Jump to content

Carrock

Senior Members
  • Posts

    575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Carrock

  1. I suspect it would be unnecessary. Apollo astronauts quickly developed gaits for fast movement on the moon, which likely included peak muscle and joint stresses similar to movement on earth. Indoors, I suspect it wouldn't be long before an astronaut achieved a sextuple backflip. Perhaps living in 1/6g would be physiologically quite similar to 1g, unlike living in microgravity. Astronauts could spend a few weeks on the moon first to find out if they really need to sleep in a centrifuge. This is the sort of potential problem that can be ignored as long as it doesn't become a real problem.
  2. Confusing Wikipedia article at best. I read it as From Wikipedia The clear implication (in context) is that momentum is unchanged if you take a longer time. Contradicted by the equation a few lines later. Just working out what the author means is an effort and I'm not sure which of us got the meaning right.
  3. I notice you maintain that most people think that and don't provide a single reference. I couldn't find anyone other than you claiming the above. Nice vague statement, to which the only answer is yes or no, depending on what you mean. No comment. I'm done with wasting my time. As you've called me a liar and a troll, why not report the relevant posts?
  4. Experiments don't mean or create functions. You think was serious? Extraordinary claims need references.
  5. I presume we agree an uncountably infinite set of actual monkeys is impossible? Why? Use an uncountable set of points rather than the nonexistent uncountable monkeys. Give each point a finite time, say 1 second, to do its thing. Total time required is one second times the number of uncountable points. That time would have a length equal to the number of points on that length. BTW I hope it's obvious I'm not taking this thread too seriously.... x-posted with taeto
  6. There are other opinions. Does an e.g. random number generator not require space and time? From the Shakespearian monkey/random number generator defence league website: Each monkey would require a finite amount of time to do its thing. In all, an uncountably infinite length of time would be required. In a shared location, uncountably infinite volume would be required. Either way, uncountably infinite spacetime would be required. Spacetime may be infinite, but it's not uncountably infinite.
  7. As each monkey has finite volume, where would you put an uncountably infinite volume of monkeys? If each monkey can be numbered and assigned a unique integer, can you create an uncountable list of these monkeys? Or are most of the monkeys so bored and irrational they can be assigned zero volume and an irrational number? (I'll eventually get round to responding to your post on another thread.) x-posted with studiot
  8. An extract from a story I read years ago that stuck in my mind. Readable ( but not easily ) at https://archive.org/stream/Fantastic_v20n02_1970-12/Fantastic_v20n02_1970-12_djvu.txt
  9. Please define the particular Copenhagen interpretation you're referring to.
  10. It would only necessarily be flat in three spatial dimensions. If e.g. the density were greater than critical, the universe would eventually stop expanding and contract i.e. it would be a closed 3-sphere. Parallel light beams would converge.
  11. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe This is a quite old idea, and an oversimplified description - see beecee's response - but does indicate how the universe can be flat on a sufficiently large scale.
  12. I would be unable to explain in a way you could understand that electric cars can run without a traction battery.
  13. Thanks for the reference which I read a while ago but lost. I think it's worth reading in its entirety, particularly for its description of how action at a distance can, by delayed choice, either provide essential information to show an interference pattern or show which slit the entangled particle passed through... all with information limited to lightspeed.
  14. These seem to me, rightly or wrongly, like oversimplified descriptions with details essential for (my) understanding omitted. And I suspect you meant "Directly measuring an electron at one of the slits would destroy the interference pattern." Please provide reference(s) and/or more info.
  15. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    You have attributed to me a view I have not stated and do not hold. Still, that's better than quoting part of a sentence to change its meaning. You haven't broken any forum rules and your opinion of due process is clear.
  16. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    So... I pointed out you have contradictory opinions, you ignored that and every other point, selectively quoted my post to change its meaning, and responded 'Diddums.'
  17. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    None of these were issues when she chose to go out there. She went of her own accord (or so it has been reported - unless the press made that up). Maybe she was lied to and was disillusioned when she got there - some things are a little hard to come back from though (like ISIL/ISIS). She may have been lied to but understood the law and the situation and may have been disillusioned when she discovered the situation was as she expected ... really. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amira_Abase%2C_Shamima_Begum_and_Kadiza_Sultana No criminal charges so far....
  18. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    One more response as you quoted me... Such people don't have executive privilege and could be tried and convicted. The government can do what it likes with no fear of legal sanctions for those who made its decisions, even if unlawful. About 20% - 50%(depends on source) of US death row inmates exonerated by improved DNA forensics had made false confessions. No worries about informal, probably edited interviews as evidence of her guilt? Several of these factors probably involved in her 'confession:' By the same logic every criminal you can't be certain won't commit another crime should be locked up for life. Should there be one law for patriotic criminals and another for politicals? As the child of a political I suppose you don't want due process for him either. Criminal citizens can freely enter even if 'we' don't want them back here.
  19. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    etc etc This whole thread seems to be basically about whether due process, e.g. innocent until proved guilty etc, is a right or a privilege granted at the discretion of the government. I'm done here.
  20. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    From https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47301623
  21. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    Not in every legal sense. She' still young enough to be punished as a child in this context. If she's an adult, why doesn't Bangladesh assign final (non)citizenship status at 18? It's actually depressingly common for children to be punished as adults for crimes only children can commit. Do you really think individuals' responsibility to accept the consequences of their actions should reduce with increasing age?. Just saw your edit. Indeed. In some countries fifteen(or nineteen) year olds can be executed for crimes similar to those which she has allegedly committed. I doubt you want her executed, but that's where your logic seems to lead.
  22. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    Or saying children should not be punished more than adults. If she'd been 21 her citizenship couldn't be revoked, according to legal precedents.
  23. Carrock

    Shamima Begum

    I knew you'd pull that one... so predictable. Yes. She must experience the full weight of her actions. And of course, if you're suspected of being complicit in your daughter's actions, you'd be happy to have your own citizenship, like hers, revoked based on secret evidence. You must experience the full weight of your suspected actions. Or not? Don't trivialize it. Is life as a stateless person trivial? Do you really think any country would grant her citizenship?
  24. Yet another way to look at this.... The distinction between classical and quantum objects is purely arbitrary. See e.g. Heisenberg cut. Evidence of e.g. a macroscopic decoherence field or a consciousness/observer field has been looked for and not found. When/where/if a measurement is made is therefor an arbitrary choice, generally based on convenience. Since measurement/nonmeasurement is arbitrarily defined, any observation effect during measurement would have to be nonexistent to be consistent with measurements.
×
×
  • 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.