1

Just Chat! / Re: Mathematics is a decent science.

« on: 19/06/2021 09:17:47 »

Mathematical proofs are absolute deductions from clearly stated axioms. So mathematical knowledge, in the form of standard formulae and solutions, grows by expansion with no culling.

Scientific proof is closer to "proof spirit" or the German Prufung - a test. Scientific knowledge is the residue of explanatory hypotheses that have not been disproved by experiment, so it grows almost by contraction towards "unified theories" and the like, and scientific data, the measurements that we use for engineering and for investigating the validity of our hypotheses, grows by expansion and refinement.

The bit in between, where we use known mathematics to model our observations and make predictions, is intellectually treacherous: as can be seen from many threads in this forum, it is tempting to believe that the model is the reality. The simplest case of the behavior of light, demonstrates that you sometimes need two very different models to predict the result of a single reality.   

2

Just Chat! / Re: Mathematics is a decent science.

« on: 17/06/2021 11:11:41 »

The principal language of science is mathematics. If this were a cricket forum, you wouldn't expect it to have a section on  English.

John and Jane do indeed have serious problems, but I don't know where to look for clinical guidance. Georg Cantor never really recovered.

3

The Environment / Re: 7.7 billion people and counting: what can we do about human over-population?

« on: 15/06/2021 21:19:35 »

from: alancalverd on 06/06/2021 15:52:49
Farm animals are not a natural part of the environment but entirely "man-made", and disturb the pre-agricultural equilibrium

Previously, wild animals did the same thing.

Not to the same extent.Wild herbivores are not bred to fatten quickly and their numbers are kept in check by wild carnivores. We have got rid of most of the latter and vastly increased the mass of herbivores, clearing forests and draining swamps in order to feed them.

However, in 2002, the United Nations FAO estimates that there were 19 billion chickens in the world, with China having the largest number, followed by the US, Indonesia, and Brazil. By this calculation, for every person in the world, there were three chickens. By 2009 the global chicken population was estimated to have climbed to 50 billion.

and 8000 years ago, there were just a few scrawny birds scratching about on forest floors. Add a billion sheep, a similar number of cows, and around 800,000,000 pigs, and you have a lot of man-made animals exhaling CO2 where once were trees, shrubs and tall grasses inhaling it.

Compare these numbers with 1.2  million wildebeeste and a maximum of about 5 million caribou, and you might get the point that the plant/animal mass ratio has changed rather sharply with the expansion of meat farming, and that ratio, along with burning both fossil and wood fuels, is what determines the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

The politically important point is that humans can live perfectly well - and many would argue better - without farming meat, so it is an expanding source of CO2 that is not essential to our standard of living, unlike burning fuel.

4

New Theories / Re: New theory of modern science

« on: 12/06/2021 23:14:37 »

A good friend and mathematician showed me, a few months before she died, a note that I had written 50 years previously: "physics is a trivial particularisation of mathematics". I still hold that to be true, provided that you interpret "trivial" in its mathematical sense.

The whole business of physics is to produce mathematical models of what happens, and for that we use a very small subset of mathematics, plus an awful lot of hard experimental work to make sure we know what we are talking about and check that the maths really does consolidate and predict the results of our observations.

So what? The complete works of Shakespeare is, mathematically speaking,  a trivial particularisation of the English language. And a  motor car is a really tiny application of physics and chemistry (itself a tiny subset of physics). To invert the question (the sort of thing scientists do), we can consider Shakespeare (Henry V, prologue)

Can this cockpit hold
The vasty fields of France? Or may we cram
Within this wooden O the very casques
That did affright the air at Agincourt?
O pardon, since a crookèd figure may
Attest in little place a million,
And let us, ciphers to this great account,
On your imaginary forces work.

Just because it's a tiny bit of a trivial application of an enormously (infinitely? more than that - we can distinguish several kinds if infinity....!) broad subject, doesn't make physics, chemistry or astronomy any less significant in our trivial  lives.  You can build a car with maybe a dozen spanners, and the catalogs list thousands of different  tools including spanners, but that doesn't mean the car is designed by spanner manufacturers, or is less useful than a horse. 
 

5

Just Chat! / Re: What is that Black String around peoples wrists?

« on: 08/06/2021 21:55:14 »

It means that the wearer thinks it is useful or beautiful, or has been told to wear it by someone who controls him.

6

Question of the Week / Re: QotW - 21.03.02 - Difference between rechargeable and normal batteries?

« on: 03/06/2021 23:31:14 »

The lower internal impedance of rechargeables is particularly important for power tools as it allows higher stall current and torque than can be achieved with the same size primary cell. Used with a "joule thief" inverter, you can also turn more of the theoretical stored energy into useful energy at constant voltage. 

