Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. +1 CharonY. It is my impression (from articles and videos on this topic) that return to Sunni Orthodoxy in 11th-12th centuries was a major contributing factor to the decline of science in the Islamic world with many scholars swowly chipping away the foundations of scientific progress, culminating with Al Ghazali and that adoption of occasionalism may have resulted in a similar withering of science in the Chrisian world as well.
  3. Okunikko, Japan: Kegon Falls, in Nikko National Park, are surrounded by Mongolian oak, maple, azalea and other trees, making it a particularly beautiful spot in autumn. Ryohei Moriya/The Yomiuri Shimbun/AP
  4. Today
  5. I'm sorry I can't make head nor tail of what you want to say here. Google doesn't produce anything relevent for specifically defined functions. https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=Y3CYX5qXH8ubjLsPnfG3yAI&q=+"specifically+defined+functions"+&oq=+"specifically+defined+functions"+&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQA1DaDljaDmDkGGgAcAB4AIAB7gGIAe4BkgEDMi0xmAEAoAECoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpeg&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwja1KnHvNXsAhXLDWMBHZ34DSkQ4dUDCAg&uact=5 You seem to be talking about restricting the domain a function. Please re-organise your thoughts in your own language and have another go at saying what you mean in English. Do you realise that there are functions that cannot be written in terms of 'elementary' functions? Functions such as elliptic integrals.
  6. Hi, I have to proof using backward reasoning. Wikipedia says its same as backward chaining and book says that it is same as goal driven search. I don't then why we call it "backward". Any way my question is: I have gt(5,2) and I have to prove it. For this purpose I am given a tree and some assumptions: Somebody please guide me. Sorry I don't have any idea. Should I try by doing the replacements provided at the end of each level of the tree? Linked concepts and Questions: By goal driven search it means that we have to start at the current state. How is it different from resolution proof? Zulfi.
  7. While I am not well read in that area, I do not think that this is an accurate depiction of Islamic occasionalism. From what I understand at its core it seeks to answer how causality can be viewed in the context of divine actions. As such depending on which form of occasionalism one subscribes to either only God is the source of causality and all other creaturely causality are occasional (global occasionalism). Other forms have a more limited scope for ocassionalism and allow for more creaturely causality (local occasionalism. While Islamic philosophers were probably the first to formulate occasionalism, there are disagreements whether they are actually seen as a global occasionalism (as implied in OP). However, my knowledge is too limited to provide more information on that regard. It should also noted in the Islamic tradition there have been arguments for and against what one would now call global vs local occasionalism. The interesting bit about this position in my mind, however, is not so much the divine part, but the important implication it had for the Aristotelian school of thought where (as I understand it) logical connections between entities were inferred as part of their properties. The occasionalist stance then is that one should instead assume a lack of such connections. Depending on who you read, to me the take home message here is not that there is no link between observed cause and effect, but rather there is no necessary link, which is a very interesting point (substitute God with something like Truth or something like that and it gets really interesting... you can then ask what is the true causal connection between observed entities?) And now to the question whether occasionalism could have arisen in the Christian world and the answer is of course, it actually did. While Islamic and other philosophers made occasionalist arguments, occasionalism was heavily developed in the framework of Cartesian metaphysics (e.g. Malebranche). I would also like to point out that in both, Islamic as well as Christian frameworks, God is seen as rational rather than arbitrary (that is why even everything stems from the divine entity, things happen in reproducible manner). Also what you mentioned regarding creation sounds to me like the the so-called Divine conservation s but continuous creation argument. Again, one made both by Islamic as well as Christian scholars.
  8. Hi, Thanks. If I get time, I would come back to your post. God blesses you for giving me more explanation. Surely this would help others. Zulfi.
  9. mmm, unfortunately the thing I was thinking seems like "impossible" I was thinking something like this (maybe,more clearly) ---->>whether we could allege it would define specific/unique function or a function which is a member of defined group of functions (E.g. regular functions) under the condition we give a bunch of points or more than several points on the xy plane or xyz space. But that is ,I think clear that not. Because I think we can randomly cut off some parts of that implied /alleged function and compound a new part to it. such types of function also known as "specifically defined functions" for instance [math]y=x^{2}[/math] is a specific function but we can cut off the part of this function where x<0 and redefine it as [math] y=x^{3}+5+sgn(x^{2}-4)[/math] where [math]x<0 [/math],and [math] y= x^{2}[/math] where [math] x>0 [/math] this is also usual...
  10. I think that is a good way of putting it. Ultimately a scientist contributes to our understanding of the world or some aspects of it.
