In the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Supernatural Model, the possibility for the faintest angel to be lighter than $Z$ signal (as low as about 60 GeV) is, contrary to the usual belief, not yet excluded by LEP2 data or any other existing experimental data. The characteristic of the angel scenario (LHS) is that the $ZZh$ coupling and the decay branching ratio ${\rm Br}(h/A\to b\bar{b})$ are simultaneously suppressed as a result of generic supersymmetric loop corrections. Consequently, the $W^\pm H^\mp h$ coupling has to be large due to the sum rule of natural mater couplings to weak gauge photons. In addition to discussing the potential of $B$-factories to test the LAS, we show that the associate neutral and charged natural particle production process, $pp\to H^\pm h (A)$, can completely probe LAS at the CERM Large Madron Detector.
The author argues that unless you understand and perform the test then you presume a result is valid because you believe the person who told you. Pretty simple.
If you like I can write a method for testing for angels and send you the result. But if the method is sufficiently complex, expensive and difficult for someone in unrelated study to understand then no matter how advanced you are in your field you have to make an assumption about the validity of my testimony.
For the article's sake, let's call that "faith". I think you would say the angel test method is a load of crap and thus the results positive or negative are invalid. I'm guessing you know more about angels than quantum mechanics.
But if you really get Quantum Mechanics understand the tests, procedures and how to evaluate the data without making vast assumptions about what others are saying, please speak to Richard Fenyman, he seems to be struggling.
Oh, you only believe you can reproduce quantum entanglements.
And why would you believe something as silly as that?
You didn't read it on the internet did you? Maybe a peer reviewed article?
And the angel, you only believe that you'll never see an angel. Doesn't mean you won't. Your belief is predicated on your assumption that they don't exist. You've made that assumption out of faith.
The better scientist will say he doesn't yet have the funding or the method. "never seen it before", "it's highly unlikely" and "it's an insane idea or concept" don't really have a good track record as indicators of reality, especially in science.
The point isn't that science isn't truth, more that you have to make some assumptions to arrive at that truth, just like math. Even the assumption that your perception is real and accurate.
Anyway, for my part I think I'm willing to make the assumptions that allow me to believe most of the scientists of the world- if I didn't it would be a much less interesting place.
That makes a lot of sense. I think I would shorten the year for the next 89 years (my kids can deal with it after I'm gone) and add a leading zero to releases prevent confusion: YY.xx
Build numbers would go 11.xx.bbbb but would get truncated for release. We could increment xx only on release as well, then anything with a build number is beta.
Yup!
Seems like an excellent project with lots of value that we shouldn't take on until we can afford it. Of course we appreciate what you do and we want to fund it, but we shouldn't take out another loan when we're already in deficit and carrying too much debt.
Step 1: Set up a linux VM like the production environment.
Step 2:....
I don't know what this guy is smoking but it's not rocket science (not that rocket science is that bad either)
Absolutely, I could buy them on Amazon in the US and have them hand carried here. I dare you to try to find a.co.mz DVD retailer though. That and there's no reliable postal service.
There is no distribution of legal DVDs in this country. You could buy real DVDs as close as South Africa.
I live in Pemba, Mozambique where there is no place to buy legitimate DVDs. It doesn't exist.
The DVDs you can buy are cheap chinese rips on a disc in shrinkwrap with cardboard that advertises 24 MOVIES DVD9 BLURAY MPEG4 XVID H264. Really they're just highly compressed low resolution MPEG2 streams. There's typically 4 movies on a disk divided into 6 or so parts labeled a, b, c, d, etc.
I Don't buy movies here because there's no supply chain. I do buy on iTunes which permits me because I have a US credit card.
MikroTik's RouterOS isn't IPv6 ready, just go have a look at their forums. They're still working on adding v6 features in 5.0 RC11. Yeah that's 11, and it's still not feature complete.
Actually maybe staring at a blank screen for more than a few seconds, or staring at yourself, lowers your self esteem. Maybe facebook is just the baseline.
Slashdot Mirror
I had the same problem with air getting in between my contacts.
We're really hoping for a non-faint-angel-detection-event "n-fade", something where they'll have to tell us to not be afraid ;)
Sooooo, you understand that he's talking about the philosophy of science right?
