Trurl

You sound like a teacher. I guess it differs state to state but in my area teachers make a decent wage. It is the substitute teachers that don’t and they use them to fill teachers’ positions. All a substitute teacher needs is a bachelors degree. They lowered the certification to fill openings. But you are right that does lower wages. I felt that working online would be easier to control the classroom. I am not skilled at giving detentions and unruly kids. I’d rather work with adults. I guess now is the best time to find a job in education. If I was going to take a class, I agree that in person is better. I have taken online classes and all the work was left up to me. The professor just graded me telling me I did it all wrong. I had nothing such as other student’s work to compare. The comments did not show what was wrong except minor grammar. The videos on YouTube are way more educational. But you don’t earn a degree watching YouTube. I have some ideas that I would use to improve online courses. Online courses are not cheaper than in person but the instructors usually don’t give instruction. With modern internet technology this should not be so. You made a good point that math instruction is difficult remotely, but why doesn’t the classroom share a document in real time in a chat room? What is your take on this?

There is a shortage of teachers. What would be a legitimate online school to teach for? I am not a secondary school teacher but I am asking about cyber schools both secondary and post secondary schools. What are trusted employers? How do you apply? One challenge to secondary schools is disciplining the classroom. I assume the online format would correct this. But if anyone knows of teaching positions in a legitimate online school post it.

iNow, I know it seems link a cowardly response. I am just saying NATO should have done more before it escalated. Sometimes you can’t just talk, you have to back it up. Well the Ukraine has backed it up and stood up to the bully. But how can NATO help them? I ask that question because it is this thread’s question? I don’t know what you can do but talk to the other side. Did you study the Vietnam War in high school? Both sides blew each other up until the U.S. left. Now we’re friends. They don’t teach the part on how peace happened. Could it all just have been avoided?

That isn’t a source. It is my speculation. I think NATO failed the Ukraines. The U.S. says the Russians are going to invade. We’re are the peace talks? We send weapons and intelligence. Both won’t stop the Russians. We should have flooded the country with humanitarian aid. What is Ukraine’s plan to win this war? Now the woman and children are displaced. I believe for the world to maintain peace both Ukraine and Taiwan would have to be released from NATO in a bargaining agreement. I know the Ukraine and Taiwan are not part of NATO so they only receive aid. But I think the NATO countries know they can’t protect them without disaster. So NATO is forced to slow the progression of war and hope a solution presents itself over time. I stated that the world can be as safe and peaceful without the entire world being a democracy. We can spread democracy peacefully through the people changing their own country. But there is a fine line between peaceful influence and pissing off Russia or China. Again this is all my speculation. I don’t have any intel other than the media and internet. But this is my view of the positions of Ukraine and Taiwan.

Ok. I was reading this thread and someone rant on a rant about the left and communism. Maybe this reply can be moved. But I remember somewhere I say something somewhere else that described the World was safer when there was a balance of power throughout the World. I speculate that NATO didn’t act in Ukraine because it was the safer think to do.

I love freedom and democracy but is it right for every country? Strategically probably not. Did George W. Bush do this with Husain? Sure it would be great to give democracy and stop the spread of communism. But wasn’t that be Vietnam? Every country is to blame. Let’s “spread democracy” and kill thousands on both sides until it isn’t profitable. And what is the purpose of Pelosi of ticking of China? That is no better than rocket man launching or Iran threatening to building a nuclear program. I would say the people of other countries would love democracy. But the leaders are threatened by it. To put it in relation to psychology, it is like having an atheist believe. How will a country react to the fact outsiders want to change the rules? Not a smart move to force beliefs on anyone. On both sides.

I have attached a PDF to view. I know it could be formatted more clearly. But if the Pappy Craylar Hypothesis is true: We can verify a number is Prime by multiplying it by a known Prime number and see if a Semi-Prime results. And we may be able to take a known Prime and see which consecutive number will result in a Semi-Prime, thus establishing a pattern. This pattern is seen in the PDF I posted by taking the error of the equation when (p^4 / ((p*Data)^2 + p)). I know it is hard to see in my PDF. I’m working to make it easier to read. I have been reading a book that said if there is a pattern in Prime numbers the Riemann Hypothesis is false. And if Prime numbers are completely random the Riemann Hypothesis is true. But the question is do you have a pattern if you can predict where the next Prime number occurs? I ask this because there may be a computation to find the next Prime number, but the overall placement of all Prime numbers may be arbitrary. @studiot : This is what I was describing in my status update. 20220622ProofSFN.pdf

I think the situation worked out as best as it possibly could. As far as lives not lost. Any effort to stop the rioters would result in massive casualties. Killing your fellow Americans doesn’t make sense. Trump doesn’t call of the rioters because if he does he has to admit he is in control of them. I think the only reason he makes a statement is to save the rioters lives. More firepower was on the way in my speculation. Whatever was planned didn’t work. And the game becomes more dangerous to prolong the riot. I know it was bad but the dems say it could have been worse. As for future security I don’t know. It is just like gun violence issue with no easy answer. I say we ban Biden and Trump both from the next election.