Most primary cells can be recharged a few times by adding a bit of AC ripple to the charging voltage. It's a black art that has largely been superseded by efficient rechargeables but various gadgets for maintaining primary batteries were popular in the 1970s because 4 x 1.5V cells was cheaper, lighter and had better energy density and less standby leakage than 5 x 1.2 V NiCads in a walkie-talkie. 

7

The Environment / Re: Will there be another ice age?

« on: 02/06/2021 22:16:16 »

The history of global temperature over the last 500,000 years or so is a series of very rapid warmings followed by slow cooling, the whole cycle taking about 100,000 years. Right now we are in a particularly rapid warming so it is unlikely, based on past evidence, that there will be another ice age for at least 50,000 years.
 

8

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Is it possible for a psychoactive drug to take effect within seconds?

« on: 02/06/2021 16:27:05 »

Yes. Consider normal anesthetic procedure: "Please count down from ten" - very few patients get below five before joining the fairies.

9

Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution / Re: How can I keep my grass short?

« on: 01/06/2021 23:28:16 »

  I'm told that the neighbours will not tolerate looking at an unkempt garden with 4 foot grass.

And why should you tolerate nosy interfering neighbors? Do they criticise what you wear in the garden?
Plant a bamboo hedge. There are few things as effective as a bit of 8 foot grass to interrupt their view.

 

Is there anything (maybe Biological) that can help my neighbours worry less about my grass?   

A sexually transmitted disease, perhaps. Or an infestation of bed bugs. The combination of biological and psychological warfare can be very effective in keeping other people's noses out of your business.

Many years ago we received a trade sample crate of hundreds of very convincing plastic flowers. My mum planted them in snowdrifts, for just long enough to convince the neighbors that she had magical powers over nature. Serves the right for looking.

10

Geek Speak / Re: Do we have enough safeguards for the advancement of science?

« on: 01/06/2021 18:04:26 »

Not in general, but when said politicians enjoy massive public support to the extent of being able to raise an army, navy and air force in spite of a binding treaty, develop entirely new and indiscriminate ballistic (anti-civilian) weapons, invade every adjoining country, and support said military operation with food and machinery for 5 years, I think the "civilian" population must bear some of the blame, and in the case of a mechanised war, must expect to have their factories bombed. Bombing was more of a lottery than a science in the 1940s, so schools houses hospitals and all the other newsreel-fodder suffered too. The problem with civilian populations in wartime  is that until the good guys actually invade, dissenting minorities are going to get lynched by the majority or bombed by the enemy, so pretty well everyone becomes complicit if they want to eat.   

The object of education is to avoid the student having to find things out for himself. One would hope that future populations would consider the destruction of German Italian and Japanese cities as  a sufficient lesson not to be repeated.

11

Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution / Re: How can I keep my grass short?

« on: 01/06/2021 00:19:06 »

Rabbits are less messy than cows and don't completely destroy the lawn, but I would recommend a radically different approach - mental mowing.

The Boss sees it as an unending chore, fighting back the inevitable green tsunami which was there before us and will not just outlive us but even use us as nutrient as it grows on our graves, so what is the bloody point.....

I on the other hand imagine that I am preparing Twickenham, Wembley, Wimbledon, St Andrews or Lord's (depending on the length of the cut). Who knows, with a bit of practice I might even be talent-spotted and get to do that final cut cheered on by an expectant crowd.... On a dry winter night I might creep out and make a runway for SoE to insert another agent - it's even more fun to mow in the dark!

If you don't enjoy sport or have a taste for guerrilla warfare, sprinkle the grass with gin, so it comes up "half cut".

12

Geek Speak / Re: Do we have enough safeguards for the advancement of science?

« on: 31/05/2021 23:32:05 »

They won the day when they were given a democratic mandate to rule Germany. I don't think the Nuremberg Rallies were faked. It was civilians who collaborated to identify those sent to concentration camps and murdered. It was civilians that built the camps and drove the trains. 5,000,000 civilians joined the Hitler Jugend, presumably encouraged by 10,000,000 parents and as many grandparents. By obliterating cities and occupying Germany for 50 years, it is to be hoped that the Allies will have taught all civilians everywhere that such behavior is not tolerable.

The infection lingers in a few places, but there can be no shame attached to destroying its largest tumor. In surgery and radiotherapy there is an inevitable  "zone of regret" around the target, but it's better for the whole patient to kill a few healthy cells than to allow the cancer to regrow. 

13

New Theories / Re: Is this the new model of the Universe?

« on: 31/05/2021 16:28:44 »

Beware - anyone who implies "light years" is a measure of time plainly doesn't understand cosmology. Best not to advertise the fact.

There have been grumbles. You would do well to moderate your posts so I don't have to.

14

Geek Speak / Re: Do we have enough safeguards for the advancement of science?

« on: 31/05/2021 00:13:14 »

Is something like this happening in Physics, where "Relativity" and "Quantum Theory" have become almost "Religious Beliefs", which any aspiring physicist is required to accept?

