Capitalism, just like communism, is slavery. Communism confiscates all property and enslaves everybody. Capitalism gives all property to the givernment and a few super rich and enslaves the rest. The only value is to the slave masters. Unless you own incoime property, you are a slave. If you have to go to work for someone to make a living, you are a slave. If you think your taz burden is only 30%, think again. If you count all the hidden taxes, it's more like 60 or 70%. You are a slave and you don't even know it.
The earth has existed for billions of years before homo sapiens showed up. It belongs to nobody and should not be bought and sold as property. It should not be divided for a price. Doing so invariably ends up putting the vast majority of people into abject poverty and servitude because a few ends up owning 90% of the land and its wealth and resources. The land and its wheath should be divided as an inheritance to be passed to our children and their children. What we do with our piece of the pie is up to us. Demand freedom! Always!
Richard Stallman: With free software, you are free to make a modified version and use it, and free to publish the modified version if you want to, but you are not required to publish it. That's you choice.
Freedom is the key. Intellectual property owners accuse those who copy the stuff they publish of stealing their property. They want to prosecute (persecute is a better term) those who do, fine them and/or put them in jail like common thieves.
My question is this, who's going to prosecute IP owners who steal my freedom?
Let's face it, if you can't put a fence around it, or chain it, or lock it up in some manner, it does not belong to you. It does not matter if it's music, writings, software, ideas, inventions, drawings or what have you. Once you release it, it becomes like the air that we breathe: it belongs to nobody and to everybody.
You say, "Well, I worked hard and I must get paid for my work." Right. Well there are a million things in society that you never paid a scent for and you enjoy them freely. Time for you give something back. "Well", you say "how am I gonna make a living?" Good question. It is one that you need to ask your governement.
They instituted the slavery system that you live and work in. Tell them it's no good. Tell them that everybody should be given a piece of the earth, an estate if you will, for you and your descendents. Ask them what they're going to do when AI and advanced technologies finally make human labor obsolete. How is the slave system going to work then? What will your worthless intellectual property going to support you then?
Wow, what a beautiful piece of poetry, one of the best tributes I've seen to Poul Anderson's Passing.
I took it from the first page of Poul's own masterpiece, "The Boat of a Million Years." It is translated from ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, The Book of Going Forth by Daylight, Theban recension, ca 18th Dynasty. I thought it was a fitting adieu for one of 20th century's giants. I can't think of any other sci-fi author who can match Poul's grasp of history and the human condition. A great loss.
May he go forth in the sunrise boat,
May he come port in the sunset boat,
May he go among the imperishable stars,
May he journey in the Boat of a Million Years.
you know worm holes and time travel aren't really accepted as such outside the minds of Jack Sarfatti, Rudy Rucker, bored middleschool kids and science fiction writers.
You're kidding me. A simple search on Google for either wormhole or time travel contradicts your statement. Stephen Hawking claims that time travel is a serious scientific pursuit. See the references on my site.
Quantum computation, on the other hand, has something behind it
Quantum computing is just as much snake oil and crackpottery as time travel, if not more so. In fact, Dr. David Deutsch of Oxford, who has set himself up as the quantum computing pope, also believes in time travel (I quote him on my site). It's just snake oil on top of snake oil. I am preparing a page on my site to unmask the crackpottery of quantum computing. Stay tuned.
There is really nothing wrong with the idea of a a world government as long as it is not a fascist one. Fascism has had a long history. The current western world is a continuation of the fascist Roman empire which was a continuation of the fascist Babylonian empire. Only the seat of power has moved over the millenia.
Computers and the internet are the latest tools in the arsenal of the fascist. Record keeping has always been the true basis of their power to control the masses. Now that we have all been numbered (social security numbers, driver's license numbers, etc...) it a simple thing to spy on the citizens of supposedly free countries. By forcing ISPs to spy on everybody, the governments of the world are in fact instituting Big Brotherism as the de facto form of modern government. Why? Because we are all slaves and the slave masters need to have control over their slaves.
It should be noted that all of your arguments are perfectly sound when applied to euclidean geometry as well, just so long as you include time as part of your position marker - and there's no reason that you shouldn't. I'm somewhat confused by this whole thing: what part of relativity are you complaining about?
