Leaderboard

I will preface the following with the fact that the US is very socio-politically diverse and generalizations are just those. The US has some of the best education, healthcare, most socially progressive programs, etc in the world - for some people. Being an immigrant that has lived in the US for 13 years, it's not just talk. The US is a violent country. The US violent death rate is 7 times higher than the average for high-income countries. While a lot is explained by the firearm homicide rate being 25 times higher, the non-firearm homicide rate is also three times higher than average. Violence is glorified/normalized throughout US culture. I was watching a PG 13 movie with my son, with smoking and coarse language being the two causes listed for the rating. Someone got shot in the head in the first two minutes. Boobs will make a movie age restricted faster than beheading, and half the population has boobs. Then you have the weird juxtaposition between between conservative morality laws - over a quarter of Kentucky counties are dry (i.e. possession of alcohol is a crime), and yet it has stand your ground legislation - if you fear for your life and you shoot someone in your home or anywhere else, you are immune from criminal or civil prosecution. Then you have a poor education level. 54% of US adults read below the 6th grade level. 1 in 5 US adults are completely illiterate. 30% of US adults can't do basic math in whole numbers. Research shows that a lack of basic education leads to a narrow and fear based world view. This means that a phenomenally large proportion of the US population is morally conservative, narrow minded, fearful, and has normalized violence. Appeals to violence by politicians are attractive to a huge population base in the US.

Frontline has some good in-depth features. And they often partner with excellent investigative news organizations, like ProPublica. I can tell this episode will be hard to watch. Not sure I quite grasp what Koti's (now trashed) reply was about. If he can regain some equilibrium I would be okay with having a civil chat about it.

Yeah, yeah... Blah, blah. Every time you're caught in an embarrassing lack of understanding of the basics of this problem, you choose not to answer and keep blowing smoke in a different direction. Do you or do you not understand the role that the light cone plays in the discussion of causality? This is, of course, a rethorical question, as it's pretty obvious you do not: ⁉️ ⁉️ (my emphasis.) For two arbitrary events, A and B, A can be in the future light cone of B, A can be in the past light cone of B, or A and B can be space-like separated --ie. either one of them is outside the overall light cone of the other. Space-like separated events are never, --repeat, never-- on the same light cone. Events in the same light cone are causally connected. It is for events outside their respective light cones that any discussion of non-locality would make any sense. You are shockingly ignorant of the concept of causality, and of many other physical concepts. Do some explaining and self-correcting, please, because last time you said something about this, you got it completely backwards. And stop blowing smoke. Bad as it is, ignorance is not your problem. Your problem is you think you actually understand something, and are incapable of acknowledging your ignorance. Your problem is the --highly intellectually toxic-- combination of hubris and ignorance. Another possibility is that two space-like separated events are both on the same (future) light cone of a previous event thus including both in the absolute future of such antecedent event. Or both are on the same (past) light cone of a subsequent event, thus including both in the absolute past of such subsequent event. None of these qualifications is in your language. You are either sloppy, or deliberately ambiguous, or both.

So much being said about Elon Musk right now but surely it is as simple as him being a bog standard anti-tax, anti-regulation, anti-union free market Libertarian who's commercial successes give him an inflated idea of his own insights in other areas. His Longtermist human destiny to leave Earth behind thing is a bit idiosyncratic but the temptation to try and remake the greater nation, economy, society more to his liking is not so unusual - just most people don't have the money or influence for it. More to his liking will almost certainly pare down to the same old unexceptional "what is good for my business is good for the nation" that other wealthy industrialists espouse. Which puts him firmly in the US Republican camp irrespective of how welcome the successes of EV's and batteries are to those concerned with the climate problem - who, by the failure of those on the Right to treat it seriously, are more likely to lean Left. The significance of social democratic policies (even the US has them, even if explicitly not referred to as such) to the opportunities for long term capitalist wealth creation won't get any credit. Like other rich and successful entrepreneurs his dealing with politicians and political parties will, unlike ordinary citizens, come with high levels of personal access and is likely to be a lot less ideological than it is transactional, especially given one of his major businesses depends on bidding for taxpayer funded contracts... but not his taxes.

Where do you find a cow with no legs? Right where you left it! Why are doctors always so calm? Because they have a lot of patients! Why was the math book so stressed out? Because it was full of problems!

The gamma factor is used to characterise the relationship between inertial frames in flat spacetime, ie between frames that are related via Lorentz transformations. When you have a test particle freely falling into a black hole, it will trace out a world line in a spacetime that is not flat - you can still choose another far-away frame as reference, and both of these will be locally inertial, but spacetime between them isn’t flat, so these frames are not related by simple Lorentz transformations. Hence, asking about what the gamma factor between these frames will be is meaningless - it is only defined for frames that are related via Lorentz transforms.

The selected discussion topics clearly indicate that you are not.. Is it OK for you to ask about quantum physics? Humility? Or you misspelled humanity? Humility depends on the context in which it is used. One prefers to survive, another wants to gain something, another has no self-esteem.

Nope. But you have... 😉 Let's at least give him/her/it the chance to explain themself, who knows it might be interesting.

It could be pertaining to religion or deep philosophical / paradoxical quandries but really it could be anything. I can garauntee an intelligent answer, this may seem like a troll account but I'm 100% serious, and if I'm taken seriously I'd be pretty much being willing to write the books worth of reasoning required to give proper explanations to these deep topics that supposedly evade tha common mind, I made this an ask me anything because I'm lazy and I do better when It's bouncing off other people so to speak. This also the first site I found that didn't gate keep posting privileges, talk about being anti thetical to the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom. I'll check this post for comment within the next 48 hours, I'm going to bed. BTW the more unique/specific your question the easier I can answer, I respect the hell out of any really original questions example: does reality really exist?