Hey guys, let's say you have a 500 foot pole out in space, far away from anything (no friction, nothing). you are on one end of the pole, and i on the other. Then i push the pole towards you. Too bad Freud didn't live long enough to hear that one.
Anything else I should know? A few more things, by the sound of it. The first thing you should note is that the peer review system is very effective at filtering information. This makes it suited to both its official intent, which is to improve the quality of discourse, as well as to censorship. You seem to assume it is the former, but that is just an assumption about the intent and integrity of those holding editorial positions and key chairs. And you seem unaware that controversial views make it into the peer reviewed literature all the frikken time.
If indeed these observations are accurate (statistically they have a very low probability of being errors) then it's impossible to use red-shift as a metric for the "age" of the universe. And the rest of conventional cosmology also falls away. What do you get? No Big Bang, faster than light travel for rocket-ship sized objects, and other neat results. FTL travel is forbidden by general relativity, not the big bang.
Dr. Halton C. Arp used to be one of the premiere U.S. astrophysicists (assistant to Hubble, winner of many awards in his own right, including "best young American astronomer", plenty of publications, etc.), but after 28 years as a staff astronomer at Mount Palomar was kicked off the telescope for his heretical views about red-shift. Can you document that?
Now he's in a self-imposed sort of exile at the Max Planck Institut fur Astrophysik in Germany That's a rather prestigious place to spend your exile.
but continues to believe that his many observations are valid. IOW, he's sticking to his ideas that were tenable 40 years ago, even though they haven't been for the past 20 years.
The problem is the peer review system: they have trouble getting their observations and views published. That too is a favorite argument of cracked pots.
So now I'm supposed to conclude that not only is the mainstream interpretation wrong, but that its supporters are conspiring to keep its problems out of the literature.
Current cosmology is anything but settled. The following interesting documentary shows the perspective of astrophysicists and cosmologists that believe the mainstream view is flawedhttp://www.mininova.org/tor/360930. There definitely are quite a few observations that do not fit the mainstream cosmology. Well hidden from university students and the general public? Is there some reason I shouldn't immediately dismiss this as more crackpottery?
I'm guessing that your journal isn't in the field of science or mathematics. People in math and many other sciences are not automatically computer savvy. That wasn't my point. It's just that LaTeX is the de facto standard for generating professional publications in most of the sciences, mathematics, and CS. So when he says his journal's authors wouldn't know WTF tex is, I can draw the conclusion with reasonable confidence that his journal isn't in one of those fields.
I'm not in a scientific field, but I am on the staff of a scholarly journal.
If you asked our scholars for ODF, TeX, or anything else other than Word, they wouldn't even understand what you meant. I'm guessing that your journal isn't in the field of science or mathematics.
I'm quite sure that some of the brightest minds would not want to spend time to juggle with Tex. They have better research to do. It's actually quite easy, if you use it regularly.
I have no idea if they exist yet, but after I saw them in Blade Runner as a kid I always dreamed of being able to dim and outright black out my windows with the push of a button. Or you could get fancy and mount a bar over the top, with a thick cloth that you can slide out on the bar to black out the window.
Is there some inalienable right to free music? If you think the market is overpriced, go hear a local band or pick up your own noisemaker and have some fun with it. Maybe if the RIAA executives hear a bunch of Slashdotters' singing they'll come down on their prices.
In a country whose long-term drift toward fascism has accelerated into a rush, there are far more important issues that we should be raising hell about.
I'm not going to just vote for a particular party -any- time. There are horrible candidates from any party. If you vote for your party, you're doing yourself and your country a gigantic disservice. What happens when your libertarian president turns out to be either extremist or extremely moderate or even perhaps mildly some other party? Also, when any third party starts actually winning elections it's going to start attracting the same hypocritical scum the other parties do.
Look at the hypocrisy and corruption among the religious right's leadership. Is that because the rank and file want that kind of leadership? No, it's because there's money and power to be had, and plenty of people willing to pretend a little righteousness to get in on the whores and cocaine. To say nothing of those who might have been innocent before encountering the reality of "power corrupts".
VOTE LIBERTARIAN Yeah, 'cause that turned out so well the last couple of times.
not for the Republicrats nor the Democans. They have sold this country to the highest bidders, while the Libertarian party will hold true to the constitution and not take anything from the MAFIAA. That remains to be seen.
notice that windows always seems to hang (with very little response) just after I log in whilst all the startup programs start up (SeaMonkey quick launch, Miranda IM, AVG Anti-virus etc). Once the apps load, it becomes responsive again pretty quickly. It's not just on startup. I'm an occasional Windows user, and it always feels like I'm using a one-thing-at-a-time operating system.
This is all very nice they are doing this, but the need is now. Not just for windows, but all the apps have to become multi-core aware. I wonder how much the OS needs it to begin with. How much work is it doing at any given moment, other than what has been handed over to other processes, which should already be able to run on any free core?
Or are daemons to recent a concept for MS to be using...
Bravo! You and others are repeating the exact same errors I pointed out.
1. Axiom: An extra-universal is not provable through the laws of nature.
2. Axiom: Science is a tool that attempts to describe the laws of nature.
3. The laws of nature do not show a being governed by them. Therefore, such a being cannot exist. Except that that's not what he said. He merely suggested a natural explanation for something that some people like to claim, without evidence, is the result of supernatural meddling.
Slashdot Mirror
So now I'm supposed to conclude that not only is the mainstream interpretation wrong, but that its supporters are conspiring to keep its problems out of the literature.
Anything else I should know?
I thought branes (hypothetically) caused the big bang, and inflation is something that happened after the big bang.
of foil to the hat.
You're a great example of the irrational paranoia I was talking about.
or have you ever, given money to the RIAA?"
Is there some inalienable right to free music? If you think the market is overpriced, go hear a local band or pick up your own noisemaker and have some fun with it. Maybe if the RIAA executives hear a bunch of Slashdotters' singing they'll come down on their prices.
In a country whose long-term drift toward fascism has accelerated into a rush, there are far more important issues that we should be raising hell about.
Yeah, and it's funny as hell that she's become such a boogeywoman to right-wingers. She's more conservative than a lot of Republicans.
Look at the hypocrisy and corruption among the religious right's leadership. Is that because the rank and file want that kind of leadership? No, it's because there's money and power to be had, and plenty of people willing to pretend a little righteousness to get in on the whores and cocaine. To say nothing of those who might have been innocent before encountering the reality of "power corrupts".
Or are daemons to recent a concept for MS to be using...
1. Axiom: An extra-universal is not provable through the laws of nature.
2. Axiom: Science is a tool that attempts to describe the laws of nature.
3. The laws of nature do not show a being governed by them. Therefore, such a being cannot exist. Except that that's not what he said. He merely suggested a natural explanation for something that some people like to claim, without evidence, is the result of supernatural meddling.