Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/18/17 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    There is nothing about this discussion that has to do with making a clumsy pass at a woman in a social situation. There is nothing about this discussion that has to do with putting one's foot in one's mouth. There is nothing criminal in the acts you described. You are conflating these with harassment and assault. I think you are profoundly missing the point. Given the amount of violence that exists towards women, I suspect they are all afraid at various times, which was one of the points the article made. There was no generalization of all men as you describe. Just that you can't tell the difference between someone who might do you harm and someone who would not, just from a cursory view, and that informs your actions and behaviors. What are the odds that any given Muslim is a terrorist, and how many are on the plane? The reason that it's "of course not" comes down to math. Countries worry about terrorism, because of that math. How many terrorist attacks will you experience in your life? How does that compare to women and sexual misconduct, or other violence?
  2. 1 point
    Indeed. That was my point. So maybe don't insist that it's just the one thing. Your opinion/view is not fact.
  3. 1 point
    I'm not sure that is true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth Do you mean epicycles? But these examples are not really relevant because we are talking about mathematics. If something is true in mathematics then it is always true.
  4. 1 point
    No, it isn't really. Why would you reduce the set of real numbers to the naturals? It is uncalled for. There are infinitely many numbers in between 7 and 8 (and between any real numbers as well). What you are trying to do is define an infinitesimal. But an infinitesimal cannot exist because, as has been noted, there cannot be an infinite amount of zeroes and then 1 at the end. If it ends in 1, then there MUST be a finite number of zeroes. Do you understand that a decimal number ending in any given number must, by definition, be finite?
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
    What is being discussed is that a) certain people abuse their power in order to treat others as sexualized objects that b) due to the power imbalance it is not tit for tat in the sense of an agreed exchange and c) that specifically women face regular sexualization even in other innocuous settings that make them keep these types of abuse to themselves as it appears to be permeating through society (tbf, though, male victims also often do not come forward, but for the opposite reasons under the same societal structure). What you call "PC" is essentially a coming change in society in which we believe (or at least pretend) that we want equality and treat each other with respect. Especially in public places, at work and especially in boss-employee situations (or equivalent power structures). I understand that this is a significant departure of things from even 20-30 years ago, but as usual, one is expected to navigate those shifts.
  7. 1 point
    Oh my God! Do you have any idea at all what the topic of this thread is?!?! It's like talking to a pinball machine.
  8. 1 point
    I think we are taking it a bit too far. Soon people will be afraid to express themselves if we make such assertions. While I do not agree with tar at all, we should try to disagree with him with arguments not labels.
  9. 1 point
    Np it was also for the benefict of other readers to help them follow the thread somewhat without derailing it. Lets summarize heuristically for other readers benefict. The OP is studying different techniques and specifics on how to mathematically define an object and system under Vector fields via symmetry relations that apply to Noethers theorem. First he went through the proofs defining a vector itself, ie the requirement of 2 units to describe. (magnitude and direction). Magnitude is a scalar quantity. Then he established that these two units are independant quantities. One can change in value without changing the other. Then he estsblished the boundary conditions of the magnitude as a normalized unit under a coordinate basis. ie the scale of the graph, to the ratio of change to the length of the vector 1 to 1 ratio to axis coordinates. Then he went further and applied Cauchy inequality, to a plane, which also shows the triangle inequality. This relates to i,j. Thus establishing an orthonormal and orthogonal basis. In order to define Hilbert space he had to apply all the above to apply the outer products of two vectors to close the Hilbert group. Now he is looking at how these two Hilbert spaces are applied under treatments. So here is a practicum question. Take right angle triangle ABC with identity connection i,j. Is C an independent unit ? Is it a Hilbert space?
  10. 1 point
    Good on the above but lets be careful here. One can linearize nonlinear systems to good approximation which is essentially what you are doing above. In this there is huge variety of techniques. Two primary classes of field treatments apply to this. Conformal and canonical. Canonical it is the distances via end points that is the priori. On conformal it is the angles. So be careful to identify the treatment involved when jumping theories or mixing them... Also remember [latex]\mathcal{H}×\mathcal{H}=\mathbb{C}[/latex] "× " is The cross product. So these two Hilbert spaces. The two vector fields are perpindicular to one another in cross products. Angular momentum is a Cross product space https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_momentum Side note your primarily using ODEs observable differential equations, the other being partial Pde,s
  11. 1 point
    There is a big gap in your understanding of people who aren't you.
  12. 1 point
    I hereby retract my previous statement. I have no further interest in hearing your thoughts on this topic.
