Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/06/21 in all areas

  1. The attachement from the international libraries association is self explanatory. Although not specifically for scientific matters I thought it was particularly well presented and a good candidate as a sticky on this site.
    5 points
  2. To expand of swansot's post: When you look at the spectrum of a distant light source like a star or galaxy, the spectrum will contain bright and dark lines. These are the emission and absorption lines from the different elements in the source. Every element has a distinct pattern of lines that occur at a particular point of the spectrum. If the light from the source is absorbed/scattered, you will see a dimming of a certain part of the spectrum, but those lines will still be there, in the same pattern and same part of the spectrum because all that is happening is that you are receiving a smaller proportion of light from one end of the spectrum. With red/blue shift, what we see is all these spectral lines shifted to new positions in the spectrum. So for example, a pattern that normally is in the yellow part of the spectrum will move towards the orange. You may not even notice much of a change in the overall "redness" or "blueness" in the spectrum as a whole, as non-visible frequencies shift into the visible at the red end, and visible light at the blue end shifts into the non-visible range.
    5 points
  3. ! Moderator Note We don't delete anything, but we also won't direct traffic to obviously incorrect science. I will ban you though. Sorry, but I hope you have horrible luck with that website of yours, and I hope you don't mess up too many of your fellow humans with your ignorant misinformation. Please study some science.
    4 points
  4. As a biologist I know that not to be true. What you state is part of a larger evolutionary narrative where biological structures, such as brains are build up successively from simpler to more complex form. Only, that is not the case, it is more like a broad branch of different structures to fulfil sometimes similar functions. It is like saying that modern microchips incorporate vacuum tubes. Specifically, the "old" structure, responsible for fear and aggression is mostly the amygdala, but is only found in vertebrates. Lobsters, for starters do not even have a brain and we do not share the same structures or responses. I.e. it is not more insightful than e.g. saying that folks should always stand their ground, like trees. Those that uproot themselves will die of nutrient deprivation. Or men should never procreate otherwise the women will behead them and use them as snacks. It only sounds insightful if you do not think about it. Also delicious (actual) brains.
    4 points
  5. Fungi have tens of thousands of sexes - theoretically up to 36,000. Humans have an XY chromosomal mating system - meaning there are two sexes. However, these sexes are not binary, nor fixed in a small but significant number of cases. "This article began by asking how frequently members of the human population deviate from a Platonic ideal of sexual di-morphism. A summary of the frequencies of known causes of sexual ambiguity based on Tables 1–7 appears in Table 8. The grand total is 1.728% of live births." There are also both biochemical and genetic causes of sex plasticity in humans - i.e. physiological changes that occur post birth that alter sexually dimorphic hormonal and physical traits. E.g. there are a known suite of loss-of-function mutations that can result in male to female sex reversal in humans, and studies of endocrinological plasticity have shown that the "hardwired" neurological difference between males and females are not as well defined or temporally stable as once thought.
    3 points
  6. If the sex and gender categories are continuums, how can one delineate them? It's like saying 'How many temperatures are there in temperature?'. It has occurred to me be, albeit belatedly, that the basic premise of the OP is incorrect.
    3 points
  7. Nothing in nature is a defect per se. They may be detrimental in many conditions, but it is something that exists and if there is a classification that claims to be unviversal, these must be incorporated. The classification as a defect is purely an anthropogenic construct. Light skin colour could be seen as a defect in melanin production, for example, but is rarely considered as such. Sickle cell anemia is seen as detrimental, but in some areas they are positively selected. Dismissing genetic elements merely as defects or exceptions do not prove the rule. If one claims that these classifications are universal, they must be universally applicable. If you have to add certain qualifiers then obviously you are just trying to press things into a mold that does not fit. And obviously if we go beyond humans (or mammals) there is far more variability. The issue with using the genetic ability to give birth as a gender means that any mutation that would render someone infertile would define them as male, which obviously not make much sense (as well as the fact that biology changes with different age stages and so does the ability to reproduce). Obviously, sex is quite a bit less diverse than gender and if you imagine both as a biphasic distribution, sex has probably sharper peaks and much fewer cases in between those peaks. But they still exist. Yes, but also they are often only binary in certain contexts. When we divide up a population into male and female, it is a simplification to accommodate a certain research question, for example (i.e. we just ignore cases that don't fit but due to low frequency it is still broadly representative of the larger population). It is like creating models of complex processes. This works out fine in a general sense (i.e. many studies in humans work well if consider sex binary). But on an individual level it can be more complicated, though it typically is more associated with gender, rather than necessarily sex.
