I apologise for being so closed-minded that I actually think that historical truth exists. I apologise for being so closed-minded that I actually think that historical claims are investigable. I apologise for thinking that therefore any religious believer whose belief is based on an historical claim has little to fear from research into neurological phenomena.
I apologise for having looked at evidence and having drawn a conclusion. I apologise for drawing a conclusion which differs from yours. I apologise for wanting a rational discussion.
I apologise for not having freaky mystical experiences to rely on. I apologise for maintaining strong religious convictions in spite of that clear deficit. I apologise for thinking that that does no discredit to my commitment to truth.
In short, I apologise that I'm not another Slashdot clone, and for mistaking this thread for an intelligent discussion as to whether religious believers need to be concerned about this research. In future, I shall endeavour only to post comments which are unchallenging of hidden assumptions and uncritical of philosophical materialism.
Exactly. I'm not a Christian because I've had some weird experience--frankly, I never have--but because Jesus Christ "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried, on the third day he arose from the dead" and he did all that for me. If you attack "mystical experiences", you're attacking a straw man as far as I'm concerned.
Well, steady on... it's unlikely that the specific predictions of a pre-Big Bang universe can ever be tested empirically. Spend a moment wondering what kind of experiment you would do to find out what lay behind a very tiny ball of extremely bright, hot stuff which is all there is at that point in time. What can be tested is the theory underlying the predictions. But predictions are derived from a theory by a process of approximate logic and thus are never more established then the underlying theory, and are normally less so.
Moreover, Bad Astronomer's just sloppy when he says that theories can be verified or falsified by tests. Well, either sloppy, or his apparent Popperianism is merely apparent. Theories can be falsified, but never verified.
Well, perhaps the US' dominance was an "accident of history"; but so were most other globe-spanning empires. For example, the British empire arose because of many similar factors: immigration of skilled workers, natural resources, a water barrier to interference, that same water barrier being the link to the wider empire, a clear technological gap which meant we could supply the world with goods no-one else could, etc. As it was with us, so with the Roman empire, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Hittites... the list goes on. The history of empire operates on twin premisses: 1. Every empire arises "by accident", and 2. empire gives way to empire.
What am I saying? This isn't a peculiar set of circumstances; this is normalcy.
What happens is that velocities don't add together using the simple addition rule. See the Wiki. Once you're at reasonable fractions of the speed of light (say about 10%; certainly by the time you hit 50%), the fact that it's not simple addition makes an appreciable difference. In your example, each space-ship measures the other as going at about 94% of the speed of light.
Also, there are actually a large variation of planes that can be detected with this method. Imagine our solar system as a disk. Then imaging looking at it from the top view. This view does not allow the planet detection using the transient method. However, angle your view down until you can see just one of the planets cross over the sun. From this angle on, and twisted up to 360 degrees, is where this transient method works. So actually, there are many planes of orbit which can be used to detect planets with this method.
If you think about it geometrically, you'll see that what's going on is that you require a very particular line, or something within about half a degree either side (Earth's shadow against the Sun is of the order of half a degree), to pass from the centre of the star through the centre of the exoplanet and connecting with Earth. Speaking very geometrically, that means that if you randomly select a basis of two unit vectors to span a planar subspace of our three-dimensional space, then you want this given vector (or something close enough) to be a linear combination of the first two.
The odds of that are quite slim, and I'm not a statistician so although I know how I'd set about working it out, I think I'll pass on that calculation.
Well, the quarter for a battery can be removed by using wireless power (qv Slashdot, also today). So you'll just get radiated cereal, instead of over-packaged cereal.
Yes... I submitted this story shortly after I read it; but there was no news of it on/. at all (neither my submission nor anyone else's), until now. It rather makes you wonder why we bother.
Slashdot: News for nerds who don't keep up. Stuff that mattered.
Not only that, but (contra the Slashdot summary) it wasn't Google putting forward the proposal; it was a shareholder. It would be a bit rich for the board to propose a policy and then to advise against it.
Well, a qubit is binary in the sense that while it can be can be in a superposition of many different states, those states are all constructed from two basis states, normally written "0" and "1". It's only a sense, granted, but the description isn't completely without foundation.
He wasn't precisely an ardent atheist, more a sort of a-theist -- or a pan-deist, if you want to put it that way. It's a nice point, but he didn't believe in a personal God involved in the universe; he did, however, believe in (as he put it) "Spinoza's god, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of the world" (cf. the Wikipedia page on him). Certainly, he was not (I use the word under advisement) irreligious.
Yes, I know that was a comment on a throwaway. : )
That'd be because the UK's suffix is (drumroll please).uk! Stone the crows, it's a cor-blimey miracle guv. You never see.gb because that would be "Great Britain" which is a geographic, not political, designation.
And you don't get exemplary damages everywhere. Here in the UK, for instance, we have set down in precedent three situations where they can be applied, and they're really very restrictive. You rarely hear of such damages over here; they really need to be applied only as punishment—and of course, in such cases, there really should be criminal, not civil, proceedings.
Many people have wondered what a village (yes, it's not a town, it's a village at that size!) of eighty souls is doing installing a voting machine. I want to know what the devil it's doing electing a Mayor. Surely you good people don't pay nearly enough taxes to warrant a civic offical for eighty people?
I'm guessing, based on the grandparent's information, that what he means is that the sound of "security" reminded timothy of "sex" (both begin "sek-") and that the format of the sentences are similar: "Sex and the Single Girl", "Security and the $100 Laptop". I can see that; there's a kind of rhythmic similarity to the two.
