Sure, if you want to make the massive oversimplification of saying that time is a 'dimension' just like the other 3.
It's not like the other three, but it is a dimension. It can literally be interchanged with the spatial ones - in certain ways. If I'm in motion relative to you, some of my time becomes your space and vice versa. Granted, it's not exactly like the case with just three, because there are limits on the kind of rotations we can make our (personal) four axes undergo, but I don't think that makes it any less a dimension than any of the spatial ones.
Just because you have seen it on an X axis doesn't make it part of a simple coordinate system.
Right. It's part of a slightly-less-simple coordinate system.
Um, by definition, half the infants and children have above-average levels of lead in their blood.
I thought it was obvious that the average they're referring to is the national one.
The CDC limit for lead blood levels in children [cdc.gov] sets 10 ug/dL as the threshold when action should be taken. So while the increase in lead levels is notable, most kids should still be within the limits of what's considered safe. The authors of the study are contending that no amount of lead in the blood is safe, and their study is written under that premise.
That answers what I was wondering. There are presumably plenty of other places where the levels are similarly above national average, but below the CDC limit - and I assume they're not getting any bottled water from FEMA.
The proportion of infants and children with above-average levels of lead in their blood has nearly doubled since the city switched from the Detroit water system to using the Flint River as its water source, in 2014.
How much "above average"? There's probably at least one contaminant in most places that's above the national average, but that doesn't automatically mean it's something to be concerned about. I'm not saying this isn't something to be concerned about, but I'm just not quite that's the statistic to gauge it by.
Obviously the fact that the numbers used to be lower is not a great thing, but if some other town had, and had always had, 4% of kids with "elevated" (a specific amount, it seems) lead blood levels, would FEMA still be shipping in bottled water? Is 2% okay but 4% isn't? Or is it only that things have got worse that is the problem?
Animals can exhibit magical thinking. Pigeons can develop elaborate (by pigeon standards) rituals in the "belief" that it will cause food to be dispensed from a box, when it's actually just on a random timer.
So, when scientists tell you how to live your life or tell you that the science is settled and you should just do what they tell you, just remember how this guy died: A tragic accident ended his life when he was caught and strangled by the system he created.
Okay. And after I've remembered it, then what? Ignore all science because this one guy was hoist with his own mechanism? Or listen to all science, but just bear in mind that future information might contradict it? Or should I toss a coin for each bit of science I hear?
That doesn't answer the question of whether they are actually capable of doing it or not.
Besides, meta data can (presumably) tell you which phones are calling which other phones. It also gives you the phone's location. That's plenty of useful info.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, if you want to make the massive oversimplification of saying that time is a 'dimension' just like the other 3.
It's not like the other three, but it is a dimension. It can literally be interchanged with the spatial ones - in certain ways. If I'm in motion relative to you, some of my time becomes your space and vice versa. Granted, it's not exactly like the case with just three, because there are limits on the kind of rotations we can make our (personal) four axes undergo, but I don't think that makes it any less a dimension than any of the spatial ones.
Just because you have seen it on an X axis doesn't make it part of a simple coordinate system.
Right. It's part of a slightly-less-simple coordinate system.
A day after Philips announced that it would drop support for third-party Hue bulbs
Is "drop support for" a euphemism for "actively block"?
I hate the use of 'novel' and 'efficient' in scientific titles. I will be the judge of that, thank you very much.
"Efficiency" is a perfectly cromulent scientific concept that can be measured objectively.
...what?
Link?
Zelda?!
Um, by definition, half the infants and children have above-average levels of lead in their blood.
I thought it was obvious that the average they're referring to is the national one.
The CDC limit for lead blood levels in children [cdc.gov] sets 10 ug/dL as the threshold when action should be taken. So while the increase in lead levels is notable, most kids should still be within the limits of what's considered safe. The authors of the study are contending that no amount of lead in the blood is safe, and their study is written under that premise.
That answers what I was wondering. There are presumably plenty of other places where the levels are similarly above national average, but below the CDC limit - and I assume they're not getting any bottled water from FEMA.
The proportion of infants and children with above-average levels of lead in their blood has nearly doubled since the city switched from the Detroit water system to using the Flint River as its water source, in 2014.
How much "above average"? There's probably at least one contaminant in most places that's above the national average, but that doesn't automatically mean it's something to be concerned about. I'm not saying this isn't something to be concerned about, but I'm just not quite that's the statistic to gauge it by.
Obviously the fact that the numbers used to be lower is not a great thing, but if some other town had, and had always had, 4% of kids with "elevated" (a specific amount, it seems) lead blood levels, would FEMA still be shipping in bottled water? Is 2% okay but 4% isn't? Or is it only that things have got worse that is the problem?
The Latest: NYC officials: We got same threat, call it hoax
Why are these NYC officials talking like a Native American stereotype?
Animals can exhibit magical thinking. Pigeons can develop elaborate (by pigeon standards) rituals in the "belief" that it will cause food to be dispensed from a box, when it's actually just on a random timer.
So, when scientists tell you how to live your life or tell you that the science is settled and you should just do what they tell you, just remember how this guy died: A tragic accident ended his life when he was caught and strangled by the system he created.
Okay. And after I've remembered it, then what? Ignore all science because this one guy was hoist with his own mechanism? Or listen to all science, but just bear in mind that future information might contradict it? Or should I toss a coin for each bit of science I hear?
Oh, and you managed to spell his name wrong as well. It's Midgley, not Migley.
(and no banned)
Do some bloody editing, someone, please.
Yes. Or at the very least you should puntuate, you barbarian.
(since you don't have the option of finding a rich spouse to support you if you fail).
Hey, don't disparage my five-year plan.
I know ours is tilted, or the milky way would be round the equator, which it isn't. And I looked it up.
I read that as "and I looked up" which would also work.
You think Median is the same as Average?
You think I said that?
Somewhere above 130, since you ask.
not if the overall intelligence distribution is lopsided in some way
It's not, at least not when it comes to IQ. The same number of people should have an IQ under 100-X as have an IQ over 100+X, by definition.
Yeah, it was last Thursday.
you would not be annoyed.
Too right. I'd be bloody furious!
Attempt no ball games there. Damn kids.
That doesn't answer the question of whether they are actually capable of doing it or not.
Besides, meta data can (presumably) tell you which phones are calling which other phones. It also gives you the phone's location. That's plenty of useful info.
Of course, you're still not likely to see people committing public acts of typewriting
Really? What's the point of being a hipster if people can't see you doing it?!
Furthermore:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So they are expecting to be able to detect planets via "perpendicular" observation (and may have already done so, but it's not been fully confirmed).
So the limitation to find it is more or less the same as crossing the sun.
It's still wrong to say "We can only detect planets they pass their star" which is all I was disputing. I understood the animation and the technique.
We can only detect planets they pass their star
Wrong.