I have nothing against relativity. My problem is with famous sicentists who make all sorts of cockamamie claims (like wormhole, time travel, etc...) on the basis of relativity's success.
Well, we change relative to time, yeah?
No, we just change. Static time intervals is derived abstractly from change.
you say time is static... because'changing time' is self-referential Well, if it's static, then it doesn't change over time, which, according to you, causes the same problem.
There is no such thing as "changing over time" because it implies an independent time coordinate t that changes. A changing time coordinate is illogical, by definition. Why is that so hard for you to understand? You must be a physicist or maybe you aspire to be one.
I use the word 'static' for want of a better term. 'Unchanging' may be more appropriate. In a model where there is no change, even the concept of 'no change' is meaningless. However, an outside observer can come to the conclusion that there is no change.
We can't go after all the companies that supported the DMCA. There are too many of them. We must choose a single corporation and make an example out of it. Since Adobe was the first to try to enforce the fascist DMCA law, it is the logical target of our ire. As a start, do not use Acrobat and Photoshop. Concert your.pdf files to another format if possible. Make them sweat a little. As far as the music industry is concerned, my advice is: download it all and copy it all!
We must make an example of Adobe. We should continue to boycott Adobe, the music industry and every company that supported the DMCA until they make an about face and the DMCA is repealed. Otherwise we loose.
Oh kay... ya know, I sat through and read your page, and the problem I have with you is that you spend as much of your argument calling the other person names than to actually argue. It makes you noticable, but it also makes you an ashhole.
That's purely subjective. Certainly I am an asshole but only to those who take offence. Isn't it about time that the crackpots get a taste of their own medicine? OTOH, I get plenty of emails from people who thank me for not being a drone.
Of COURSE, by definition it is impossible to move in spacetime.
Well, I am glad we agree. The strange thing is that about half the emails I get from physicists insist that things do move in spacetime while 20%agrees that it's impossible but still cling to time travel, wormholes and all that nonsense. Go figure!
Eventually he turns around and starts moving forward again, having moved backwards in time, so to speak. The thing is, his differential rate of chage of time with respect to time, for the whole period, including when he is turning around and moving backwards with respect to everyone else is 1.
Your entire argument is flawed. There is no such thing as moving backward (or forward) in time or "rate of change of time with respect to time". Why? because changing time is self-referential. It's that simple. That's the reason why there is no motion in spacetime. I thought you agreed with me above because you understood. You apparently don't.
I've written this before but it's worth repeating.
Intellectual property laws exist only because we have a slavery system. Our livelihood depends on working for others so we can pay our taxes. The reason that we have to work for others is that 99% of people have been deprived of an inheritance in the wealth of the land. Income property is owned by a few and the state. The others are slaves. Artists, programmers and inventors depend on their work to make a living. Can we blame them? We all depend on our labor because we are all slaves. So now we are swimming in a ocean of laws and rules that take away our remaining liberties, one by one.
Let's face it, if you cannot put a fence around it or put chains on it, it does not belong to you. Makes no difference whether it is ideas, writings, software, music or what have you. Once you've released it, like the air, it belongs to nobody and everybody.
Intellectual property owners (such as Microsoft, Adobe, and the music industry) will fight freedom with everything they've got. Right now they have two formidable weapons: IP laws and powerful police states to enforce them. But those who yearn to be free also have a formidable weapon, the internet.
The internet and other communication technologies (e.g., file sharing systems) are the first major kinks in the armor of a sick system. As technology progresses, the system will eventually collapse. What will happen to a slave-based economy when robots and advanced artificial intelligences replace everybody, i. e., when human labor, knowledge and expertise become worthless?
And don't think for a minute this won't happen in your lifetime. The internet is the latest giant leap in human communication. Before that came mass telecommunication technologies and before that was the movable press. If history is any indication, we can expect a giant leap in technological progress and scientific knowledge. In fact, it is happening before our very eyes.
We should all demand a system where everybody is guaranteed income property, a piece of the pie, an estate if you will. There is plenty for everybody.
Communism confiscates all property and enslaves everybody. Capitalism gives property to a few and enslaves the rest. It's sad. The land should not be divided for a price. It should be an inheritance for us and our children and their children. It's the only way to guarantee freedom and a truly free market in a world where human labor is about to go the way of the dinosaurs.
