MigL

As the memory and storage requirements are not excessive, I don't think the rquirements are based on the processing ability of newer processors, as that seems to have stalled, for intel at least, since about the Haswell architecture, 5 years ago. ( stopped the tic-tock strategy and can't seem to migrate to smaller scales, while AMD uses TSMC for fabbing ) The requrements seem to be driven by the presence of the Trusted Platfom Module and the presence of 'secure boot' in the BIOS/UEFI, and is an effort to combat ransomware, which seems to be a growing problem. If Microsoft goes ahead with this, it will benefit business users, but alienate all those home users who switched to Win 10, as they'll need to update their machines. So, mostly because MS can't be bothered to fix the problem in their software, they expect the general population to expend money upgrading what are essentially internet browsers, to the latest bells and whistles that Intel and AMD will glaldy provide. Once the complaints start, I see MS backing off, as they will not support two differing systems ( again ), and possibly do the hard work of introducing encryption in software, possibly even as a user toggled add-on, which can be 'switched off' f it impacts system performance too much. The problems all started when Bill started bringing strippers home to his pool, while Melinda was sleeping ... ( just joking, let the poor ( actually filthy rich ) guy have some fun 😁 )

How competitive ? Do you use a male fishfinder, the less accurate female fishfinder, or do you cheat and modify your male fishfinder to look like a female one ? ( I never miss an opportunity to hammer a point home, Zap 😄😄 ) I must admit, I ( and some others ) feel somewhat like J K Rawlings. Mentioning that, some of the steps being taken to ensure 'equality' for trans women are detrimental to the equalty of cis women, is immediately shouted down with accusations of transphobia. ( we never did discuss this, but it seems to tie in )

I live in Ontario, Canada, and I cannot count the number of fresh water lakes we have. You live in Iowa. Where the heck do you fish ? 🙂😃😆

Of course it's biased, INow; the article is written by a woman, who feels women are disadvantaged by that particular situation. Are you, a man, going to tell her she's wrong ? Are you going to tell her not to get so worked up, and go in the kitchen and bake something ? ( this comment is similar to what your comments about gay marriage dring to the discussion ) Even sports that require mostly co-ordination and not too much physical strength, have different accomodations for men and women. I played a round of golf this morning, and was reminded of the different tee-off for women. In 'our' haste to make things equitable for trans women, we are disadvantaging women ... again. And fishing might be a sport, Studiot, but it's not a competitive sport, where you have to compete against someone who may now be physiologically mostly male, but competing as a female

You keep throwing gay marriage, civil rights, universal healthcare, climate change, evolution, and other similar topics, into a discussion they have nothing to with. i thought you read all the posts; you must have missed this one I posted ... twice. Barbara Kay: Transgender weightlifter may expose the unfairness of trans athletes in Tokyo (msn.com) Or will you only accept it when someone does a peer reviewed study of it ?

What makes you think neutrinos will even interact with topological solitons ?

I have previously explained why this is not like gay marriage at all. Gay marriage doesn't disadvantage anyone. Trans women ( male to female ) disadvantage ciswomen in sporting events which are predominantly strength based. Pointing this fact out is not akin to being against gay marriage. And your statement to dismiss, or silence, the argument that cis-women are disadvantaged by trans-women ( in some respects ), is not something I would expect from you. edit: just put quotation marks around the quotes, and be done with it, JC Oh, and demerit points make for a poor choice of argument. Discussion, and cosideration of other's posts, is much preferred.

If you had stated that there are things we may possibly never know ( as exchemist stated in the post above yours ), like the color of aunt Mabel's socks, on a world, in a universe that existed 100 billion years before ours, this discussion would have ended 9 pages ago, as everyone would have agreed with you. But let us be clear, these are 'scientific' obstacles to our knowing; the fact that you chose to term it 'supernatural' ( among many other terms ) is what got under people's skin. This is a science forum; you'll have to excuse us for thinking like scientists.

