MigL

I don't think it gives the impetus to ISIS, rather to the Russians, to cement their control of the area. I wouldn't put it past V Putin to have suggested the move to D Trump as a means to deflect attention from his mounting domestic problems.

Regardless of what he actually said, the interpretation is of the intent, Stringy. Did he say 'stupid woman' as an identifier, or did he imply that she belongs to the stupid gender ? It is not as simple as someone slapping another person, where the action has intent and is wrong to all observers. This action has differing interpretations, even among members of this forum. Is someone going to declare themselves the arbitrer of correct behavior and say his own interpretation is the ONLY valid one ? Otherwise all we have is one group ( with one interpretation ) calling the other group ( with differing interpretation ) 'sexist'. I don't know much about J Corbyn ( as some others seem to ) but it seems like your politics is descending to American levels. Sorry mate !

And threatening nuclear war because the US is pulling out of treaties which the Russians have been ignoring for years. Yet we have so much disdain for our leaders ( some undoubtedly justified ) that a lot of us tend to believe this aggressive bully.

Sure. If I interpreted your above post as offensive, would that make it actually offensive, or would it simply mean that I have a problem with you and your post because of 'baggage' carried over from previous discussions ? Would that be right ? If you're going to base 'offensive behavior' on your interpretation of what someone said, you'd better make sure everyone interprets it the same way.

No, I wasn't suggesting that at all.

Using DrP's logic, NATO has been around more than twice as long as the EU and none of its member states have gone to war against each other. Should we let Russia join NATO ? The country that prompted the formation of NATO, to stop aggressive Russian expansion into Eastern Europe ( happened ) and Western Europe (nearly happened for 50 yrs of cold war ) Don't know if anyone noticed, but Russia has started expanding westward again. Ask any Ukranian.

When people interpret what others say, it also says a lot about them... Isn't that the bigger issue. These types of actions or words, are 'perceived 'wrongs', not intended wrongs. In this very discussion we have no idea as to the intent of the speaker, yet we have widely varying opinions by others ( including forum members ) as to what he meant, or they perceived him to mean. This perception may have nothing to do with any actual wrong, or intent, on the part of the speaker, but may be due to the 'baggage' we all carry with us that colors our perspective. If its good practice ( or behavior, or manners ) not to call someone stupid in public, isn't it also good practice not to jump to conclusions and to assume the worst about a person based on your interpretation of what he said. ( or even to get a lip reader to decode what he said privately, and expose it in the news )

Any physical or mental trait associated with a certain group will follow a Gaussian distribution ( bell shape ), with the 'normal' being the section between 5% and 95%. If you compare any specific trait between genders ( or even between what some call races ), you will find large and variable amounts of overlap between the two distributions. Say we are considering the trait of physical strength. There is a large overlap between the two distributions for males and females; some wimpy men are much weaker than a typical female, while some Russian female shot-putters are stronger than even football players, as examples. The 'normal' may almost completely overlap, but the extremes ( the 0-5% and 95 -100% ) will not. The two bell shapes are slightly ( or more, depending on trait under consideration ) offset. IE the differences between gender ( or the trait we call race ) are only manifest in the extremes.

I guess I'm sexist. ( I'm also a religious bigot because I tend not to swear with/at religious people ) Sometimes our 'plumbing' is a part of who we are, INow. Certainly not all that we are, but to a small but measurable extent,our plumbing determines levels of certain hormones which make us more temperamental and willing to take risks, or alternately, more caring and calm. I can be tolerant of other's self perception, but not willfully blind

Sorry, my mistake. I understood it to be an external optical drive, not a hard drive ( I was in a hurry ) External mechanical hard drives come in two types, 2.5 inch, which can be powered by a USB port as they require only 5V, and 3.5 inch which require both 5V and 12V, so an external 12V supply is mandatory. So, yeah, you'll need a 12V adapter at about 0.7 amp ( it just drives the motors, not the logic circuits ) Again sorry for my mistake; hope you didn't go out and buy a 5V adapter. Incidentally when I upgraded all my laptops to SSDs I put all their mechanical hard drives in external enclosures ( less than $10 apiece, SATA to USB3, from China, through EBay ). I now have 9 of them ranging in size from 500GB to 2TB. Plus 3 of the 3.5 inch externals ( all 2TB ) but I'll be damned if I can find the power adapters for them .

Most likely 5V, as it is an auxiliary power supply only, and USB is 5V. I have two similar units, and mini USB ( as opposed to micro ) can usually supply enough juice to operate. I don't even know where my auxiliary power units are; I don't think I've ever used them.

Your original post, Quiet, asked for REASONS to dismiss ( and also to keep ) the notion of the aether. You have been given plenty of reasons, and some of those developed historically. At first we had a model which relied on commonly held assumptions of what a wave needs to propagate. With J C Maxwell's and A Einstein's work, we were able to get rid of these 'assumptions' and simplify the model. And this new model has worked exceedingly well. Are you now saying you wish to discuss something else concerning the aether ?

