BHs are small compared to their mass-equivalent star size. Because of this they can orbit pretty close to each other before actually merging. This means they can go a percentage of the speed of light when orbiting each other and so create bigger gravitational waves.
There is a difference between gravitational waves and gravity.
You mean a guy that actual launders money for Putin and his oligarchs? A man who sold his name for "look I'm rich"-money and is now just a figure-head for Saudi and Russian investors.
> Diesels were given a tax break (less tax on fuel) for decades because of the lower CO2 emissions
This isn't true at all. You pay less tax on diesel because that is the fuel used by most farmers and hence another way of subsidising farming in the EU. We're talking about the 70s here.
But if you want to blame AGW for every bad thing in the world go right ahead.
4 words: Berkeley Earth Surface Report. Touted as a totally independent look into climate change and AGW. Funded by the Koch brothers; looking at independent data sets; using raw data and so on; WUWT talked about how this is the definitive study to prove AGW or not.
Guess what: Same conclusion as all the other climate scientists.
WUWT also deleted any mention of this report. This is precisely what the deniers asked for but because the conclusion didn't match their expectations they just ignored the report. Do you think this makes deniers look like good scientists or just partisan hacks who don't believe in AGW because they just don't want to?
In 2013, the state House passed a bill that requires voters to show a photo ID issued by North Carolina, a passport, or a military identification card to begin in 2016. Out-of-state drivers licenses were to be accepted only if the voter registered within 90 days of the election, and university photo identification was not acceptable.[59] In July 2016, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court decision in a number of consolidated actions and struck down the law's photo ID requirement, finding that the new voting provisions targeted African Americans "with almost surgical precision," and that the legislators had acted with clear "discriminatory intent" in enacting strict election rules, shaping the rules based on data they received about African-American registration and voting patterns.[60][61] On May 15, 2017, the law officially died when the US Supreme Court rejected efforts to review the Appeals Court ruling.[62].
Muslims are responsible for many terrorist acts in the real world. If Muslims don't want to be profiled,
they need to force an end to the bad behavior of the misbehaving Muslims.
Men are responsible for many terrorist acts in the real world. If men don't want to be profiled,
they need to force an end to the bad behavior of the misbehaving men.
> south of 1% then that monster will have very little power.
How does that work out? The Constitution is precisely the same. The powers it gives to those in the 3 branches is precisely the same.
Could you explain what you mean?
Science is about the testable. Math (and logic) is about the provable. Philosophy is about the more fundamental questions.
But a lot of theoretical physics straddles between your definition of science and maths. Not just String Theory but most of the Standard Model and General Relativity. Einstein wasn't trying to create a testable theory when he wanted to see what SR would say about gravity. He was simply trying to find a mathematically consistent framework that would deal with accelerating bodies and not violate SR. He didn't say, "Well I will work on this because it's testable". He just worked on the framework and its conclusions, after the fact, could be tested - lucky for Einstein. Of course, if it wasn't testable we might never know who Einstein was - so we're lucky both ways, I guess.
Sure it can be taken as arrogance, or you can take it as some people still have a high-school mentality with knowledge transfer and expect all the work to come from the "smart one" - when in real life it should come from both sides.
As for our "expert" engineer - what is expected from him is to follow the conventions and not redefine well known definitions (like what a prime is). If you want to impress someone with your knowledge of a language you don't first start of with spelling errors and horrendous grammatical errors. It defeats the whole purpose, and we are not talking about an exercise handout here, or someone wanting to learn maths or physics, but high level proves that is trying to show how stupid the "majority" is and how smart they themselves are. If you want to play with the big boys then you need to make sure you have dotted your i's and crossed your t's.
Now, it's not like academics don't have to do things for free: peer reviewing papers and writing reviews (e.g. Mathematical Reviews) are things most science/maths academics already do for free. Consuming a whole lot of their time. Then on top of that it's the weekly 100-page handwritten manuscript that, now, you say, also has to be reviewed because, you know, that one time in history when that guy, you know the Indian one, was right.
And trust me. It's not the original manuscript. It's been photocopied to death and sent to hundreds of people - the complete opposite of how a mathematician/scientist will do it.
