Jump to content

Area54

Senior Members
  • Posts

    1395
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Area54

  1. You seem to have missed my point. You indicated confusion, or uncertainty about pendulums, and left versus right. My observation - there are two kinds of people, those who understand the strength and weaknesses of dichotomies and those who don't - was intended to make an incisive point. Simplifying matters into an either-or choice can facilitate discussions; that is a strength of dichotomies. It can also mislead by over-simplifying and ignoring important collateral issues. And while I regret my message was not expressed clearly enough for you, I note that, as @dimreeprpoints out, you cannot reasonably deny the notion that some people may understand dichotomies and some may not. Perhaps you should re-read my post. These are the relevant words, with the key qualifier emboldened. "Something as complex as politics and government requires, in a democracy, to be simplified to the point where the majority of the electorate can understand the issues." Do you feel all people in a democracy are equally capable of understanding the complexities of government? Surely not? I've put the key words in your post in bold. Last time I looked at a pendulum, and all the many others time before then, the one distinguishing fearure of all of them was that they "went back and forth". As to accomplishing the same thing "with less expense and noise", I don't think I said anything that denied (or supported) that point of view. That would depend upon local, regional, national, continental and global concerns. It would depend upon past history, upon anticipated futures, upon current theories of government and of society. Surely you are aware of at least some of the positions adopted by the left, or the right, in your own context? Or, were you actually asking for a primer in basic (dare I say it?) political dichotomies? I'm sure people do ask what it means, from time to time. I've always thought the meaning clear and incisively delivered. Your first question in this quote does appear rhetorical. If it is not then a moment's reflection should provide you with the answer. If not, I'm here all week.
  2. There are two kinds of people: those who understand the strengths and weakbesses of dichotomies and those who don't. Something as complex as politics and government requires, in a democracy, to be simplified to the point where the majority of the electorate can understand the issues. In an adversarial form of government, such as that in the UK, the simplification falls naturally into identifying two sides. Left and right, conservative and liberal, for and against. The limitations of this approach are often apparent. I see little evidence that the "ultimate destination" lies any further ahead (for the most part) than the date of the next election. On the plus side, we may reflect on Churchill's words: "Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." The pendulum, representing the swing from left to right then back again, seems a pictorial way of reflecting the change of heart of a portion of the electorate when they realise the change didn't work out as they expected. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
  3. The blatant obfuscation and ambiguity in your posts points the troll detector in your direction. Those who wish to imply ethical failings in others have an obligation to be specifc and not adopt the pseudo-angst of an offended teen.
  4. You mention origami. There was an Institute of Origami in my home town, back in the 70s, but it folded.
  5. There seems to be an implicit suggestion in several posts that @WendyDarling is arguing in bad faith. Having read all the exchanges carefully it seems to me more a matter of lack of competence on the part of WendyDarling. There is an inability to offer clear definitions, to the extent that they seem to quite lack an understanding of the characteristics of definitions. Equally they appear to have a distorted picture of how science works and what some of its findings actually are. Despite their claim to be using logic their posts are replete with more wooly thinking than I've seen for a long time. It's a pity, because they might actually have something worthy of discussion, if only they could present it in a consistent and coherent way.
  6. Apology readily accepted. I found your post surprising, as it was quite out of character for you. Thanks.
  7. In the first example the author states "However there is too little information currently available to suggest that this site has any responsibility for the differential performance of skeletal muscles with age". I suggest that "differential performance" suggests a quantitative difference on some spectrum of performance. For example an aged muscle deliver 20% less power than a young muscle, or its twitch rate is reduced by 35%. A "different performance", in contrast, would suggest a qualitative difference. I know nothing about muscle physiology, so this example is by way of a guess - a qualitative difference might relate to appearance of different waste products. A similar argument seems applicable to the other examples. I offer this as a possible solution without being 100% convinced myself.
  8. OK. Thank you for the reply, though I could have done without the scathing sarcasm. I was interested in your comments and wanted to be sure I understood your thinking. Perhaps I'll take a remedial reading comprehension course.
