Genady

yes, because and that "something" remains regardless of my mind. The statement, has two parts. The first part refers to a "map maker", and the second part refers to the "territory".

The point I've agreed with, but not the point for which I've asked about evidence. That point, I still doubt about. Anyway, I've asked, if you have evidence, and you could simply say, no, it is my opinion, or something like that.

I did not agree with that statement as self-evident. I agreed with it because I've observed kids liking science demonstrations and asking questions. However, I don't personally know one case where they went on to become interested in science.

Can this latest exchange be split off this thread, please? I am asking as the OP of the thread and as one who is referred as "he" in this exchange. It is OT anyway, isn't it?

The only difference I see is a difference in the degree of abstraction. 7 refers to anything with a count of seven. Dog refers to something narrower. My dog, narrower. My dog now, ... Etc. Something happens in the outside world, and 7, dog, my dog, etc. are concepts we use to organize that stuff. They all exist only in our mind, and they all correspond to something in the outside world.

I need a clarification. Maybe, by example. Let's take number Pi. What is its "syllogic existence in hard memory technology"?

Obviously, we agree on this. Why they would be different? Why them being analytic would affect their sort of existence?

How come? Is 1+4 also another way to say 5? And also 20/4? Etc. They don't mean the same number. They mean that different operations give the same result.

Agree. For this statement, I will not ask for evidence. PS. I've replied before seeing you last statement. But have answered it anyway.

Yes. I think that such demonstration, as well as visiting art exhibits, music concerts, ballet performances, travel to different countries, etc., broaden their horizons. I don't think that they specifically increase their interest in science.

Do you have evidence to support this? No, it is referring to all light and to everything else.

The detected gravitational waves were produced when two stars, black holes or not, collided. The waves radiated from the collision area. They did not radiate from a black hole. After the collision process has ended and resulting black hole has settled, no gravitational waves come out of there.

I don't see why it is not a disorder. I don't see what being a disorder has to do with abuses which happen in all professions. I don't see what it has to do with "worthiness".

Gender dysphoria (GD) | Definition, History, Symptoms, Treatment, & Facts | Britannica:

Not that I know of. +1

Like any other mental disorder?

This little hospital has 16 rooms connected as shown in the picture. There is one patient in each room. The patients in the rooms 2 to 16 are bedridden, but the patient in room 1 is fine and ready to go home. This patient wants to meet every other patient once, and only once, and then to exit the hospital from the room 16, as shown. How can it be done?

Defined and realized are two different things. I am talking about realization, not about definition. My question was about mathematics. Things do not have measurable properties there. Let's take an example, the sum 2+3=5. It has part in your existence, it has no property to measure, it is absolute, sustainable, viable. It exists everywhere.

You mean about the time reversal? If so, yes. It is a universal causality relation between events.

Correct.

Here is how the masters explained it, from Misner, Thorne, Wheeler, Gravitation, p. 823. For clarification, r=0 is the BH center, r=2M is the BH event horizon.

After the first photon passes the vertical polarizer, the photons are not entangled anymore, and there is no further correlation between them regardless of what is done to any of them.

Right. I would put in a small print, "as long as we're talking about the black holes of classical general relativity". Consider this fact for example: the curvature is such that you would NEVER see anything falling into the black hole. You would see the things moving slower and slower and slower as they get closer and closer to the BH, never crossing the event horizon. Can the blanket demonstration demonstrate this?

So, you lie to poor children? 😄

On the #16 now. Most of the first third of the course, so far, is dedicated to questions and answers related to existence of God. This disappoints me.