The thrust is very weak, 1/100th or less of the weight of the thing. Vertical thrust and the vacuum both will reduce buoyancy below what is required, so I deduce the need for lift.
The sayings of Jesus concerning pacifism are accorded more of a claim to historicity than many of the other sayings attributed to him. His recommendations, when filtered for historicity by rigorous scholars, seem to be much more pragmatic than the usual interpretation that he is promising a magical reward extrinsic to the practice of peace. After all, what can be gained by resisting an irresistable enemy?
-- Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Not so! A minority vote always counts for more than a majority vote, since a minority vote can eventually overturn the result. Partisan vote counters always sweat over the additional minority votes.
Also, voters can count their vote as one on the margin, so votes count for about 20 times more than a naive analysis would indicate. If partisan postions differ by more than 5%, as does happen, then voting is amazingly powerful in an economic calculation.
I advocate mightily for the use of a preprocessor with Java because of its lack of multiple inheritence and templates. Isn't the aspects compiler merely a preprocessor applied in order to make up for these deficiencies?
-- Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Re:What simpler theory is there?
on
Testing Relativity
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The simple theory of everything must eventually fit the constraint of not having a design which necessarily entails a designer but instead having a design consisting merely of mappings from the entirety of mathematics, metamathematics, and the much larger realm of mathematical possibility - this last entity being necessarily logically incoherent.
In metamathematics, about the only a priori landmark I know of is Godel's proof. It separates the finite and logically unambiguous field of geometry from general mathematics. My favorite thought is to map this landmark onto the boundary of classical, geometric, physics with the distinctly different field of quanta. The need, proved by Godel, for an unlimited number of axioms in general mathematics then maps rather nicely onto the uncertainty principle in nonclassical physics. And, since general mathematics does not map onto geometry, it follows that quantum mechanics does not map onto general relativity. Like ordinary categorical propositions in self referential logic, quanta can not be linked to particular locations.
String theory is so ad hoc and unprincipled that it can not compete with these considerations. String theorists do not take very well after the examples of Spinoza and Einstein.
The other a priori landmark in mathematics that I know about is the distinction between coherent mathematics and logically incoherent mathematical possibility. The mapping of the two can not be complete, since one is innumerably larger than the other.
These three levels have a particular way of mapping onto each other and within themselves, and then of mapping onto physics and metaphysics, I think.
Geometry maps exactly and nonmetaphorically onto classical physics - properly defined rather than conventionally defined; this is the Einstein-Davis hypothesis emphatically ratified. The metaphysical notion of first cause is then contained entirely inside of general relativity, since this theory itself mandates causality.
Just as geometry can only be a partial map or symbolic transform of general mathematics, the classical universe in its geometric character can only be an epiphenomenal or partial translation of quantum mechanics. But, both of these translations are logically coherent, if partial. So, the metaphysical concept of the logical ground is mapped onto the logical substructure which is provided by quantum mechanics to classical general relativity.
Mathematical possibility consists not merely of all mathematical statements, but of all translations between them, and of all transforms between translations and between translations and statements, and so on. This enormous entity maps to the metaphysical concept of the ground of being. It is all but entirely incoherent.
Quantum mechanics is then a very partial relation or symbolic transform of mathematical possibility - actually ever possible transform which meets the criteria of approaching logical coherence. And, it seems that all features of classical physics, in particular time, are needed in order to attain a maximal logical coherence in quantum mechanics.
So, this is a theory containing a maximum of complexity. But, it is simple in being a priori as much as possible.
-- Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Let me make the claim that the current topic of discussion - social complexity and its inherent implication of social differentiation, strongly supports Gould's advocacy of group evolution. Otherwise, extremes of inborn intelligence would be selected against. See the work of Howard K. Bloom.
Punctuationalist theory gathers evidence in its favor from a simple mathematical consideration - that genetic change is necessarily very slow in a large interbreeding population, and much faster in a small population.
-- Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
It's been written (last year in more than one study) that ADHD is likely a condition of origin later than the species and selected for its survival value, namely for settling new territory and for fast reactions in combat. So, the Americas and Australia have a higher rate of incidence.
The authority on the subject, Prof. Barkley, wrote (Sci. Am., Sep. 1998) that the essence of the condition is physical uninhibition when distracted. Ritalin simply provides inhibition.
