That's because Canada isn't as much a malignant oligarchy as the US.
We can do that because we have, like most countries except the USA, universal health care.
Yes, but we have tax cuts for the 1%, which will someday trickle down so that kids with cancer can get treatment without their families going bankrupt. Now that we're doubling down on the tax cuts, utopia's surely just around the corner.
Why not just make the Monday after DST time change a national holiday? Problem solved.
Me, I like Daylight Savings Time, because it will allow me to sit out on the porch in May listening to the Blackhawks game and still have enough light to read. And in the Winter it would suck having to go to work in the morning in the pitch dark.
Not only did he publish, but his work was peer-reviewed.
I don't doubt he did research, or that he was a Natural Philosopher. But that doesn't make him a scientist
Yes, it does. If Galileo is a scientist, if Copernicus was a scientist, if fucking Isaac Newton was a scientist, then so was Giordano Bruno.
nor does it make math a science.
Karl Popper, who has written the most cogent definition of science, originally thought as you do. He was wrong, as he later admitted. Popper concluded that "most mathematical theories are, like those of physics and biology, hypothetico-deductive: pure mathematics therefore turns out to be much closer to the natural sciences whose hypotheses are conjectures, than it seemed even recently." Imre Lakatos has gone so far as to have now applied Popper's theory of falsification to mathematics. Math is not only a science, but it's THE science.
The committee is not the entire House. If you think all GOP are going to support it you're insane.
No, the ones who are in vulnerable districts will be given a pass, but only after they know they have enough Republican votes to pass it. This phenomenon even has a name. It's called the "Hastert Rule", proudly named after its inventor, a long-time Republican House leader who was also a pedophile and is currently in prison.
Math teachers aren't scientists, though nothing is stopping a scientist from teaching math.
A math professor is more than just a teacher. They're expected to publish original work (Bruno did) and do research (Bruno did). And this was the 16th century. There were no "senior lecturers" the way we have today who teach a subject but do no work in the subject.
Was Galileo a scientist? If so, then Bruno was most certainly a scientist. They were peers, who reviewed each other's work.
For me, trying to visualize things brings only very brief, half-formed flashes before it's just blank again. Almost as if I begin to visualize, and then am introspecting the process too much and it dissipates.
Too bad Oliver Sacks is gone. I bet he would have liked a look at your noggin.
I'm unable to visualize not being able to visualize. I guess the variations in human consciousness are pretty vast.
If this is the same thing- this would be too foreign for me. I actually have a better-than-average memory, but I can't "picture things".
This is very interesting. I've never heard anyone say this before. If you think about your mother's face (or dog, or the Apple logo), do you not conjure a picture?
If I asked you to draw the symbol for infinity, in the moment before you start to move the pen on paper, do you not "see" the symbol? Could you describe a giraffe without looking at a picture?
Either way, I'm glad you've been able to succeed despite your perceived perception problem.
He lectured in mathematics at Oxford and barely missed out on becoming the chair of mathematics at Padua (to Galileo) because of political reasons, so yeah, he was a scientist.
Giordano Bruno did not come up with the "infinite universes" theory. That idea is basically as old as humanity, but Bruno himself got it from Nicholas of Cusa (Cusanus), who was a highly regarded cardinal.
The difference is that Cusanus believed the universe was infinite because God was infinite and Bruno just thought the universe was infinite because it was. Unlike other scientist/clerics of his time, he didn't necessarily feel the need to couch his theories in language that would make the "Religious Right" of the Church at that time feel better.
Slashdot Mirror
The people who are ruling our world are really a bunch of lying jackoffs. All the money, all the power, but they're still lying jackoffs.
Age is a social construct. Unless you're hoping to dunk a basketball or join Circe du Soleil.
And remember, growing old is definitely better than the alternative.
Since the median age is about 26, I imagine that point has come and gone.
Of course, the median age in the US is about 36, but the world median age sits at 26.
Most people are younger than yourself.
Does your Fortune 150 company not give you Christmas or the 4th of July off?
You'll want to look that up.
Did you know that a rise in per capita cheese consumption causes people to die from getting tangled in their bedsheets?
I can prove it.
http://tylervigen.com/discover
This is the truth.
You're right.
That's because Canada isn't as much a malignant oligarchy as the US.
Yes, but we have tax cuts for the 1%, which will someday trickle down so that kids with cancer can get treatment without their families going bankrupt. Now that we're doubling down on the tax cuts, utopia's surely just around the corner.
But then you'd have more people voting, and I'm not sure our current economic/political system could survive that.
You need to renegotiate your contract. I'm allowed 14 national holidays a year, and 15 in a leap year.
It depends on what you've got waiting at home, I suppose.
OK, I concede.
If you have to look it up, then you just don't know. The scientific method goes back to the Bacon brothers, Roger, Francis and Kevin.
You can trace it to the 13th century and even earlier.
Hockey doesn't count as sportsball, since there is no ball involved.
Why not just make the Monday after DST time change a national holiday? Problem solved.
Me, I like Daylight Savings Time, because it will allow me to sit out on the porch in May listening to the Blackhawks game and still have enough light to read. And in the Winter it would suck having to go to work in the morning in the pitch dark.
Let me take 'em one at a time.
Of course it did.
Not only did he publish, but his work was peer-reviewed.
Yes, it does. If Galileo is a scientist, if Copernicus was a scientist, if fucking Isaac Newton was a scientist, then so was Giordano Bruno.
Karl Popper, who has written the most cogent definition of science, originally thought as you do. He was wrong, as he later admitted. Popper concluded that "most mathematical theories are, like those of physics and biology, hypothetico-deductive: pure mathematics therefore turns out to be much closer to the natural sciences whose hypotheses are conjectures, than it seemed even recently." Imre Lakatos has gone so far as to have now applied Popper's theory of falsification to mathematics. Math is not only a science, but it's THE science.
No, the ones who are in vulnerable districts will be given a pass, but only after they know they have enough Republican votes to pass it. This phenomenon even has a name. It's called the "Hastert Rule", proudly named after its inventor, a long-time Republican House leader who was also a pedophile and is currently in prison.
A math professor is more than just a teacher. They're expected to publish original work (Bruno did) and do research (Bruno did). And this was the 16th century. There were no "senior lecturers" the way we have today who teach a subject but do no work in the subject.
Was Galileo a scientist? If so, then Bruno was most certainly a scientist. They were peers, who reviewed each other's work.
Freedom.
I'm curious, if you don't mind me asking: Can you "hear" music in your head? If I were to name a song that you like, could you summon it in memory?
Too bad Oliver Sacks is gone. I bet he would have liked a look at your noggin.
I'm unable to visualize not being able to visualize. I guess the variations in human consciousness are pretty vast.
This is very interesting. I've never heard anyone say this before. If you think about your mother's face (or dog, or the Apple logo), do you not conjure a picture?
If I asked you to draw the symbol for infinity, in the moment before you start to move the pen on paper, do you not "see" the symbol? Could you describe a giraffe without looking at a picture?
Either way, I'm glad you've been able to succeed despite your perceived perception problem.
He lectured in mathematics at Oxford and barely missed out on becoming the chair of mathematics at Padua (to Galileo) because of political reasons, so yeah, he was a scientist.
The difference is that Cusanus believed the universe was infinite because God was infinite and Bruno just thought the universe was infinite because it was. Unlike other scientist/clerics of his time, he didn't necessarily feel the need to couch his theories in language that would make the "Religious Right" of the Church at that time feel better.