There are unanswered questions ( paradoxes even ) in Physics today. Physics if far from done, and we have barely scratched the surface of the Physics of the universe. Arrogant people ( even scientists ) thought Physics was 'complete' over 100 years ago, then, Quantum Mechanics forced a new paradigm on the scientific community, and we realized how little we actually knew. When, and only when, we know ALL of the Physics of the universe, and there may still be unanswered questions, will I consider explanations that are 'beyond' science. But that's just me.

In the thread about the incompatibilities between GR and QM, Joigus makes some excellent points about how each model treats time ... "For starters, quantum mechanics makes time a very special parameter. You need a distinguished time that goes hand in hand with a so-called Hamiltonian of the system (the energy operator). This Hamiltonian is also the mathematical operation that embodies time translation for the system. GR, on the contrary, has no special time. There is no preferred coordinate system in GR. If you have no special time, you have no special Hamiltonian, which means you have no special time-updating law for the state." Wheeler-DeWitt, being the basis for LQG, probably treats time similarly to GR, and not a 'special' parameter.

I don't believe anyone has suggested that. Nor is there a problem with all sports, as sports which require co-ordination are not a problem ( tennis, golf, etc ), while those that require physical strength ( sprinting, weightlifting, shot put, etc ) are unfair to cisgender women. If those 6 trans athletes ( 😄 ) deserve a chance to fairly compete in sports, then so do the several billion women of the world.

You guys have spent pages aruing about each other's discussion styles, rather than addressing the question.

Well, if we both agree that there is a problem, but we're not willing to propose solutions, what exactly are we discussing, Zap ? And I will support that minority group also; I'm just not willing to do at the expense of supporting the women of the world. Thanks, Prometheus, I had forgotten CharonY's post.

Well, if we both agree that there is a problem, but we're not willing to propose solutions, what exactly are we discussing ?

Considering this ... Barbara Kay: Transgender weightlifter may expose the unfairness of trans athletes in Tokyo (msn.com) and not golf, what exactly do you propose to make it work ?

The essence of this debate seems to be... "Can science alone explain the existence and workings of the universe, or is something 'outside' of science needed ?" Holmes seems to think science alone cannot do it, and 'something else' is required. I happen to think science alone can, or will eventually, be sufficient. I'm struggling to figure out what some of the other members are proposing/opining.

Because cultural appropriation is frwned upon. Gender appropriation seems not to be.

Yes, I got the humor. And was trying to perpetuate it 🙂

Remember guys, this is a SCIENCE forum. Can we just stick to the science ?

This is certainly NOT like gay marriage. Gay marriage doesn't infringe on any one else's rights. As JC has repeatedly pointed out, Trans athletes infringe on women's rights to fair competition. And there have been realistic examples given, Swansont; I posted one myself. INow and Zapatos are willing to put the rights of those 6 people ( the number of trans athletes, he claims ) above the rights of more than 50% of Earth's population. So, are we again telling women they are not even second best to men, but actually also behind trans people ? And Dimreepr seems to think that the only benefit from a 'game' is learning that others can compete with unfair advantages, so there is no point in actually playing.

The differential equation discribes the general case ( all possible cases ), and as such, has no specific solution. Specific cases are solved by applying the relevant boundry conditions to simplify it, but some of those cases may still have no solution.

Hey, don't thow me under the bus 😄. For further info about symmetries, the intrinsic physical and mathematical fatures of a system, Holmes, you might want to look up Noether's theorem as it relates to continuous ( Lye groups ) and discrete (finite groups ) symmetries; These form the basis of our conservation ( and invariance ) laws. Symmetries can also be classified as global, such as the ones mentioned above, or local, which are the basis for gouge theories. One could argue that there are no 'rules, axioms or assumptions' in Physics, but these so called 'rules' simply follow from the way things are. ( do you consider this 'special pleading' also ? )

You ( and Holmes ) might want to read this Quantum field theory - Wikipedia It probably explains things better than I could. ( and saves me a lot of typing )

Seems the fight to fix perceived inequalities for trans people is more important than women's rights to equality. ( according to some virtue signaling people )