A trait similar to ADHD but milder is called novelty seeking.
High giftedness is usually confused with ADHD by authorities nowadays, but there is actually no relation or disrelation of giftedness to ADHD at all. The authorities on giftedness (Dr. James Webb) correlate it with intensity and sensitivity as well as talent. (ADHD kids can become intense, and therefore gifted, on what they can do. And, they can be taught to compensate for their uninhibition.)
Is it the time to raise the issue of paradox which arise from using string theory to compute general relativistic results? After all, string theory, like the field theory it comes from, is not compatible with general relativity in the first place.
Take Susskind's calculation (April 1997 Sci. Am.) that a stationary probe lowered toward an event horizon will experience extreme temperatures from the blue-shifted Hawking radiation. Actually, the correct relativistic calculation seems to indicate that an illusion of observation is invoked here - that inferences taken from the distant or from the near measurements will disagree on the point of origin of the Hawking radiation.
The correct calculation is that the high temperature apparent to the near probe is only directly from the center of the black hole; the off-center radiation is red-shifted to oblivion at a certain angle, which provides the illusion to the near probe that the Hawking radiation has retreated toward the center of the black hole.
The philosophical implications of such mutual and ineradicable accusations of illusion go very deep. The universe takes drastic measures to avoid contradiction by hiding it behind an event horizon. Even so, mutual accusations of illusion must still be made; contradiction resolution is supremely difficult.
But, Susskind's problem in his article is simply a miscalculation using string theory's inadequate adaptation to general relativity.
The latest information on autism is that it is a very severe congenital malfunction and malformation of synapses in the brain. (See Science News and its biannual index for the best coverage of biomedicine research.) I find analogies of autism to milder forms of social impairment such as Asperger's, whether misdiagnosed or not, to be dubious.
ADHD is a common misdiagnosis applied to the highly gifted. The core feature (according to Barkley) of ADHD is physical uninhibition when distracted. But, the essence of high giftedness is sufficient independence and passion to seriously annoy the authorities. There is a clear difference, but the distinction is too subtle for authoritarians.
Radical empiricism also counts as a very dubious "personal" philosophy. Spinoza is not a crackpot.
Proceeding from the existence of the EM potential, A, is not begging the question; it is merely organizing the theory on a parsimonious basis, since writing the wave function of a test charge inherently requires the existence of A.
The existence of A also ties into unification with general relativity. Kaluza pointed out long ago that A becomes the addition to the metric tensor - the potential of gravity - when an extra dimension is added to space. The conventional string theory adopts Kaluza's suggestion as a premise.
It is my understanding that it is not trivial to modify EM to allow for monopoles. Doing so would destroy EM's status as a pure tensor, a geometric object. Allowing the EM potential, A, as a tensor (rank 1 and covariant) yields the Maxwell equations plus conservation of charge as theorems; they become Bianchi identities. In other words, the nonexistence of magnetic monopoles is a mathematical truth if general relativity is more than just another system of epicycles.
Quantum field theory is very successful experimentally (as successful as epicycles would be with the use of an unlimited hierarchy), but it is notably unsuccessful philosophically; there is no unity of substance in the theory. Therefore, as Spinoza commented, relations between the different substances, charges, matter, fields and space, become magical in nature, not providing a philosophically satisfying account of the physics.
I think that radical empiricism, in its opposition to such philosophical satisfaction, is actually an anti-intellectual movement. And, I see a danger in trusting empiricism as an implied and unexamined metaphysics for academic physics.
Will someone else come along and show that we don't understand gravity sufficiently, and postulate a theory that will eliminate the need for dark matter and energy?
It is my impression that general relativity is extremely robust in its connection to a-priori mathematics, that it is very close to the inevitable properties of the richest mathematics which is unified in concept and also not self referential. So, an alternative theory must not, then, disturb this a priori property of Einstein's equation of gravity. (Thinking of general relativity as a-priori mathematics is equivalent to the Einstein-Davis theory that the classical universe is made out of curved spacetime.)
This same equation of gravity also yields the conservation laws, even of other fields and forces, as a theorem. So, an alternative theory must not disturb this property of the theory of gravity.
