Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
from the underneath side looking up, the scaffold spun clockwise.That would make sense. Most ropes of this sort are 3 strand with a right hand lay. This means that in construction the rope is tightened by twisting the end anticlockwise, so when it is stretched (as described by @Bored chemist ) it will untwist clockwise when viewed from below.
Perhaps you're still convinced that movement needs a time dimension to facilitate it but are unwilling to stand up for your conviction.That depends what you mean by dimension and what you mean by facilitate.
The idea that there is a past, present and future is speculation when all we know is the present. I remember where objects were before they moved (past), and I can predict where objects will be after they move (future) but memory and prediction of movement is far from being evidence of a time dimension. This is a mistake and one that is rearly admitted.I’m not sure who you think rarely admits it. I would agree if you are talking about the general population, but physicists (and philosophers) frequently debate this area. Your view is a form of temporal presentism, but there are many other options including block universe. So, you have nailed your colours to a particular wall, some would agree with you, but there are others who would say you are wrong to do so.
…….as long as you remember they are just imaginary.Imaginary has a different meaning in physics to common usage. It does not equate to not real, as in unicorns are not real.
If you can devise an experiment that will provide unequivocal empirical evidence of your idea, then you will be in line for a Nobel prize. The reason there is so much debate and varying views in this area is because there is no empirical evidence.I understand you for some reason don't like that time is a dimension,Pesky empirical evidence.
I want to meet you at Joe's in 10 unicorns, of course we will have to set up a convention for one unicorn like the swing of a pendulum or the movement of the sun, however we won't need to set up a convention for the spatial dimensions because they actually exist and we can measure them directly.As Origin points out, you are confusing units with dimensions.
Then we have temperatures and green house gasses as carbon dioxide, each one limiting your crop yields.Indeed. Local market gardeners add CO2 to their greenhouses (never mind 400 ppm - these guys go for a toxic 1 - 5%) to maximise crop yields. Forestry officers around the world have noticed steadily improved tree growth over the last 150 years.
The fun question to ask of an AI system is whether it could design a tool that would allow it to do something it isn't already designed to do.I seem to recall that there has been an attempt to patent an invention in the name of an AI. I must check, but I think British patent office said only people can be named as inventor, but somewhere else allowed it.
seems that there's a hurdle of definitions which need to be agreed before one can even ask the question i.e. agree on the definition of the question ?We even need to agree what the answers might mean.
I know my dna remains the sameI wouldn’t be so sure about that. DNA does mutate as it passes from cell to cell and we age.
For instance, will any of the original heart I was born with remain with me now?I would say not a lot, if any, of the original cells. Usual quoted cell replacement is between 7 & 10 years, but can be shorter for important organs.
If Mr Putin has expressed it that way, I would say he's correct. It reminds me very much of a gang of bullies in the schoolyard, fighting and threatening, and then onlookers, unsure of whom to cheer.When I was at school the bullies were often the bigger, older boys who would pick on the weaker newcomers. Either you had something they wanted or just didn’t like the way you looked, talked etc.
Hmm. I will state from my point of view, which is fairly simple…I have never altered anyone’s posts to change the meaning.
It's easier handling trollingThat’s because we’ve been helping you out by sending warnings to the trollers and removing some of their inappropriate posts, some you might not have seen.
You don't want this essay here, it's pretty controversial, am I correct? Then just say it.That’s a strange statement considering the efforts we’ve made to keep you from being banned, despite your best efforts to the contrary. As long as you respect the spirit of the rules there is no problem.
[it's liberating to admit mistakes, you should try it.I often do. Why do you assume I don’t?
…plus there appears to be an 'L' under neath the middle toe, so it must be a left foot.Ha ha
But Lambda can be copied like we cannot, so if I were to ask it any questions, I'd pose my queries along those lines: What if you were copied? What if two copies were somehow merged? What if you were 'moved' to new faster hardware? Would the old hardware fear being turned off still?That’s an interesting one. It echoes the question raised in Star Trek, does a transported person die on disassembly and be reborn at the other end. Certainly cloning to new hardware and then turning off should mean death to the old AI.
This really doesn’t need scientists from a different universe and it isn’t down to special relativity.That each scientist is going to end up with a different description of this universe from using special relativity.Here may be a clearer way to see my issue. Imagine a very simple universe where there only exists object A and an object B. They are on a collision course. Scientist A, (from another dimension) uses object A as a point of reference. But scientist B (from yet a different dimension than scientist A) uses object B as a reference. Each scientist is going to end up with a different description of this universe from using special relativity.So what's your issue?
Still not about the essay Collin.It’s very much about that and clarity of what you are trying to say.
Bored chemist, much as I hate to do this, you are in error. I have it on good authority that there is only one unicorn. Hence the correct expression is "the unicorn did it". I don't have to remind you of the rigour needed in all such scientific matters, correct units, correct dimensions and of course correct unicorn.Please state your authority.
I would like to explore with you nothing more than the available evidence, that being the three observable dimensions of space and the three dimensional objects that move in it. Time therefore is just another way of expressing the three spatial dimensions. eg. I am 3 miles from home or I am 3 minute from home.Ignoring relativity for the moment, 3 miles is a fixed dimension - assuming say shortest distance, but 3 minutes is a variable depending on your speed. How does your model handle that?