Absolutely not. The consequences of relativity and quantum mechanics are applied and critically tested every day. People may be skeptical if you report a shift in a well-known spectral line or a massive particle travelling faster than c, but rather than burn you as a heretic or worship you as a deity, your critics will try to repeat the experiment.

Physics is nothing more or less than the business of building mathematical models of what happens. If the model doesn't usefully describe and predict, it's wrong.

15

Geek Speak / Re: Do we have enough safeguards for the advancement of science?

« on: 29/05/2021 16:59:22 »

We need only look at historical examples like the Stanford Prison experiment to see where things can go wrong if you are driven by scientific curiosity

An experiment that demonstrates a fundamental problem with human behavior cannot be considered "wrong" if it informs us of the dangers of granting authority without responsibility and accountability.  The object of scientific curiosity was to see how quickly and how badly things go wrong.

16

COVID-19 / Re: Can we get herd immunity?

« on: 25/05/2021 23:40:26 »

Excessive use of medications & steroids are already causing complications such as mucormycosis.
Black fungus, White fungus, shot up diabetes, increased heart attacks, brain fog etc etc.
👎

And an increase of life expectancy of 85 days per year since 1930, leading to an increase in the diseases of old age such as those you have listed.

17

COVID-19 / Re: Can we get herd immunity?

« on: 25/05/2021 17:53:51 »

Two different interpretations of herd immunity.

I would distinguish between the survivor population as a herd of immunes, i.e. a subspecies with inherent and hertiable immunity or tolerance, and a population of "normals" who have simply survived but do not possess heritable immunity.

Problem is that the wild carriers of COVID seem to be in the first category, and human survivors mostly in the second, larger but much less robust category. So as long as there is a wild pool of infection, we need to retain active protection.

Allowing the lazy journalese of "voted for Boris", I wonder if "voting for Jeremy" would have been any better. The Labour Party under JC couldn't agree to implement the result of a referendum without having another one, and the man himself, having campaigned to put his finger on the nuclear button, couldn't say whether he would press it or scrap it. Faced with a COVID epidemic, I'm sure the front bench would still be arguing about whether it was inherently discriminatory, was it permissible to suggest it originated in a socialist utopia, or should known terrorists be vaccinated before appearing on a public platform with The Leader. The choice seems to be between corrupt incompetence and prejudiced indecisiveness.

18

The Environment / Re: 7.7 billion people and counting: what can we do about human over-population?

« on: 24/05/2021 22:25:15 »

No-one can stop you committing voluntary euthanasia, if you want to do it.

True in my case and right now, but the perverts who sell religion have continually prevented Parliament from decriminalising assisted suicide, so causing unlimited pain and suffering to those who want to end their lives but are too crippled or institutionally restricted to kill themselves.

I'm happy to be counselled. Indeed I've been a counsellor for those contemplating suicide, and never lost a client. But stopping anyone from ending his own intractable and inevitable suffering simply because you like to interfere in other people's lives is pernicious, officious and vicious, and prosecuting those who help is utterly inhumane.

There's no justification for throwing in your towel prematurely.

There's every justification for throwing in the towel when you are getting beaten to a pulp with no hope of recovery.

Don't quit too soon.

Rubbish. A successful gambler quits when he is winning. Only a fool chases his losses.

My curse is sincere. May the parasites who preach Hell and Damnation to the suffering, experience it.

19

COVID-19 / Re: Can we get herd immunity?

« on: 24/05/2021 15:29:45 »

Yes and yes, because herd immunity isn't the same as inherent tolerance or immunity. If 80% of the population is immune through vaccination or prior infection, the probability of anyone else being infected becomes very small (herd immunity) but those that are infected can indeed breed mutants.

20

The Environment / Re: 7.7 billion people and counting: what can we do about human over-population?

« on: 24/05/2021 12:15:39 »

I see from your profile that you are 79. Very generous of you.

But at the tender age of 76 I have paid a lot of tax in the hope that the NHS will provide a full cradle-to-grave service.

I distinguish between extending life and extending healthy life. The former is prohibited by the second half of the Hippocratic Oath "....nor strive officiously to sustain life...." but religious perverts keep objecting to any law that would allow a sane man to avoid pointless and endless pain and suffering if he can't actually top himself, so doctors have to resort to criminal neglect (known as the Liverpool Pathway) instead.

Having swapped defective products for a free hip and two good lenses, I intend to continue flying around the world doing  good for profit for as long as I am able, and hope to end up in a civilised State that permits euthanasia when it becomes unbearable to continue and no further maintenance or remedial work is possible. If I go on for another 25 years, it will be a Good Thing and no more than I have paid for.

I take this opportunity to wish a slow and painful death followed by an eternity in Hell on all those who oppose voluntary euthanasia. I understand that is the correct form for a class curse, and I bestow it with all my heart.