Alternative theories are very severely restrained, I think, by these considerations.
Yes, even if the absorption is proportional to the gravitational mass, then the shadow theory of gravity clearly predicts a decay of angular momentum of all orbits. The gravitational force would be skewed by the transit delay of the dark energy.
The theoretical limits on employment come only from inefficiency caused by lack of education, and not really from satiety from more efficient competition. And any inefficiency would only cause inflation, not necessarily unemployment, if the authorities are determined to maintain employment levels. Unemployment is really a decision to be made by the authorities.
But let me modify what I said above by noting that the response of the economy to interest rate decisions is nonlinear at different phases of the cycle; the response to actual autonomous spending is more reliable. It seems that it is easier to use fiscal policy and public investment than monetary policy to control an economy.
Remember the insights from Keynes and from Arthur at the Santa Fe Institute. The job market is one of increasing returns or positive feedback. Spending more on payroll causes yet more spending which impacts payroll. There is no single market-clearing level of employment. Spending levels which are decided against the grain of the level of employment do change the level of employment, and the effects of spending decisions can apparently vary spectacularly depending on the phase of the economic cycle.
Please explain to your wife that high IQ is not ADHD, although they are conventionally confused. See the LDONLINE site for articles which address the subtle distinctions - subtle to the ignorant or authoritarian.
ADHD children focus well on things like combat games and exploring new territory, but not otherwise. See the Science News index and Barkley's article in the Sep. 1998 Sci. Am. for more information.
It is plain that you do not have ADHD, but a style of giftedness. According to Barkley, physical uninhibition when distracted is the key to the ADHD diagnosis; this is what the stimulant drugs can counter. Intellectual uninhibition, which you possess, I speculate does not involve the same inhibitory nerve circuits with DRD4 receptors.
A short attention span implies disinterest or incompetence to absorb the material. Distractibility implies sensitivity or fear - not the same concept.
Re:Personal experiences with ADHD, mood swings, et
on
Working with ADHD?
·
· Score: 1
If anyone is possibly bipolar, then lay off from the inositol. See the Science News index.
Re:Required for programmers
on
Working with ADHD?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
ADHD can be hard to distinguish from giftedness if one is uninformed or authoritarian in outlook. See the LDONLINE site for articles listing the subtle distinctions; ADHD is an impairment uniform across environments - except where ADHD itself has survival value, namely combat and settling new territory (see the Science News index). But giftedness is temperamental and choosy of its environment.
Ritalin is a cocaine analog, slower and longer. The drugs mentioned here aid inhibition and adherence to planning for about everyone, not just for ADHD.
Short attention span is not ADHD, that would be called slow learning instead. Distractability is not ADHD, neither is boredom, and neither are narrow focuses and passions. ADHD is a neurological condition of physical unhibition when distracted; it impairs comparison of impulses and reflexes with the higher level planning located elsewhere in the brain. See the Sci. Am. article by Barkley, September 1998.
I am glad that the non-identity of the Schwarzschild Radius with the event horizon is already known. (Did Susskind forget?)
Yes, near the event horizon (as distantly perceived), the tidal and time distortions are locally very mild for a large black hole. But, the time distortion seen from a distance is always severe. And, the tidal stretching experienced by the falling observer is perceived by the distant observer as extreme flattening instead (according to Susskind).
To an observer falling through the SR, the event horizon farther in is dimmed by red shift, and may not seem so hot. The distant observer will see the falling observer merge with the material at the event horizon located at the SR.
No, you may not escape - ever - from the perceived event horizon of any other observer. That would creat an unresolvable contradiction for that observer. Even if distant observers chase you into the SR, you will be at the singularity before they catch distinct sight of you. Special non-Newtonian forces prevent distant observers from perceiving an increased distance between you and the singularity (in the simple case). And, the infinite red shift on outbound information is not symmetric with the finite blue shift on inbound information.
Slashdot Mirror
The thrust is very weak, 1/100th or less of the weight of the thing. Vertical thrust and the vacuum both will reduce buoyancy below what is required, so I deduce the need for lift.
I am not sure they have done the math. Is a lift to drag ratio of 100 really possible?
A tax on profits is not passed on to customers in a competititive market.