    3 points
  8. Depends on what you mean by sex. Do you mean what gender you identify as ? Recreational ? Or procreational ? This is a Science site, and we classify sex only as it pertains to reproduction of the species. Self identity and recreational, we leave to the psychologists and sociologists. In terms of reproduction, there is a hard line between the two sexes/genders; one gives birth to young, the other doesn't. As they get older women might lose that ability, but sometimes we lose other abilities also. Are humans not classified as bipedal when they use a cane or sit in a wheelchair ? Are humans sighted, or on a 'spectrum', because some lose their eyesight as they get old ? It is black and white; that doesn't mean there aren't species that reproduce asexually, but of those that can even change sex, ( as Sensei mentions ) only give birth as female. Which 'sex' do you want to discuss ?
    3 points
  9. I believe I addressed that. Sorry I wasn't more clear. I did not mean it to be an infrared herring 😄 .
    3 points
  10. Well, I have been off work and isolating since recently contracting COVID. I've had my vaccinations but have still been quite ill (feeling a bit better now). Apparently I have contracted the Delta variant which is the one that is keeping the infected rates high where I live. Anyhow this has given me the opportunity to watch more blogs, lectures, debates involving Jordan Peterson. I have concluded, in my own opinion that in general, he has some valid ideas formed and grounded from well researched scientific data. I appreciate that in his field of psychology interpretation plays a big factor in many studies. However, I haven't seen any evidence of bias born from any personal desire or gain. He (appears) from what I have seen to be sitting pretty much centre field and if does lean towards any particular side its certainly far from either extreme. In fact he is very adamant that both sides are required and a balance and unity should be maintained, that the extremes on both sides are damaging to society. Thus far I'd have to agree with this view and would cite myself to a similar stance. I do however disagree with some of the terms and language he uses, I think some of this though maybe unintended, promotes misunderstanding and mis-interpretation and actually fuels the ongoing backlash against him. I also don't necessarily agree with all his ideas or policies, some are overly paranoid and/or a bit dramatic and don't sit true for all people. Maybe this is the approach he adopts in an attempt to get people to notice, I can't comment on that. In summary: I think he is a very intelligent person who is obviously very knowledgeable and passionate about his speciality in phycology. I think he is passionate about things that sit outside his field of expertise, but I don't see him claiming to have all the answers or stating they are all strictly true. He has some good (in my opinion) ideas and I believe that he, in general, wants to make society better and believes his ideas, if adopted by most, would help to do this. I can't comment whether or not this would be the case, but I think most of the ideas he has proposed, would make some steps towards improvements. I don't believe is is racist, transphobic, sexist or any other of the bigoted terms used to characterise him. I think these are just used as decoys to misdirect people. So I think (my opinion) this is rather unfair. Conclusion: Like him, hate him, be indifferent, agree or disagree... I believe the world needs people like JP in the public eye, to shake thinks up and make people at least stop and think about things, help them consider their own lives, ideas, actions... rather than blindly following or burying their heads.
    3 points
  11. The example of extreme sexual predators often comes up, since it is the most extreme test of any rehabilitative philosophy. My impression is that such persons cannot be cured, and some are so sick that a reasonable case for euthanasia could be made. While I object to the death penalty for several reasons, I would see someone raping a seven year old - as in @beecee example - as a candidate for euthanasia. As for the parents, I cannot imagine being them and not wanting the sick creature removed from the planet promptly. We cannot argue moral principles of justice solely from the wishes of angry and traumatized parents, but we can argue from the principle of mercy, both towards the perpetrator and the victims.
    3 points
  12. Like, within the last 2 hours, or just today? Maybe you mean how many have I done since last week? Please clarify. You are perfectly capable of getting onboard the train of thought that Trans people commit suicide in much higher rates, not of their own volition, but due to the external pressures of oppression and bullying. Yet you can't grasp that the professor quit because of those same external pressures, and keep insisting that she quit and was not fired ? Maybe I should have asked "Do you choose to apply root-cause analysis only when it suits your argument ?"
    3 points
  13. No disrespect iNow, you are clearly a very intelligent and knowledgeable person, which I have the upper most respect for. However, although I have only known you through this forum for a short period of time. You do tend to post (at least from my own perspective) in a style which portrays a hint of self opinionated belief, with an inflexibility towards other opinions. You did during the course of this long and circular thread, infer that I was transphobic, when I had never once prior to this referenced sexual identity or gender. My argument has always been one of the extreme right, where I feel (or rather my opinion is) that people who have an agenda that aims to be disruptive rather than productive, by jumping on the PC bandwagon, are undermining the real issues, so are either; delusional, attention seekers, being ridiculous or over sensitive.
