end up being the ones you love the most.
"I have to leave early tonight, I have to fly out to L.A. I couldn't get a direct flight, I have to make a stop at the Empire State Building." -Gilbert Gottfried
But my point is it may be the only thing preventing us from achieving the same is an unwillingness to be blatantly immoral (not to mention finding a compelling reason to build one in the first place). If that's the case then, yeah, we might very well have grounds for telling the a better way to do the same thing. You never know. *shrug*
A big reason we don't build something similar of that scale now is that we tend to frown upon obvious slave labor nowadays.
No need to tell Noah anything. The flood story is a myth.
Oh, so kind of like alcohol then.
And this is an important point. I'm not a physicist, but one thing that helped me understand this better is to consider firing a single electron (for example) at the two slits one at the time. It could be at the rate of one per minute, one hour or whatever.
Every electron that makes it through to the screen behind the two slits will hit it at a single point. Nothing unusual there. However, if you make a histogram on the screen based on how frequently each spot gets hit by an electron you'll see the interference pattern you'd expect from a wave being split in two from the two slits. So each electron is a wave that travels through both slits, not one or the other.
Only if you're really really lucky.
But what if the opposing "thought" you're inviting is simply a bunch of specious reasoning debunked a long time ago? Repeated over and over. To the point that you realize that the ones doing the arguing have no interest whatsoever in any kind of objective truth. How long should you be inviting it then? How long do you pretend they deserve respect?
But if there is no difference between ball designs then why do we never see shots like these anymore?
It turns our that most people get the Paleo diet wrong. The diets of these people would differ wildly depending on the land they occupied.
For many of the myths espoused on what the Paleo diet was see here.
And really, 640 kg of unused plutonium ought to be enough for anybody.
Should that be considered a disability?
We don't need more web programming languages. Just one good one.
You know, I've heard this attitude many times before, and I just don't get it. The Earth is beautiful. We've evolved to see it as beautiful, and yet people still aren't able to enjoy they great things they have right here. Protip: if you can't be happy here on Earth then you're incapable of finding happiness no matter where you go.
It's true that the GP is just representing one interpretation. Just thought I'd throw out my favorite "interpretation", (objective collapse theory) as it doesn't seem to get much love. No multiple worlds. No living-dead cats.
Also, instead of thinking of things being fundamentally composed of objects that are sort of both waves and particles I find it easier to picture them all as waves that only occasionally act as particles under the right conditions. This seems counter-intuitive since most of the world we experience is a result of these interactions that make them appear as particles. But it makes it a lot easier when picturing how things work with QFT and the difference between virtual and non-virtual "particles".
Actually, this experiment makes a pretty good case that special and general relativity are a demonstrated facts. Unless there's some philosophical hair-splitting in the definitions I missed.
Well then I guess I'll just have to take your word for it Mister 914043. ;)