...diatribes, usually against Einstein, or mathematicians that don't understand their wonderful two page proof of Fermat's Last Theorem(*), were always engineers.
You always dread the big manila envelope in your (physical) mailbox. Then you open it to see about 100 pages of tightly written notes, or typed on a typewriter (none of them ever used LaTeX). Asking for your time to read through and appreciate, the great contributions that the writer has made to physics or pure mathematics, even though the first few pages they've decided to invent their own notation, definitions, and just for the hell of it, their own logic.
Of course, you would say, "Well history is full of people, out of the blue, turning science and mathematics on their heads and it's stuck-up ivory tower professional academics like you, that hold back the progress of science. If you only took time to read and understand the occasional maverick we would have had hoverboards and interstellar space travel by now."
My answer, is the same I give any 16 year old looking for a job, no one owes you anything - if you want them to spend their time and energy on you then *you* have to show why that won't be a waste on their part.
Engineers: I'm right until you prove me wrong.
Scientists: I'm wrong until I can prove I'm right.
(*) It's funny how you can make a two page proof proving Fermat's Last Theorem if you change the definition of a prime number.
It's only handwavy because you don't want to take the time to understand the evidence for it and against it.
There is a lot of evidence for the WIMP model of dark matter, including the current data just posted and things like the Bullet Cluster.
They take the time off in summer because of one thing...kids. If you don't have a family then you take your holidays whenever.
In the US where do your kids go for a holiday? Do they go without their dad or mum? That just sounds...sad.
When the deniers ignore their own study (Berkeley Earth Report) because it doesn't confirm their original biases then they can no longer call themselves skeptics.
Anyone going to thank the EU anti-monopolistic laws for forcing Microsoft to add alternative browsers or is that against the libertarian streak of Slashdot.
I remember when the universe was between 10 to 20 billion years old.
We were trying to figure out why the Sun only expelled 1/3 as many neutrinos as we would like.
Progress in science is one of the few things that put a smile on my face.
Slashdot Mirror
BHs are small compared to their mass-equivalent star size. Because of this they can orbit pretty close to each other before actually merging. This means they can go a percentage of the speed of light when orbiting each other and so create bigger gravitational waves. There is a difference between gravitational waves and gravity.
Wouldn't more people make it easier??
Didn't your mother warn you about simple solutions to complicated problems?
who few outside the far left liked
You mean the center-right candidate Hillary?
They didn't want Trump as president...
You mean a guy that actual launders money for Putin and his oligarchs? A man who sold his name for "look I'm rich"-money and is now just a figure-head for Saudi and Russian investors.
The scientists are saying "stop throwing your trash on the streets". But everyone else only thinks the alternatives are the only ones you've proposed.
> Diesels were given a tax break (less tax on fuel) for decades because of the lower CO2 emissions This isn't true at all. You pay less tax on diesel because that is the fuel used by most farmers and hence another way of subsidising farming in the EU. We're talking about the 70s here. But if you want to blame AGW for every bad thing in the world go right ahead.
But methane doesn't last long in an oxidising environment. CO2 lasts for thousands of years and methane for decades.
Since it's just a combination of two known elementary particles (quarks), it's not that big of a deal.
Yeah, because having your decades old prediction being verified is just so much hype! /s
We should be celebrating, instead we just want instant gratification and nothing else.
Luckily (or unluckily) the UK's involvement with the ESA is independent from the EU discussions, AFAIK
Indeed you're right. What I should have said is that WUWT deleted any mention of the Report as the definitive prove that AGW was real or not.
4 words: Berkeley Earth Surface Report. Touted as a totally independent look into climate change and AGW. Funded by the Koch brothers; looking at independent data sets; using raw data and so on; WUWT talked about how this is the definitive study to prove AGW or not.
Guess what: Same conclusion as all the other climate scientists.
WUWT also deleted any mention of this report. This is precisely what the deniers asked for but because the conclusion didn't match their expectations they just ignored the report. Do you think this makes deniers look like good scientists or just partisan hacks who don't believe in AGW because they just don't want to?