    3 points
  14. Yes this is true. An 'event' refers to a point with unique or particular coodinates in a given frame of reference. This view has merit, not only in this situation but in many others besides. There are established mathematical techniques for handling the situation. Either We can show that the system of interest is 'small enough' to ignore its sizing in the coordiante system. Sadly this is too often taken for granted or not done explicitly. An example would be taking the Earth as a point particle in the solar system for the purpose of calculating obits etc. or We can use the mathematical limiting process to consider a 'control volume' in the coordinate system and tak the (mathematical) limit of the maths as we shrink the control volume to a zero sized point. An example of this would be ordinary density which is a point function that is defined as such a limit.
    3 points
  15. It seems to me that this is just another in a line of boogey men: ill-defined, undefined or wrongly defined terms (when used by the group) that only serve to stoke fear in the base. Welfare queen. Political correctness. Socialism. CRT. Woke. Antifa. Cancel culture. Can you, or anyone, give a precise definition of cancel culture? (and explain how is it being “weaponized”?) And give some examples of someone being “canceled”? Seems to me that people claiming this are behaving as if they are owed attention, or business, and are complaining when held responsible for their actions. This might not be new, but we simply notice it more because of social media in this age of rapid and widespread communication
    3 points
  16. Oooh, this should probably be its own thread. I'd like to know what the fuss is about. It makes no sense to me. Choosing something over something else is the basic definition of market consumption. The more choices we're offered, the more we're forced to choose. If something about that choice later makes us reconsider, we're free to choose something else. I really believe those companies/celebrities whose products or services have become objectionable are the ones calling it "cancel culture", and playing the victim card. To me, it's just part of how I choose between so MANY offerings. I've stopped doing business with companies that moved their HQ to foreign countries to avoid paying US taxes. I've stopped doing business with companies because I and others have been treated poorly by their representatives. I've stopped choosing old movies with Walter Brennan in them since I found out he was a horrible racist, same with Mel Gibson once he stopped trying to hide it. I buy shoes that aren't made by children for slave wages, because I used to, and I found out what was happening, and I cancelled my orders. Damn skippy I did. I don't see how this is some new kind of "culture", other than the fact that we now have more choices and options than humans ever had before, and more online groups that share their experiences. I've been doing this my whole life. I watched my father cut up his Monkey Wards card and mail it back to them after they tried to charge buyer's insurance without his signature. He wasn't the only one, and it wasn't long before that particular tactic was deemed illegal, and laws actually changed.
    3 points
  17. Well said. The deeper in the weeds you get, the greyer the categories get. As an example, you would generally think alive and not alive were fairly good binary categories. But then you have obligate endosymbionts, retroviruses, virophages, facultative lysogeny, transposable elements, etc which all blur the line between organelle and self replicating life form. Obviously in an XY mating system, most individuals fall in to either XX (female) or XY (male). But one in 58 individuals is born with an intersex condition, and can be XXY, X0, XXX, or a myriad of other conditions that result in an intermediate phenotype. Further, twin studies and hormone studies have confirmed a genetic basis for transgenderism even in non-intersex, trans identifying individuals. It is a biological reality that there are human individuals that exist in a grey area between male and female. I have a friend who has Klinefelter's syndrome and identifies a non-binary, using they/them pronouns. Coincidentally, they are not a bored, agenda driven university student in a safe space.
    3 points
  18. So did russia, with their limited access to the Black Sea ( and the Mediterranean ). Did that give them the right to annex the port of Sevastopol, or the whole Crimean peninsula ?
    2 points
  19. Where America has Manifest Destiny, China has the Mandate of Heaven- they have a fundamentally different attitude to government than America, a more trusting one based on Confucian principles. Similar to evolved systems, neither is 'correct' but has benefits/risks. One more prone dictatorships, but also easier to harmonise to a purpose: if Covid 19 had been more virulent the benefits of the latter would be more clear. The Chinese people have been rebelling against governments at least a thousand years before the country that established America even existed, so I wouldn't worry about them being passive - as long as the government is fulfilling its end of the Mandate, the Chinese people are content, and why wouldn't they be? We might disagree with their position but we don't get to impose our view on them and to mistake it as docility is just to misunderstand their mindset. China's military aggression in and around the South China Sea needs to be understood in its historical context - China still remembers its utter humiliation by numerous Western powers and Japan. The Chinese people generally support their government in establishing a strong military presence around its territory to ensure that never happens again. If the West wants to limit China's influence they should stop bullying nations and start helping them. For instance, Australia has been harassing East Timor for decades in order to force access to oil fields, even pulling out of the UN convention on the Law of the Sea to avoid a binding ruling at the international court of justice. Now East Timor has invited China to help build up their infrastructure, giving China a presence right on Australia's coast. Taiwan has about a quarter of the semiconductor market. China would control over a third if it swallowed Taiwan.
