As far as we can tell so far, without "this" universe (may I remind everybody what this word commonly means...) - nothing exists. That includes whatever type of means for information storage and processing, in which abstracts can live.
Mathematicians can deal with them but in the fully abstract world of mathematics, right? In the face of what might as well be a property of the universe (what does "usually" mean? And didn't many physicists sort of invent large part of modern math, for practical reasons?) - does putting the "blame" on physicists help in clarifying things?
Not selling ideological objections in the vein of "why should children of others benefit from my taxes?!" (which is inherently against the ideas of modern society / misses how it makes the place nicer for everybody in the long term - but one can't be obsessed with short term wishful thinking / "think of the children!", right...) or dropping the myth of "american dream" (the US has the lowest, together with UK, social mobility among developed nations) would be a start.
When past the above - recognition of beneficent academic disciplines might be easier.
Oh no, no - I had a much older possible grudge on the part of UK-based Vodafone in mind, one revolving around avoidance of sending funds to the British;>
Though I have no idea how that would fit with ze Germans, out of all, being better;) - but BTW I have T-mobile DE across the border, plus locally a major telecom (with few nice prepaid brands) owned by them - and while not "leading", they are decent.
(ha! But who kept in power families controlling those assets?!;) )
That seems to me almost like trying to find excuses;p
Yes, it might be not at the stage of mobile nirvana - nowhere is (and where the situation is satisfactory close, it almost certainly was much worse in the past). Some minimum effort on the part of subscribers is required after all.
There needs to be only enough GSM networks. And - people at your place don't generally listen to advice of others / have such opportunity to hold their phone? (better than in stores, I'd say - where you can still go just to try the phone, you know... yes, "insincere" - well, that's the fault of the carrier for not giving a better deal)
Well, if you want to play in semantics now - so how would you call them?
The point isn't about prohibiting oaths, but prohibiting requirement of them. And as you yourself now say, there are nice alternatives after all... (I wonder what types of movements are responsible for enforcement of this part of the basic laws...)
(too many people seem to think that Declaration of Independence has in fact legal power - doesn't matter how it was over two centuries ago - to the point of me expecting it; anyway, being written by slave owners really doesn't help those words and claims on what the Constitution is based on)
Generally - those technicalities are completely secondary to what the point was - how the governance in a given place is a reflection of its society. Systematic abuses of governance are endemic to what this society is; outright excluding some damn important parts of the society, when one wishes for reform of the scope that you wish for, is naive. We might conclude that taking those specific parts head-on is impractical - but it is part of resolving abuses of power that you mention.
Why not Pallas? Overall it's very similar to Vesta...
What about only "sort of fusing" sub-brown dwarfs? A random bit of mercury thrown out by an impact?
In the case of planets "clearing its orbit" is very informative, very revealing - as far as we can tell it is related to their origin, mode of their formation and evolution.
Wait, what? First you say that the separation goes too far...then you yourself provide few high-profile examples how it's abuse is actually rampant?
That said, my point wasn't how all those things (not only abuses!) aren't present in the society - quite the contrary, all they are an important part of the society. And condition of society is also reflected in the overall system of governance.
BTW, even I know (not living under it) that "...all men are endowed by their creator..." is not in the US Constitution but in the Declaration of Independence; a document without legal power - but drafted by slave-owners. The Constitution explicitly says bible oaths are not required / them roughly and currency precisely are vestiges of Red Scare nowadays.
Generally, "because in its cradle it was like this" is not a good argument at all - particularly for the faithful. However conservatism (as a concept) strives to preserve the state of affairs - it utterly fails throughout the history. In the particular area discussed - virtually all present faithful are very strong heretics, as far as most people living few centuries ago would be concerned.
What would hold the mathematical ideas without a universe? Anyway, isn't "the math falls apart" a not too bad figure of speech when encountering what are also mathematical singularities? (within the scope of given physics of course, but...)
In other words: some model which, curiously, fits the available data has pretty much proven that people following certain approach (one which gave you large part of the modern world, including instruments you used to post the above) don't have a clue as to what's going on.
Yup, that shows them how a great grip on things you have / hence ability to say the above...
Don't you think it's all symptomatic / interweaves, considering for example the supposedly large role religious societal constructs play in the functioning of their adherents?
We already admitted that the world isn't the center of the solar system/universe... We already admitted that our galaxy isn't the center of the universe
Well, they are in the center of observable Universe / what's "beyond" doesn't really matter...
It makes unsubstantiated assumptions, expresses common but not very accurate beliefs, even about our experience of consciousness. It basically dies many times during our lifetime, at any stage is quite different from what it was - it's closer to our peers than to us at some very different stage.
How our memory is also not so great, but we still think of it in high regard, doesn't help...
You just somehow totally missed the point. There's no physical "edge", just space relevant to our frame of reference. While physicists are taking about the "outside" (like, for starters, what is the expected "size" of post-inflation Universe), it doesn't really matter / might as well not exist.
