Don't forget vendor lock-in in the software world, or the large number of physically addictive prescription medication being advertised freely to the public.
I agree with your statement about indoctrination. I suppose I forgot one important possibility: students were instructed in truth, but rather preferred not to accept it.
I'd actually say we understand E&M radiation rather well. We know how waves work, and we know that light is *neither* a wave, *nor* a particle, but something completely different that sometimes has properties of both. The confusion comes up when one realizes that light, or anything else for that matter, doesn't ever act like a wave and particle simultaneously; however, field theory neatly takes care of the problems. None of this science is purely theoretical anymore, as you suggest.
Then these same people somehow accept as fact that masses magically attract each other due to an unexplained property of the Universe, but they dispute the idea that life also could have arisen simply due to laws of Nature. Oh, if only they saw the irony: as far as physicists are concerned, gravity really is just as magical as that which they can't accept. The fact that it's probably less well-understood than evolution is just icing on the cake. It shows ignorance when people compare evolution to gravity in that way.
If I had to attribute a reason to this dichotomy, I'd guess that people feel like their identity is being threatened by research into the origins of life. People aren't able to accept that they aren't special, because in order to do that, they must overcome the nihilism that arises from God's irrelevance. If we're not special, then suddenly we're not Right anymore, either -- and we're completely, utterly alone. It's much easier for most people to trick oneself into believing in things that don't make sense than it is to conquer the Abyss Nietzsche wrote about.
On the other hand, we have gravity, a natural phenomenon that hasn't changed in recorded history. It's not threatening for science to say that gravity doesn't need God to work right, because gravity is external. Gravity is a property of the Universe, rather than of humanity, so it's much less personal.
Actually, there are more (and bigger) problems with our current understanding of gravity than with evolution. General relativity is our "theory of gravity" that you speak of -- but it's incomplete. Quantum mechanics has been shown time and again to be correct, but general relativity and QM are fundamentally incompatible without changes to one or both. There are real scientific problems with the theory of gravity; on the other hand, the only challenges to evolution are, by definition, unscientific. If you're willing to call the theory of gravity "fact," then it would be intellectually dishonest to relegate evolution to some other, "fuzzier," area of knowledge.
That's what's so silly about these debates; it's as if the people setting the standards haven't the slightest idea what it is scientists have been doing since the end of the Dark Ages. How many of them boast college degrees? That's the number of colleges that need to take a serious look at their science requirements.
Doesn't matter; work is only done parallel to the force, in this case gravity. The only part that matters is therefore the height of the track, with the screw only serving to slow the rate at which work is done.
Why not let the counterweight do work as well? Suppose you have a contraption with two equal mass carts, into which you can place a driving mass. When the heavier cart reaches the bottom, you simply take the mass out and place it in the cart at the top. The machine then functions much like an hourglass, and has a certain symmetry to it that I would call attractive.
But when you finally got into space, you'd be (very nearly) moving at escape velocity. That's how we define escape velocity, after all: it's the speed required to overcome the earth's gravitational attraction. The difference between your actual speed and escape velocity will be negligible once you're far enough away, but you have to get there or you can't escape. It's easy to show mathematically.
Yes, those poor, unfortunate, oppressed molecules! Their current natural regime hasn't ever allowed them the opportunity to blow of steam inside a terrstrial internal combustion engine! We'll just have to save them.
Exactly. If they can't get enough votes to overturn the veto, isn't the absence of any statement about immunity better than just handing them what they want? Goddamn it, let the courts decide.
I'm pretty sure they're not even allowed to grant retroactive immunity in the first place. Citizens can't be tried for an infraction that was only made illegal after the fact. Why should telecoms be allowed to break the law and get away with it because the crime was made legal after the fact?
I, for one, welcome our new pot-smoking overlords! Uh... what was I saying again? Pass that shit!
On another note, you know how Iran is always stoning people to death? The Air Force is curious, but unfortunately the term "stoned" got mistranslated...
If they were really serious about that part of the agreement, they wouldn't offer static IPs ever, for any reason, correct? The facts that static IPs are advertised as a part of various broadband plans, and that ports 80, 22, 25, etc. are all open for incoming connections lead me to believe that the no server rule has never been enforced.
(btw islam means "opression" or "submission" in the military sense, there is no choice involved for anyone)
No it doesn't. It means "submission" in the sense of giving oneself over, i.e. submitting, to God. This is why it's possible for one to be a devout Muslim but not observe Sharia law.
Um, Anybody concerned with internet privacy along with everybody who had a myspace account with pictures posted privately they did not intend the public to see.
My mother teaches elementary-age children in the media center, and she would agree with the GP. She tells me that the biggest problem she faces while trying to educate the children who are lagging behind is that they don't get enough support in the home. Single parents have much less time to devote to their kids than couples in general, and that's a FACT. There is no morality issue here; it's one of simple logistics. Most of the learning that happens in children occurs in the home, and as parents start to rely on schools to teach their kids *everything*, of course the kids don't do as well as those who had strong familial support.
Okay, I concede that you have a point. I haven't had a Windows machine in 10 years now, and I keep my desktop at home on so I can talk to it from work.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget vendor lock-in in the software world, or the large number of physically addictive prescription medication being advertised freely to the public.
I agree with your statement about indoctrination. I suppose I forgot one important possibility: students were instructed in truth, but rather preferred not to accept it.
Oh no! Help us, Nanny State! We need you to save us from our pathetic lack of willpower, responsibility, and maturity!