IP owners got the power to trample over people's freedom from our money and the help of an increasingly Big-Brotherish government with which to enact and enforce their Orwellian laws. Did the poeple vote on those laws? I don't think so.
Hit them where it hurts the most, their pocketbook. Don't buy music. Don't buy software. Download it all and copy it all! And if the government refuses to obey the people's wishes, it will be our duty and right to refuse to pay our taxes also. It's our money after all.
The point is that the hypotheses you were referring to were those that attempt to explain mass and gravitation in terms of self-radiation effects. You were calling these 'gravitoelectric' theories, but they are not.
First of all, I did not call the theory "gravitoelectric". You did. I only spoke of gravito-electric fields. Second, I can call it anything I want. Aren't we the little dictator? "Gravito-electric" is a fitting apellation for a theory that postulates that gravity is due to superimposed electric fields. Likewise, gravito-magnetic is a perfect name for gravitational effects due to magnetic fields, if any.
With reference to a single axis, the concept of velocity does not apply
Time is an evolution parameter that is derived from change or motion. It is neither observed nor measured. Only change is observed. Time is a static interval derived from motion. Moving on a time axis is self-referential. If you can't see that, you are a moron. And you have the nerve to call me an idiot? You sure got all bent out of shape over a nut.
As to your dt/dt expression, it is perfectly meaningful: its value is, of course, dt/dt = 1. It is the defining identify for an infinite, smooth number line.
1 is a line? Since when? And how would that prove motion in time, pray tell?
Those of you who are interested in learning (as opposed to being pompous) should check out the work of Dr. Lawrence P. Horwitz, a relativity professor at Tel Aviv University, especially his invariant evolution parameter formalism. Better yet, just write to him and ask him if anything can move in spacetime. Also check out the other references on my site to other physicists and professors who know that can move in spacetime.
There is something called a "gravitoelectric field", but it has nothing to do with photons or electric charge. Rather, it describes how the gravitational field in linearized gravity decomposes into electric-like and magnetic-like components, analogously to the decomposition in electromagnetism.
That's the prediction and explanation of General Relativity. What's your point?
But it has nothing to do with electromagnetic fields or photons, it's just a qualitative similarity to that theory. "Superimposed electric fields" do not comprise a gravitational field.
There is a theory that says they do. Just because you don't think so does not falsify it. What are you, God?
As to intermediate boson exchange, no one believes that such things can account for gravity, not even the "quantum physicists".
Wow! and all along I thought that's what gravitons were for.
String theorists believe in strings (which, by the way, propagate in curved spacetimes),
Nothing propagates in spacetime. By definition. The very fact that string theory postulates that time is one of the dimensions of nature falsifies it. Why? because the moment you include a time dimension in the picture, motion becomes impossible. Not that I expect you to grasp this.
which can behave like gravitons (intermediate bosons), but aren't.
If spacetime is already curved magically, what's the point of having a graviton in the first place?
The Boson which cretaes the force of gravity is called the graviton.
There are other theories of gravity that postulate "virtual" photons from electrically charged particles as the source of ordinary gravity, the so-called gravito-electric field. The idea is that positive and negative electric fields are superimposed and since they emanate radially from matter, their density follow an inverse square distribution. Superimposed magnetic fields too are postulated to generate a very weak amount of gravito-magnetic field.
Having said this, the fact that intemediate bosons are postulated by quantum physicists as the possible causal mechanism of gravity puts into question the notion that gravity is caused by the curvature of spacetime as so many have maintained for so long. Sadly, many still do.
What AI research needs is plenty of "RI" to crank through the conceptual problems too, not just the biggest supercomputers money can buy.
I could not agree more. IMO, the most exciting research in AI right now is the work being done at MIT by Rodney Brooks and his students and colleagues. Dr. Brooks is also keeping a close eye on progress in computational neuroscience and I expect a few conceptual breakthroughs to come from that sector in the not too distant future.
The traditional AI community has conviced itself that AI will come gradually. They're in it for the long haul. I completely disagree with that assessment. I am convinced (as is Dr. Brooks) that there is something important that we are not seeing. Once we see it, AI will be upon us like a flood, almost overnight.
