KJW

Like anyone, all they can do is present their case. However, JWs do adjust their teachings according to new knowledge they discover.

No, I did mean indefinite article (which first century Greek did not have). The issue is whether an English translation of the Greek scriptures precisely describes the intention of the original writers. However, my knowledge is insufficient to continue this discussion.

I'm well out of my depth here, but according to my recollection of what my mother told me concerning a particular discussion she had in the field ministry (and verified by the internet for this post), the Greek language of the first century did not have an indefinite article, and this can impact how an English translation of the New Testament is interpreted. I should remark that JWs as an organisation are very much into scholarly analyses of the scriptures in the original language.

JWs do not believe in the Trinity. Jehovah, his son, the angels, the 144000 after they have died and are resurrected, Satan, and the demons are all spirit entities. However, it's not exactly clear to me what it means to be "anointed with holy spirit". I have no experience that I can call upon and have no recollection of anyone who actually partook in the bread and wine. But, when Jesus was baptized, God's spirit descended upon him "like a dove" (Matthew 3:16), and his memory of his prehuman life in heaven returns to him. I imagine that being "anointed with holy spirit" would be like being infused with a tiny bit of God's power.

According to Wikipedia, aniline is the preferred IUPAC name.

No. JWs (apart from the 144000) are not looking forward to going to heaven. They are looking forward to an everlasting life on a paradise earth after Armageddon. The 144000 who go to heaven already know who they are. They are the ones who partake in the bread and wine at the Memorial of Jesus’ death while everyone else passes these items from person to person without partaking in them. They know they are of the 144000 because they have been anointed with holy spirit. That is a personal thing between them and their god, and the organisation is not involved with this (the bread and wine are made available for anyone to partake). In case you're wondering, I grew up in a JW household.

WTF

What is this? It looks like an answer to a homework question that was not provided. It is my understanding that benzyl bromide undergoes nucleophilic substitution via a predominately SN2 mechanism. Although the benzyl carbocation is stabilised by the benzene ring, it is a primary carbocation, and the transition state of the SN2 mechanism is also stabilised by the benzene ring. Thus, the benzene ring enhances both the SN1 and the SN2 mechanisms without necessarily favouring the SN1 mechanism over the SN2 mechanism. However, the use of a polar protic solvent does enhance the SN1 mechanism relative to the SN2 mechanism, while the use of a polar aprotic solvent enhances the SN2 mechanism relative to the SN1 mechanism, so the particular reaction conditions may be significant to the relative contributions of the two mechanisms.

I assume the post is hidden rather than deleted. The error message speaks of permission, not topic not found. On another forum I visit, one can do a search for something in a hidden post, have the search result display with a link to the hidden post, but the post itself be denied due to lack of permission.

Today I saw a meme that said: "Live your life in such a way that if the escalator stops, you don't assume it's because people hate you."

That topic is on the Home page and the Mathematics page, but not on the Analysis and Calculus page (where it is directed on the Mathematics page).

I sometimes see posts on the Home page, but when I click on them, I'm told I don't have permission to view them.

While I do consider the consistency of reality to be a reasonable argument against solipsism, I see solipsism as impossible to disprove. However, I think the biggest problem solipsism has is that, if the mind is all there is, what is it that is supporting the mind? Also, like the notion of a simulated reality, I don't see a usefulness in the notion of solipsism.

Spoiler Alert! 1/3 For two children, the possibilities are, along with their probabilities: GG = 1/4 GB + BG = 1/2 BB = 1/4 But with GG excluded, the possibilities now are, along with their probabilities: GG = 0 GB + BG = 2/3 BB = 1/3

test before Spoiler Alert! test box test after

It would've been interesting if MythBusters had carried out this modified version of the problem to see if people who think the outcomes are equally likely in the original 3-door problem still think the outcomes are equally likely in the 100-door version of the problem. I suspect that such people would still stay with their original choice because I don't think the obviousness of the 100-door problem would be apparent to those who do not understand the solution of the 3-door problem. On the other hand, if the host opened 98 doors, with your chosen door and say the 57th door left unopened, that might create a bit of suspicion, perhaps leading to the correct answer.

It's funny that you mention Deal or No Deal because I have often wondered if this has a Monty Hall problem aspect to it. I don't think it does actually. The Monty Hall problem is quite well known for its counterintuitive result. Even MythBusters had an episode that dealt with this problem.

What do you mean by this? When the contestant first chooses the door, there is a 1 in 3 chance that this door contains the prize, and a 2 in 3 chance that it doesn't contain the prize. When the host subsequently reveals what is behind one of the other doors, this does not in any way alter the probabilities of the contestant's original choice.

In relativity, everything has its own time. That is the main takeaway of the twin paradox. But whereas relativity seems to make use of already defined clocks, I think it is quantum mechanics that actually defines time (and space).

I'm currently watching a documentary series about how the universe works, and it says that it is crucially important to life for its planet to have a magnetic field. Without a magnetic field, the solar wind will strip away any atmosphere and volatile materials the planet may have. In the past, Mars was much more Earth-like, but when it lost its magnetic field, it became the desolate planet we see today.

A number of years ago, I simulated the second law of thermodynamics on an Excel spreadsheet. The system I simulated was very simple, intended to remove the complications associated with physics and chemistry. As a result of this simulation, it became clear to me that transition probabilities are not time symmetric. If one considers the reversible interconversion between two molecules, the rate constant of this reaction reverses sign under time reversal. This allows the description of the progress of the equilibration reaction to remain covariant with respect to time reversal, resolving an apparent incompatibility between the second law of thermodynamics and relativity. But transition probabilities are positive valued. Therefore, when the rate constant reverses sign under time reversal, it no longer corresponds to a transition probability. A process that obeys statistics in the forward time direction does not obey the same statistics or indeed any statistics in the reverse time direction.

What is the proportionality constant? And why is one extensive property (M) the exponential function of another extensive property (S)? It is my understanding that entropic theories of gravity have already been tested and failed.

White holes don't exist because black holes are formed from collapsing matter. The past singularity doesn't exist because that region is occupied by the collapsing matter. Only the future singularity exists.

If you have a recording of the episode, you could try Shazam.

IF you have a test for semiprime that is simpler than a test for prime, then multiplying the number by a prime would simplify the test for prime. But that's a big hypothetical IF. I don't think it's likely that such a test exists, and even if such a test does exist, I think it would be above the pay grade of both you and I to find it. Nevertheless, the idea that there might be a test of semiprimes that is simpler than a test of primes is actually not a bad idea.