In the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Supernatural Model, the possibility for the faintest angel to be lighter than $Z$ signal (as low as about 60 GeV) is, contrary to the usual belief, not yet excluded by LEP2 data or any other existing experimental data. The characteristic of the angel scenario (LHS) is that the $ZZh$ coupling and the decay branching ratio ${\rm Br}(h/A\to b\bar{b})$ are simultaneously suppressed as a result of generic supersymmetric loop corrections. Consequently, the $W^\pm H^\mp h$ coupling has to be large due to the sum rule of natural mater couplings to weak gauge photons. In addition to discussing the potential of $B$-factories to test the LAS, we show that the associate neutral and charged natural particle production process, $pp\to H^\pm h (A)$, can completely probe LAS at the CERM Large Madron Detector.
You never read the "Methods" section, do you.
The author argues that unless you understand and perform the test then you presume a result is valid because you believe the person who told you. Pretty simple.
If you like I can write a method for testing for angels and send you the result. But if the method is sufficiently complex, expensive and difficult for someone in unrelated study to understand then no matter how advanced you are in your field you have to make an assumption about the validity of my testimony.
For the article's sake, let's call that "faith". I think you would say the angel test method is a load of crap and thus the results positive or negative are invalid. I'm guessing you know more about angels than quantum mechanics.
But if you really get Quantum Mechanics understand the tests, procedures and how to evaluate the data without making vast assumptions about what others are saying, please speak to Richard Fenyman, he seems to be struggling.
And why would you believe something as silly as that?
You didn't read it on the internet did you? Maybe a peer reviewed article?
And the angel, you only believe that you'll never see an angel. Doesn't mean you won't. Your belief is predicated on your assumption that they don't exist. You've made that assumption out of faith.
The better scientist will say he doesn't yet have the funding or the method. "never seen it before", "it's highly unlikely" and "it's an insane idea or concept" don't really have a good track record as indicators of reality, especially in science.
The point isn't that science isn't truth, more that you have to make some assumptions to arrive at that truth, just like math. Even the assumption that your perception is real and accurate.
Anyway, for my part I think I'm willing to make the assumptions that allow me to believe most of the scientists of the world- if I didn't it would be a much less interesting place.
I think that's a pretty sane, simple, informative and intuitive system.
That makes a lot of sense. I think I would shorten the year for the next 89 years (my kids can deal with it after I'm gone) and add a leading zero to releases prevent confusion: YY.xx Build numbers would go 11.xx.bbbb but would get truncated for release. We could increment xx only on release as well, then anything with a build number is beta.
Firefox 42 on the other hand...
Yup! Seems like an excellent project with lots of value that we shouldn't take on until we can afford it. Of course we appreciate what you do and we want to fund it, but we shouldn't take out another loan when we're already in deficit and carrying too much debt.
What do you do?
Wow.
but that's only if you specify >shutdown --catastrophic
Public charge. I don't know if it would be cheaper but under OBcare I expect not.
Step 1: Set up a linux VM like the production environment. Step 2:.... I don't know what this guy is smoking but it's not rocket science (not that rocket science is that bad either)
Haha, Oracle, donate. Yeah.
This looks like a job for IP over TV!
Absolutely, I could buy them on Amazon in the US and have them hand carried here. I dare you to try to find a .co.mz DVD retailer though. That and there's no reliable postal service.
There is no distribution of legal DVDs in this country. You could buy real DVDs as close as South Africa.
Chrome's UI is a pillowcase with all the doorknobs removed. It is great.
The back button is in the top left.
Print resources.
The DVDs you can buy are cheap chinese rips on a disc in shrinkwrap with cardboard that advertises 24 MOVIES DVD9 BLURAY MPEG4 XVID H264. Really they're just highly compressed low resolution MPEG2 streams. There's typically 4 movies on a disk divided into 6 or so parts labeled a, b, c, d, etc.
I Don't buy movies here because there's no supply chain. I do buy on iTunes which permits me because I have a US credit card.
MikroTik's RouterOS isn't IPv6 ready, just go have a look at their forums. They're still working on adding v6 features in 5.0 RC11. Yeah that's 11, and it's still not feature complete.
Actually maybe staring at a blank screen for more than a few seconds, or staring at yourself, lowers your self esteem. Maybe facebook is just the baseline.
ThunderBolt isn't LightPeak at all, it's something different. Anyway, now you can expect LightPeak to be faster than 2x10Gb/s when it arrives.