  9. The article you have linked to is very poor quality. Why have you not at least gone to wikipedia, which is typically very reliable for basic facts like this? This would at least have answered half of your initial question. Since, I've now pointed you there I hope there is no harm in telling you what you will find. Proxima Centauri b and Proxima Centauri c are the names given to two planets that have been orbiting the star Proxima Centauri. @TheVathas not only given you hints to the second part of your question he has basically given you the answer - assuming you know basic trigonometry.
  10. My recollection is that research in the last decade has suggested the Earth may not be engulfed. This as a combination of two factors: the sun will not expand as much as earlier estimates suggested; Earth's orbit will increase slightly, as you noted for Mars, because of the reduced solar mass. I haven't located the relevant paper(s) yet, but will post if I can track it/them down.
  11. Would you restrict that to Piers? Or do you just see Jeremy as an outlier on a leftist spectrum? He was, after all generally consistent in his positions, which is not typically 'nuttish'.
  12. A small correction: I think you are recalling the Hungary vs. USSR match. The "blood in the water" being a reaction to the brutal suppression by the Soviets of the 1956 Hungarian uprising. On the main thrust of the topic, sport can definitly be a unifying force, but only amongst those inclinded to favour unification.
  13. Well, no. That is incorrect. I share @beecee 's hesitancy to say too much, since that would be providing an answer in the Homework section. beeceee gave a nice clue - that also references why your post is incorrect - when he noted the lower case 'b' and 'c'. They are used to indicate something rather specific and it isn't that Proxima Centauri is a double star.
  14. Excellent. May I count on your support for the small, oft excluded and, frankly, never even recognised group of Balding Britons with Bad Breath, Big Bellies and Boring Biographies?
  15. Keep in mind that lurkers read these threads also. They may well outnumber the participants, and even the non-participating members. The post was an opportunity to educate some of them.
  16. The search for evidence of life by Perseverance falls into two categories: From sedimentological studies identify environments that could have been habitable. For these instances: Use the onboard analytical equipment to search for biosignatures. Look for possible fossils - I have not yet tracked down the specs on the Perseverance camera system, but supecte detection would be imited to macrofossils. Cache promising samples for eventual return to Earth for comprehensive laboratory analysis Edit: Full camera specs in this paper. The relevant camera for this discussion is the Cachecam: "The Cachecam, a new camera type, will acquire images of Martian material inside the sampletubes during caching operations at a spatial scale of 12.5 microns/pixel."
  17. No problem at all. I'll transfer the blame to you. I wasn't aware I had called anyone out as a troll. Would you elaborate? Nor have I. I reached a provisional conclusion that the OP had a selfish attitude. I offered them two options, one hyperbole riddled instance where they proudly refused the vaccine and another where they did the socially responsible thing and took it. They (and you) appeared to miss that second option. I've reread my post several times and am comfortable that the option was clear unless one chose to be deflected by the hyperbole. Or, to put it another way, there was no insult.
  18. How do you define evil? Without knowing that, disection of your thesis is difficult. As @Bufofrogpoints out, evil is a human construct. Are you exploring the role of evil in human evolution only, or in all evolution? If all evolution, are you imagining organisms other than humans can practice evil?
  19. M.I.T. say he's not a scientist. Sheldon Cooper says he's not a scientist. That's good enough for me. It ought to be good enough for you.
  20. That was my impression. And not as amusing as some of the time wasters.
  21. If I aim a reply at a silly post, does the reply share the inconsequence of the post?
  22. All of my money is tied up in loose change!
  23. While this is true I doubt that the natural processes of weathering will be significantly affected by the tensional forces discussed in the paper. I gave some though to mentioning metasomatic and metamorphic changes, but could based on the abstract the authors do not appear to directly suggest those. I should expect enhanced metasomatism via increased micropores in a tensional environment. Enhanced metamorphism seems unlikely - perhaps @beeceecould say if the paper offers examples of such in the Turkish locations referenced.
  24. Surely the key word in @MigL's post is "typically"? He suggests, and I agreee, that typically an engineer applies known science. Applies is a key word in my sentence. Engineers are (typically) engaged in the application of principles. Scientists are (typically)engaged in the derivation of principles.
  25. You are mistaken. Scientists seek to gather knowledge. Engineers seek "build" things. I have worked with scientists and with engineers. I have worked as a scientist and as an engineer. The two minds sets are different. The methodologies are different. The aims are different. I repeat, you are mistaken.
×
×
  • 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.