    2 points
  20. I think what he is doing is because in the Torah the writing is in consonants only, so when he uses the English word God he only uses the consonants. Why he is doing that is beyond me.
    2 points
  21. Coincidentally, my total praying time = amount of time I talk to my mother when I'm in trouble.
    2 points
  22. You could try hot filtration. You might need a fairly high temperature to bring down the viscosity of the molten wax sufficiently. There are industrial filtration systems that could do this sort of thing, in principle at least. For example, earth treatment of certain grades of lubricating oil is a well-established procedure.
    2 points
  23. They are now. Before they were invented, nobody complained. Once a new thing - gizmo, convenience, extra little perk - becomes available, the people willing and able to do so pay extra for them. Then the manufacturers, hoping to charge more for all their products, spend a fortune of advertising that links these perks to the perception of success, and the people (usually staring with youngish middle-management) who want to be successful and try very hard to appear successful, buy whatever pricey product a celebrity is endorsing. When enough people buy it, the manufacturers can lower the price (still above the previous price, but not beyond to average buyer's credit limit) and in a few more years, make some of the desirable features standard - so the buyer no longer gets the option of not having it. For the next model, then, they have to come up with a new 'extra' for the elite wannabes, until that becomes standard.... The consumer is so used to having his gimme buttons pushed, he doesn't even notice.
    2 points
  24. Hey, are there more than 2 sexes? I recently talked to a person who told me that it has been scientifically proven that there are more than 2 sexes biologically and that the biological sex is a spectrum, so I wanted to ask if this is the truth? Btw: it was definitely about biological sex, not gender. My ideas: I know men have XY and women have XX chromosomes. I know there can be mutations in which humans can have XXY chromosomes, but is this called the another sex? especially when this person isnt fertile. And if you include all mutations of the sexgenes, would you get a Spectrum? If you were to ask me spontaneously what the definition of a sex is, I would say that you can be divided into men and women depending on the task to which you belong in reproduction, but it is not that easy because if you are through an accident becoming sterile you wouldn't belong anywhere anymore and if you were born sterile there is also a problem, so it needs a better / more complex definition, I suppose. I would be interested in your facts to put it simply: Are there more than 2 sexes?
    2 points
  25. Oh cool. Thanks a lot for that. Interesting, thanks, that will help.
    2 points
  26. studiot, Before I approach your thoughts I should state that I am currently installing major heat pump installations in a large Hospital in Brisbane as part of a project that is removing an old coal burning system. As I have said here on other occasions I am not a scientist (though I have returned to study science at Uni) but do deal with engineering, installation and commissioning loosely in air-conditioning and building services - the technology side of construction, if you will. I would agree that an air-cooled heat pump may not match a gas boiler in the residential environment. Also that the tech data published regarding "efficiencies" of heat pumps is used to suggest otherwise. Even engineers get confused on that. But it's like using a truck as a taxi, it's just not where the device is strong. Any refrigerant cycle will produce heat on one side and cold on the other. If you only harness one side you've missed half the benefit. Quite literally. Worse - in most air-conditioning systems that unused heat needs an additional heat rejection system which costs additional energy. If you have a need for cooling and heating, at the same time, NOTHING will match the efficiency of a heat pump. If you don't, then more investigation is required before you commit if you want the optimum solution. We've had to be creative in the hospital with dispersed plant rooms, having to tap in to the existing systems that are available as we spread from one end of the campus to the other. And we are competing with a very efficient centralised coal burning steam system. Tough gig to match that let alone beat it. In part it works like this: The huge coal burning boiler (which run a large steam system) are to be decommissioned. The coal burner, which all things being equal will not be beaten on efficiency by anything, will be replaced by smaller dispersed gas or electric fired steam generators. Coal is better than, gas, which is better than electric. <Don't trust those words, do the engineering, but mostly it is adequate as a generalisation>But all things are not equal. Overall capacity is reduced by a combination of thermal heat pumps (driving air-conditioning) and potable hot water heat pumps. And where we had to, we use residential style electric Hot Water Units just to get load down to make the rest of the system work. It's a negative on efficiency but against the full system one we could cope with. There is the obligatory and pointless but visible PV system thrown in - a green sticker slapped on the building as these days to be virtuous must be signalled to the world. They have their place (I have them at home) but this is not really it. The thermal heat pumps, on the hot side, feed thermal or potable hot water. On the cold side they feed whatever we could find - chilled water (on the return leg hence "pre-conditioning" the return water before it gets to the chillers); - condensate water (on the flow side giving additional cooling to equipment that needs it). It would have been pointless to install heat pumps that simply wasted the cold generated. On a personal basis I am now investigating heat pumps at home for pool heating combined with air-conditioning. It's problematic as we don't necessarily need to heat the pool in summer, when the air-conditioning is running. But I'm working on it. The trick on this one will be performance on "the shoulders", ie not either peak summer or winter but the messy bits between where the engineering is more tricky and much more experience is required. Your experience with efficiency measured as operational cost (and that is actually a very good indicator) comparing a heat pump (where half of the benefit simply goes to waste) compared with a gas boiler does not surprise me in the slightest. Your maintenance cost will increase as well, by the way. But it is wrong to call these systems twaddle. PS At home my hot water is an instantaneous gas system. I'd consider solar but there is not enough roof real estate once the extensive PV system was installed, it's a three phase system to cope with air-conditioning and pool pumping. It's working fabulously well. And I like my gas hot water.
