Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/25/20 in all areas

  1. As of 2018, the Supreme Court had overruled more than 300 of its own cases. (ref. 1) Negative, there are no legal mandates to "balance the courts" by partisan boundaries. There are only three legal mandates, one mandate is an Act, one mandate is a congressional statute, and the other mandate is a constitutional article. By "even split", I presume you mean an even partisan (a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person; prejudiced in favor of a particular cause) boundary for the total number of justices. It is constitutionally possible, though improbable based up
    2 points
  2. That's right. The Northrop F-20 Tigershark, a development of the F-5 and T-38, was involved in two crashes during development/sales tours, which were effectively caused by aggressive maneuvering ( sustained 9g ). This caused the pilots, Cornell and Barnes, to gradually lose peripheral vision until blackout; neither of themsurvived the crashes. Cornell died during a demonstration in Taiwan. Barnes died practicing an air show routine here in Canada. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/video-alert-watch-unfortunate-f-20-tigershark-first-prototype-crash-68937 https://www.latimes.co
    1 point
  3. ..in the hypothesis about infinite number of parallel Universes (or infinitely forever repeating, in the all possible ways), everybody which you know are molested in infinite number of Universes.. and there is infinite number of Universes in which you do not even exist.. and there is infinite number of Universes in which you are woman, man, heterosexual or homosexual, or transsexual etc... and you do the all jobs of the world.. you are homeless or being billionaire, businessman, actor, politician, king and queen, etc. etc.. and there is infinite number of Universes in which you are killed in
    1 point
  4. You're half-way there, just stop imagining why it matters tomorrow. No-one can help you, if you're determined to destroy yourself, give yourself a break there's no coming back after. In the right context, there's nothing ridiculous about a god.
    1 point
  5. simply, I see the use of "de morgan" rules.
    1 point
  6. It is explained in detail in the document, especially the part where the truth table for both expressions are compared: Extract from http://watson.latech.edu/book/intelligence/intelligenceApproaches2b1.html (emphasis mine) Maybe you could give some more detail about with step that causes trouble. Without the "not" we have the expression "sunny_day ∨ garden_wedding" instead of the tutorial's "~ sunny_day ∨ garden_wedding" That implies that there could be sunny days with weddings not in the garden and that is not what the origi
    1 point
  7. I agree. Random thoughts, not much science below: IF (extremely big if) the far-fetched idea is correct I assume the current universe is not likely the the very first occurrence of the universe, there was many prior universes. I have no evidence that any events in any earlier universe affects us. So from a philosophical point of view; since I do not remember living the same life in an earlier universe I neglect the chance of remembering this universe if there is ever repetition. And if this is indeed the first version of the universe and memories from this universe will remain i
    1 point
  8. I would suggest to try to concentrate on the here and now. The philosophy of living for the moment (also called mindfullness apparently : ref google). This technique has helped many people.
    1 point
  9. I think you know which one I meant: In both cases you are essentially asserting that Maxwell’s equations are not valid, so this is just a repeat of the same thing.
    1 point
  10. Yeah, who'd have thought? Nice to see a pope who doesn't think we are still in the 17th century. 😀
    1 point
  11. Please don’t lump me in with politicians
    1 point
  12. Surely, you are going too far. If we know that the average temperature of the Martian surface is -60C, how can that be "utterly useless" in our efforts to engineer a rover capable of surviving on Mars? On the contrary, it has enabled us to engineer numerous recent examples of rovers capable of operating in this low-temperature Martian environment.
    1 point
  13. ! Moderator Note I looked at their Google scholar page, and while many of the publications are in Russian, it is pretty clear that this person is not in the business of aerodynamics. Expert? Maybe, but not in the area you are writing in. In any case, as you do not seem to have any new data I see no reason why this should remain open.
    1 point
  14. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wTP2RUD_cL0 Money for Nothing (and get your chicks for free) Apparently Trump's election team wanted to use that to open his rallies but Sting was insisting on royalties. Then Trump said he expected the royalties from them but Sting said he wasn't even American, just an Englishman in New York 🤔
    1 point
  15. ! Moderator Note This is a listed example of a bad-faith argument in our rules. ! Moderator Note Spectacularly wrong. One might think you are trolling. In any event, hijacking threads to bash science without supporting arguments violates multiple rules
    1 point
  16. Yes but what is the point of that analysis for those people? To gather 1000 plus points on an internet forum?
    0 points
  17. It may give the correct answer, but that does not prove that it is physics. Faraday's Law does give the correct answer in most cases, but not because it is a valid principle. If it were valid, it would give the correct answer in every case. Mike
    -1 points
  18. I can obviously read your paper and it is wrong. You asked for a hint and I gave you one. Here's another you can solve it in O(n^2) or less with parallelization. I feel it would be better to write it as an academic paper with references. But I am awful at writing papers and let's face it "Give me, a more adult answer" will be exactly the kind of annoyance I can expect if I publish. There are people with phds who haven't solved it for years I doubt they will look favourably on somebody who doesn't have one (There is quora questions on this exact thing)
    -1 points
  19. If you mean this topic: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/47901-faradays-law-is-false/ then I have to tell you that I have nothing to do with the man who has posted it ten years ago.
    -1 points
  20. I have a few paintings with brief versions of the story on my insta @Keeney.jacob IMO this may already be known math, or the effect at least. I derived much of my math while astral projecting, and I can't even remember when I got that formula, I just knew it was important and I battled my way from Hell to Heaven busting up some ghosts. Source for the equation - Stephen Hawking, Founder of the Ghost Science Center. The place somehow got smashed up, motha fucka didn't want to talk or cave to torture. Somehow Neil deGrass Tyson is up there and I managed to get some knowledge in a hostage
    -1 points
  21. I will, I busted black holes while ghost hunting. I'll take a piss on some degrees sooner or later. But you can wait till I dabble in product proofs. I will also being drawing out the higher dimensions in order, since I can visually see them. For context: How to Divide By Zero - Explained for laymen. Understand, I am currently re writing math, it may never pan out but all is a mental exercise to me. 1/0= Undefined - site my bad math all you want I'd start with yours here. Definition of Zero, 1-1=0 2-2=0, producing a canceling effect. 1/0= -1 it's mirror neuron 1/0 = 1/1
    -1 points
  22. Look please at the figure below: The red and the blue circles are cross sections of the two relevant sides of the rectangular loop. The two ends of the loop are connected to two slip rings. One slip ring is connected to the Plus-terminal of an oscilloscope; the other slip ring is connected to the Minus-terminal. Let's say we have colored the two relevant sides of the loop - one in red color, the other in blue color. In the figure (b) the loop has rotated 180 degrees with respect to its position in the figure (a). Can you guess what I am going to say next? How much
    -1 points
  23. I came up with this odd equation to explain the Tunneling Effect that exists at the event horizon of a black hole. -1<=0=>(-10)+11 This may not adhere to any standard format. I typed this up awhile back and don't want to edit it. I'll type up a better version with some art. I would like feed back, you may as well save "you're wrong." On the surface -1=0=1 cancels out and is mathematically sound. I will do my best to clarify this concept. My math was derived while doing paintings and research on the paranormal. My methods would be considered scientific nonsense. Much of my data
    -1 points
  24. Where am I asserting in the thread you have linked that the Maxwell's equations are not valid? More generally, what has that thread to do with this one? Moreover, do you have some objections against the things said in this thread? Otherwise, I would consider your replies as trolling.
    -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.