studiot

He said a lot about a lot of things so not until you tell us more specifically, no. Did you understand what I said about the difference between free and isolated and many forces ?

You obviously know more about flicker frequencies than I do. But yes, that is why I said a rosetta stone is needed. Something to tie distance along the sound track to time, such as a musical beat or in my case the engine rpm. The OP was wanting to analyse a sound track, but I can tell you more about the sf short story if you like. It has a very funny punchline, which you flicker frequency would be relevant to.

Noted, thanks. @Luc Turpin Since I will be in bed long before your 24 hours is up and you are lurking in the background here the thoughts of a Nobel Physics Laureate on the subject. He has a remarkable way of making things clear in plain English, picking out the important points. There are several new ideas that to think about. Please let us know if you understand what a differential equation is. You need to know what they are, not all the maths that goes with them.

Exactly, pushed down the line. But using the scientific definition of determined is complete in itself.

First a fact, then a staw poll of 1 my observations. It is known that the body does not respond directly to the environmental temperatureby feeling hot or cold. Don't forget that your temperature is regulated quite closely. The feeling of hot or cold is most closely related to the rate of heat loss (or gain) and therfore theefoort the body has to put in to counteract that to maintain its temperature. Having noted that fact, I have noticed a few things. In colder times, you do not need to lift the temperature much above ambient to fell warmer and much more comfortable. I to 2 dgrees is enough for this effect. I agree with your comment. My experience is that when the temperature dropped from 20 most people say it's getting sold and bump up the temperature more than the difference. After a period of acclimatisation they no longer do this until the pattern is repeated at 18, 16, 14, 12 etc, as the ambient steadily falls with the season. Yet I find lifting from 12 to 14, 14 to 16, 16 -18 easily enough. Secondly I find that people (myself included) suddenly say it is getting cold on a falling thermometer but are perfectly happy with their preferred temperature (be it 15, 16 , 18 or whatever) on a rising thermometer. This is consistent with the fact that heat loss determines our 'temperature' sense. I also think that raising the temperature 1 to 2 degress must lower the humidity a bit, even if it does not always show on my insensitive meter. Hopefully this is of some help

Yes I readily acknowledge your showing me the philosophical use of this term, in another thread. Thank you. However my point here was not the details of the scientific use but the fact that the philosophical use is open ended, whereas the scientific use has tightened things down to a complete and useful system. Is the Plato method any use in resolving the hidden variables issue in Bell's (or any other ) theorem ?

Are you still interested in your query ?

Thanks, I'll try to remember that. New fangled fonts are a nuisance like that. Your linked Plato article reminds me of the convex hull in a linear programming exercise.

I last studied comfort zones in environmental engineering in 1973 and have long since thrown all those old notes on the bonfire (to keep warm ?😀) I'm sure the graphs of comfort zones, plotted on temperature - Humidity charts are on the net nowadays. In the UK the Office, Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963 presribes a minimum work temperature of 16oC But 10oC is rather cold., so I do't remember if this temperature is covered. The current temperature in this home office room of mine is 14oC and the humidity is 73%. Since the outside temp was 1oC last night and has been 3oC all day, lifting it only 1 or 2 degrees certainly makes it fell better but doesn't really affect the RH meter much. I'm sure I have seen a more recent stress tesing reasearch, and I think it was from the University of Bristol. However BigG can only find this from November last year on the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63602501 I saw that programme as well. sorry about the rushed spelling.

Interesting you should raise this point. Within the last two days I posted a comment about under, over and critical determination in Science, in another thread. At the end I tried to use the @ function to alert you as I thought you might be interested. unfortunely the utterly stupid input editor would not accept you and generate the link so I don't know if you saw it. However the point is Thank you for telling us what philosophers mean by undertermination. Science and the Scientific Method (ie the subject of thsi trhead) has a quite different definition and usage.

That must depend upon why the humidity is as it is.

Sorry I don't understand the question. Nor do I understand why the OP, who I see has been back several times since I posted, has not responded.

I don't see how your post deserved a negative vote so I have reversed it. It was an unbiased factual report. Thank you for reporting the AI response, which seems to contain only generalities gleaned from advertising. I would trust it as far as a vehicle from a used car saleman.