    2 points
  27. Let me take this opportunity to remind readers of some useful factoids shared recently in another thread. They’re insightful when attempting to accurately answer the thread question and when pushing back on the many remedially inaccurate responses being shared here with great certitude and unfounded confidence. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/125880-jordan-petersons-ideas-on-politis/?do=findComment&comment=1190758 https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/125880-jordan-petersons-ideas-on-politis/?do=findComment&comment=1190791 I just don’t know who to believe... These quotes from our resident biology experts who’ve worked in the field for years and years and years and who are massively clear on the vagaries and messiness in biological classifications, or the people who are forcefully arguing an untenable position based on outdated 6th grade level understandings of biology and misplaced preconceptions. It’s such a hard choice. 🙄 QFT
    2 points
  28. You know that there is no such thing as 'frictionless', don't you ? The laws of Thermodynamics can be likened to a card game ... 1 - You can't win ( can'tcreate energy in a closed system ). 2 - You can't break even ( no such thing as frictionless ). 3 - You can't get out of the game ( entropy )
    2 points
  29. Wait, MigL repeats my infrared herring joke (made in the post previous to his) and he gets the plus ones for it?? Do not quite follow the pecking order here, but it's not my cup of tea.
    2 points
  30. You need to stay here a bit longer, we don't agree on everything. Your snapshot of the members positions is too short.
    2 points
  31. No, his motive. New gun... party! As we say here, he's playing the the big "I am...". He travelled 20 miles into a trouble with a gun and you call it "standing his ground".
    2 points
  32. They should get created in such events as e.g. neutron star mergers - we just can't look for them. This has several reasons: First, transuranes are terribly unstable, with half-life in the millisecond range. (see below for some more...). Then, these unstable superheavy nuclei would decay into lighter nuclei, eventually ending up in one of the four possible decay series. (One of these, the Neptunium cascade, is technically extinct in earths natural element composition, as the half-life of its most stable isotope is in the million-years-range - while Earth has a few billion years of age) So, unless you're thinking REALLY big, no chance that these nuclei are stable... (...and thinking really big means atomic weights in the 10^57 range - Chandrasekar * Avogadro... ...and these "atoms" are commonly known as "neutron stars". White dwarfs still have discernible elemental compositions AFAIK.) Nuclear physics, however, predicts that at certain nucleic weigths with appropriate proton numbers, the nuclei should again be more stable. The best known is the element 110 island of stability. The wikipedia entry concerning that is quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability. As of now, we don't yet have the techniques to get those isotopes with the sufficent neutron numbers, though, but the less-stable isotopes that were generated did AFAIK mostly behave as predicted. The question where trans-irons come from - after all, nuclear fusion kinda "stops" at iron - has been partially answered / demonstrated: The merger of neutron stars mentioned above. https://www.science.org/content/article/neutron-star-mergers-may-create-much-universe-s-gold But beware, that case isn't closed yet, there's much ongoing debate: Look here for a more differentiated take: https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2026110118. Still, we know that NS mergers do generate heavy elements, and there's no reason that there should be a cap at somewhere around 100 Da. That superheavy stuff just tends to decay really, really fast...
    2 points
  33. It’s a matter of precision and accurate framing. We don’t “have evidence to support” that death is the end. It’s the most likely valid explanation, site, but we don’t have evidence FOR it so much as we absolutely lack ANY evidence whatsoever despite thousands of years of seeking that death is NOT the end… that ANYTHING at all happens or persists in any meaningful way once our biological functions cease. Perhaps a bit pedantic, but is more precise. Similarly, we don’t have evidence that flying unicorns don’t exist, we just lack evidence that they really do exist in anything more than fantasy books and children's imaginations.
    2 points
  34. bangstrom has been suspended for 3 days for soapboxing, goalpost-moving, and depleting ocean resources with their prodigious use of red herrings.