It seems that the amount of energy spent in the magnetic containment fields is what is keeping fusion generators from reaching a breakeven point. Isn't it true that the superconductivity in high temperature superconductors can be maintained solely by the power needed to keep the conductors cold enough? Beyond that, it seems that the current in the coils can be as high as needed without further increases in power input. To reach breakeven one would theoretically only need to increase the plasma density. Is there something I don't know about plasma containment that continually depletes the magnetic fields?
Is there a fusion expert out there who can shed some light into the energy requirements of plasma containment?
Nobody debunks a scientific theory without first understanding the claims it is making. In smaller words, try reading before making an ass out of yourself.
You'd have a little bit more credibility if you showed any hint that you actually read the page you are criticising. I have nothing against relativity. I have something against famous con artists who claim that it does not forbid time travel. Too bad you feel you need to defend them.
I've read that website, and I'm just curious about one thing; how can one person be so wrong, and yet have the ability to make a shockingly ugly website, too? Further, how could someone actually be taken in by all of this quackery?
Interesting but where is the argument?
That whole website comes from the naive, Newtonian definition of motion. Asserting that the colloquial meaning of a word influences it's technical definition is a fallacy.
For your information, Newtonian mechanics and Einstein's relativity are both classical physics theories. They both use the same definition of motion.
Tsagas says that magnetic fields are woven into space-time itself, becoming "an inseparable part of the space-time fabric".
When are people going to realize that spacetime is a fictitious, abstract math construct? There is something out there that is responsible for gravity. Something material, physical. That something is certainly not spacetime. Why? Because nothing can move in spacetime, by definition. Spacetime is just a math hack. Sorry.
"It is up to us, it is up to the citizens of a free society to either accept the chauvinism of science without contradiction or to overcome it by the counterforce of public action." Paul Feyerabend
Slashdot Mirror
This is funny, BilldaCat.
Bravo! Now, another 10 grand could easily smuggle him out of the country. Freedom is worth it.
Capitalism, just like communism, is slavery. Communism confiscates all property and enslaves everybody. Capitalism gives all property to the givernment and a few super rich and enslaves the rest. The only value is to the slave masters. Unless you own incoime property, you are a slave. If you have to go to work for someone to make a living, you are a slave. If you think your taz burden is only 30%, think again. If you count all the hidden taxes, it's more like 60 or 70%. You are a slave and you don't even know it.
The earth has existed for billions of years before homo sapiens showed up. It belongs to nobody and should not be bought and sold as property. It should not be divided for a price. Doing so invariably ends up putting the vast majority of people into abject poverty and servitude because a few ends up owning 90% of the land and its wealth and resources. The land and its wheath should be divided as an inheritance to be passed to our children and their children. What we do with our piece of the pie is up to us. Demand freedom! Always!
Richard Stallman: With free software, you are free to make a modified version and use it, and free to publish the modified version if you want to, but you are not required to publish it. That's you choice.
Freedom is the key. Intellectual property owners accuse those who copy the stuff they publish of stealing their property. They want to prosecute (persecute is a better term) those who do, fine them and/or put them in jail like common thieves.
My question is this, who's going to prosecute IP owners who steal my freedom?
Let's face it, if you can't put a fence around it, or chain it, or lock it up in some manner, it does not belong to you. It does not matter if it's music, writings, software, ideas, inventions, drawings or what have you. Once you release it, it becomes like the air that we breathe: it belongs to nobody and to everybody.
You say, "Well, I worked hard and I must get paid for my work." Right. Well there are a million things in society that you never paid a scent for and you enjoy them freely. Time for you give something back. "Well", you say "how am I gonna make a living?" Good question. It is one that you need to ask your governement.
They instituted the slavery system that you live and work in. Tell them it's no good. Tell them that everybody should be given a piece of the earth, an estate if you will, for you and your descendents. Ask them what they're going to do when AI and advanced technologies finally make human labor obsolete. How is the slave system going to work then? What will your worthless intellectual property going to support you then?
Wow, what a beautiful piece of poetry, one of the best tributes I've seen to Poul Anderson's Passing.