  13. 1 point
    For a waveform to be a single frequency then in the time domain it must be infinite in extent. If you have a shorter pulse, then it will be a mix of frequencies. So the more narrowly specified the width, the less well-defined the frequency, and vice versa. That is the same as conjugate pairs in QM.
  14. 1 point
    zapatos and I like a good debate and have clashed several times in the past, that's why I'll sleep on it before commenting on his very good points.
  15. 1 point
    No reply as yet. Conway, is this a question in set theory? Please try to give us any kind of a handle on your reasoning, so that we can at least guess how to frame an answer.
  16. 1 point
    Hi Conway, Is there any way that you can expound your position in terms which a layperson could understand? This is always possible, at least in principle, even with the most complex scientific position. If you can do this, I would willingly correspond, because this is an area in which I have a special interest.
  17. 1 point
    Brilliant move. Victim blaming is obviously what’s needed here. Well done!
  18. 1 point
    Hello you all! Here's a means to produce a sine wave voltage, very pure, with metrologic amplitude, whose frequency can be varied over 2+ octaves in the audio range - this combination may serve from time to time. It uses sums of square waves with accurate shape and timeshift. A perfectly symmetric square wave has no even harmonics. Adding two squares shifted by T/6 suppresses all 3N hamonics as the delay puts them in opposition; this makes the waveform well-known for power electronics. Two of these waveforms can be added with T/10 shift to suppress all 5N harmonics, then two of the latter with T/14 shift, and so on. A filter removes the higher harmonics as needed. The operation makes sense, and may be preferred over direct digital synthesis, because components and proper circuits may provide superior performance. Counters produce accurate timings. If a fast output flip-flop outputs a zero 1ns earlier or later than a one, at 20kHz it leaves -90dBc of second harmonic and at 1kHz -116dBc, but at 1MHz less interesting -56dBc. If the propagation times of the output flip-flops match to 0.5ns, at 20kHz they leave -100dBc of third, fifth, seventh... harmonic and at 1kHz -126dBc. 74AC Cmos output buffers have usually less than 15ohm and 25ohm impedance at N and P side. On a 100kohm load, the output voltage equals the power supply to +0 -200ppm. 5ohm impedance mismatch contributes -102dBc to the third harmonic, less at higher ones. Common resistor networks achieve practically identical temperatures and guarantee 100ppm matching, but measures give rather 20ppm. This contributes -110dBc to the third harmonic, less at higher ones. This diagram example would fit 74AC circuits. Programmable logic, Asic... reduce the package count and may use an adapted diagram. To suppress here the harmonics multiple of 2, 3, 5 and 7, it uses 8 Cmos outputs and resistors. As 3 divides 9, the first unsqueezed harmonic is the 11th. A counter by 210 has complementary outputs so that sending the proper subsets to 8-input gates lets RS flip-flops change their state at adequate moment. Programmable logic may prefer GT, LE comparators and no RS. I would not run parallel counters by 6, 5 and 7 instead of 210 as these would inject harmonics. The RS flip-flops need strong and fast outputs. Adding an octuple D flip-flop is reasonable, more so with programmable logic. I feel paramount that the output flip-flops have their own regulated and filtered power supplies, for instance +-2.5V, and the other logic circuits separated supplies like +-2.5V not touching the analog ground. That's a reason to add an octuple D flip-flop to a programmable logic chip. For metrologic amplitude, the output supplies must be adjusted. All the output flip-flops must share the same power supplies, unless the voltages are identical to 50ppm of course. A fixed filter can remove the higher harmonics if the fundamental varies by less than 11 minus margin, and a tracking filter for wider tuning is easy as its cutoff frequency is uncritical. The filter must begin with passive components due to the slew rate, and must use reasonably linear components. ---------- I tried almost three decades ago the circuit squeezing up to the fifth harmonic, and it works as expected. Squeezing up to the third is even simpler, with a Johnson counter by 6 and two resistors. Measuring the spectrum isn't trivial, for instance Fft spectrometers can't do it; most analog spectrometers need help by a linear high-pass filter that attenuates the fundamental. Marc Schaefer, aka Enthalpy
  19. 1 point
    Set up an email account (CleanWoodedHills@gmail, or something like that), and post a sign at the area asking for volunteers for a morning of cleanup before winter, and see if there are others who also consider it their favorite local park. You're a better judge about the area with regard to whether a major effort will cause more harm or good. I just know that a job like that is a great opportunity for many hands.