    2 points
  35. Ok to continue where I left off. Just to point out that I am offering backgound explanations and insights that you won't find in any one textbook. If you just want a formal development, there are many good presentations on offer. The official title is not 'spacetime' but 'the spacetime continuum'. A continuum is a grid or framework of points where at every point the properties of interest are the same. This expresses the idea of homogeneity, which is also inherent in the Principle of Relativity. For instance take a piece of squared graph paper. It is a continuum. A geometric continuum. A finite continuum, since the paper has edges, but a continuum nonetheless. The graph paper has no 'origin'. We can impose an origin at any point by imposing a pair of axes. And impose scales marked on the paper. This then gives a particular coordinate system to the grid. It also gives us a large number of possible different coordinate systems. I will start with static coordinate systems (which do not need time) before proceeding to moving coordinate systems (which do need time). For completeness I will start with one dimensional (ie one axis only, the x axis) coordinate systems. Coordinate systems are also called 'frames' , and will introduce the motivation for this name. The importance of one dimension is that it gives us a definition of length or distance between any two points A , B in the continuum as in fig (1). We use the rather awkward looking square root of the square of the difference in coordinates, xA and xB because this makes the distance from A to B the same as the distance from B to A and also makes this a positive or zero (ie nonnegative) quantity, which is only zero if A and B are the same point. [math]\sqrt {{{\left( {{x_A} - {x_B}} \right)}^2}} = \sqrt {{{\left( {{x_B} - {x_A}} \right)}^2}} [/math] Note. This conforms to the mathematics definition of a metric or distance function. Metrics in Physics can also be negative and Relativity explores what happens when the metric in Physics is negative. Another mathematical nicety is that the modulus or absolute value |xA-xB| can also be used as a metric, but has the disadvantage that it is not differentiable at zero. Work in progress to be continued.
    2 points
  36. I should add… MULTIPLE others have pointed out these same things, often in more detail and with more rigor than I did. I framed the above as I did since so many replies have focused on targeting me personally. I’m reminded of an old saying in politics: When the law is on your side, pound the law. When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If neither the facts or law are on your side, pound the table… or on the character and integrity of me as iNow, in this case.
    2 points
  37. Well, going back to the actual point of the article, despite the rift between younger and older folks, overall there is actually little evidence that the perspectives on "woke" matters is noticeably different from the rest of the population. I.e. even if older folks are more concerned, about PC being overboard, the actual proportion of folks agreeing with what seems to be PC notions is actually low and with regard to language use, the popularity of these fall around 30-10%. In other words, folks, regardless whether being college graduates or not, are more concerned about things being too PC rather than agreeing with PC notions. Thus, the worry does not seem to align with the actual existing elements folks are worrying about. This, btw. is in line with what we have experienced in the other thread. Folks being worried about the use of alternative pronouns are far outweighed by actual experiences (in college) regarding requests for the use of these pronouns. College graduates agree more than those without a degree that cancel culture is a bit issue (more than 50% compared to ~40%). So at least this poll does throw a wrench in the notion that the university is overrun by indoctrinated "SJWs". But then if they are not it, who is?
    2 points
  38. I’m not the one who claimed people are being thrown in jail for using the wrong pronouns. I’m not the one who failed to provide even a single example of this actually happening. I’m not the one who keeps misrepresenting this law despite repeated correction. I’m not the one who claimed people are being involuntarily terminated from their jobs for using the wrong pronouns. I’m not the one who claimed a lesbian professor was involuntarily terminated for her lack of respectful pronoun use. I’m not the one who introduced this professor into the discussion when asked to provide even a single example of someone actually getting fired. I’m not the one who kept claiming she was involuntarily terminated for her views even after being repeatedly corrected that she resigned. She quit. I AM the one who suggested that this example was irrelevant to our discussion. I AM the one who said this example wasn’t of equivalent scale to the issues being faced by the trans community even if it was somehow conceded as relevant. I AM the one who CORRECTLY framed her situation as resigning voluntarily as a result of the social backlash she faced for sticking her foot into her mouth. And now… I am the one saying that providing EVEN MORE examples of people facing social backlash on college campuses (not facing jail, not facing termination from employment, just some not positive social feedback for their approach to OTHER issues which aren’t even tangentially related to trans pronouns) has fuck all to do with this conversation. I hope this clarifies, and eagerly await on the edge of my seat with bated breath seeing how you will mischaracterize your next set of examples and where the goalposts get moved to next time.