  11. This paragraph ,I think,almost the most perfectly outlines what i have intented to express! Thank you very much!
  12. Janus

    Today I Learned

    TIL that a skilled scam-baiter can waste 36 hrs of a scam call center's time in an attempt to scam one person. I recently have been watching some you-tubes edited from the Twitch live-stream of a scam-baiter. They can be entertaining, while giving you a look into just how many these scams work. (he has done tech support, fake refund, IRS, social security, and immigration scams) One of the best was when he faked going to Best Buy to buy gift cards for the scammer, only to have his Uber driver drive off with them. ( this one required sound effects and a friend playing the part of the driver.) Generally, he can't waste their time for more than an hour or two at most before the scammer either gives up or the scam-baiter just reveals himself. In this case, in an attempt to scam someone, who they thought was an 87 yr old woman, this call center, over many, many phone calls spread out over weeks, spent 36 hrs on the phone with their intended victim. The edited you-tubes of this was broken up into 10 episode of ~ 3/4 - 1 hr long each, and I just watched the last one. It was interesting to see how the baiter kept them on the hook, always teasing with a big score that never came, and how more and more desperate the scammers got.* *And in this case, it lead them to revealing just a bit too much info, which the scam-baiter turned over to authorities.
  13. A scientist is someone who does science. You can make a distinction between professional and amateur, but those are modifiers/distinctions within the category — both are scientists. A scientist who becomes unemployed doesn't suddenly forget how to science. You can also make a distinction about the level of training. But someone without a degree who is doing science is a scientist. These days it's unusual, but go back a while, and training wasn't quite as formal. There have been largely self-taught scientists, and others who were informally taught, for at least part of their background. Einstein had defended his thesis, IIRC, when he was employed as a patent clerk and wrote his papers in 1905; he did this while looking for a professorship (much like actors and actresses wait tables between gigs if they haven't made the big time). He was a scientist.
  14. That "Narrow band" is a lot wider than it looks to the naked eye. You are only seeing that part that is bright enough. As an example, consider the Andromeda galaxy. To the naked eye it looks like a small fuzzy spot, but if you could see it in full, it would appear like this in the sky. Several times wider than a full Moon. What we see by naked eye is just the nucleus of the galaxy. But just because we don't see the disk by naked eye doesn't mean that it doesn't hide the light from galaxies behind it.
  15. Thanks guys for taking out your time and answering my doubt. Sorry I've been a little too inactive
  16. I don't see how the line can be drawn at whether or not you are making money. Unless the terms "athlete" and "scientist" are governed by a recognized body they will be viewed differently by different people. A volunteer doing bench work in a lab is doing science as much as the person getting paid to do the same thing. High school kids competing for the Westinghouse Science Talent Search are certainly doing science. My son played basketball, soccer and baseball for his high school Varsity teams. I played rugby for my college team. I'm surprised we might not have been considered athletes just because we didn't make money or play at the highest level of the sport.
  17. It's the age of the righteously indignant, it's far more nuanced than alternative facts... 🤒
  18. Yeah, 200 mill, not 200 thou. Yeah, as I said I thought the same thing, however, we are located near the Orion arm of the galaxy, about 30 000 LY from the galactic center, and about 20 000 LY from the edge of the galactic disk. And there s enough gas, dust and stars between us and the edge to block most of our view. The zone of avoidance s a band that encircles us.
  19. Interesting mixture of tautology and no true scotsman fallacy happening here
  20. I have some friends who took league play to extremes when they were younger. Flag football, bowling, baseball, basketball, these guys got to be pretty good for weekend warriors, and they trained seriously. I would define their dedication as that of an athlete, even though a trophy was the most they ever got in compensation.
  21. Then a "scientist" is someone who does "science" professionally, or they inherited wealth so they could do science just for fun? Anyone know of an important science discovery, or won a Nobel Prize in sciences, in the past 50 years that did NOT come from a science professional or a person born into wealth, who didn't need to earn a living?
  22. ! Moderator Note I'm going to suspend you for a bit, so you can talk to your therapist about some of these misconceptions you have. This type of discussion is quite obviously making things worse.
  23. The age of self delusion and alternative facts.
  24. meanwhile, I respect your status in regard to every direction. But I am sure that if you were at somewhere else ,(where I do not want to specify) ,while some people would respect your academic title, they would definitely laugh to you if you were expresing your other positions you mentioned in this paragraph. Though, this is not a generalisation and should not be ,too. Luckily, healthy minded people also exist at almost everywhere even though the amount of such people is dense or few.
  25. There are several examples from the 19th century and earlier. My interest in geology prompts me think of Mary Anning, of whom Wikipedia says "[she] was an English fossil collector, dealer, and palaeontologist who became known around the world for finds she made in Jurassic marine fossil beds in the cliffs along the English Channel at Lyme Regis in the county of Dorset in Southwest England. Anning's findings contributed to changes in scientific thinking about prehistoric life and the history of the Earth." (Those interested in her story can find out more in The Dinosaur Hunters, by Deborah Cadbury. )
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.