Given that English is not your first language, some of the ideas I was trying to convey, might have gotten lost in translation. If you would require a 'substrate' or medium, for EM waves, you would need to model some pretty fantastic properties. One property is that, to support the highest speed possible for a disturbance travelling in it, it would need to exhibit extremely high ( near infinite ) stiffness. Stiffer than diamond, or even neutronium. The other property is that it needs to offer very little ( near zero ) resistance to objects travelling through it, or else Michelson-Morley would have detected something. These properties are at odds with each other. And since we have working models that DON'T require a 'substrate' or medium ( very extensively tested ), we choose to keep it simple, and cut away anything unneeded with Occam's razor. The aether 'substrate' or medium, is simply NOT needed

The aether was thought or assumed to be needed, because, up to that point in time, all classical wave motion had involved a medium. The medium is the 'thing' that waves for energy to translate. In the early years of the 20th century, models were created which didn't require a medium, for certain wave motions. Experiments were also done, which established that the then accepted model for the aether could not exist as such. the choices were, then, to keep the aether model, but modify it with such fantastical properties, that it could never be detected ( but you would still have a medium for all your waves ), or discard it completely, as the newly introduced models didn't require it. These newly introduced models have been extensively tested in the last century, and are in very good agreement with experiment. The aether has simply become superfluous; it is not needed. And the two principles ( there could be more ) that allow us to discard it are the KISS Principle and Occam's Razor.

IIRC Kaluza-Klein had no compactified dimensions. Sting or M theory's 10-11 dimensions can have the additional ones compactified as Calabi-Yau manifolds ( or not ).

Whatever you choose, I hope things work out well for you, Raider. All everyone here is telling you, is to keep all options available and don't close any doors. Finishing High School gives you many more options than not. Keep in mind that the yardstick you are using to measure your life's successes is short ( you're what, 17 yrs old ? ). I hope you have no regrets when that yardstick is 50 yrs long. ( unfortunately everyone has regrets; I don't regret not getting married, but I do regret not having kids )

We are in two differing frames of reference... You are looking at your school years as something to get through, to get to where you want to be. I look at them as some of the best years of my life, and they helped shape who I am today. Just something to consider.

This isn't the same advice you've gotten from the others... Stay in school and pursue the social life. Just don't go to extremes or get out of control. I miss my high school and University days. This past summer, we had our 40 year Gr.13 ( last year of high school in those days ) reunion, and it was great seeing all my old friends and catching up. The thing is, you can be approaching 60 ( like me ) and still get an education if you want it badly enough. But when you're approaching 60, you can't be young, no matter how badly you want it. Don't make the mistake of rushing your youth.

Contrary to popular belief, solids and liquids are compressible. Nowhere near the extent that gases can be, but still a measurable amount. A sound ( pressure wave ) is, after all, just a moving localized area of compression.

But that IS the way things already were, Moony. I'm OK with the change, as it does seem more inclusive to those wo don't identify as strictly M or F. But otherwise, nothing much has changed. My only point was that gender information is, sometimes, pertinent to a discussion. ( and you guys are also right, sometimes that information is misused )

Thanks for getting into the spirit of things, CharonY. It would be nice to have these kinds of discussions with people whose opinions I respect. Interested in being a History Expert ( as well as Mod ) ?

I don't think I should go on a rant with anyone. Frankly, I like myself better when I'm dealing with a woman than when dealing with other men. It isn't 'agreement' so much as a different approach. Men dealing with men invariably leads to a pi*sing contest, and no good ever comes of it. Other than Helen of Troy ( not really, just a plug for the History section ), how many wars have women started ?

Very recent history ( 50 yrs or so ) is generally covered by the Politics section. There might be a demarcation between ancient and post-Roman eras due to record ( or lack of ) keeping. But I would be more than happy with just one section. ( and I can drop out of the Historum forums , people are more personable here )

Maybe it's a generational thing, Phi. But I tend to be more respectful when dealing with a woman. I have previously gone off on a ( misguided ) rant about you, Phi. I would never do that with Hyper, but would encourage communication and clarification when in disagreement. I don't know if you've ever worked in an all male environment. I have. Guys tend to act like jerks, and invariably you find yourself drawn into it, and acting/talking totally boorish, unlike your usual self. But as soon as you have one woman in the workplace, all that is gone, and people are generally more respectful of each other. Isn't that one of the problems with forums ? People aren't talking face-to-face, and this 'distance' leads to more disrespectful behavior. The more 'human' you make yourself, and less a disembodied screen of text, the better chance you have of being respectful, and, being treated with respect.

So, if van Moltke had explicitly followed the Shleiffen plan during the German attack on Paris at the onset of WW1, and Germany had taken the Eastern Front in two weeks ( as Expected ). Then concentrated all her efforts on the Russian Front, the outcome would have been vastly different. A rebuke and penalties for the Serbians for the assassination of the Arch-Duke, and the retention by the Germans of Alsace and Lorraine, but not much more. On the other hand the future ramifications would have been vast... Lenin would not have been released to return to Russia, the Bolshevik revolution and the rise of Communism. Italy would have stayed out, or sided with the Germans, so no rise of Fascism and Mussolini. War reparations would not have forced hardships on Germany, so no rise of Nazis and Hitler. France would have not been devastated, as they had lost a war with Germany $0 yrs earlier. Austro-Hungarian Empire and Otoman Empire would have still crumbled ( they were already on their way out ) England would have stayed out and still rival Germany today economically. America would not have emerged on the world stage, and would perhaps, be less reluctant to involve itself intercontinentally. Would have been a vastly different 20th century. OH, I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT THIS WAS THE HISTORY SECTION.