    2 points
  39. Yes, is is the famous square root of minus 1 [math]i = \sqrt { - 1} [/math] The purpose of i is twofold. To rotate the axis in an imaginary direction. To turn a + into a minus, so not i does not appear on both sides of the equation since [math]{(ict)^2} = {i^2}{c^2}{t^2} = - 1{c^2}{t^2} = - {c^2}{t^2}[/math] Yes I am going to take time out of explaining graphs and frameworks and also because sometimes a peek ahead is motivational and I propose to use the just the x and t axes for this peek. I was going to say that If you are an electrical engineer, that I hope you know enough mechanics to work from Newton's laws to the Principle of Relativity. However you have answered that so I will introduce the diagrams. Nowhere is this more true than in Relativity. It is worth knowing that there are lots of different ways to arrive at SR and GR, but they all start with two basic Principles for SR and a third is added for GR. Different authors express these Principles in different ways, most suitable to their route. The strategy I am following is to look for relationships where one measurement is identical to another. Such situations lead to invariants. One such is called the form invariant, which is employed in the Principle of Relativity The idea is that a physical law must not depend upon the coordinate system. That is it should have the same form in all relevant coordinate systems. As an example take two particles A and B, interacting though some force F(xA, xB) and consider their equations of motion in one dimension (the x axis) Newtons tells us that if mA and mB are their respective masses and xA, xB their x coordinates then [math]{m_A}\frac{{{d^2}x}}{{d{t^2}}} = F\left( {{x_A},{x_B}} \right)[/math] and [math]{m_B}\frac{{{d^2}x}}{{d{t^2}}} = - F\left( {{x_A},{x_B}} \right)[/math] Now suppose we describe these same two particles in acoordinate system whose origin is at x0 in the original system and call this new system the x' system. Then xA = x'A + x0 and xB = xB + x0 Substitute these two equations into the first two we get [math]{m_A}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = F\left( {x{'_A} + {x_0},x{'_B} + {x_0}} \right)[/math] and [math]{m_B}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = - F\left( {x{'_A} + {x_0},x{'_B} + {x_0}} \right)[/math] since x0 is a constant [math]\frac{{d{x_0}}}{{dt}} = 0[/math] So the forces of interaction do not have the same form (are not form invariant) as in the original coordiante system. If they did they would be [math]{m_A}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = F\left( {x{'_A},x{'_B}} \right)[/math] and [math]{m_B}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = - F\left( {x{'_A},x{'_B}} \right)[/math] And the new equations depend upon the origin x0 of the new system. So Newton's equatiosn, as they stand do not conform to the Principle of Relativity. However all is not lost. the remedy is to work with coordinate differences, not directly with the coordinates so we write F(xA,xB) = f(xA - xB) yielding equations of motion in the new system in the required form [math]{m_A}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = f\left( {x{'_A},x{'_B}} \right)[/math] [math]{m_B}\frac{{{d^2}x'}}{{d{t^2}}} = - f\left( {x{'_A},x{'_B}} \right)[/math] This is the motivation for using the pythagorian square root of the sum of the squares of the coordinate distances I mentioned in an earlier post.
    2 points
  40. The universe since the beginning of the Big Bang is roughly 13.7 billion years old and thus nothing we see can have occurred more 13.7 billion years ago. Since the universe is expanding, the light we see from distant galaxies was emitted when the galaxies were closer to us than they are now. That is, light that has been traveling toward us for 10 billion years may have originated in a galaxy that is now 40 billion light years distant from us. The universe is believed to be roughly 93 billion light years in diameter although we can only observe things that are up to 46 billion light years away. The reason we cannot see objects further than 46 billion light years is because objects beyond that distance are receding from us at a rate greater than the speed of light (c). Since we are receding from those objects faster than light can travel, any signal coming from them will never catch up to us. The amount of time the light takes to get to us represents how "out of date" an image is. If light from earth traveled 10 billion years to a distant star, they will see us as we were 10 billion years ago, although by then we will be much further away than 10 billion light years.
    2 points
  41. Looking in again, get the impression you are somewhat talking past each other. I think the pressured-to-quit example is being used as a sort of "representative anecdote" of a broad cultural repression of certain kinds of speech. Really could have its own thread, since it seems more about what Jon Ronson called the shaming culture, and less about legal restrictions on behavior. I don't think anyone here would disagree that learning institutions should embody free discourse and not doing dogpiles on unpopular opinions to where teachers feel forced out. So it seems like a red herring, really. But I may have missed stuff here - things got busy in the Vat household the past week or so.
    2 points
  42. Let me see if I can express in your modus operandi, even if ensures you will continue to be blind to one side of the issue: The format where you decide what I meant, interpreted in the most absurd fashion? You're probably right, and why you are incapable of understanding J Peterson's argument, and will continue to choose to believe that it's about his malicious attempt to avoid showing any respect for some very vulnerable members of society. How did I do?
