MigL

I agree, but it does indicate that there are problems with the current rules. Just trying to 'slot' these extraordinary instances into the existing framework of rules won't work anymore. That is all some of us are asking for; reexamining the rules to give all competitors a fair shot.

Sure, but then I could say 'you were beat up by a girl, ha-ha'. Another example that shows there is a problem with the current system, and rather than waiting for problems to arise, clear rules should be IN PLACE, before they do. Rules governing Olympic runners send a disturbing message to female athletes, especially those who are Black (msn.com)

For future consideration ... 'You are 'gnorant' is ambiguous. 'You are ignorant of such-and-such a fact' is not. But certainly people should stop being so sensitive, and easily offended; this is a place to exchange opinions ( among other things ). As Prof. J Peterson says, when you have an opinion, you're bound to offend some people. ( the alternative is not to have an opinion, or be denied an opinion, which is much worse )

Who are you kidding, Swansont. You're nowhere near as hot as Sarah Connors, while handling a Franchi SPAS12 shotgun.

I'm sorry, I just had to give this a +1 Not that I approve of this type of discussion, but this is damned funny.

Did I miss anything ?

Odderon particle is the odd charge parity counterpart of the pomeron class of particles; postulated in the 60s and 70s to explain the rising cross-section of proton/proton soft collisions at high energies. I fail to see how you can have a 'visual' of that particle. Can you also visualize a proton, an electron, or a Higgs boson ?

The properties of the Higgs field were known more than 50 years ago, when P Higgs first postulated the Higgs mechanism to explain the masses of the W+/_ and Z bosons, which result from the symmetry breaking of the Electro-Weak force. The hi energies at which its bosonic field excitations ( Higgs boson ) become evident was always out of our reach, until the LHC was built. The Higgs scalar field is well known: we just needed to find its bosonic carrier particle, to verify it actually exists. So, what exactly do you mean by 'how the insides change' for a scalar field ?

Thanks INow. You're the bestest.

Spain is the same time zone as Italy, so 4:00 am ? Get some sleep, or you'll be grumpy in the morning.

Would it be possible to list the blog author along with the title on the index page ? I've been trying to find ( and struggle to read ) all of AJB's blog entries. The only clues are the words 'manifold' and 'bundle' in the title. Otherwise I have to click and open each and every one.

It's not too late to do some studying and learning. Before you get too deep into the mess you've presented.

Because no-one deserves to remain ignorant ... Enjoy. ( and because this thread is uickly developing into another 'Schroedinger's cat proves there is no God' thread that I don't want to participate in )

Other than Shania Twain, I've never heard anyone use those words either, Studiot. But she looked fantastic when she did ! And before this thread gets bogged down in arguments regarding fallacies, rather than the OP ... I'm saying that if a person who has a medical condition like extremely dry skin, and needs to soak in hydrating moisture all day, such that their skin is wrinkly like a 60 year old, decided he needed to compete against you in the over60 marathon and promptly left you 3 hours behind, you wouldn't think it was a fair race.

And, as for being "too stupid to see it" ... I'm no ggenius, but, speak for youself 😁 .

My choice of language is not as nuanced as yours, Zap; it has no hidden meanings. Considering yourself a woman , if you are born male, is not a life choice, but undergoing surgery and hormone treatment is. Doctors don't automatically do it; you have to decide and make the choice which affects your life. Hence life choice. And since the surgery and treatment is what we are examining with respect to gender segregated sporting competitions, I think my use was accurate. Being disabled is not a threshold requirement either. But participating in thrilling activities, like flying a plane, or competing in recreational sports is not an essential. If your livelyhood comes from a cprofessional sport, obviously that is a problem that needs fixing. ( I have said that before ) As for this business about outdated definitions of men and women, I note no-one has addressed why we now need 47 definitions ( and growing ) of differing gender/sexual orientations ... And I still fail to see how you guys can be so sensitive to the disadvantages faced by trans women in sporting competitions, yet completely ignore the disadvantages that puts cis women at in those same competitions. Is trans the flavor of the month for social justice warriors ? 😄😄😄 I'm joking, really !