--
Michael J. Burns
The sayings of Jesus concerning pacifism are accorded more of a claim to historicity than many of the other sayings attributed to him. His recommendations, when filtered for historicity by rigorous scholars, seem to be much more pragmatic than the usual interpretation that he is promising a magical reward extrinsic to the practice of peace. After all, what can be gained by resisting an irresistable enemy?
--
Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Not so! A minority vote always counts for more than a majority vote, since a minority vote can eventually overturn the result. Partisan vote counters always sweat over the additional minority votes.
Also, voters can count their vote as one on the margin, so votes count for about 20 times more than a naive analysis would indicate. If partisan postions differ by more than 5%, as does happen, then voting is amazingly powerful in an economic calculation.
--
Michael J. Burns
I advocate mightily for the use of a preprocessor with Java because of its lack of multiple inheritence and templates. Isn't the aspects compiler merely a preprocessor applied in order to make up for these deficiencies?
--
Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
The simple theory of everything must eventually fit the constraint of not having a design which necessarily entails a designer but instead having a design consisting merely of mappings from the entirety of mathematics, metamathematics, and the much larger realm of mathematical possibility - this last entity being necessarily logically incoherent.
In metamathematics, about the only a priori landmark I know of is Godel's proof. It separates the finite and logically unambiguous field of geometry from general mathematics. My favorite thought is to map this landmark onto the boundary of classical, geometric, physics with the distinctly different field of quanta. The need, proved by Godel, for an unlimited number of axioms in general mathematics then maps rather nicely onto the uncertainty principle in nonclassical physics. And, since general mathematics does not map onto geometry, it follows that quantum mechanics does not map onto general relativity. Like ordinary categorical propositions in self referential logic, quanta can not be linked to particular locations.
String theory is so ad hoc and unprincipled that it can not compete with these considerations. String theorists do not take very well after the examples of Spinoza and Einstein.
The other a priori landmark in mathematics that I know about is the distinction between coherent mathematics and logically incoherent mathematical possibility. The mapping of the two can not be complete, since one is innumerably larger than the other.
These three levels have a particular way of mapping onto each other and within themselves, and then of mapping onto physics and metaphysics, I think.
Geometry maps exactly and nonmetaphorically onto classical physics - properly defined rather than conventionally defined; this is the Einstein-Davis hypothesis emphatically ratified. The metaphysical notion of first cause is then contained entirely inside of general relativity, since this theory itself mandates causality.
Just as geometry can only be a partial map or symbolic transform of general mathematics, the classical universe in its geometric character can only be an epiphenomenal or partial translation of quantum mechanics. But, both of these translations are logically coherent, if partial. So, the metaphysical concept of the logical ground is mapped onto the logical substructure which is provided by quantum mechanics to classical general relativity.
Mathematical possibility consists not merely of all mathematical statements, but of all translations between them, and of all transforms between translations and between translations and statements, and so on. This enormous entity maps to the metaphysical concept of the ground of being. It is all but entirely incoherent.
Quantum mechanics is then a very partial relation or symbolic transform of mathematical possibility - actually ever possible transform which meets the criteria of approaching logical coherence. And, it seems that all features of classical physics, in particular time, are needed in order to attain a maximal logical coherence in quantum mechanics.
So, this is a theory containing a maximum of complexity. But, it is simple in being a priori as much as possible.
--
Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Let me make the claim that the current topic of discussion - social complexity and its inherent implication of social differentiation, strongly supports Gould's advocacy of group evolution. Otherwise, extremes of inborn intelligence would be selected against. See the work of Howard K. Bloom.
Punctuationalist theory gathers evidence in its favor from a simple mathematical consideration - that genetic change is necessarily very slow in a large interbreeding population, and much faster in a small population.
--
Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
It's been written (last year in more than one study) that ADHD is likely a condition of origin later than the species and selected for its survival value, namely for settling new territory and for fast reactions in combat. So, the Americas and Australia have a higher rate of incidence.
The authority on the subject, Prof. Barkley, wrote (Sci. Am., Sep. 1998) that the essence of the condition is physical uninhibition when distracted. Ritalin simply provides inhibition.
A trait similar to ADHD but milder is called novelty seeking.