I took it from the first page of Poul's own masterpiece, "The Boat of a Million Years." It is translated from ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, The Book of Going Forth by Daylight, Theban recension, ca 18th Dynasty. I thought it was a fitting adieu for one of 20th century's giants. I can't think of any other sci-fi author who can match Poul's grasp of history and the human condition. A great loss.
May he go forth in the sunrise boat,
May he come port in the sunset boat,
May he go among the imperishable stars,
May he journey in the Boat of a Million Years.
-The Book of Going Forth by Daylight
He will be missed
you know worm holes and time travel aren't really accepted as such outside the minds of Jack Sarfatti, Rudy Rucker, bored middleschool kids and science fiction writers.
You're kidding me. A simple search on Google for either wormhole or time travel contradicts your statement. Stephen Hawking claims that time travel is a serious scientific pursuit. See the references on my site.
Quantum computation, on the other hand, has something behind it
Quantum computing is just as much snake oil and crackpottery as time travel, if not more so. In fact, Dr. David Deutsch of Oxford, who has set himself up as the quantum computing pope, also believes in time travel (I quote him on my site). It's just snake oil on top of snake oil. I am preparing a page on my site to unmask the crackpottery of quantum computing. Stay tuned.
There is really nothing wrong with the idea of a a world government as long as it is not a fascist one. Fascism has had a long history. The current western world is a continuation of the fascist Roman empire which was a continuation of the fascist Babylonian empire. Only the seat of power has moved over the millenia.
Computers and the internet are the latest tools in the arsenal of the fascist. Record keeping has always been the true basis of their power to control the masses. Now that we have all been numbered (social security numbers, driver's license numbers, etc...) it a simple thing to spy on the citizens of supposedly free countries. By forcing ISPs to spy on everybody, the governments of the world are in fact instituting Big Brotherism as the de facto form of modern government. Why? Because we are all slaves and the slave masters need to have control over their slaves.
It should be noted that all of your arguments are perfectly sound when applied to euclidean geometry as well, just so long as you include time as part of your position marker - and there's no reason that you shouldn't. I'm somewhat confused by this whole thing: what part of relativity are you complaining about?
I have nothing against relativity. My problem is with famous sicentists who make all sorts of cockamamie claims (like wormhole, time travel, etc...) on the basis of relativity's success.
Well, we change relative to time, yeah?
No, we just change. Static time intervals is derived abstractly from change.
you say time is static... because'changing time' is self-referential Well, if it's static, then it doesn't change over time, which, according to you, causes the same problem.
There is no such thing as "changing over time" because it implies an independent time coordinate t that changes. A changing time coordinate is illogical, by definition. Why is that so hard for you to understand? You must be a physicist or maybe you aspire to be one.
I use the word 'static' for want of a better term. 'Unchanging' may be more appropriate. In a model where there is no change, even the concept of 'no change' is meaningless. However, an outside observer can come to the conclusion that there is no change.
We can't go after all the companies that supported the DMCA. There are too many of them. We must choose a single corporation and make an example out of it. Since Adobe was the first to try to enforce the fascist DMCA law, it is the logical target of our ire. As a start, do not use Acrobat and Photoshop. Concert your .pdf files to another format if possible. Make them sweat a little. As far as the music industry is concerned, my advice is: download it all and copy it all!
We must make an example of Adobe. We should continue to boycott Adobe, the music industry and every company that supported the DMCA until they make an about face and the DMCA is repealed. Otherwise we loose.
Oh kay... ya know, I sat through and read your page, and the problem I have with you is that you spend as much of your argument calling the other person names than to actually argue. It makes you noticable, but it also makes you an ashhole.
That's purely subjective. Certainly I am an asshole but only to those who take offence. Isn't it about time that the crackpots get a taste of their own medicine? OTOH, I get plenty of emails from people who thank me for not being a drone.
Of COURSE, by definition it is impossible to move in spacetime.
Well, I am glad we agree. The strange thing is that about half the emails I get from physicists insist that things do move in spacetime while 20%agrees that it's impossible but still cling to time travel, wormholes and all that nonsense. Go figure!
Eventually he turns around and starts moving forward again, having moved backwards in time, so to speak. The thing is, his differential rate of chage of time with respect to time, for the whole period, including when he is turning around and moving backwards with respect to everyone else is 1.
