sethoflagos

I try not to write TLDR posts in this format of forum. Please take it as understood that any necessary applicable space definitions are in place to establish uniquely that the statement I gave is to be taken to apply within the everyday understanding of school level geometry and number theory. This is after all the 'absolute truth' a former school maths teacher once presented to his former students, is it not? In that space, I maintain that it's a pretty good example of an absolute truth. I accept without reservation that the statement may have limited applicability in cloud cuckoo land. Or Grok.

In what sense is: 25/8 < π < 22/7 not both the absolute truth and factual?

This led to a major reduction in the production costs of manufactured items. Ref: Industrial Revolution I'm not sure your use of 'deflationary' matches the meaning you intend. I've assumed your intent is better served by 'disinflationary'. An understandable confusion but they're quite distinct and can have very different impacts on the overall economy

Domestication and selective breeding of plants and livestock Urbanisation Copper & bronze smelting Iron smelting Horse riding The wheel Steam power Steel-hulled shipping Industrial mechanisation Mechanisation of farming Internal combustion engine The Haber process... Silicon-based computing is definitely up there with them.

And the oddest trick is seeing Elon Musk being bewitched by hardcore Communist fiction.. It's a long video (based on his interview crash with Zanny Minton Beddoes) but hilariously tragic

Tell me about it. I've been working with the Federal Government on that one off and on for over 15 years. (It's why I relocated from Lagos to Abuja)

Eva, can I, Wärtsilä, rut a naturalist raw in a cave? (tee-hee)

🤔

I did enjoy that post - a lot there to relate to. I think the psychos call it Weltschmerz. I'm no expert in general philosophy, but I do have an interest in the philosophy of science as I do like to understand the reason why I do stuff the way I do it. For me as a practising engineer, my interactions with other engineers gets a bit of framing: Naturalism: the 'no miracles' clause. ie prayer is no substitute for employing the best welders. Realism: pipes and pumps exist independently of our minds, and we perceive them sufficiently similarly to have common grounds for non-random discussion. This establishes a territory for agreement ie a space where we can have a common absolute understanding of truth. Scientific realism: this is specifically the narrower aspect of realism that I've described above. It is the foundation of the scientific method, and therefore should be an area where all active members of this site might be expected to agree quite closely. Throughout this thread my posts I think I've defended (my understanding of) scientific realism with a deliberately straight bat. I expected a bit of kick back from those who've previously shown themselves to hold anti-realist views, but it's been interesting to see the variety of alternate views. At times, it seemed that we were reenacting the Science Wars.

Ii's exactly the same as the flaring of associated gas around various parts of the globe. Unless the bastards see the sword of Damocles dangling by a thread over their heads, they will just take the piss (please excuse my French).

And now, the Great Schism! A slightly earlier one (before the Czech Republic was aligned) with a bit more nuance: And now CONCACAF join UEFA!

Exactly!!

I had to have a little chuckle at this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/30/government-map-mislabels-african-countries

Having designed industrial cooling systems for large industrial facilities in temperate, sub-tropical, tropical, and (hot) desert environments over the years, I think I'm safe in saying that there is no problem in either the technical or the economic feasibility of closed loop water cooling systems (and/or propane-based refrigeration) exhausting their waste heat to the local environment via air-cooled heat exchangers. Only the accountants take issue with the extra few per cent on the CAPEX and overheads. And some of those extras are often exaggerated or even illusory when conformance with present/anticipated environmental protection requirements are considered.

From time to time I've encountered more traditional, less developed communities that are based on subsistence agriculture, small scale domesticated livestock, and supplemented with a little hunting. Perhaps more so during my time in Gabon than the more developed Nigeria. Certainly, they've little to no money other than what emigrées may have sent back home or a bit of external trade; and life expectancy at birth may struggle to reach 50. But I have some difficulty in equating their condition to 'poverty'. They generally manage to keep themselves well nourished and at least until the outside world parks itself on their door step, they seem to be generally stable and contented with their lot. Perhaps the term 'poverty' requires there to be some expectation of more on the part of either those in it, or those around them.

That ship has sailed. It is screamingly obvious that the ellipsis in his comment represented an unspoken accusation of dishonesty on my part. He will not clarify this, as he would be invited to provide examples and fail, betraying the reality of who is genuinely dishonest here. Again, screamingly obvious that those he pisses off are predominantly (though not exclusively) those he accuses of dishonesty (see above), 'emotional appeals' (see above), 'gaslighting' (see above - the neg came from me), 'dodging the question', etc. All unwarranted ad hominem attacks over what are more his stock in trade. This comment itself is a prima facie case of his own regular gaslighting. Are we all really that blinkered? Or is it simply more gaslighting. I am unable to discern any significant change in behaviour since the 'drunken' defence. I'm inclined now to suspect that that defence itself may have been a dishonest tactic to evade closer scrutiny. May be wrong, but... (ellipsis substituting for 'judge for yourselves') Patently untrue. A lot of rhetorical questions and downright offensive statements packed in there too. Patently untrue. Several instances in the last couple of pages alone of him butting into dialogues between others. ... but not to apologies for the systematic pattern of abuse. In a thread dedicated to the nature of truth and honesty, I find your posts ironic... Cross posted with @Phi for All So sorry, perhaps I spoke out of turn here.

Enough to make a difference? Something from today's local news Business Insider AfricaHeirs of Africa’s richest billionaire back plan to donate...Aliko Dangote plans to dedicate one-third of his wealth to charity, with his heirs publicly backing the succession strategy behind Africa’s largest business empire

Wild stabs in the dark.

You might find the wiipedia page on Abstract & Concrete interesting. The philosophical concensus is that abstracts such as numbers exist independently of space-time (and its contents) and therefore in a sense go beyond metaphysics: they are thought to be entirely valid in the realities of all possible universes.

Okay.

Bet you can't get that one past Emily!

Question: If we lacked today's understanding of chemistry, might we not view fire as a strongly emergent property of large heaps of dried organic matter and air? We could see it initiated by a tiny spark of incandesence from a flint only to spawn this monster that seemed to 'magically' generate its own downwardly causative, self-sustaining incandescence that clearly was present in neither the heaps nor the air prior to ignition. Strong emergence has also been invoked in sudden generation of improved technologies during periods of economic growth. Perhaps even dark energy is strongly emergent (if there is such an animal) as it does apparently seem to appear literally out of nowhere to influence the remainder of the universe. I don't actually think these will prove to be valid examples. But one thought that occurs to me that all three exhibit the exponential growth I associate with positive feedback systems. Need to think about it a bit more, but is this a characteristic of over-determined systems - those with too many 'causes' for the existing 'effects'?

This is generally the case only at the frontiers of scientific understanding and discovery - where any novel idea is hyped to the max in the wildly speculative clickbait environment of youtube. The major elements of our endeavours utilise mature technologies that have been well understood now for generations. We have been able to accurately predict eclipses, occultations, and transits now for centuries, irrespective of Newtonian gravity being superseded by General Relativity a mere century ago. And don't get so hung up on absolute accuracy: absolute truth doesn't require that. If you announce a result as being accurate to two significant figures, and it actually IS so (ie.the precise value must lie within o range of +/- 1% or so), then that IS the absolute truth. If you can be giving me spiteful, unmerited neg reps, then you can stop trolling my posts for attention, right?

Yes! Spread the message by all means!

Think about the coomonplace, macroscopic stuff around us: trees, potholes, fork-tailed drongos: the objects that punctuate the everyday experience of everyone in our local environment. You kick a rock in your bare feet and your toe hurts. All reasonable individuals are able to align at this human scale level, surely.