Before that reference, though, it had me baffled, too.
Hokay, missed that. All the same, I'd wait for final verification before breaking out any bubbly (and then proceedng to analyse its egress from bottle to glass).
Hmmm... the arxiv, of course, has a bit of a 'reputation'. They'll take anything, and more power to them for being willing to do so. However, it does tend to mean that if one's a non-specialist, the cranks can look awfully convincing. Without, obviously, wishing to ascribe that appellation to the good Associate Professor, I would note that this paper carries some of the hallmarks: an extremely dodgy abstract, poor punctuation (as described above in comments), ropey spelling, dubious use of English (whassiss "immortal"?) and poor LaTeX skills.
As I say, far be it from me to call "crank", but I'd wait for this to appear in a peer-reviewed journal and get responses. I suspect the Millennium (sp!) Prize committee may well be doing likewise.
Slashdot Mirror
I apologise for being so closed-minded that I actually think that historical truth exists.
I apologise for being so closed-minded that I actually think that historical claims are investigable.
I apologise for thinking that therefore any religious believer whose belief is based on an historical claim has little to fear from research into neurological phenomena.
I apologise for having looked at evidence and having drawn a conclusion.
I apologise for drawing a conclusion which differs from yours.
I apologise for wanting a rational discussion.
I apologise for not having freaky mystical experiences to rely on.
I apologise for maintaining strong religious convictions in spite of that clear deficit.
I apologise for thinking that that does no discredit to my commitment to truth.
In short, I apologise that I'm not another Slashdot clone, and for mistaking this thread for an intelligent discussion as to whether religious believers need to be concerned about this research. In future, I shall endeavour only to post comments which are unchallenging of hidden assumptions and uncritical of philosophical materialism.
Exactly. I'm not a Christian because I've had some weird experience--frankly, I never have--but because Jesus Christ "suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried, on the third day he arose from the dead" and he did all that for me. If you attack "mystical experiences", you're attacking a straw man as far as I'm concerned.
Which religions do you have in mind? "+5 Interesting", but scatter-shot.
Moreover, Bad Astronomer's just sloppy when he says that theories can be verified or falsified by tests. Well, either sloppy, or his apparent Popperianism is merely apparent. Theories can be falsified, but never verified.
Can Linux run the US?
What am I saying? This isn't a peculiar set of circumstances; this is normalcy.
What happens is that velocities don't add together using the simple addition rule. See the Wiki. Once you're at reasonable fractions of the speed of light (say about 10%; certainly by the time you hit 50%), the fact that it's not simple addition makes an appreciable difference. In your example, each space-ship measures the other as going at about 94% of the speed of light.
If you think about it geometrically, you'll see that what's going on is that you require a very particular line, or something within about half a degree either side (Earth's shadow against the Sun is of the order of half a degree), to pass from the centre of the star through the centre of the exoplanet and connecting with Earth. Speaking very geometrically, that means that if you randomly select a basis of two unit vectors to span a planar subspace of our three-dimensional space, then you want this given vector (or something close enough) to be a linear combination of the first two.
The odds of that are quite slim, and I'm not a statistician so although I know how I'd set about working it out, I think I'll pass on that calculation.
Well, the quarter for a battery can be removed by using wireless power (qv Slashdot, also today). So you'll just get radiated cereal, instead of over-packaged cereal.
Yes... I submitted this story shortly after I read it; but there was no news of it on /. at all (neither my submission nor anyone else's), until now. It rather makes you wonder why we bother.
Slashdot: News for nerds who don't keep up. Stuff that mattered.
Not only that, but (contra the Slashdot summary) it wasn't Google putting forward the proposal; it was a shareholder. It would be a bit rich for the board to propose a policy and then to advise against it.
So how many War and Peaces are in an hour of continuous mp3?
And more to the point, how many War and Peaces are there in a New Jersey?
Parity errors: dontcha just love 'em?
Well, a qubit is binary in the sense that while it can be can be in a superposition of many different states, those states are all constructed from two basis states, normally written "0" and "1". It's only a sense, granted, but the description isn't completely without foundation.
I believe various dictatorsips have frequently posted such reasons outside their own polling booths. Armed to the teeth, usually.
Yes, I know that was a comment on a throwaway. : )
That'd be because the UK's suffix is (drumroll please) .uk! Stone the crows, it's a cor-blimey miracle guv. You never see .gb because that would be "Great Britain" which is a geographic, not political, designation.
And you don't get exemplary damages everywhere. Here in the UK, for instance, we have set down in precedent three situations where they can be applied, and they're really very restrictive. You rarely hear of such damages over here; they really need to be applied only as punishment—and of course, in such cases, there really should be criminal, not civil, proceedings.
Many people have wondered what a village (yes, it's not a town, it's a village at that size!) of eighty souls is doing installing a voting machine. I want to know what the devil it's doing electing a Mayor. Surely you good people don't pay nearly enough taxes to warrant a civic offical for eighty people?
How about accelerating tabletop particles?
Still think she needs a decent copy-editor, though.
Before that reference, though, it had me baffled, too.
Hokay, missed that. All the same, I'd wait for final verification before breaking out any bubbly (and then proceedng to analyse its egress from bottle to glass).
As I say, far be it from me to call "crank", but I'd wait for this to appear in a peer-reviewed journal and get responses. I suspect the Millennium (sp!) Prize committee may well be doing likewise.
Well, someone can't be in debt, or everyone'd be in hock to everyone else and we'd be back where we started.