  20. 0 points
    Thank you. Based to the two post previous to yours I was going to suggest that the topic be closed. My reading of those prior two post is that the situation is hopeless. Those two seem to believe that since some men are misogynistic harassers and sexual predators that all women must assume that all men are and therefore women must never report harassment and sexual abuse for fear of retaliation. Case closed, game over, why even talk about the subject? Men are pigs. I'm much more hopeful than that. In fact I don't believe most work places even come close to what is common in Hollywood or the greater entertainment industry. Does any aspect of your workplace come even close to what you heard about coming out of Hollywood these days. In the mean time I'll just keep being a man who is kind enough to notice when my coworkers put an extra effort into their appearance, change their hairstyle, got new glasses, or similar things when appropriate. I believe it shows kindness and that I recognize them as human beings. To not do so would, in my opinion, be cruel. I have been doing just that for over thirty years in my profession and personal life and never had a complaint.
  21. 0 points
    I opened this topic and it is about Harvey Weinstein and the culpability of women who kept Harvey Weinstein abuse secret thereby allowing other women to be abused. Somehow it has turned into a "men are pigs" topic. Not my intention and I wish it would stop. Having just read the last page or so of post let me say this. Human beings are sexual creatures. Denying this is a mistake at both the individual and societal level as well as in our personal life and our public life. What needs to be done is to stop sexual predators whether they are rapists or simply intentionally causing emotional distress. Somehow however this noble objective has moved into a form of zealotry where kindnesses such a paying each other complements on our appearance, or enjoying the beauty of the opposite sex are taboo. I felt iNow's "They don't know" link to be sad on many levels. My primary sadness was that the author seems to believe that all men are the enemy either as predators or through obliviousness. A minority of men are predators and few are men oblivious to the predation of women. Not even tar. Perhaps the problem is that women have been taught not to seek the help of men of good character.
  22. -1 points
    Often people who do not understand mathematics look at a math text and it looks like non-sense. Unfortunately, a few then decide that if they write non-sense, it is mathematics!
  23. -1 points
    By the way, in terms of their properties and functionality, so-called "imaginary" numbers are every bit as real as "real" numbers. They are indispensible in engineering, science, architecture, quantum mechanics, and indeed pure mathematics. The only reason we call them Imaginary is because we don't know how to represent them in numerical form. That's one of the philosophical defects in our mathematical discourse.
  24. -1 points
    Airbrush, I understood Trump's "locker room talk" apology, having been in many locker rooms and having been in the Army. The access Hollywood tape was from a decade ago, when he was not on the road to the presidency but an entertainer. He after all, did not grab anybody by the privates that did not want to get grabbed by the privates. He just said that since he was a star, people would let him do that to them. Everybody here knows the stories about couch casting. Sex is for sale in Hollywood. I saw a very crude show on cable about the porn stars awards, best this kind of sex that kind of sex awards. The recipients were scantily clad and spoke very crudely. It would be almost a badge of honor for one of these folks to suggest they were so desirable sexually as to have used that power to get a leg up in the industry. The main stream Hollywood culture is only a little bit North of this kind of standard. After all, sex sells, and in the magazine and advertising and film industry, the better looking get the jobs. If two young ladies had identical looks and identical acting prowess and one put her hand on the casting director's shoulder and the other stood 6 feet away, the approachable one, might have an advantage in the hiring decision. Or consider casting for a movie with a sex scene and one candidate bears her shoulders and the other puts on a thick sweater. If you are a starlet and you purse your lips and show off your figure, are you not asking to be the object of desire? Regards, TAR And Hillary's outrage at having a powerful man in the oval office using his power to gain sexual favors, is addressed at Trump's access Hollywood talk, when it more appropriately should be aimed at her husband's actual acts. In the actual Oval office. With the power of the presidency being overtly used to get a blow job.
  25. -1 points
    Seriously Swansont ? You never made a clumsy pass at a girl/woman when you were younger ? You've never put your foot in your mouth in mixed company ? Never had to apologize to a woman for using inappropriate language ? Should any of those actions have made you a criminal ? I think you were young like the rest of us and you're lying now. It would be really sad if someone's perception of our immature discovering of our sexuality made criminals of us all. And no, the article wasn't specific to employer/employee, or power disparity.; it generalized to all women, and all men. Should women be afraid of all men, because harassment happens so frequently, that even the smallest comment is perceived in a sexually threatening manner ? Should I be afraid of any black man following me down the street at night because of my misguided perception ? Or any muslim boarding the same plane as me ? ( that is what I was getting at ) Of course not. H Weinstein chose NOT to stop when he was told to. And because these were young girls just getting into the business, no-one cared. The older, established actors and actresses, who had power and could have stood up to him, chose not to although they knew what was going on. The ones who could have done something about it, yet chose not to do so, should be ashamed of themselves.