High giftedness is usually confused with ADHD by authorities nowadays, but there is actually no relation or disrelation of giftedness to ADHD at all. The authorities on giftedness (Dr. James Webb) correlate it with intensity and sensitivity as well as talent. (ADHD kids can become intense, and therefore gifted, on what they can do. And, they can be taught to compensate for their uninhibition.)
--
Michael J. Burns
An elavator from the moon to L1 would be even less demanding of its materials, right?
--
Michael J. Burns http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
Is it the time to raise the issue of paradox which arise from using string theory to compute general relativistic results? After all, string theory, like the field theory it comes from, is not compatible with general relativity in the first place.
Take Susskind's calculation (April 1997 Sci. Am.) that a stationary probe lowered toward an event horizon will experience extreme temperatures from the blue-shifted Hawking radiation. Actually, the correct relativistic calculation seems to indicate that an illusion of observation is invoked here - that inferences taken from the distant or from the near measurements will disagree on the point of origin of the Hawking radiation.
The correct calculation is that the high temperature apparent to the near probe is only directly from the center of the black hole; the off-center radiation is red-shifted to oblivion at a certain angle, which provides the illusion to the near probe that the Hawking radiation has retreated toward the center of the black hole.
The philosophical implications of such mutual and ineradicable accusations of illusion go very deep. The universe takes drastic measures to avoid contradiction by hiding it behind an event horizon. Even so, mutual accusations of illusion must still be made; contradiction resolution is supremely difficult.
But, Susskind's problem in his article is simply a miscalculation using string theory's inadequate adaptation to general relativity.
--
Michael J. Burns
The latest information on autism is that it is a very severe congenital malfunction and malformation of synapses in the brain. (See Science News and its biannual index for the best coverage of biomedicine research.) I find analogies of autism to milder forms of social impairment such as Asperger's, whether misdiagnosed or not, to be dubious.
--
Mike Burns
I did identify ADHD as a misdiagnosis. I like the papers you referenced, and here is another:
c 52 2.html
http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/add_adhd/eri
Rejection and persecution by authority is indeed a big problem for the highly gifted; see the books by Howard K. Bloom for the underlying theory:
http://www.howardbloom.net/
My conclusions in philosophy of science do not resemble postmodernism; see my www pages:
http://home.mindspring.com/~mburns9/
--
Mike Burns
ADHD is a common misdiagnosis applied to the highly gifted. The core feature (according to Barkley) of ADHD is physical uninhibition when distracted. But, the essence of high giftedness is sufficient independence and passion to seriously annoy the authorities. There is a clear difference, but the distinction is too subtle for authoritarians.
--
Mike Burns
Radical empiricism also counts as a very dubious "personal" philosophy. Spinoza is not a crackpot.
Proceeding from the existence of the EM potential, A, is not begging the question; it is merely organizing the theory on a parsimonious basis, since writing the wave function of a test charge inherently requires the existence of A.
The existence of A also ties into unification with general relativity. Kaluza pointed out long ago that A becomes the addition to the metric tensor - the potential of gravity - when an extra dimension is added to space. The conventional string theory adopts Kaluza's suggestion as a premise.
--
Mike Burns
It is my understanding that it is not trivial to modify EM to allow for monopoles. Doing so would destroy EM's status as a pure tensor, a geometric object. Allowing the EM potential, A, as a tensor (rank 1 and covariant) yields the Maxwell equations plus conservation of charge as theorems; they become Bianchi identities. In other words, the nonexistence of magnetic monopoles is a mathematical truth if general relativity is more than just another system of epicycles.
Quantum field theory is very successful experimentally (as successful as epicycles would be with the use of an unlimited hierarchy), but it is notably unsuccessful philosophically; there is no unity of substance in the theory. Therefore, as Spinoza commented, relations between the different substances, charges, matter, fields and space, become magical in nature, not providing a philosophically satisfying account of the physics.
I think that radical empiricism, in its opposition to such philosophical satisfaction, is actually an anti-intellectual movement. And, I see a danger in trusting empiricism as an implied and unexamined metaphysics for academic physics.
--
Mike Burns
SEE asked:
Will someone else come along and show that we don't understand gravity sufficiently, and postulate a theory that will eliminate the need for dark matter and energy?