Your entire argument is flawed. There is no such thing as moving backward (or forward) in time or "rate of change of time with respect to time". Why? because changing time is self-referential. It's that simple. That's the reason why there is no motion in spacetime. I thought you agreed with me above because you understood. You apparently don't.
Mod me down some more!
I've written this before but it's worth repeating.
Intellectual property laws exist only because we have a slavery system. Our livelihood depends on working for others so we can pay our taxes. The reason that we have to work for others is that 99% of people have been deprived of an inheritance in the wealth of the land. Income property is owned by a few and the state. The others are slaves. Artists, programmers and inventors depend on their work to make a living. Can we blame them? We all depend on our labor because we are all slaves. So now we are swimming in a ocean of laws and rules that take away our remaining liberties, one by one.
Let's face it, if you cannot put a fence around it or put chains on it, it does not belong to you. Makes no difference whether it is ideas, writings, software, music or what have you. Once you've released it, like the air, it belongs to nobody and everybody.
Intellectual property owners (such as Microsoft, Adobe, and the music industry) will fight freedom with everything they've got. Right now they have two formidable weapons: IP laws and powerful police states to enforce them. But those who yearn to be free also have a formidable weapon, the internet.
The internet and other communication technologies (e.g., file sharing systems) are the first major kinks in the armor of a sick system. As technology progresses, the system will eventually collapse. What will happen to a slave-based economy when robots and advanced artificial intelligences replace everybody, i. e., when human labor, knowledge and expertise become worthless?
And don't think for a minute this won't happen in your lifetime. The internet is the latest giant leap in human communication. Before that came mass telecommunication technologies and before that was the movable press. If history is any indication, we can expect a giant leap in technological progress and scientific knowledge. In fact, it is happening before our very eyes.
We should all demand a system where everybody is guaranteed income property, a piece of the pie, an estate if you will. There is plenty for everybody.
Communism confiscates all property and enslaves everybody. Capitalism gives property to a few and enslaves the rest. It's sad. The land should not be divided for a price. It should be an inheritance for us and our children and their children. It's the only way to guarantee freedom and a truly free market in a world where human labor is about to go the way of the dinosaurs.
Demand liberty! Nothing less.
IP owners got the power to trample over people's freedom from our money and the help of an increasingly Big-Brotherish government with which to enact and enforce their Orwellian laws. Did the poeple vote on those laws? I don't think so.
Hit them where it hurts the most, their pocketbook. Don't buy music. Don't buy software. Download it all and copy it all! And if the government refuses to obey the people's wishes, it will be our duty and right to refuse to pay our taxes also. It's our money after all.
Demand liberty! Nothing less!
The point is that the hypotheses you were referring to were those that attempt to explain mass and gravitation in terms of self-radiation effects. You were calling these 'gravitoelectric' theories, but they are not.
First of all, I did not call the theory "gravitoelectric". You did. I only spoke of gravito-electric fields. Second, I can call it anything I want. Aren't we the little dictator? "Gravito-electric" is a fitting apellation for a theory that postulates that gravity is due to superimposed electric fields. Likewise, gravito-magnetic is a perfect name for gravitational effects due to magnetic fields, if any.
With reference to a single axis, the concept of velocity does not apply
Time is an evolution parameter that is derived from change or motion. It is neither observed nor measured. Only change is observed. Time is a static interval derived from motion. Moving on a time axis is self-referential. If you can't see that, you are a moron. And you have the nerve to call me an idiot? You sure got all bent out of shape over a nut.
As to your dt/dt expression, it is perfectly meaningful: its value is, of course, dt/dt = 1. It is the defining identify for an infinite, smooth number line.
1 is a line? Since when? And how would that prove motion in time, pray tell?
Those of you who are interested in learning (as opposed to being pompous) should check out the work of Dr. Lawrence P. Horwitz, a relativity professor at Tel Aviv University, especially his invariant evolution parameter formalism. Better yet, just write to him and ask him if anything can move in spacetime. Also check out the other references on my site to other physicists and professors who know that can move in spacetime.
Don't be mindless drones. Resist the Borg!
There is something called a "gravitoelectric field", but it has nothing to do with photons or electric charge. Rather, it describes how the gravitational field in linearized gravity decomposes into electric-like and magnetic-like components, analogously to the decomposition in electromagnetism.
