MigL

What happens when that apple that you 'know' to be red ( Captain Kirk said so ), is blue shifted into the ultraviolet, or the infrared ? Can you still see the light, John ? Photons are still getting to you are they not ? But they are carrying information about the apple in another frame. Similarly, a gas arc can glow in the infrared or ultraviolet, can you still see the light ? Or are the photons just carrying information about temperature and composition ?

The OP says liberal views. To me that means liberal and conservative views. Certainly NOT Democrat and Republican views. There are plenty of threads about the sad state of American politics. Can we stick to the topic please ?

Seems you guys have 'US blinders' on... To the rest of the world liberals are not democrats and conservatives are not republicans. I would venture to say that Canadian or British conservatives are probably to the left of most US democrats. Its hard to have this discussion when the American 'standard' is applied to the rest of the world. ( Canada has no death penalty and even conservatives don't want it. But to answer Ten oz's question, maybe we can just maim them a little bit )

I also notice that the list isn't prioritized. Sometimes the biggest decision is the priority of these ideals/beliefs. For example, a country should take care of its weakest members ( no.1 ). Obviously the best way to do that is to make sure everyone has a job and is a productive member of society. But companies should also pay their employees a fair living wage ( no.6 ), so what do you do when another country has lower wages and your industries cannot compete on a world market ? Your choice is then, lose jobs ( as we've been doing since the 60s ) or introduce regulations and trade barriers. You clearly cannot have both and, as they say, 'the devil's in the details', and if you don't get the fine tuning right you make more problems than you solve. Liberals and conservatives ( NOT democrats and republicans ) sometimes have a difference of opinion as to the best 'split' in the above situation. Does that make either of them wrong ? Edit: Dimreepr just addressed this, also.

Well what do you know... I guess I'm a liberal. But, you know, when I list all the good conservative ideals, I value them also. What then, does that make me ? I like my politics 'a la carte' ? ( liberal/conservative not to be confused with democrat/republican )

Apparently, at one time, immigrants to the US were greeted by the inscription on the Statue of Liberty "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Even the ones from 'sh*thole' countries that had suffered famines and world wars. ( I believe D Trump's grandfather immigrated from Germany in the 1890s, and made his fortune building hotels/whorehouses during the Yukon rush ) Those immigrants in the late 19th century and early 20th century made America great, and, the economic powerhouse that it has been since. How can D Trump make America great again without a similar immigration strategy ? Times sure have changed.

Thanks Koti. Furyan5 may have taken this discussion a little too seriously. You gotta have some fun.

Would have to agree with iNow, diet is probably the primary factor, nothing to do with race. Ethnicity, on the other hand... Being of Italian descent, I notice my own BO changes if I eat too much garlic or preserved meats. I've noticed the same of Slavic people ( garlic and pickled foods ). X-posted with BeeCee.

Sooo. No-one liked my movie review ? ( sometimes we take ourselves too seriously )

Just because his discussion methods were a little unorthodox ( and a little rude ) doesn't make him wrong. And I will say again that most of this discussion is pointless ( but otherwise interesting ) as its mostly about semantics... But what our eyes 'see' or detect is the interaction of only certain frequencies of EM radiation with out detector cells. Why do some 'colors' appear brighter than others when there is no change in intensity of the EM radiation ? Why do we not see infrared/microwave radiation when every warm body is emitting it ( even in the dark BeeCee ) ? "Visible" light interacts with our receptor cells. "Invisible" light such as infrared or ultraviolet does not. In a Physics discussion 'light' is EM radiation, not a specific subset of the spectrum ( that's why there is a definition for 'visible' light ). So while you may be able to say you can 'see' visible light, you definitely cannot see 'invisible' light. Does that clear things up ?

I don't see how anyone can challenge evolution, especially in the winter when we all get colds and flu from mutated viruses, that the previous year's vaccine has no effect on. As to the original OP, and the chances of life arising by chance ( anywhere in the universe ), I will only quote Jeff Goldblum once in my life... "Life, uh, finds a way" from Jurassic Park

What ? No comments about my movie review ?

Sorry did not mean to tread on your toes, Stringy. But the tariff did force Bombardier to negotiate a 'free', 51% acquisition of the C series jets by Airbus. ( Airbus builds some jets in the US and can get around the tariffs ) It has made Airbus, the only winner in this situation, an even greater challenge to Boeing. With their ( and the State Department's ) bullying tactics, both Boeing and Bombardier ( and Canadian taxpayers ) have lost out. Now Boeing is trying a merger/acquisition with Embraer, so as to be able to compete with Airbus' more complete lineup. ( Brazilian government has already quashed that idea, and unwilling to give up control )

The information the violet photon carries, John, is not related to itself but to its last scattering, or, temperature of its emitter. The information itself is 'altered' in some situations. Light coming up out of a gravity well is red-shifted. The car's color doesn't change. The information getting to the detector ( eyes ) does. ( Wait a minute, is that argument in my favor, or against ? Damn, I hate this definition stuff. )

Now I know what 'tempest in a teapot' means. Was this story reported in Daily Mail ?

