John Cuthber

"Is ingenious too strong a term?" yes

Toxicity- though it's hard to see the relevance in the context.

If wiser minds don't prevail and close the thread, I might respond when I have had a few drinks. I'm hoping it will make more sense then. Congratulations on timing this for Friday evening.

I don't think this is exactly a scientific review of the issue, but it does offer some explanations. What a drag it is getting old "Kids are different today, " I hear every mother say Mother needs something today to calm her down And though she's not really ill, there's a little yellow pill She goes running for the shelter of her mother's little helper And it helps her on her way, gets her through her busy day "Things are different today, " I hear every mother say Cooking fresh food for her husband's just a drag So she buys an instant cake, and she burns a frozen steak And goes running for the shelter of her mother's little helper And two help her on her way, get her through her busy day Doctor, please, some more of these Outside the door, she took four more What a drag it is getting old "Men just aren't the same today, " I hear every mother say They just don't appreciate that you get tired They're so hard to satisfy, you can tranquilize your mind So go running for the shelter of a mother's little helper And four help you through the night, help to minimize your plight Doctor, please, some more of these Outside the door, she took four more What a drag it is getting old "Life's just much too hard today, " I hear every mother say The pursuit of happiness just seems a bore And if you take more of those, you will get an overdose No more running for the shelter of a mother's little helper They just helped you on your way, through your busy dying day Hey

Could you expand on that- with real examples? Please take care to distinguish what the pollsters said from what the press and TV said about the pollsters' assessments.

This nonsense is old enough to have been parodied ages ago. There was a young man who said "God Must find it exceedingly odd To think that the tree Should continue to be When there's no one about in the quad." Reply: "Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd; I am always about in the quad. And that's why the tree Will continue to be Since observed by, Yours faithfully, God.”

Anyone planning to build a school is designing it for people who are not born. What we have here is an example of religion crowding common sense out of someone's head.

They can; he did. And you will find the God Squad doing it a lot when they discuss abortion. So well over half don't think that. And, beware of selection bias.

Why do we condemn stepping on bugs but embrace sport fishing? I'm not sure we do. https://dilbert.com/strip/2001-02-16

It's a bit stupider than that: "Can [ any group] prove their beliefs?" No, -because if you could prove them they would be deductions or facts rather than "beliefs". To open a thread with a logical error like that, and then go on to make other daft claims as the OP has, doesn't bode well.

You seem to have that the wrong way round. The wealthy don't need to fear the future, but the poor do.

It is obvious that the original nothing has gone off to dance on the head of a pin.

That's good. Now have a go at fixing the other problem which I highlighted: And yet, at least in most people's opinion, it still is beautiful. So your assertion is nonsense. I know what a rainbow is, and how it works. But if someone tells me there's a rainbow outside, I'm very likely to go to the window and admire it, because it's pretty. Since rainbows are beautiful, it is clear that nothing has proved that they aren't. So, explaining rainbows doesn't prove what you said it does. So you are wrong. Is there any reason why I should read anything else you say?

Let's face it, when I said "If we expect 540 nm radiation", I was being ironic. We don't expect that. Partly because, if we did,we should expect it from any electron in a strong em field, and falling under gravity- for example, in a dropped sandwich. His claim is as plausible as if he said we ought to see a sandwich light up before it hits the floor.

I know that the model of an atom as "electrons orbiting a nucleus" is ... unhelpful, but the fundamental point is still there. The electrons of an atom must be doing something; we know that there are interesting effects like the colour of gold and the melting point of mercury- which arise from the relativistic effects of electrons. So there is some significant similarity between the electrons in an atom, and those in an accelerator. If we expect 540 nm radiation from the electrons in an accelerator interacting with gravity, why don't we expect some similar outcome from the electrons in a dropped sandwich? Ask the guy who pays the electricity bill for the synchrotron.

https://xkcd.com/285/ Ad yet, at least in most people's opinion, it still is beautiful. So your assertion is nonsense.

The trouble is that you don't get to choose either/ or. The neutrino detector emission is broad band, so your idea doesn't work. There are plenty of occasions where a narrow band detector is useful. But in many, perhaps most, of those, it's useful to be able to tune the detector. That's easy if the frequency selective element- perhaps something as simple as coloured glass- can be changed, but it's tricky if you have to change the whole detector. So, yes, if you were looking at something like LIGO where the bandwidth is narrow, that's great. But they aren't short of sensitivity (on that count) If they were, they could get a brighter laser. There will be applications, but it's never going to be as useful as a simple photocathode, nor as cheap.

Does your "position" a lab tech allow you to redistill IPA? It's likely that the manufacturer of the equipment put some time and thought into deciding what disinfectant to use. If their answer was isopropanol then its unlikely that you will come up with a better option.

The state of the art is that photocathode quantum efficiencies are typically about 10% to 30% (Lower figures for IR sensors, higher ones at visible and UV wavelengths). https://www.rp-photonics.com/photocathodes.html So there's a limit to how much better you can get. You certainly won't do better than a 10 fold improvement. On the other hand, by selecting a resonant wavelength, you must de-select the other wavelengths. And since, for many applications, it's better to have a flat frequency response tan a peaked one, I'm not sure this idea is going anywhere.

Except that you cut out the bit that shows that there is an effect on children born to older mothers which is not chromosomal. And the "meaningful" bit of your sentence was the bit that elicited this response If I was in your position, I'd stop digging.

My actual post, part of which you have snipped out of the whole, thereby altering its meaning, included this And that's probably not chromosomal.

I wish I had been drinking milk. Whisky really stings. That depends on perspective. For example, Down Syndrome is more likely in the children of older mothers. Most people would say it's a health issue. It is absurd to ignore it . But there's also an increase in cardiovascular problems in children of older mothers. It may or may not be chromosomal but it's certainly an issue. https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/JP275472

LOL Apart from island states, almost all national borders are arbitrary.

No, it is not.

There can only be something like 21 million bitcoins. Of those nearly all (about 18 million) have been "minted". So the idea that people will continue to spend additional resources after they are all made just shows a total failure to understand the way things work. Not much point continuing until the OP learns what he's talking about.