?

Thank you, I know how sound systems work. Until the advent of digitisation, all the recording systems I know of have been transverse to the direction of travel of the recording medium, from soot on glass plates through impressions in wax cylinders to linear tracks on long pieces of paper to spiral tracks on disks. What I am trying to understand is what your question is. Do I understand that you wish to analyse this track to determine playing speed ? If the track was a piece of music, a musician would be able to determine the number of beats per minute for the piece. So if you played and timed it at any old speed, correcting it to the beat would do it for you. I am not a musician so would not be able to tell you if Fourier analysis would do this for you instead, however I have done FA for engine analysis achieving the same purpose. Effectively you need a Rosetta length embedded in the sound track that you can calibrate. By the way I once read a very amusing science fiction short story about aliens who did this, not for sound but for a film strip they found in the ruins of an old dead civilisation. They worked out that running the film through a suitable projector they created, would produce a 'movie'. But they didn't know how fast to run the film. That was when the fun started.

Sound waves are indeed longitudinal, but aren't the mechanical copies impressed on the medium transverse ?

I don't like the use of the word coercion because it is stronger than forced. My question was Rhetorical. Do you seriously believe there is only one unique use of the term free will employed ? On the face of it your definition sounds good but it is incomplete. Intentions and beliefs ? All of them all of the time ? Is free will a general state or doe it apply sometimes and not others ? No I was not starting at the beginning, but do I not have a point (that you ignored) ?

Wouldn't a counter example to this definition be someone at the beginning of a nuclear physics course saying I have free will to pass my exam ? She may be able to pass that exam at the end of the course, but at the beginning she can only wish.

Would you not say the term isolated is better than free ? A free body has a special significance in mechanics, that is usually associats with many forces acting on that body. If we want to say 'free of all imposed forces' (which is what I think you mean) physicists would say isolated. Would you not agree that if we are going to propose a unversal rule, like your original hypothesis, we must be able to apply it universally ? Even to systems that although we know of no actual instance, we would expect conform to all known laws ? So consider either a universe with only one single body in it or alternatively one single body so far from any other body that it may be considered isolated ? Can you describe the motion of such a body ?

Understanding "Free Will" ? If you are going to understand free will you need to start by realising that this is a compound statement with an inherent tension or partial contradiction. Furthermore if you are going to fully understand it you cannot pick and choose specific or particular definions alone. ~Fully automatically points to 'understanding' being a range rather than a single instance. We can then see that both free and will also have ranges of meaning rather than just one. Sometimes it is easier to define the negation or opposite of something and then say that the something is 'everything which is not the negation'. Working along these lines what is the opposite or negation of free will ? Do we negate one or both terms ? Opposites to free couls be 'forced', or 'constrained' , which are different. But 'will' implies a degree of forcing, therby opposing the idea of free. Constraints are weaker than forcing, to which there is no opposition. So we come to the idea that free will is anything within a set of constraints. Physics make considerable use of the idea of 'degrees of freedom'. On use of degrees of freedom is in making the distinction between a structure and a mechanism. Structures ( and indeed other systems) can also be what is known as overdetermined. Mechanisms are where a structure is underdetermined, so has one or more degrees of freedom, so is 'free' to take up a range of positions. Does the mechanism therefore possess 'free will ? Note for @Alkonoklazt Computer systems and programs also conform to this underdetermined/overdetermined/uniquely determined classification. Don't know why the @function is not working properly ?

Which would be incorrect so you do, in fact disagree with Newton. A body will continue in its state rest of uniform motion, in its right line, unless acted on by a force. Which boils down to And a change to its state of motion is defined as an acceleration, whether from rest or any form of actual motion, rectiliear or otherwise. Note carefully the difference between what is needed to effect a change of motion and what will happen if no force is applied. An associated question If a force is applied to a body will it necessarily change its state of rest or motion ?

Another well thought out, well balanced post. +1

To try something and find it doesn't work......................................That is adventurous. And if you then learn something like why it didn't work then it may have been worth it. To try the same thing again with the same result........................ is foolhardy. To try the same thing a third time.............................................. Now that is just plain stupid.

Note that since T = 2π√(m/k). the period also depends upon the mass of the lamp.