In 2013, the state House passed a bill that requires voters to show a photo ID issued by North Carolina, a passport, or a military identification card to begin in 2016. Out-of-state drivers licenses were to be accepted only if the voter registered within 90 days of the election, and university photo identification was not acceptable.[59] In July 2016, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a trial court decision in a number of consolidated actions and struck down the law's photo ID requirement, finding that the new voting provisions targeted African Americans "with almost surgical precision," and that the legislators had acted with clear "discriminatory intent" in enacting strict election rules, shaping the rules based on data they received about African-American registration and voting patterns.[60][61] On May 15, 2017, the law officially died when the US Supreme Court rejected efforts to review the Appeals Court ruling.[62].
Muslims are responsible for many terrorist acts in the real world. If Muslims don't want to be profiled, they need to force an end to the bad behavior of the misbehaving Muslims.
Men are responsible for many terrorist acts in the real world. If men don't want to be profiled, they need to force an end to the bad behavior of the misbehaving men.
> south of 1% then that monster will have very little power. How does that work out? The Constitution is precisely the same. The powers it gives to those in the 3 branches is precisely the same. Could you explain what you mean?
Science is about the testable. Math (and logic) is about the provable. Philosophy is about the more fundamental questions.
But a lot of theoretical physics straddles between your definition of science and maths. Not just String Theory but most of the Standard Model and General Relativity. Einstein wasn't trying to create a testable theory when he wanted to see what SR would say about gravity. He was simply trying to find a mathematically consistent framework that would deal with accelerating bodies and not violate SR. He didn't say, "Well I will work on this because it's testable". He just worked on the framework and its conclusions, after the fact, could be tested - lucky for Einstein. Of course, if it wasn't testable we might never know who Einstein was - so we're lucky both ways, I guess.
Hi, I don't have much to add. Your comments are valid. But thanks for the well thought out reply.
As for our "expert" engineer - what is expected from him is to follow the conventions and not redefine well known definitions (like what a prime is). If you want to impress someone with your knowledge of a language you don't first start of with spelling errors and horrendous grammatical errors. It defeats the whole purpose, and we are not talking about an exercise handout here, or someone wanting to learn maths or physics, but high level proves that is trying to show how stupid the "majority" is and how smart they themselves are. If you want to play with the big boys then you need to make sure you have dotted your i's and crossed your t's.
Now, it's not like academics don't have to do things for free: peer reviewing papers and writing reviews (e.g. Mathematical Reviews) are things most science/maths academics already do for free. Consuming a whole lot of their time. Then on top of that it's the weekly 100-page handwritten manuscript that, now, you say, also has to be reviewed because, you know, that one time in history when that guy, you know the Indian one, was right.
And trust me. It's not the original manuscript. It's been photocopied to death and sent to hundreds of people - the complete opposite of how a mathematician/scientist will do it.
Of course, you would say, "Well history is full of people, out of the blue, turning science and mathematics on their heads and it's stuck-up ivory tower professional academics like you, that hold back the progress of science. If you only took time to read and understand the occasional maverick we would have had hoverboards and interstellar space travel by now."
My answer, is the same I give any 16 year old looking for a job, no one owes you anything - if you want them to spend their time and energy on you then *you* have to show why that won't be a waste on their part.
Engineers: I'm right until you prove me wrong.
Scientists: I'm wrong until I can prove I'm right.
(*) It's funny how you can make a two page proof proving Fermat's Last Theorem if you change the definition of a prime number.
It's only handwavy because you don't want to take the time to understand the evidence for it and against it. There is a lot of evidence for the WIMP model of dark matter, including the current data just posted and things like the Bullet Cluster.
They take the time off in summer because of one thing...kids. If you don't have a family then you take your holidays whenever.
In the US where do your kids go for a holiday? Do they go without their dad or mum? That just sounds...sad.
When the deniers ignore their own study (Berkeley Earth Report) because it doesn't confirm their original biases then they can no longer call themselves skeptics.
Anyone going to thank the EU anti-monopolistic laws for forcing Microsoft to add alternative browsers or is that against the libertarian streak of Slashdot.
I remember when the universe was between 10 to 20 billion years old. We were trying to figure out why the Sun only expelled 1/3 as many neutrinos as we would like. Progress in science is one of the few things that put a smile on my face.
What is the statistical difference between the models and reality? Again, any peer reviewed papers on this?