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.


Messages - Your Mom

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 3139
31
That sounds way less stupid, right?

32
I may be missing a something about the homeopathy theory, but I can't see how this would work even assuming the validity of that theory.

So you put a thing in some water that has some property that's supposed to be beneficial for some ailment. Then you dilute that solution down until the beneficial thing is...well...nothing, and the solution is pretty much water, but water that contains the "essence" of whatever the beneficial thing was.

Putting aside the  :roll: and assuming that the practice actually works that way, wouldn't we still have to have a thing that actually did something to the Ebola virus before we could disappear that thing and allow its ghost to go right on killing the virus?

Ah, but the critical kernel of the homeopathic hypothesis is that you dilute something that causes the same symptoms as that which you are trying to cure. So first we would need to find something that causes hemorrhagic fever, and THEN we would dilute it down to nothing and it would cure ebola.

33
I love phrases like "please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence, but...

BUT

BUT

 :lulz: BUT it totally is, because now I will quote from a Wikipedia article a sentence that I assume you haven't read or don't understand, little lady.

34
Holist, although I have not yet read it, I have also heard that LMNO's dad's book is reasonably accessible for novices and laypersons: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1107004837/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A84IVOA24OI3N

I found this one enjoyable: http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-World-Physics-Everyone/dp/067401832X/

While I am aware that there are segments of academia that place great importance on primary sources, in the sciences it's very important to look not merely at a crystallized moment in the history of our understanding, but at the current state of the research, in order to understand how everything we currently know is tried together. As I mentioned before, it is exceedingly rare for an old and well-tested theory to simply be invalidated by new discoveries; rather, usually the new discoveries and new understanding modify and add to the previous understanding.

35
I started to write up something about general relativity and how it relates to Newtonian physics, and how classical mechanics is just a limited case of general relativity, but then I realized how useless that would be.  Pearls, swine, etc.

The book I linked to, which is essentially the story of Einstein's once-rejected Cosmological Constant, explains the history of non-euclidean geometry and the relationship of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity with Newtonian mechanics in detail, in layman's terms, but I think this is another case of classic Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, in which the victim cannot grasp that is is the limits of his own knowledge that is the major contributor to the disjunct, rather than the ignorance of his conversational partners.

I think that's a much bigger problem in the world at large, than most people are willing to admit.

In fact, one might say this conversation is the micro to the world's macro.

Cough.

 :lol: Well-played, sir.

36
I started to write up something about general relativity and how it relates to Newtonian physics, and how classical mechanics is just a limited case of general relativity, but then I realized how useless that would be.  Pearls, swine, etc.

The book I linked to, which is essentially the story of Einstein's once-rejected Cosmological Constant, explains the history of non-euclidean geometry and the relationship of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity with Newtonian mechanics in detail, in layman's terms, but I think this is another case of classic Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, in which the victim cannot grasp that is is the limits of his own knowledge that is the major contributor to the disjunct, rather than the ignorance of his conversational partners.

37
I would be more impressed if you just admitted that you don't really know what you're on about. Here is a book I suspect you might enjoy or find helpful: http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Equation-Einstein-Relativity-Expanding/dp/0385334850/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1413789647&sr=8-6&keywords=God%27s+theorem

Please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence, but I am going to quote from Wikipedia:

"A discrepancy in Mercury's orbit pointed out flaws in Newton's theory. By the end of the 19th century, it was known that its orbit showed slight perturbations that could not be accounted for entirely under Newton's theory, but all searches for another perturbing body (such as a planet orbiting the Sun even closer than Mercury) had been fruitless. The issue was resolved in 1915 by Albert Einstein's new theory of general relativity, which accounted for the small discrepancy in Mercury's orbit.

Although Newton's theory has been superseded, most modern non-relativistic gravitational calculations are still made using Newton's theory because it is a much simpler theory to work with than general relativity, and gives sufficiently accurate results for most applications involving sufficiently small masses, speeds and energies."

This is basically the story I remembered from about 29 to 27 years ago. I screwed up, the anomalies with Newton's theory were not resolved by special but by general relativity, which indicates that my knowledge is superficial in the field. But it seems that the basic statement (Newtonian Mechanics fails at macroscopic levels at relativistic speeds) holds true.