  26. -1 points
    That is not a hypothesis, it is a fact.
  27. -1 points
    Well I refuse to let jerks mess up my normal, polite, well mannered coexistence with others. Particularly members of the opposite sex. I'm glad professional conduct standard exist for low lives, but I was raised to behave properly. Like most, these conduct rules and harassment training classes are a waste of time. I'm also tired of being painted with the same brush as sexist a-holes.
  28. -1 points
    Ten Oz, From the article. The study, called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, was begun in 2010 with the support of the National Institute of Justice and the Department of Defense. The study, a continuing telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of 16,507 adults, defines intimate partner and sexual violence broadly. Advertisement Continue reading the main story The surveyors elicited information on types of aggression not previously studied in national surveys, including sexual violence other than rape, psychological aggression, coercion and control of reproductive and sexual health. So sexual assault includes since the study, coercion and control of reproductive and sexual health. Seriously, I don't even know what types of behaviors they include under that vague, subjective umbrella. That is the exact type of thing that worries me. That I could have committed a sexual assault by definition and not even known it. Regards, TAR
  29. -1 points
    If it's not one thing it's another. I have read many of your post and believe me you are as vain as the next person.
  30. -1 points
    Recent news reports tell us of decades of sexual abuse and harassment by Harvey Weinstein. I'm sure the abuse we have heard about is simply the tip of the iceberg. My guess is the list of abused aspiring actresses is much larger. The reports we have heard so far often refer to rumors of abuse swirling around Weinstein throughout his decades of abuse. In addition there are reports that the news media has spiked stories about this subject. What I find absent in all of this is stories questioning the ethics of actresses who remained silent about their abusive and criminal encounters with Harvey Weinstein. How culpable are these women for the abuse of women that followed them on the casting couch? Let's take for example Ashley Judd. Ms. Judd is a vocal feminist. Here is an image of Ms. Judd protesting the comments of President Trump. https://every2min.com/2017/01/22/rape-survivor-ashley-judd-explains-why-trump-triggers-so-many-sexual-assault-survivors/ Here is another image of Ashley Judd with Harvey Weinstein. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4962354/Ashley-Judd-breaks-silence-Weinstein.html Ms. Judd could find her voice politically, but not professionally. How many women would have avoided Harvey Weinstein abuse if she had publicly accused Weinstein? The same question goes for all the other women abused by Harvey Weinstein.
  31. -1 points
  32. -2 points
    Zapatos, Granted. But I know that. I can only guess what makes other people happy. I can not understand why someone would do something I would not do, yet I allow them to do it, and look for the reasons why they might do it. Personally I am against my daughters ever being strippers or nude models or porn movie actresses or prostitutes or escorts and against them getting into any abusive relationship. But I let them live their lives, with only the knowledge that they know what would please me or displease me. The rest of the world has no obligation to please me. I can suggest a woman should not become a porn star, if she does not want to be a sex object, but if she becomes a porn star and somebody looks at her breasts while she is walking down the street, she has lost quite a bit of credibility when she comes over to me and slaps my face, for being a male pig. My daughter has come to us with complaints about workmates and bosses, not harassment complaints, complaints about how someone is not doing their job, or about asking her to do something she does not think is the way she would do it. We normally tell her that that is the way it is. You have to put up with inept people, and just do your job, and you have to put your ego in your back pocket when it comes to your direct supervisor and the owners of your business. iNow, The article you posted talked about how a woman has to always smooth things over and take the non-confrontational route, and this is exactly what we all must do, all the time. Males often work for males, and have to suppress their testosterone appropriately and take orders. I would be very afraid in a prison of the big muscled dude that wanted to make me his sex slave. So I make sure I never wind up in prison, bunking with a big muscled dude that wants to make me his sex slave. SwansonT, I do not now or ever condone bullying or sexual assault or spousal abuse with a "wink". I do however believe that people can put themselves in high risk situations for certain inevitabilities and need to make their own risk reward calculation as to whether they should be in the situation. I know people who do drugs. I do not. I think it is stupid that they do, because of the risks. I used to drink, I gave it up. I used to smoke and gave it up and now think it ill advised that my wife continues to smoke, and a close cousin drinks too much wine. But they can do what makes them happy. They know the risks. You often berate me for conflating ideas, but in the case of sexual harassment, it is society that is currently confused as to what they are trying to say, and they are conflating rape