It is my impression that general relativity is extremely robust in its connection to a-priori mathematics, that it is very close to the inevitable properties of the richest mathematics which is unified in concept and also not self referential. So, an alternative theory must not, then, disturb this a priori property of Einstein's equation of gravity. (Thinking of general relativity as a-priori mathematics is equivalent to the Einstein-Davis theory that the classical universe is made out of curved spacetime.)
This same equation of gravity also yields the conservation laws, even of other fields and forces, as a theorem. So, an alternative theory must not disturb this property of the theory of gravity.
Alternative theories are very severely restrained, I think, by these considerations.
--
Mike Burns
Yes, even if the absorption is proportional to the gravitational mass, then the shadow theory of gravity clearly predicts a decay of angular momentum of all orbits. The gravitational force would be skewed by the transit delay of the dark energy.
The theoretical limits on employment come only from inefficiency caused by lack of education, and not really from satiety from more efficient competition. And any inefficiency would only cause inflation, not necessarily unemployment, if the authorities are determined to maintain employment levels. Unemployment is really a decision to be made by the authorities.
But let me modify what I said above by noting that the response of the economy to interest rate decisions is nonlinear at different phases of the cycle; the response to actual autonomous spending is more reliable. It seems that it is easier to use fiscal policy and public investment than monetary policy to control an economy.
Remember the insights from Keynes and from Arthur at the Santa Fe Institute. The job market is one of increasing returns or positive feedback. Spending more on payroll causes yet more spending which impacts payroll. There is no single market-clearing level of employment. Spending levels which are decided against the grain of the level of employment do change the level of employment, and the effects of spending decisions can apparently vary spectacularly depending on the phase of the economic cycle.
Please explain to your wife that high IQ is not ADHD, although they are conventionally confused. See the LDONLINE site for articles which address the subtle distinctions - subtle to the ignorant or authoritarian.
ADHD children focus well on things like combat games and exploring new territory, but not otherwise. See the Science News index and Barkley's article in the Sep. 1998 Sci. Am. for more information.
It is plain that you do not have ADHD, but a style of giftedness. According to Barkley, physical uninhibition when distracted is the key to the ADHD diagnosis; this is what the stimulant drugs can counter. Intellectual uninhibition, which you possess, I speculate does not involve the same inhibitory nerve circuits with DRD4 receptors.
A short attention span implies disinterest or incompetence to absorb the material. Distractibility implies sensitivity or fear - not the same concept.
If anyone is possibly bipolar, then lay off from the inositol. See the Science News index.
ADHD can be hard to distinguish from giftedness if one is uninformed or authoritarian in outlook. See the LDONLINE site for articles listing the subtle distinctions; ADHD is an impairment uniform across environments - except where ADHD itself has survival value, namely combat and settling new territory (see the Science News index). But giftedness is temperamental and choosy of its environment.
Ritalin is a cocaine analog, slower and longer. The drugs mentioned here aid inhibition and adherence to planning for about everyone, not just for ADHD.
Short attention span is not ADHD, that would be called slow learning instead. Distractability is not ADHD, neither is boredom, and neither are narrow focuses and passions. ADHD is a neurological condition of physical unhibition when distracted; it impairs comparison of impulses and reflexes with the higher level planning located elsewhere in the brain. See the Sci. Am. article by Barkley, September 1998.
I am glad that the non-identity of the Schwarzschild Radius with the event horizon is already known. (Did Susskind forget?)
Yes, near the event horizon (as distantly perceived), the tidal and time distortions are locally very mild for a large black hole. But, the time distortion seen from a distance is always severe. And, the tidal stretching experienced by the falling observer is perceived by the distant observer as extreme flattening instead (according to Susskind).
To an observer falling through the SR, the event horizon farther in is dimmed by red shift, and may not seem so hot. The distant observer will see the falling observer merge with the material at the event horizon located at the SR.
No, you may not escape - ever - from the perceived event horizon of any other observer. That would creat an unresolvable contradiction for that observer. Even if distant observers chase you into the SR, you will be at the singularity before they catch distinct sight of you. Special non-Newtonian forces prevent distant observers from perceiving an increased distance between you and the singularity (in the simple case). And, the infinite red shift on outbound information is not symmetric with the finite blue shift on inbound information.
--
Mike Burns