studiot

Didn't the authors pick the wrong geological period ? the Silurian was 425 MYA This is long before the Carboniferous period produced the coal and oil we find today. Isotopes are mentioned as possible tell-tales. We do that already to distinguish between volcanic eruptions and meteorite impacts with extra terrestrial irridium.

Where exactly did you state these numbers to be real numbers ? I replied almost immediately, requesting detail of your claim and noting that as it stood it did not match the absolute category of truth. To which you replied rather rudely and carried on in that vein subsequently.

Nor would I. Interesting example. +1 Ref: Number Line Unfortunately this is not proof of what you actually said. If you read the article you referred to it makes it clear that there are several number lines and you chose to pick numbers from the set of rational numbers Q. So you are referring to the Rational number line, not the Real number line that most of the article is about. Now Pi is, as I mentioned in my first response, not a rational number or a member of Q. So the mathematical expression your wrote, though well meant, is actually strictly meaningless. I know what you mean, but that is not enough for the title 'absolute' , which is not the famous engineering 'near enough is good enough'. For your further information Q is the simplest number system that is complete (which means there are no gaps). So there are no gaps to insert numbers like Pi or, as I also mentioned, the square root of 2 That is why these numbers are irrational. Q has the same property as R that between any pair of numbers there is an infinitude of further numbers of the set. You can chose a rational number as close as you like to any given one, but however close your get you can never close the difference. There will always be an infinitude of further rational numbers between your proposed one and the given one. Yet, as the ancient Greeks (Pythagoras) found out to their horror there are further numbers that require a different number system, hence we have the Real number system. So as I said your statement is true in the reals, but not the rationals.

Since you have made the claim, I am waiting for you to substantiate it in true SF fashion. Just saying ( to paraphrase) "It's true because I said so" is not enough.

Dicynodonts were just one of the many branches of synapsids, which is a more general classification that includes mammals. EBSCOAnapsids, Synapsids, and Diapsids | Zoology | Research St...<p>Anapsids, synapsids, and diapsids represent three key groups of amniotes, a class of vertebrates that evolved the amniotic egg around 310 million years ago during the Carboniferous Period. Anapsids

Since the times of the ancient Greeks schoolboys have been taught that neither Pi nor the square root of 2 are members of the rational number system. But if you couldn't be bothered to read my post, why reply ?

Brilliant +1 I think I indicated that there is more too it than that, the car industry being a good example of the effect I am talking about.

I don't know whether to say this as not a very good example or is a very good example The question is example of what ? It is true in some number systems but not in others, where pi may not even be defined. So how can it be absolute truth ?

In response to your questions please note that the dinosaurs' time on Earth spanned nearly three geological periods. This is compared to our time as a single thin line across the top of the diagram. Consequently they must have experienced many different environmental conditions before the Chicxulub extinction event. Prior to the rise of the dinosaurs the dominant land animals were reptiles called synapsids. These included rhino like vegetarians and sabre toothed tiger like meat eating predators. So pretty big creatures. The developed in the late Devonian and spread across the globe. Their heyday was in the Cretaceous when the atmouspheric carbon dioxide was at a maximum and enormous plants abounded. This all came to an abrupt end with the Permo-Triassic extinction, the greatest extinction event of all time, where (as far as we know) only one species of synapsid survived. This we called Lystrosaurus. Following the plate tectonic activity that caused the PT extinction an the synapsids did not recover well, leaving a space for diapsids to develop and evolve in the Triassic. These diapsids developed into the dinosaurs and eventually again spread over most of the globe. The dinosaur branch was totally wiped out, but some smaller (by comparison) diapsids (such as crocodiles) made it through to the present day. For information the mammals were a branch of the synapsids were present but lost out under the dinosaurs, but developed rapidly after the Chicxulub extinction as some survived.

How's this ? I would say that thought is a general term that relates to both voluntary and involuntary abstract processes in the brain, some useful some less so that may be constructed of several ideas. In this sense perhaps the relationship between truth and an fact is similar in that a truth may be constricted of several facts. For example It is a fact that hydrogen is the smallest atom. It is also a fact that hydrogen is the 'lightest' atom. So it is true that hydrogen is both the smallest and lightest atom. You will have to ask @Gees about the rest of your post.

A further comment would be that technological innovations follow each other in a sensible sequence since they all require some part of previous innovations to be possible or accessible. Some of these innovations brought great benefits, some less so. The innovations that were affordable by the general population will show the greatest deflationary impact. Most of these were the result of mass production in some way. There has been a succession of such examples before and as the Industrial Revolution developed. Semiconductor devices could not have occurred before we had reliable machinery to make them This machinery could not have occurred before we had reliable materials to make them of. Modern very high density electronics could not be manufactured without the sophisticated electronics to control these machines.