I am for supporting the Ukraine. But I come to the conclusion that they should have avoided war and surrendered to Russia. Yes I know it is more honorable to fight. But I don’t think fighting was in its best interest. They could fight a battle they can win. But more importantly look at the loss of life. At least with surrendering civilian lives are saved. And there would be open peace talks. I don’t like to see them be given ineffective weapons because airplanes and missiles are what they need. From what I hear on the news the can’t attack Russian soil. I want them to prevail but I don’t like to see all these people dying for lack of diplomacy.

Darn. But that doesn’t explain why some posts have thousands and some have single digits. Wouldn’t it make more sense to track member’s views? Like on profiles? Can’t the forum stats identify a human user? What about trackers? When you view a website they say you have 10 trackers trying to spy on you. I want SFN readers not bots. But if it were accurate it would be useful. Knowing your audience and how many readers have read what you wrote is very important. Not as important as the message. But if you write a message and no one sees it, the message falls short of its goal.

How accurate is the views number under posts? Not the views to profile. I thought it was accurate because it increased slightly over time. Also the post has replies. I wanted to inspire new cryptographers. I believed it was so simple and would spread fast. Is 11,000 to large? Is it accurate?

In the book, DBB, the author says the complexity and construction of living creatures cannot happen without design. Like when you see a bridge and know engineers developed it. It is not proof but it is logical. But on a side note, we do have history and archeology but they are limited because we can only look at what’s left over. We can say communication is better today early humans didn’t have written language, but these people were building arches and the Great Wall of China. So by what method do we tell how advanced they are? We thing man advanced became smarter and now we have nuclear power, electricity, and cars but that took thousands of years. Are we smarter than our ancestors? It is more logical to say technology improved with time, but is there a measure of technology advancement? I mean if we graph it mathematically what does the rate of change show? What is putting evolution in motion? DNA and folding proteins? What puts everything together? But what I think is evolving is the mind across a lifetime. I mean both nature vs. nature occurring as one. If connecting proteins is like connecting transistors when does the mind develop. We don’t have Ai yet. When does a evolved organism start to think? These are just my thoughts. I’m sure everyone ponders them sometimes. Things like the ancient Greeks building on what was already known about parallel lines. When you have to hunt and gather food, who thinks about parallel lines? All that goes beyond the scope of the book. But evolution to me is what occurs after the organism is formed.

Actually I was referring to the creative designer which you also think is far fetched. But since you bring it up what in science says are ancestors can’t be more advanced? I don’t mean this as an insult. I want you to ponder it. Things like pyramids, construction, knowledge of math. Do we have anyone in the world today that is operating at that level to produce such things?

This is going to sound ignorant. I apologize ahead of time. I have limited knowledge of “The Traveling Sales Man” problem. But maybe the problem is drafting. If circle were drawn with the radius of the distance between 2 points would the straight line distance between where the circles intersect be the shortest path? That is easy to say. But I don’t know how to test it. I also haven’t studied current attempts. Is this similar to others attempts?

There is a difference between knowing something and teaching it. And not all learning is done through a formal school. But what I understand about you post is that you want to improve learning. Which you can do on a small scale. Become a teacher. But writing curriculum is another job. You can’t start a formal education without employees. It is easy to say no boring assignments or standardized tests, but those are the necessary evil to measure and assess the students. I agree with the others about learning the script. I think some of your problem with current learning is the instructor and not the curriculum. I was taking courses to become certified as an adult editor and the instructor in one class failed me. Which I believed was unjustified. I retook the class and got an A or B. But the point is the instructor makes or breaks a class. You don’t like the “boring assignments.” But it is only boring due to the instructor or students. Learning is fun. It is also a lot of work. You want it to be fun. The fun is a little bit more difficult to see in a formal setting. When I read your post it sounds like a problem with a teacher. You want to become a better teacher. But “going by the script” is the only way. Concentrate on the material and what you would do to fix it. And keep your attitude towards the teacher friendly. They are in control of the classroom. You benefit in no way making them an adversary.

