LaurieAG

The entire article goes down to where it says "Posted 25 Aug 2021, updated 25 Aug 2021". Below this are Related Stories so you may have confused the sub headings in the article as these. Read the article down to the sub heading "Snow on central Tablelands" below to find the quote as it succinctly explains this anomaly. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-25/bom-says-weather-bomb-unlilkely-to-go-off/100403638 Please read the article and note that it was posted on the Wednesday, refers to the weather on Tuesday (yesterday in the article) and states that the Official maximum temperature for Tuesday was that recorded at 9:00am on Wednesday (today in the article) so Tuesday's official maximum temperature was the highest recorded temperature between 9:00am Tuesday morning and 9:00am Wednesday Morning. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-25/bom-says-weather-bomb-unlilkely-to-go-off/100403638 The BOM disagrees. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/cdo/about/airtemp-measure.shtml

This was at the beginning of my post. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-25/bom-says-weather-bomb-unlilkely-to-go-off/100403638 When you use official temperatures for a day, that omit the first 9 hours of the day, and instead use the 9 hours from the next day you get situations like the one described by the ABC above where official maximums are higher than the actual maximum for the day. This will not impact official maximums if the temperature in the next 9 hours of the next day is below the maximum on the day. I suppose it is some sort of pre electronic anachronism from when people would have had to get up at midnight to take the readings. I'm glad they are doing it now, especially after the 2004 official report made after the Canberra bushfires highlighted the lack of effective forest management practices in this respect. Obviously the policy of just "putting out fires" as they occur, adopted by all the different governments until a couple of years ago, just causes untold damage to people, property and livestock.

Beecee, on Thursday the Al Jazeera weather man said that the 11.5 degrees Celsius recorded in Sydney was the second coolest maximum there in the past quarter century while the ABC article on Wednesday said it was the coldest maximum daily temperature since 1984. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-25/bom-says-weather-bomb-unlilkely-to-go-off/100403638 I am not saying that man made climate change/global warming is not occurring but am saying that official temperatures that can be 1.2 degrees Celsius above the actual daily maximum temperature are evidence of a systematic bias that could cause problems with rates of change calculations. Incidentally, I was looking for rainfall results in Greenland due to recent reports of record rainfall there and could not find any actual records apart from one site where the details for the 3 days this month were blanked out. I noticed that they also reported their temperatures and rainfall to 9:00am their time so I assume the bias against lower maximums referred to above would be common around the world in similar circumstances to those in Australia. The reason I was looking for the actual rainfalls is because the articles describing this event only talked about 7 billion tonnes of rain in 3 days. So I decided to calculate the average rainfall in millimeters per square meter. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data-services/content/faqs-elements.html 3 day rainfall = 7,000,000,000 tonnes with 1,000 kilograms per tonne As the Greenland ice sheet size is slightly larger than Greenland itself I used that. Area of rainfall = 1,710,000 square kilometers with 1,000,000 square meters per square kilometer As 1 kilogram is the weight of 1 liter of water and 1 liter of water is equivalent to 1 mm of rainfall for a square meter the calculation is simple. (7,000,000,000 x 1000)/(1,710,000 x 1,000,000) = 4.094 kilograms/meter or 4.094 mm of rainfall in 3 days averaged for every meter of the Greenland ice sheet. I understand the point being made in the articles although Crawford Point had 14mm in 2.5 days (image in link below) so the rainfall must have varied quite a bit over the entire ice sheet if the average total rainfall for the 3 days was around 4.0 mm. http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/2021/08/rain-at-the-summit-of-greenland/

If you write things in terms of tau (2π) universally you just end up with numerology.

That's probably as good a criticism of the show, and it's lack of real balance, as you can get.

The difference between ALT and the other 3 is given in the paper. Essentially it uses a preferred (absolute) reference frame based on gravitational centers.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-15-dollars-amendment-fails-covid-relief-bill/

So the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer has nothing to do with the 'free' market and taxation systems? You are aware that the end 'user' pays the tax for the 'polluter'? Any system that was fair and equitable across all levels of materials, manufacturing, import/export and all nations involved would do, otherwise you have grey areas to exploit and massive profits to be made.

Have you considered that cynicism about the way the 'free' market operates is sufficient a reason to not support a tax that will most likely deliver a healthy profit and not provide the desired environmental outcome? There's not really much point if the user pays the full cost and businesses exploit countries, who are not part of the 'system', and pocket the difference.

The presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle of the common law. The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that the presumption of innocence imposes on the prosecution the burden of proving the charge and guarantees that no guilt can be presumed until the charge has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

It's not that clear cut from the Ipsos poll on November 18. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKBN27Y1AJ

If your summer was hot and humid you may have an uneven buildup of dust and moisture on your blades.