"Makes sense" is unsubstantiated(*). Quantum mechanics and relativity also don't make sense for neural systems evolved to survive in completely different, intermediate scale of the Universe.
(*)Unless you mean in the context of Buddhism. In which case, while perhaps not supportive, it's certainly a part.
Not to mention the fact that we have quite terrestrial aircraft already that can outsmart and/or maneuver SAMs.
But it doesn't work like in the works of fiction, too. Properly locked-on barrage of missiles, facing no countermeasures / fired on an unsuspecting target is almost a case of no contest.
While technology involved would be impressive, it still has to work within constraints of physics and practicality.
Would be interesting to see poachers arming themselves with AA defenses. Maybe those old South Park episodes, depicting hunting with a bazooka or Apache, were somewhat prophetic.
That gimmicky "whoa!" style of present documentaries seems to have come from across the Atlantic / UK productions are on average still somewhat better (not saying it isn't bad) from US ones.
What H.G. Wells wrote is a very good example because of its complete implausibility, on the most basic logical level. NVM techno babble - "continuing explosion" defies the concept of "explosion" itself. Wasn't even more destructive than chemical bombs (what good is a continuos explosion in the same place? If anything, it would be quickly contained by its own crater / cave). And Niels Bohr had other motives to express doubt.
The proportion of U-235 in the ore was simply astronomical in comparison to our "sources" of antimatter. How is that philosopher's stone going? With a dream that old, and technically possible now... BTW, CERN/LHC is very much an international effort.
Even if we had a method of obtaining it many orders of magnitude more efficiently than our (quite good) understanding of physics allows - it doesn't resolve the biggest showstopper, containment. And even disregarding also that / assuming it can be done - there's a very fundamental problem with any bomb which needs to be very actively stopped from exploding at all times (while not being more powerful than quite inert and handy fission/fusion devices)
Antimatter catalyzed explosive devices might be within a realm of possibility. But Niels Bohr would have something to say about that as well...
Another example: confusing scifi teleportation with particle statistics effect.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as we can tell so far, without "this" universe (may I remind everybody what this word commonly means...) - nothing exists. That includes whatever type of means for information storage and processing, in which abstracts can live.
Mathematicians can deal with them but in the fully abstract world of mathematics, right? In the face of what might as well be a property of the universe (what does "usually" mean? And didn't many physicists sort of invent large part of modern math, for practical reasons?) - does putting the "blame" on physicists help in clarifying things?
Sure, like some Structural Funds with the goal of encouraging initiative, which are IIRC somewhat tied to the deal with engineering scholarships.
Not selling ideological objections in the vein of "why should children of others benefit from my taxes?!" (which is inherently against the ideas of modern society / misses how it makes the place nicer for everybody in the long term - but one can't be obsessed with short term wishful thinking / "think of the children!", right...) or dropping the myth of "american dream" (the US has the lowest, together with UK, social mobility among developed nations) would be a start.
When past the above - recognition of beneficent academic disciplines might be easier.
Oh no, no - I had a much older possible grudge on the part of UK-based Vodafone in mind, one revolving around avoidance of sending funds to the British ;>
Though I have no idea how that would fit with ze Germans, out of all, being better ;) - but BTW I have T-mobile DE across the border, plus locally a major telecom (with few nice prepaid brands) owned by them - and while not "leading", they are decent.
(ha! But who kept in power families controlling those assets?! ;) )
My apologies, I forgot how "anywhere" means only few places of interest to sizable groups of citizens of the Empire.
That seems to me almost like trying to find excuses ;p
Yes, it might be not at the stage of mobile nirvana - nowhere is (and where the situation is satisfactory close, it almost certainly was much worse in the past). Some minimum effort on the part of subscribers is required after all.
There needs to be only enough GSM networks. And - people at your place don't generally listen to advice of others / have such opportunity to hold their phone? (better than in stores, I'd say - where you can still go just to try the phone, you know... yes, "insincere" - well, that's the fault of the carrier for not giving a better deal)
Well, if you want to play in semantics now - so how would you call them?
The point isn't about prohibiting oaths, but prohibiting requirement of them. And as you yourself now say, there are nice alternatives after all... (I wonder what types of movements are responsible for enforcement of this part of the basic laws...)
(too many people seem to think that Declaration of Independence has in fact legal power - doesn't matter how it was over two centuries ago - to the point of me expecting it; anyway, being written by slave owners really doesn't help those words and claims on what the Constitution is based on)
Generally - those technicalities are completely secondary to what the point was - how the governance in a given place is a reflection of its society. Systematic abuses of governance are endemic to what this society is; outright excluding some damn important parts of the society, when one wishes for reform of the scope that you wish for, is naive. We might conclude that taking those specific parts head-on is impractical - but it is part of resolving abuses of power that you mention.
Why not Pallas? Overall it's very similar to Vesta...