I know no one believes me. But this is proof of the Pappy Craylar Conjecture. It is attached in PDF format, because I had to highlight some numbers. Notice how the error of 3 equals 3*7=24 and notice how 11 does the same. The position of the Prime numbers in the first 1000 Prime numbers corresponds to the position on the equation. In other words, 3 is in the second position on the set of numbers and 11 is the fifth position. The test Primes are in the order that the Prime numbers occur. I have highlighted the numbers that represent the equations. I know the equations are difficult to read in standard form, however these are the same equations I have been using. So I challenge you do download the attached PDF. 20220622ProofSFN.pdf

Like I said intelligent design is not always related to creationism. I was contrasting my post to the thread “ Who created God” Some theorize that there is no evidence of God today so why did he exist in the past then decide not to show himself today? But we have evidence of intelligent design today. We clone, gene edit, and such. So if creative design exists today what about the past? That is my argument. The author is explaining the biological systems are too complex not to be designed. He uses verbose analogies such as why blood clots and how the eye reacts to light. It’s over done. We know it is complex. On a different point why in science do we always have to have a beginning? Humans have a beginning and end? I realize we can’t picture a universe that always existed, but is that a limitation based on us? And note that science and religion were not always opposites. Early scientists were to explore the mysterious of Gods creation. You could argue scientists have been persecuted by religion. But much of Darwin was used to fuel the holocaust. Even Einstein barely escaped with his life. But my point is we don’t all have the same opinions, but different views doesn’t mean war. Evolution has many logical theories but aren’t we more than that? I mean if you look at cells you think evolution. But what if you look in your life?

If you read the book you may like it. I read 4 chapters and it does not promote religion. It is science. There is a difference between intelligent design and God. The book exposes the limitations of Darwinism. But what if an organ was 3D printed or A.I. perfected? Would the android ask, “Who created my creator?”

Why would he have to be created? We talk about infinity in the forums all the time. How about always was.

For students or amateurs (myself included), I recommend Wikipedia or https://oeis.org/A000040 Here is a great number theory resource that can be imported to Excel or Mathematica. I imported the 1st 1000 Primes into Mathematica. I was very proud until I learned Mathematica had a library built in, in my S.Y.I post. I recommend downloading the notebook file in my post and importing your own file. But the possibility of manipulating numbers on oeis and Wikipedia sites is endless.

No. I am just saying you can’t go back to no weapons. I believe the assault weapons ban that expired only covered new manufacturing. Just like the legalization of weed you can’t fix the problem by making it illegal again. Both are problems. But I am saying if the gun lobbies lose one restriction they know more restrictions will follow. So we can’t agree on any laws. It is important to note, every time a ban on guns is mentioned it only increases sales. We are not in disagreement. I am just stating that is the reason there is no easy fix. We can’t agree on masks or abortion. How can we pass gun control? Make gun control a federal law with universal background checks?

I am not for the sale of assault rifles. But many already own them. You cannot eliminate them. It is a dangerous move to change the Constitution. I know that seems ridiculous. But that is why the gun laws are debated so heavily. If the gun owners concede to one law they will be subjected to more laws eventually leading to loss of all rights. I don’t agree but this is why nothing is done. We need guns to be tied to a psychological program on our cell phone. Just as Google tracks us. Things like gps location, flagged searches, and the psychological profiles that all the data creates. This seems impossible but what if a gun check required your online profile to be searched?

Calvinism vs Arminianism

You must be a scientist. Always striving to discover something new. I too am aligned with the free will side. But there is also compelling arguments for predetermined side. Look at you phone constantly monitoring and influencing you. The question to ask is who controls such events? Is it random? Who would be a separate observer to intentionally influence others? And all these multiverses would not be possible if we had no choice. Now my question is how would we even know determined or fixed. We have a first person perspective and are oblivious to how it works. I just like the discussion. I think I am in control of my decisions, but if you watch the lecture you may doubt the certainty of fee will. But like you free will is good enough for me. I shouldn’t have let that lecture influence me.

I was watching a lecture on the philosophy of science fiction and there was a debate on the movie The Matrix. All about how the trilogy is a debate on free will. If God knows are character and presents us with a decision and knows our response, did we have a choice? And if we didn’t have a choice who is to blame? I want to pose the question: If we don’t have free will how can anything new be created? And if there was no free will how could you prove something is new? For scientists and engineers they don’t think in philosophy. They are makers. I believe in free will. I don’t see the point of things being predetermined. Of course me not liking a predetermined system does not mean it doesn’t exist.