While I studied calculus at high school we didn't cover infinitesimals until university. https://www.math.wisc.edu/~keisler/calc.html

Dark matter and dark energy are most likely non local cosmological phenomena that arise because our current scientific method cannot conceive anything (balancing energy/mass) existing outside of the big bang/CMBR bubble and as a result looks solely for a solution inside that bubble while our local conception of the Milky Way and other galaxies don't have that restriction. This appears in the difference between the virial overdensity constant, Δc, in the universal ΛCDM model and that typically assumed locally for galaxies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virial_mass#Virial_radius

It's probably just due to the critical overdensity constant, Δc, being used for the dm halo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virial_mass#Virial_radius The Milky Way's dm halo radius is approximately 10 times the baryonic matter radius (according to Wikipedia) so the dm volume is approximately 1000 times that of the baryonic matter volume (1^3 vs 10^3). If we keep the dm to baryonic matter ratio the same, as that derived with the ΛCDM model from the PLANCK data, we get a critical dm overdensity in the Milky Way that is half the average dm overdensity (i.e. 200 in 1000 times the baryonic matter volume) compared with ΛCDM (i.e. 100 in only 500 times the baryonic matter volume)

A data structure is created in a database to store and query the data from a program in the most efficient/effective way. The structure of the data is modeled in various ways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_database One example of a programs data structure is an Entity Relationship diagram. There are many other ways to model data structures including Data Structure Diagrams, Data Flow Diagrams and NIAM for object oriented projects. The best method for modelling data structures depends on the nature of the data and many of the above methods can be used in conjunction with each other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity–relationship_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_structure_diagram https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-flow_diagram https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-role_modeling

It looks like the paper was written by a marketing person or somebody who doesn't know much about job matching systems. I designed a Competency Management System and developed software as a proof of concept in the mid 90's. I later worked for a company that provided Competency Based training services for the international mining industry and adapted the Competency Management System to extract data from the companies Competency database in the early 2000's. What they describe is a elementary job matching system (Figures 1 and 2 in the pdf) that only links one candidate to one job, which has no facilities to determine Training Needs Analysis or even produce a list of jobs that one candidate is competent for, and describe these deficiencies as a 'feature'.

It seems that there is a relationship between SR and QM that you may have overlooked. My original reference was "Relativistic QM uses Lorentz transformations which are also applicable to SR i.e. the calculus is the same." I came across this recent publication that highlights aspects of the historic and ongoing development of QM that give insights into to many of the weirdness issues and my concerns, as discussed in the original thread. Kronz, Fred and Lupher, Tracy, "Quantum Theory and Mathematical Rigor", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). My prior reference to SR was with respect to the diagram of an SR based "optical appearance" plot that shows both the straight line and spiral/wave nature of in-transit photons, emitted from rotating/orbiting sources to a relatively stationary observer over one complete rotation/orbit, that are present at the discrete time and location of the observation. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-nvd/ While QFT doesn't take gravity into account it is still an import part of QM. Further, the "Quantum Theory and Mathematical Rigor" article also includes references to QM that do not exclude "improper functions", particularly derivations based on the Dirac δ function such as rigged Hilbert spaces. The mathematically rigorous foundation is mainly with regards to the self-contradictory properties as identified by von Neumann above, so my original point about "improper integrals" is valid on the higher structural level of symmetries. As I have said before on other threads, IMO these issues and the 2*pi matter ratio artifact only impact the higher universal sum calculations and do not generally interfere with QM below this level of abstraction.

So the only real repeatable aspect of dark matter is that (Universal dark matter + Universal ordinary matter)/(ordinary matter) = (28.5% + 4.82%)/4.82% = 2 * Pi +/- 1.1%, as calculated by LambdaCDM via both the WMAP and PLANCK data, but that is not weirdness? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_(spacecraft)#2013_data_release I agree entirely, it is the only non weird fact about universal dark matter that we know about with any certainty.

Corrections? The diagram I posted, that shows the two states of weirdness together in the one model, i.e. the consolidated spiral pathways of straight line in transit photons emitted from rotating/orbiting sources over time, is based on an SR 'optical appearance' plot not GR. Another weirdness is the difference between the reduced Compton wavelength (lambda_bar) used in quantum matter (LambdaCDM universal matter) and the standard Compton wavelength (lambda) used in calculating observed universal matter, which also equals 2*Pi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength#Distinction_between_reduced_and_non-reduced 2*Pi is not very far away regardless of the type of quantum weirdness.

Relativistic QM uses Lorentz transformations which are also applicable to SR i.e. the calculus is the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_in_quantum_mechanics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem

That was only the first part. If the observer is stationary relative to the center of rotation/orbit of the sources, the sources continue to rotate/orbit and emit for 1 complete rotation, and the photon path is not distorted or blocked, there will be a discrete spiral line of photons stretching from the observer to the emission source at the time and location of the observation. And the calculus it uses?

I suppose you could call it first degree Quantum weirdness when most people are aware that 1/ the photons/wavelengths that are emitted from all the rotating sources in the universe 2/ travel in straight lines from their emission point to the relatively stationary observer 3/ although they are not generally aware that the source and observer are connected by a discrete spiral photon/wavelength path at the time and point of observation, if the source is still rotating and emitting and the path has not been blocked or distorted along the way. The second degree of Quantum weirdness is that people who aren't aware of both the straight line and spiral paths of virtually all observed or in transit universal photons/wavelengths 1/ call the ratio of Total Calculated Universal Matter/Total Observed Visible Universal Matter numerology 2/ even though it equals 2*Pi +/- 1.1% for both the WMAP and PLANCK data using the Lambda CDM model. I also suppose it is a consequence of the symmetry of the calculus of improper power functions, as proved by Emmy Noether, where piecewise continuous integrals with limits from +infinity to -infinity (that don't converge), could be considered as valid improper power integrals, if they were considered a sub function of a higher level function of (at most) 1 rotation (i.e. 2*Pi). https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9807044v2

The latest data from John Hopkins shows the rate of Confirmed Infections/Recoveries to be 37.04% (Confirmed: 80,994, Deaths: 2760, Recovered: 30,000).