That should read "IAAP," of course.
I'd actually say we understand E&M radiation rather well. We know how waves work, and we know that light is *neither* a wave, *nor* a particle, but something completely different that sometimes has properties of both. The confusion comes up when one realizes that light, or anything else for that matter, doesn't ever act like a wave and particle simultaneously; however, field theory neatly takes care of the problems. None of this science is purely theoretical anymore, as you suggest.
Disclaimer: IIAP.
Then these same people somehow accept as fact that masses magically attract each other due to an unexplained property of the Universe, but they dispute the idea that life also could have arisen simply due to laws of Nature. Oh, if only they saw the irony: as far as physicists are concerned, gravity really is just as magical as that which they can't accept. The fact that it's probably less well-understood than evolution is just icing on the cake. It shows ignorance when people compare evolution to gravity in that way.
If I had to attribute a reason to this dichotomy, I'd guess that people feel like their identity is being threatened by research into the origins of life. People aren't able to accept that they aren't special, because in order to do that, they must overcome the nihilism that arises from God's irrelevance. If we're not special, then suddenly we're not Right anymore, either -- and we're completely, utterly alone. It's much easier for most people to trick oneself into believing in things that don't make sense than it is to conquer the Abyss Nietzsche wrote about.
On the other hand, we have gravity, a natural phenomenon that hasn't changed in recorded history. It's not threatening for science to say that gravity doesn't need God to work right, because gravity is external. Gravity is a property of the Universe, rather than of humanity, so it's much less personal.
Actually, there are more (and bigger) problems with our current understanding of gravity than with evolution. General relativity is our "theory of gravity" that you speak of -- but it's incomplete. Quantum mechanics has been shown time and again to be correct, but general relativity and QM are fundamentally incompatible without changes to one or both. There are real scientific problems with the theory of gravity; on the other hand, the only challenges to evolution are, by definition, unscientific. If you're willing to call the theory of gravity "fact," then it would be intellectually dishonest to relegate evolution to some other, "fuzzier," area of knowledge.
That's what's so silly about these debates; it's as if the people setting the standards haven't the slightest idea what it is scientists have been doing since the end of the Dark Ages. How many of them boast college degrees? That's the number of colleges that need to take a serious look at their science requirements.
Doesn't matter; work is only done parallel to the force, in this case gravity. The only part that matters is therefore the height of the track, with the screw only serving to slow the rate at which work is done.
Why not let the counterweight do work as well? Suppose you have a contraption with two equal mass carts, into which you can place a driving mass. When the heavier cart reaches the bottom, you simply take the mass out and place it in the cart at the top. The machine then functions much like an hourglass, and has a certain symmetry to it that I would call attractive.
Hey, don't you mean *vrooom*?
Your story reminds me of the time when I turned an ordinary bicycle into a gravity-powered superbike. I still have a scar from that one.
This story is about Feynman, so it needs to be tagged "richardfeynmanisgod."
But when you finally got into space, you'd be (very nearly) moving at escape velocity. That's how we define escape velocity, after all: it's the speed required to overcome the earth's gravitational attraction. The difference between your actual speed and escape velocity will be negligible once you're far enough away, but you have to get there or you can't escape. It's easy to show mathematically.
Parent is running Windows, which I can fully believe behaves the way parent says it does.
Yes, those poor, unfortunate, oppressed molecules! Their current natural regime hasn't ever allowed them the opportunity to blow of steam inside a terrstrial internal combustion engine! We'll just have to save them.
Exactly. If they can't get enough votes to overturn the veto, isn't the absence of any statement about immunity better than just handing them what they want? Goddamn it, let the courts decide.
I'm pretty sure they're not even allowed to grant retroactive immunity in the first place. Citizens can't be tried for an infraction that was only made illegal after the fact. Why should telecoms be allowed to break the law and get away with it because the crime was made legal after the fact?
I, for one, welcome our new pot-smoking overlords! Uh... what was I saying again? Pass that shit!
On another note, you know how Iran is always stoning people to death? The Air Force is curious, but unfortunately the term "stoned" got mistranslated...
If they were really serious about that part of the agreement, they wouldn't offer static IPs ever, for any reason, correct? The facts that static IPs are advertised as a part of various broadband plans, and that ports 80, 22, 25, etc. are all open for incoming connections lead me to believe that the no server rule has never been enforced.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-MH-99-010.html Yes, the government funds abstinence research.
I've found mention of a single prayer study funded by NIH, and there's a reasonable amount of literature, but I can't find a link to the grant.
(btw islam means "opression" or "submission" in the military sense, there is no choice involved for anyone) No it doesn't. It means "submission" in the sense of giving oneself over, i.e. submitting, to God. This is why it's possible for one to be a devout Muslim but not observe Sharia law.
Oh my Godwin!
Um, Anybody concerned with internet privacy along with everybody who had a myspace account with pictures posted privately they did not intend the public to see.
The intersection of these two sets is empty.
My mother teaches elementary-age children in the media center, and she would agree with the GP. She tells me that the biggest problem she faces while trying to educate the children who are lagging behind is that they don't get enough support in the home. Single parents have much less time to devote to their kids than couples in general, and that's a FACT. There is no morality issue here; it's one of simple logistics. Most of the learning that happens in children occurs in the home, and as parents start to rely on schools to teach their kids *everything*, of course the kids don't do as well as those who had strong familial support.
Okay, I concede that you have a point. I haven't had a Windows machine in 10 years now, and I keep my desktop at home on so I can talk to it from work.