studiot

Thank you, but you don't need need a Markov , or any other, chain to state the probability of a single event. However you do need to state unequivocally what you mean by the probability of event E is, for the three cases P(E) = 0 P() = 1 0 < P(E) < 1 since depending upon the type of classic probability you are using these cases, at least, will be different.

Possibly the best council in the whole bible. Yet not something cannot be appreciated by the non religeous or that even needs religeon. Interestingly the sermon on the mount was almost word for word the same as the teaching by Loa Tsu in the tai ching many years beofre.

swansont has already asked for examples and so I am asking for them as well. At the moment you are just piling generality upon generalitywithout the detailed support these claims require. I would have thought it would have been wise to start with a statement of which of the the three classic types of probability, as taught for UK state school exams, you are referring to and also giving a specific example from QM that runs contrary to it or them.

I wonder what sort of AI might have been involved this this 1000 time overcharging BBC NewsWoman charged £4,586 for two-hour car park stay in SloughIt took three weeks for the mum to receive a refund for the accidental overcharge. I note that the human organisation failed to correct the error promptly until pushed by the BBC.

New stuff to me. +1 One thing about the Bible is that you always learn something new everytime your ead it in the way I suggested

Well if it is one idea, it rather depends which science it appertains to. Some science such as Astrophysics have little or no meaning without maths. In some other sciences such as geology you can establish a whole lot without mathematics. One man's meat is literally another's poison.

If neither of you are scientific persons how do you know this idea is scientific ? Since you have just joined, you (or your 'friend') may not realise that members may only have one account by the rules.

You are doing exactly what I recommend. Trying to pick the bones of the matter out of several mixed up reports, +1

I am sure that chinese medicine has worthwhile things to teach western medicine, but I am equally surel that his works the other way round as well, ie western medicine has things to teach chinese medicine. From your posts to date you are proposing a 'one size fits all' solution whereas whereas one fact that western medicine has learned is outstanding. There are a range of responses to any treatment (including no treatment) covering the range from absolute success to abyssmal failure. What is wrong with lactulose ?

That’s why I put “map cleanly,” I’m acknowledging their existence in America, but it was never whole heartedly supported by the American public in the same fashion it was in Nazi germany Actually you said none of which map cleanly so I got your meaning thank you that modern America and prewar Nazi Germany are not the same. But then again I said "history books" . Modern America is not History but the rise if Nazi Germany is so you completely missed my point and addressed something else. The important points I mentioned concern that rise, which is how they are connected to history. One of which is the training and military development they Germany received, before WW II , supporting the rise of another fascist dictator in Spain.

Perhaps you have different histoy books in the US ? You certainly missed important elements in your summary.

Yes why not ? But you have you use your intelligence, whether you consider it natural or god given, to asses what you find. For example I Kings VII 23 is in perfect harmony with Science, whereas Revelation 13 : 18 is just theatrical drama to create awe in the reader.

Thank you for answering, my questions are designed to be helpful. And although you have not quite hit the bullseye you are near the centre of the target. Good thinking +1 The simple reason is that no one, not just doctors etc had seen or known of or thought of a single cell until more than a thousand years after the bible was writtten, when microscopes were invented. So no writer could have written about them before that. Now this is important because it shows there is no conflict there between Science and the Bible. And my advice is to look for agreement and compatibility, not division and opposition. The Bible does not always agrees with itself but then again nor does Science always agree with itself either.

Remember what I said about reading the Bible in the light of what we now know today ? OK so here is your chance to do some critical thinking of your own. There are many references to plants and animals in the Bible and indeed in other ancient teachings. Today we know that plants and animals are made of many many many cells. We also know that there are simpler creatures that are made of only one cell. Why do you think the Bible has no references whatsoever to single cell creatures ? Please not I am not saying it is wrong. It is not wrong it just says nothing whatsoever about them.

Yes, but why only Mathematics ? +1 Surely this can be applied to most if not all sciences ? Also I suggest adding the words "and Philosophy of..........." as History by itself can become a boring list of facts it is the philosophy of a subject that history helps bring out.

Yes my bad. I cross posted with my edit when I realised.

I know what hot standby means, AGCR stations are the fastest fossil fuel stations for this. But battery based supply a la Shetland is even faster. The staines gravel is already pretty level. I do remember a proposal to move London airport to a more suitable site, with a proper transport link, on derelict land. Heathrow would have then been sold off and the state could have made a massive profit from the real estate value of the site, in the midst of London.

But there are (were) also arguments for placing the generating capacity near to coalfields, hence the Trent, Soar and Ouse (including Drax). The Wiki article also implicitly confirms my comment about fragmentation. And today we see flood warning is certain areas coupled with drought orders in others because the once unified water industry is now in the same boat fragmented and worse because we are without a national water grid.

I used that little word if. It is not my premise at all it was the government's excuse for the action described in the BBC article. I take your word for the 20% - 50 % spare capacity, as i said you are in a position to have better figures than I.

Heathrow excepted ?

Thanks. Indeed it also says

@baltoche Have you given up ? I would recommend a variation on the 4 terminal measurement technique https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-terminal_sensing The Wiki version is DC but you can replace the battery with an ac generator. A simple way to effect the measurent is to insert a non inductive high resistance (in comparison to the rail resistance you are measuring) in series with the source to cause it to be a constant current source. Measuring the voltage then give a direct readout of the resistance or impedance. In the days of vacuum tube meters this method was commonly used to achieve a linear resistance/ impedence scale.

No, you didn't answer my question.

Two comments about this. First we are supposed to have a national grid. Of course 'every region' brings with it the price of Thatcher's fragmentation. Second did I say network ? Networks can be fed from an extremity or from the middle or indeed from any or many points. For example power could have been diverted from Didcot B or Little Barford to Canterbury, distance just over 100 miles or even other closer stations. Then power from say Ratcliffe on Soar to these, again around 100 miles, but there are many more alternatives. Again only some of the alternatives would have been at full capacity.

Welcome and Thanks for reading my post. What do you want to discuss about it ? Please note as a new member you are limited to 5 posts in your first 24 hours. Posting is unlimited thereafter.