Or, it simply means that, like the blind men in the parable, we have only probed objective reality with limited 'senses'. An example is probing the universe with EM radiation. Who knows what wonders we may uncover when we can harness neutrino emssion, gravitational wave, or even graviton emission astronomy ?

Retinas don't detach and flop up/down at angles which might extend your field of view in a particular direction. What usually happens is that the gelatinous substance in the back of the eye, 'srinks' as it dries with age, makes small tears in the retina, and the gelatinous fluid can get under it. A 'blister' of the retina forms and, if not corrected, scar tissue/ blood pools under it leading to loss of vision. In any case, you wouldn't be able to see around corners or through them, to view the top of your head or your chin.

It is not special, so sometimes it gets wiped out the week after it 'emerges'. But that is not the reason it continuosly 'emerges'. ... "Ian Malcolm: If there's one thing the history of evolution has taught us, it's that life will not be contained. Life breaks free, it expands to new territories, and crashes through barriers painfully, maybe even dangerously, but, uh, well, there it is. ... Ian Malcolm: Life will find a way." and I promise, that is the very last time I will ever quote Jeff Goldbloom.

Our perception of reality is subjective, of course. But an objective reality does exist. ( we are as in the Indian parable of the blind men describing the lephant by touching certain parts of it )

I am now going to go off on a tangent ... When you decide to have your gender reassigned from male to female, I'm sure it is explained to you that there are some things you previously did, that you won't be able to do anymore. Like peeing standing up ! What is this obsession we have that everyone should be able to do whatever they wish, no matter their life choices ? If it is an aspect of survival, like a crippled person entering a grocery store to buy food using a ramp, then we as a compassionate society need to make it happen. And certainly, if competition is your livelyhood then trans athletes need to be able to compete, but if it is just for fum ( or games for Dimreepr ) then that is not required and cannot be considered a 'human right'. I had the same problem as Studiot; always wanted to fly jets, yet my vision sucks. Is it a 'human right' that I be able to fly jets ? Or do I suck it up and live my life without that thrill ? Of course Zap. I consider myself 'compassionate'. But, as to wether it is a 'rght', human or otherwise, I'm not so sure.

Qualification thresholds would ensure equality ( or close to it ) of outcome. If the threshold is 10 second 100m, it would ensure every competitor ran 9.9 sec. and training, effort ( and steroids in Ben Johnson's case ) count for nothing. As studiot explained earlier, equality of outcome is NOT competition. Equality of opportunity is.

So you think our society has moved past where we need to define differences between men and women ? Yet are perfectly happy with the 47 'defined' genders, LGBQT+... FFS, how is that relevant ? Notice how my response above doesn't add much to the discussion ? ( this is a teaching moment ) I don't think they should be disadvantaged either. But the solution is never to hurt one group with the intent to better another. And if the intent is to minimize the harm, certainly you are harming fewer trans athletes than cis athletes, but like I previously stated, I don't have a simple solution.

While testosterone levels are of some benefit to classifications, basing weightlifting classes on the amount that can be pushed or pulled, or sprinting classes on how fast you can run, simply ensures everyone is equal and training/effort doesn't matter. I realize I've been complaining and offering little in terms of solutions, but it is a really complicated issue. It is not just testosterone that affects strength/speed performance; all sorts of other hormones control general differences between males and females ( like lean body mass, ribcage/lung capacity size in relation to body, ratio/location of 'fast twitch' and 'slow twitch' muscle cells, etc ). There is no simple solution. I just don't agree with disadvantaging one group ( cis women ) to equalize another ( trans women ). And no, I'm not going fishing with any of you guys !

actually, I don't fish. ( too boring ) So I got nothing to say.