Please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence, but you have so little education in this field that you are completely unable to interpret the words you are parroting.

38
My professor delayed the due date for a paper, now due today at 5pm, so she could catch up on our previous papers and send them all back so we could use them on this one. She hasn't yet. This is worth 20% of my grade and I haven't even started. I cannot begin to express my frustration, this is utterly unfair.

It seems like if the whole point of delaying this paper was so that you could use previous feedback from other papers on it, it seems as if perhaps she should delay it further so she can actually give you your feedback.

Can you get started on the paper and then revise it according to feedback when you get your other papers back, so that at least the bulk of the writing/research/citations would be done?

39
I wish work would make up their fucking minds.  They either want me pulling insanely long shifts (6am to 4pm yesterday) or none at all (ie; all of this week).

Is it too much to ask for reasonable workloads, every day?  I'd much prefer working 5 hours a day, every day of the week, than pulling three huge shifts which then require at least a day just to recover from.

Well, I suppose this is why I'm applying to go back to work in education.  Not Houseparenting...but still.  Teenagers.  Urgh.  On the other hand, stable working hours are pretty desirable right now...

That's just rude. Are they using you to fill in shifts when the other employees call in sick or no-show?

40
It's not a great book, by any means, but it's very accessible and might help you.

41
I would be more impressed if you just admitted that you don't really know what you're on about. Here is a book I suspect you might enjoy or find helpful: http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Equation-Einstein-Relativity-Expanding/dp/0385334850/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1413789647&sr=8-6&keywords=God%27s+theorem

42


As for quantum physics, I know fuck all about it so that is probably more than 60 years out of date, but I don't think I have mentioned it. I mentioned special relativity, of which newtonian mechanics is a limiting case. At relativistic speeds, and macroscopic objects, newtonian mechanics fails.

Can I ask for citations? Because you seem to be talking about quantum mechanics while claiming not to be talking about quantum mechanics. I'm no physicist, I haven't even taken university physics, but this whole post reeks of "makes no goddamn sense".

This is a good start.
Einstein's own book for the interested public is still great.

Wikipedia?  :|

43
Not saying it's some horrible unforgivable insult. Just saying that you might be able to learn from it.

It's generally more uh, socially graceful to assume that the people you're talking to have a clue, than to assume that they're clueless. If you aren't totally sure they're on the same page there are ways to feel it out without jumping right to that conclusion.

Okay, I take your point. I think the reason I made the mistake is that the first appearance of VR Goggles is at 1:19, and when I watched it, I didn't realise until that time that this was the salient point. IR camera... yep, that sounds badass. And eminently weaponisable. How long before those things can shoot poison darts, for instance? (probably a negative number, is how long)

I'm not sure how else you would navigate them through a forest when you can't actually see the quadcopters themselves.  :? I dunno, it seemed pretty obvious to me. But I was already familiar with the idea.

44


As for quantum physics, I know fuck all about it so that is probably more than 60 years out of date, but I don't think I have mentioned it. I mentioned special relativity, of which newtonian mechanics is a limiting case. At relativistic speeds, and macroscopic objects, newtonian mechanics fails.

Can I ask for citations? Because you seem to be talking about quantum mechanics while claiming not to be talking about quantum mechanics. I'm no physicist, I haven't even taken university physics, but this whole post reeks of "makes no goddamn sense".

45
This is what Holist not engaging on homeopathy looks like.

 :lulz:

I CAN'T HELP MYSELF. 
:love:

Okay, I just changed my mind. I read a great deal more, looked at many studies, and decided that homeopathy doesn't work. The "homeopathic encounter", I think can be a particularly effective way of turning on the placebo-effect, depending on practitioner, context and patient...it may have an element of hypnosis to it, even. But the woo is highly unlikely to be real. This feels weird, I tell you. And it will involve re-evaluating and probably changing a number of important relationships. So THANK YOU, PD.  :argh!:  :oops:

Congratulations, pursuing more information even if it contradicts your favored hypothesis and changing your mind based on the preponderance of available evidence is pretty damn bipedal.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 3139