No different than the complaint filed by Boeing, a member of the most heavily Government subsidized industries ( defense ), which was 'rewarded' by the current Administration with a 300% tariff against the Canadian Bombardier C Series order by United Airlines, on the grounds of subsidization by the Canadian Government.

First rule of heat sinks... Highest thermal conductivity and largest possible surface area. And who builds their own flashlights ?

I really didn't think this would need an explanation... 'Seeing' is the brain's interpretation of information it gathers from certain detectors ( usually the eyes ). The detectors work by ( usually ) interacting with EM radiation. Whether something is 'visible' or 'invisible' depends on the ability of the information, the EM radiation, to get to the detectors, the eyes. This can be due to the path ( something may be in the way ). the intensity ( its too dark, I can't see anything ), or the type of information ( some animals can 'see' infrared, we cannot ). The point I'm trying to make is that light, or photons, are the information carriers. And while we 'see' by interacting with the information carriers, a photon itself cannot transmit any information about itself ( it would need to radiate light ) for us to be able to 'see' it. I.E. photons are invisible. everything else is semantics.

I dunno. Something positive instead of talking about D Trump ? And I may have liked Logan, but it was a depressing movie ( and screwed up timeline again ).

I wear one of my many watches at all times Studiot, and in the summertime the interaction of UV light from the sun with my skin forms, after a few days ( I'm Italian and tan easily ), an image of my watch on my wrist. You could say any interaction is an imaging, or 'seeing', albeit with different sensitivity and speed. On the other hand my left eye 'sees' perfectly well, and focuses an image on my retina and its detector rods and cones. However the information cannot get to my brain because glaucoma damaged my optic nerve; and I 'see' nothing. Maybe we need to define what visible and invisible means instead.

No Ten oz, no-one has a right to be racist, as that infringes on other's rights. Yet the fact remains that nearly half of the voters in the last election were dissatisfied with the way government functioned. Enough to vote in a 'wild card' like D Trump. If not educating some of that half ( and showing them the error of voting D Trump ) what do you propose ? Further alienating them with taunts of 'racist/bigot/ nazi' ? Taking away their vote ? Deporting them ? Or continuing on as before and hoping for a different outcome ?

No argument about D Trump, John. But I was talking about educating your fellow citizens, instead of calling THEM names.

Immigration will always be needed, as we don't reproduce enough to even replace our population. As a result, the average age is rising. We can either keep working into our 70s, or bring in young people from other countries, to work, pay taxes, and provide pensions for us old geezers ( no, I'm still working and not near retirement ). That being said, there are smart ways, and stupid ways of handling immigration. A smart way is consistent checks on all immigrants, not just specific countries, as undesirables can come from anywhere. a stupid way, is the revision of the rules according to different administrations as is happening now in the US. If the rules that determine immigration/admission are changed, there cannot be a change to the legality of your previous immigration status. You cannot change a law and retroactively prosecute people for previously legal things that they may have done.

If you look at amounts spent by country as a percentage of GDP on defense, the US is not the highest. If you only look at absolute values, the results are skewed because the US is an extremely rich country, and can spend ( and waste ) a lot of money. There are countries where defense spending has reached double digit % of GDP ( Saudi Arabia in 2014 ) And years where Russia's % GDP spending has been higher than the US. ( not that I'm defending the 'pork barrelling'; 2.2 bill dollars for ONE bomber ? ) ) A lot of valid points have been made regarding what's happened, and what needs to happen. Yet these are your fellow citizens who voted in the likes of D Trump, as is their right. Yet everytime discussion with a Republican comes up, the 'racist', 'fascist', 'white-supremacist' and 'nazi' labels start flying. It is not just the two parties that can't work together. it is even intelligent people like the members of this forum. Assuming that most people who vote Republican are either protecting their self interests ( those cannot be swayed ) or uneducated, afraid of changes, and feel their Government has failed them ( who can be swayed ); would it make sense to concentrate on the second group, to educate them, have a government that shows concern for them, and show them the error of their current ideology, instead of calling them names and blaming them for everything that's gone wrong ?

The earliest time we will ever be able to 'image' with EM radiation is approx. 300000 yrs after T=0. This is the CMB, before that photons had a very short MFP because they readily interacted with massive particles ( creation/annihilation ). However, if we can find a way to 'image' neutrinos, we may be able to get much closer to T=0, as they interact extremely weakly. And graviton imaging would get us to within the first second after T=0. ( don't know if that will ever be possible, but would that be close enough ? )