with me enjoying a pair or breasts on a young lady, and confusing a boss demanding sex for a raise with me telling a dirty joke or telling a woman that her dress was my favorite color and looked very nice. During the election cycle Hilary made a big deal about how sexist Trump was, because he called a winner that let herself go, fat. To me, everybody missed the objectifying women boat completely and continue to miss it. The fact that women were parading around in swimsuits and beautiful dresses was the institutional objectification. And it is too ingrained in our society that we don't even see it. Well look. Look at news show where four people are sitting in full view on a stage. The two men will be in suit and tie with their legs open and the women will be in dresses with their legs crossed. Looks matter on TV. The ugly and fat are usually seen as ugly and fat and the thin and beautiful are seen as thin and beautiful. I am thinking that Weinstein and Redford would not have received the same outrage for the same transgressions. Zapatos, Additionally I do not understand why people watch devil movies, and movies with gratuitous violence. I am somewhat disgusted with our society when I flip though the upper channels, looking for a good movie and see scene after scene of torture and murder and depravity. I am somewhat bewildered when a commercial for some stupid things come along and the next week everybody has one. So yeah, there is a big gap between me knowing what other people are thinking, and what makes them happy, and what I think they should be thinking and what I think they should be doing to make other people happy, but that piece of paper has two sides. You neither know what motivates me, what morals I hold, what disgusts me and what fills me with joy. Regards, TAR
  33. -2 points
    Still treating people with passive aggressive superiority I see. I suppose you think "facts" are unchangeable? Case in point....Greek ellipses...case in point flat earth.....facts can be challenged....OldchemE has the right to do so. Sure if he hadn't have argued with you after your first reply things would have been great huh Strange? That said .999...is = 1.....in my opinion. But I appreciate and will continue to listen to the op and his/her ideas with out being a jerk.
  34. -3 points
    The conflation of actual sexual abuse and abuse of power with making a woman feel uncomfortable. Um...it is a thread about Harvey Weinstein taking sexual advantage of young starlets, where Hilary has used the fact to say that we voted a sexual abuser into the Oval office and the PC on this thread have used my old white somewhat sexist maleness to impugn my society and my president. I am defending myself and my president and my age group and sex against such silly comparisons.
  35. -6 points
    iNow, As much as you would like to think I am a child rapist or something, I am nothing of the sort. I am a regular, well raised, polite guy with a happy wife and two grown daughters. In raising my daughters I used to tell the joke that raising a boy was easier to do than raising a daughter. With a boy you had to be concerned with where one penis was. With a girl you had to worry about where every penis in town was. I understand the article to some extent, but do not think it is accurate to say a woman is at a constant disadvantage. There are dad's like me around that would and did protect my daughters from "people like me" and the power thing is not unique to women. I am just as scared of a big hairy rich and powerful brute like Weinstein having his way with me as you are. I am actually not afraid of that at all, but If he was my boss, I would not want to cross him. Not afraid of being sexually assaulted, but afraid he would make my job miserable if I crossed him. When I was at my last job, I had for many years found fault with my company's president's agenda. After I got laid off and rehired I changed my tune and decided that whatever my president's agenda was, was my agenda. It is not so much courage, but stupidity that causes one to bite the hand that feeds them. Power in this country might very well accrue to more old white males than any other demographic, but you have to do some work, take on some responsibility, have some education and talent, be trustworthy and capable to get into the leadership positions and the industry leadership positions, where wealth and power can accrue. Or steal it or inherit it, or back into a good spot somehow. For women that get into an industry where naked lineup auditions are possible, should give them a hint for what it is they are in for. I am not saying that anybody that gets raped is asking for it, I am saying that sex and money and power is a two way street, and women that use their sexuality to make money and accrue power, are not innocent victims of a bias system, they are willing participants in the game. My main thesis these days is that humans like to please each other. I like looking at a pretty girl, and a pretty girl likes me looking at her and gets pleasure from it. I have this theory, because girls like to look good for young men. Maybe not old guys like me, then I am a dirty old man, leering at them, but when I was a chiseled stud coming out of the Army, girls enjoyed my attention and complements. I remember swimming in a pool at a conference where several of the women in the group where watching me swim. Later I found out that the suit I was wearing was sort of flesh tone and thin and it looked somewhat like I was swimming naked. I wore the suit again the next night and enjoyed the fact that women enjoyed the fact. Regards, TAR