exchemist

So interaction with the vacuum rather than interference. OK.

Agree with the general sentiment but, on one point of detail, do we not now treat spontaneous emission as due to interaction of the atom with vacuum fluctuations?

I read this thread and burst out laughing. There's a sort of Spinal Tap quality to it.

Interesting. Perhaps his son was the last straw then that triggered Musk to “come out” as the nazi he secretly was all along. But it does not seem coincidence that within 6 months of his son’s announcement Musk had bought Twitter, sacked the moderation staff and embarked on a series of high profile far right activities, not just in the US but concerning Europe too. All very odd, counterproductive behaviour for a maker of EVs. But, back to your observation about Silicon Valley, I realise Peter Thiel is on record as expressing contempt for democracy. And it seems Zuckerberg has also run up the Jolly Roger, promoting a new, snarling macho persona, quite at odds with how he used to present himself. So yeah, there does seem to be a lot of it about among the tech bros.

That’s why I wondered about surface tension. Burping may be impossible if you are so small that you can’t break the surface tension on a bubble in your gut. But I agree “exploding” ants seems a bit of an, er, stretch.

What is fascinating? Most of us, including me, cannot read Chinese characters so please quote the posts you are responding to in English.

Are you able to discuss any of this, in your own words?

So what? The Easterlin paradox seems to have nothing to do with referenda.

As @swansont points out, this does not seem to have anything to do with the thread topic, let alone the points I have made. Can you explain its relevance?

One obvious problem is the presence of a low kinetic energy central core. There is no such structure observed in the cosmos.

OK so not that then.

You offered an opinion based on AI, without doing the homework of reading the background. And surprise surprise, what you posted was therefore wrong. You posted botshit, in fact.

I suggest you read the report, then, or the synopses of it that have appeared in the media:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2gy78gpnqo QUOTE The switches were returned to their normal inflight position, triggering automatic engine relight. At the time of the crash, one engine was regaining thrust while the other had relit but had not yet recovered power. UNQUOTE Who knows more about this subject: the people who wrote the report or you?

We’ve been over this before. It’s obviously unworkable, due to the number and the complexity of the issues a government has to resolve. Most people won’t have the time, the expertise or the interest to make informed choices. Furthermore, your idea runs the obvious risk that on-line referenda might be hijacked by coteries of activists, leading to highly unrepresentative outcomes. Forget it.

According to the report, the error was recognised and both engines re-lit before impact, though neither was able to spool up and develop enough thrust in time.

If there is an undercarriage retraction switch, say, that is similar, one might perhaps engage the wrong muscle memory if distracted. But we shall have to see what further analysis reveals, I suppose.

You may be confusing baking soda with baking powder. The latter is a mix of baking soda and tartaric acid which, when wetted will immediately start to react and evolve CO2. Baking soda on its own, however, won’t react when wet, only when acid is introduced. From what I read, ants eat sugar mixed with baking powder and the acid in their digestive system then triggers gas production. This apparently kills them. I’m not sure how but surface tension is a big deal for tiny insects, so maybe bubbles form that block their system or something. Someone else here may know. You need the sugar to persuade the ants to eat the stuff.

I have no interest in reading botshit, though. Which, by your own admission, this is. When you have ideas of your own, and you take the trouble to relate them to the previous exchanges we have already had on the topic, so we don’t waste time repeating ourselves, then I may pay attention.

When you have some ideas of your own to discuss, posted on the forum rather than off-site, it may be worth reading them. But you haven’t already done this topic, in a thread you abandoned last year?

Since I wrote that I've seen a bit more of the report, which claims both pilots were properly rested. However, there was a comment from an experienced pilot who said that turning these fuel switches on and off is such a routine action that it becomes delegated to "muscle memory". If so, a keys-in-the-fridge scenario could well be the explanation. We do get these mystifying cases of human error from time to time. As far as I recall, nobody ever found out why the driver of the Moorgate Tube train accelerated into that blind tunnel wall.

I wonder about pilot fatigue. Air India has been in the news recently for failing to comply with guidelines for max hours and rest periods.

How did you manage to track this scammer's location?

I think you should tell us where you got that image from.

Now that would make a lot of sense. So the aim is to corrupt AI into feeding suckers scam phone numbers. Brilliant!

Spade! with which Wilkinson hath tilled his lands, And shaped these pleasant walks by Emont's side, Thou art a tool of honour in my hands; I press thee, through the yielding soil, with pride. [continues] W. Wordsworth (yes, really). There is also apparently a poem, which I cannot trace titled: “Lines Written to a Friend on the Death of His Brother, Caused by a Railway Train Running over Him Whilst He Was in a State of Inebriation” , by one James Henry Powell. (There is or was an anthology of bad verse called "The Stuffed Owl", which we had in the family when I was growing up, bought and much chuckled over by my mother, who was an English teacher.)