That's the prediction and explanation of General Relativity. What's your point?
But it has nothing to do with electromagnetic fields or photons, it's just a qualitative similarity to that theory. "Superimposed electric fields" do not comprise a gravitational field.
There is a theory that says they do. Just because you don't think so does not falsify it. What are you, God?
As to intermediate boson exchange, no one believes that such things can account for gravity, not even the "quantum physicists".
Wow! and all along I thought that's what gravitons were for.
String theorists believe in strings (which, by the way, propagate in curved spacetimes),
Nothing propagates in spacetime. By definition. The very fact that string theory postulates that time is one of the dimensions of nature falsifies it. Why? because the moment you include a time dimension in the picture, motion becomes impossible. Not that I expect you to grasp this.
which can behave like gravitons (intermediate bosons), but aren't.
If spacetime is already curved magically, what's the point of having a graviton in the first place?
The Boson which cretaes the force of gravity is called the graviton.
There are other theories of gravity that postulate "virtual" photons from electrically charged particles as the source of ordinary gravity, the so-called gravito-electric field. The idea is that positive and negative electric fields are superimposed and since they emanate radially from matter, their density follow an inverse square distribution. Superimposed magnetic fields too are postulated to generate a very weak amount of gravito-magnetic field.
Having said this, the fact that intemediate bosons are postulated by quantum physicists as the possible causal mechanism of gravity puts into question the notion that gravity is caused by the curvature of spacetime as so many have maintained for so long. Sadly, many still do.
It's the police state vs. the freedom of the people. In one word, Big Brother.
Don't be mindless drones! Resist the Borg!
What AI research needs is plenty of "RI" to crank through the conceptual problems too, not just the biggest supercomputers money can buy.
I could not agree more. IMO, the most exciting research in AI right now is the work being done at MIT by Rodney Brooks and his students and colleagues. Dr. Brooks is also keeping a close eye on progress in computational neuroscience and I expect a few conceptual breakthroughs to come from that sector in the not too distant future.
The traditional AI community has conviced itself that AI will come gradually. They're in it for the long haul. I completely disagree with that assessment. I am convinced (as is Dr. Brooks) that there is something important that we are not seeing. Once we see it, AI will be upon us like a flood, almost overnight.
Actually no the containment is fairly energy cheap, the real problem is the startup energy versus the energy it creates.
Thanks for the explanation.
It seems that the amount of energy spent in the magnetic containment fields is what is keeping fusion generators from reaching a breakeven point. Isn't it true that the superconductivity in high temperature superconductors can be maintained solely by the power needed to keep the conductors cold enough? Beyond that, it seems that the current in the coils can be as high as needed without further increases in power input. To reach breakeven one would theoretically only need to increase the plasma density. Is there something I don't know about plasma containment that continually depletes the magnetic fields?
Is there a fusion expert out there who can shed some light into the energy requirements of plasma containment?
Nobody debunks a scientific theory without first understanding the claims it is making. In smaller words, try reading before making an ass out of yourself.
You'd have a little bit more credibility if you showed any hint that you actually read the page you are criticising. I have nothing against relativity. I have something against famous con artists who claim that it does not forbid time travel. Too bad you feel you need to defend them.
Nobody defines motion as v= dt/dt.
That's the point.
I've read that website, and I'm just curious about one thing; how can one person be so wrong, and yet have the ability to make a shockingly ugly website, too? Further, how could someone actually be taken in by all of this quackery?
Interesting but where is the argument?
That whole website comes from the naive, Newtonian definition of motion. Asserting that the colloquial meaning of a word influences it's technical definition is a fallacy.
For your information, Newtonian mechanics and Einstein's relativity are both classical physics theories. They both use the same definition of motion.
Tsagas says that magnetic fields are woven into space-time itself, becoming "an inseparable part of the space-time fabric".
When are people going to realize that spacetime is a fictitious, abstract math construct? There is something out there that is responsible for gravity. Something material, physical. That something is certainly not spacetime. Why? Because nothing can move in spacetime, by definition. Spacetime is just a math hack. Sorry.
"It is up to us, it is up to the citizens of a free society to either accept the chauvinism of science without contradiction or to overcome it by the counterforce of public action." Paul Feyerabend