First to answer your question. Why am I talking about Harry Potter. Because it is my answer and amplification to another member's post. Yes this thread is about the difference between truth and fact. And I have openly admitted that I do not know the difference nor has any responder provided any comprehensive and satisfactory answer. There have been many responses, and I have tried to address all of them. But many have also introduced other concepts some of which need setting aside from the main topic and perhaps even merit a thread of their own. What has emerged is that everyone seems to have their own version of this difference, but that everyone's personal difference excludes some or even all of another's version. Surely this can't be a totally satisfactory state of affairs. No I don't see 'lies' as a qualifier. I had tried to indicate that lies are one of several types of falsehood. Perhaps that was not clear enough. As regards your theatre comment, I suggest that whilst the technical world has its 'models' the arts world has its equivalents, a 'plot' being the literary equivalent. But in both cases the oft used expression "The map is not the territory" applies. A model, or a plot or an graphics outline, or a musical schema etc all have the same characteristic that they only embody part of what they are portraying more or less faithfully. Some models are more complete than others but; None of these can ever be an exact replica in all respects. In a way maybe a fact is a model of truth, but only part of it. Don't forget reflexes, which are actions without thought.

+1 Perhaps a small addition ? We don't really yet want to have a handle on the hidden costs.

Well I agree with swansont that technology improvements in the semiconductor industry has had a significant effect on relative values in our society. But npts2020 has hit the nail on the head with mass production, although it started 200 or even 2000 years before Henry Ford and each time around made a massive impact on society. +1 There have been other factors thoug, - wars, the throwaway society, pre semiconductor and even valve communications technology, electricity for example.

Whilst I was asleep during some ancient history, I was wide awake in English. Unlike many languages English distinguishes between 'Abstract' and 'Concrete' nouns, again underling its suitability as a language for Science. Abstract nouns includes your 'world of ideas'. Both types are regarded as 'real' . You need to add qualifying words of phrases to make finer distinctions, another capability English excels in. One such might be material v immaterial. Shadows are still very real, but immaterial. A concrete block is obviously real and material. One test I like is "Can the object affect the real world ?" as separate from abstract v concrete or material v immaterial or true v false. As regards your scientific question it is necessary to distinguish between action at a distance and instantaneous action at a distance. Noting first that 'action' has its standard English definition, not the specialist definition used in Mechanics, I would observe that the problem hasn't gone away. They were aware of it in Newton's time, but they pushed it into the long grass as intractable. In truth, all we have done with better experiments and measurements is to reduce the scale over which it might be observed, very dramatically. We too have brushed it under the carpet.

Obviously I was asleep during that history lesson so I had to look it up. Google has a different version of the story but I get the gist. The difference between Harry Potter and the Delphi Oracle is that users (not necessarily the prophesiers) believed the prophesies to be' true'. I can't think anyone believes Harry Potter to be 'true' except within the context of the books. Prophesies may be lies, deliberate untruths, fiction is generally known and recognised to be 'made up'. (I know that some call some fiction lies such as "The Man Who Never Was" in WWII a made up character the Allies knew to be untrue that deceived the Germans." But yes lies, pretence and deceit can also affect the real world around us, as noted.

This reference was much more interesting. Yet it still suffers from that all too human desire to classify and pigeonhole all things. As such it misses out on the fact that fiction can affect the real world about us. (My usual example of this is Harry Potter, though there are examples aplenty available.) This is partly why I commented that this thread is not about 'Real'. Another pair of words to be wary of in this context is material v immaterial.

Am I glad that I wasted no time reading any of the claptrap referred to in your reference or studying any of the terminology involved.

That would be me. If you are saying there are many beefs around the planning process I would agree wholeheartedly. The planning process in the UK is a joke, which is sad considering the importance of the subject. The comments by others about ulterior motives and/or disregards should be noted. No one however, seems to want to question the need for all these data centres. I see the situation as organisations wanting to secure their long term business prospects rather than satisfying a societal need. Once they have persuaded unwary lay users that they (the users) don't need to store their data locally they have a free ticket to long term business. Yet we are suffering more and more hacks, outages, and other nonsense due to outsourcing data storage and flinging it halfway round the globe and back, just to buy a cup of coffee. The latest insanity in the UK is that we are having digital telephones forced on us, using the already redundant 'information superhighway' (Fibre). With this invocation, writ large, After conversion you should (must ?) keep a fully charged mobile phone in case you need to make an emergency call in case of outages of the internet. I am seriously old fashioned in that I expect 'progress' to mean the user enjoys facilities she didn't have before, rather than looses them whilst paying higher prices to increase the profits of already over rich companies.

So far as I know, there are no quantities in Physics that can be expressed as a single number full stop. The nearest I can get would be 'count' , of which gamma may be considered an example. But of course 'count' by itself is only meaningful in Mathematics; in Physics it has to be a count of something. But everything is related to something else, even gamma is a 'count' of the ratio between two quantities of the same kind (velocities, which in turn are related to other quantities) Please speak for yourself and stop preaching. Scienceforums is not the place for that. If you wish to discuss Science please also stop replacing perfectly good definitions that everybody uses and understands with other words or phrases that confuse any issues you wish to discuss. You should also have realised from your previous posts here that members respond well to requests for clarification of terms which, after all, they are the experts in.

Nah yuh can clearly seethe coins in the cap. ( I took this picture on a street in Amsterdam a few years ago.)

Did someone mention busking and begging ?

The proposal for large monetary deposits is interesting. BBC NewsData centres could pay hundreds of millions in deposits f...The regulator said a fee of between £237,500 to £712,500 per megawatt should be charged for upcoming projects. This thread is to give an airing to the increasing tension between data centres and the wider public, society and infrastructure.

Sometimes absolute accuracy is possible. How many eggs are there in a half dozen box ?

Traditional Proverb