    2 points
  43. What we should do is take a look whether that is actually the case. From what I have seen burnout and job-related issues are far more common among academics. That includes dealing with students whining about their grades. BTW, at no point did anyone said that one should be forced to agree. Again, it is just the freedom for either side to say what they think and the freedom of either side to call the other dumbass for that. And in academia specifically most countries have a tenure system, which is supposed to be a safeguard of academic freedom and which, as far as I can tell, has not been violated. So at least in that regard academics are protected. Specifically in this case I see it that the public has the right to object to her claims (whatever they are) and she has very much the right to ignore them and rely on being protected by the tenure system. However, the only protection against public opinion is really only not to become a public figure. I will acknowledge that this becoming more and more difficult these days. Nonetheless, there is a reason why some folks do not have a big social media presence and why some researchers working on potentially dicey projects in the past have not made it very public. Or to put it differently, if someone makes a statement that you personally agree with, do you want to force others not to object to it?
    2 points
  44. The phone does not disconnect after ~ 10 seconds from the moment it is covered with foil. But from the moment of covering with foil, the voice is not heard. After opening the foil, there is no voice either. If I slightly open the foil, a "good signal" is shown. Very interesting... Yes, I was wrong. Even in non-grounded foil, the telephone does not receive a signal. But when I look at the signal level, I open the foil and the phone starts to receive. I use Google translate. But I'm checking the translation. I highlight the phrase, right-click "search google for <phrase>". The translation was originally "aluminum foil". But the first google search result - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_foil I am a young man. But I don't understand a lot of things in English. Why do google translator and forum members write "aluminum foil", but wiki displays "aluminium foil"? Also Google Chrome's built-in spell checker underlines "aluminum" with a red line.
    2 points
  45. The whole thread I've felt like those supporting JP's claims are just trying to make up the most outlandish examples they can to support their view that the folks who're serious about this are delusional, with the caveat that they aren't suggesting people who actually deserve respect are delusional. Your posts in particular, koti, seem to reek of rolleyes and a lack of empathy for those interested in a serious dialogue. I was hoping to spin some of these more interesting topics off into their own threads since this one has become so toxic and boring. Right now, for some, the respect these people are asking for seems extravagant and ridiculous, beyond the basic courtesy we usually give to others. For some reason, this really pisses some folks off, but I think, like other efforts to be inclusive of more people, it will just take some time to show that what they're asking isn't that big a deal.
    2 points
  46. Mind you, these would be definitions of a Physicist ... Objective - properties inherent in the object being observed Subjective - properties perceived by the observer of an object Now I don't deny that everyone has the right to proclaim their subjective view of themselves, and the world around them; If you feel like a 'Ze', you should be able to say so. But the operative word is 'everyone', trans people, gay people, straight people, even MAGA people. Yet society strongly pressures, to the point of ostracization and job loss ( if not law ), people who don't think you are a 'Ze' from voicing their subjective view of the world around them. Do we ALL have that right or not ? Are we only giving that right to people who yell loudest ? Is that the kind of society we want/need ? We are, in effect, taking the right to their subjective opinion from those people who disagree with 'political correctness' ,as applied by the rest of society. All to make up for past wrongs, oppression, and coddling of people with agendas or mental issues. Incidentally, suicide in the general population is regarded as a mental issue. Yet in Trans individuals, suicide is seen as a result of ongoing oppression.
    2 points
  47. What Studiot is aiming at, is that a space-time diagram is not a plot, but a map. However, you cannot put time into a drawn map. So it makes sense to use time multiplied by a velocity to get a distance. 'c' is used because we already know from relativity the importance of 'space-time distance', which is similar to the normal 3-D distance in space, but not the same: instead of the 'space version' of Pythagoras (s2 = x2 + y2 + z2 ) we have s2 = x2 + y2 + z2 - (ct)2, or in just one space dimension s2 = x2 - (ct)2, which means that distances are distorted compared to a normal map of Euclidian space. Still, it can be use to create a mechanical device that transforms distances in space.time correctly (see e.g. the space-time globe).
    2 points
  48. "It is a wave" and "it becomes a corpuscle" is part of the overall problem. It's not that it is one or the other, it's that it has properties of both, and when you look for each of the properties, you will find evidence of that property. Via experiment we can only look for behavior. We can't say what it is, and also, we run into problems trying to use classical descriptions when describing quantum objects.
    2 points
  49. I find myself wondering if you have ever been formally diagnosed with reading comprehension problems
    2 points
  50. Yeah, it can get very messy from what I've read. Ultimately, when studying nature, I think we are superimposing theoretical frameworks on nature that may or may not be durable and are, in fact, pertinent only under certain conditions. For example, as in this discussion, how increasingly tenuous the binary theory of gender is... it only works viewing through a coarse lens.
    2 points
×
×
  • 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.