What about only "sort of fusing" sub-brown dwarfs? A random bit of mercury thrown out by an impact?
In the case of planets "clearing its orbit" is very informative, very revealing - as far as we can tell it is related to their origin, mode of their formation and evolution.
Wait, what? First you say that the separation goes too far...then you yourself provide few high-profile examples how it's abuse is actually rampant?
That said, my point wasn't how all those things (not only abuses!) aren't present in the society - quite the contrary, all they are an important part of the society. And condition of society is also reflected in the overall system of governance.
BTW, even I know (not living under it) that "...all men are endowed by their creator..." is not in the US Constitution but in the Declaration of Independence; a document without legal power - but drafted by slave-owners. The Constitution explicitly says bible oaths are not required / them roughly and currency precisely are vestiges of Red Scare nowadays.
Generally, "because in its cradle it was like this" is not a good argument at all - particularly for the faithful. However conservatism (as a concept) strives to preserve the state of affairs - it utterly fails throughout the history. In the particular area discussed - virtually all present faithful are very strong heretics, as far as most people living few centuries ago would be concerned.
What would hold the mathematical ideas without a universe? Anyway, isn't "the math falls apart" a not too bad figure of speech when encountering what are also mathematical singularities? (within the scope of given physics of course, but...)
In other words: some model which, curiously, fits the available data has pretty much proven that people following certain approach (one which gave you large part of the modern world, including instruments you used to post the above) don't have a clue as to what's going on.
Yup, that shows them how a great grip on things you have / hence ability to say the above...
Don't you think it's all symptomatic / interweaves, considering for example the supposedly large role religious societal constructs play in the functioning of their adherents?
We already admitted that the world isn't the center of the solar system/universe ...
We already admitted that our galaxy isn't the center of the universe
Well, they are in the center of observable Universe / what's "beyond" doesn't really matter...
It makes unsubstantiated assumptions, expresses common but not very accurate beliefs, even about our experience of consciousness. It basically dies many times during our lifetime, at any stage is quite different from what it was - it's closer to our peers than to us at some very different stage.
How our memory is also not so great, but we still think of it in high regard, doesn't help...
You just somehow totally missed the point. There's no physical "edge", just space relevant to our frame of reference. While physicists are taking about the "outside" (like, for starters, what is the expected "size" of post-inflation Universe), it doesn't really matter / might as well not exist.
Your "more importantly" only has apparent meaning for moderately intelligent naked apes, as far we know...
"Makes sense" is unsubstantiated(*). Quantum mechanics and relativity also don't make sense for neural systems evolved to survive in completely different, intermediate scale of the Universe.
(*)Unless you mean in the context of Buddhism. In which case, while perhaps not supportive, it's certainly a part.
No, no, no - "Science sides with pagan god-mockers!"
Or in other words - life as usual.
Not to mention the fact that we have quite terrestrial aircraft already that can outsmart and/or maneuver SAMs.
But it doesn't work like in the works of fiction, too. Properly locked-on barrage of missiles, facing no countermeasures / fired on an unsuspecting target is almost a case of no contest.
While technology involved would be impressive, it still has to work within constraints of physics and practicality.
Look at the parameters of this missile (yt video of launch there, too). There is no justification for such performance in the case of spacecraft.
Flight 655 wasn't about failing to respond to appropriate emergency frequencies; they were hailed inappropriately.
Does that work also for "inventing" new products / making sure Apple won't go into certain market segments? ;)
Would be interesting to see poachers arming themselves with AA defenses. Maybe those old South Park episodes, depicting hunting with a bazooka or Apache, were somewhat prophetic.
That gimmicky "whoa!" style of present documentaries seems to have come from across the Atlantic / UK productions are on average still somewhat better (not saying it isn't bad) from US ones.
Luckily Planete resists, so far...
What H.G. Wells wrote is a very good example because of its complete implausibility, on the most basic logical level. NVM techno babble - "continuing explosion" defies the concept of "explosion" itself. Wasn't even more destructive than chemical bombs (what good is a continuos explosion in the same place? If anything, it would be quickly contained by its own crater / cave). And Niels Bohr had other motives to express doubt.
The proportion of U-235 in the ore was simply astronomical in comparison to our "sources" of antimatter. How is that philosopher's stone going? With a dream that old, and technically possible now... BTW, CERN/LHC is very much an international effort.
Even if we had a method of obtaining it many orders of magnitude more efficiently than our (quite good) understanding of physics allows - it doesn't resolve the biggest showstopper, containment. And even disregarding also that / assuming it can be done - there's a very fundamental problem with any bomb which needs to be very actively stopped from exploding at all times (while not being more powerful than quite inert and handy fission/fusion devices)
Antimatter catalyzed explosive devices might be within a realm of possibility. But Niels Bohr would have something to say about that as well...
Another example: confusing scifi teleportation with particle statistics effect.