Yah, that's the reason for all those Feynman diagrams (and they do look like sqiggly lines), and the fact that the path is a probability and not a certainty, and that the reflection is all dependent on the "spin" which is a brain stretcher all on its own...
Well, I must have drawn a million Feynman diagrams getting my explanation to stick in my head. Unfortunately the whole explanation is incomplete and it still takes a book to explain what we think we know. That might be too long to include in a
I'm surprised that it hasn't been done before this. In high school, (Many, many, many years ago...) we were taught that things were transparent because "light wave could pass through." In reality, we now know that in transparent materials, a photon striking the surface passes some of its energy to the next molecule, releasing another photon, which does the same, etc., etc., until finally the last photon is transmitted to an almost unobstructed medium (air, in our case). The key question has always been, "What is the difference in atomic structure between 'transparent' medium and 'opaque' medium?" The second question has been, "How can we change the atomic structure of supposedly 'opaque' materials to work like so-called 'transparent' materials without losing the characteristics that make the current 'opaque' materials useful to us?"
Ceramic research has been on the edge of this discovery for years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Abuses abound on all fronts, but I'm surprised no one is looking at this for the political motive: The current administration is very good at deflecting criminality of Democratic politicians and very good at smearing as many Republican politicians as possible. I suspect that the reverse will be true when Republicans regain power. It's our fault: We keep electing politicians who forget that they are supposed to protect the rights of EVERYBODY, not just their party members. How cool would it be if voters voted for competency rather than just team affiliation?
I think the purpose of the penal system is to protect society from those who prey on the common citizenry, and "penalty" has noting to do with it.
I am not interested in punishment, retribution or revenge. If society is adequately protected by isolating criminals from the society, then that is adequate and moral.
Clarence Darrow maintained that the persons who committed "real" crimes, such as rape, arson, or murder, were sick. They should be hospitalized and quarantined until they were well, then released. They should not be released before they were well.
The death penalty should be reserved for those persons who are still a danger to society, even incarcerated. Some terrorists perhaps. Maybe lawyers and politicians.
Agreed. The Russians used to sit a person in a chair and put a bullet to the brain stem. Lights out. This is the same target that snipers try for to turn off hostage takers without causing a physical reaction in response.
But the nitrous oxide/nitrogen s a new idea to me and has some merit.
Basically, I suspect that science that is not evaluated scientifically loses precision and credibility.
Take the headline in the original post: How many people actually read the headline, saw the modal argument, and realized that the presupposition was leading to a straw man argument?
Now take an hypotheses with lots of data and present it to multiple administrators, legislators, politicians and the public: How many will subject this presentation to even the most rudimentary argument mapping such as a Toulmin worksheet? How many are even capable?
Science is not "wrong" or "right"; hypotheses are supported or unsupported. Conclusions are never actually true or false, just justified by the evidence subject to the limits of experimentation so far.
So, the sooner some of you software geniuses create something to quickly and efficiently evaluate and sort the arguments, the quicker we can weed out the crap and improve on the quality scientific endeavors.
I have long believed that if it was as hard to maintain a car as it is to administer a computer, the world would stay home and read books.
It is the manufacturers' responsibility to ensure that hardware does what it is supposed to, does it correctly, and does ONLY what it is supposed to do. In the coming age of self-driving cars, personal care robotics and so forth, it is inexcusable for the builder to make defective stuff. I suspect we will have to go back to first principles instead of relying on software recipes that were invented back in the 1960's.
We will run into another level of complexity when our machines start modifying themselves for something called "better performance."
This does not answer your question, but this is a legitimate area for concern and I thank you for bringing it up.
I have had to interview numerous High School graduates and Junior College attendees who were so bad at math they couldn't run a cash register. What evidence is there to indicate that "schooling" over the summer is a benefit to them or Society at large?
Although I object to his lack of citations, real proof, and his use of innuendo and other false arguments, I strongly agree that John Taylor Gatto http://johntaylorgatto.com/ is right: The American Education system is irrevocably broken and must be redesigned from scratch. The school system is (WARNING!:GROSS GENERALIZATION AHEAD!) something where you send your kids to prison during the working hours to have their heads messed with by persons only marginally capable of feeding themselves .
OK, I agree that there are SOME dedicated and competent teachers, but I suspect they are working in an environment that systematically sabotages their best efforts. It is also true that some students do well in spite of the average school environment. These anomalous students maybe have access to better schools, better teachers, and better parents.
The idea of making students go to school year-around is case of "jumping-to-solutions" and avoids any real thinking about "How can we improve our educational system?"
Not a bad analogy, but Engineering follows the rules of Physics and Chemistry, which were built on layers and layers of scientific thought and experiment. Hardly anyone writing code these days understands what's happening under the hood.
Disclaimer: I've been programming since 1965. I'm proud of the fact that I can create logic gates that will do medium to complex mathematics.
Programmers have become like lawyers: They are sometimes competent technicians but are not required to engage in original thought. We are long past the time when we should really need "coders" anymore for application production. We need thinkers who can define requirements precisely, designers who can describe processes to produce those results, and then turn the design (UML. Warnier-Orr, Flowchart, etc.) over to a generator that produces reliable, proven object code. The inventiveness is in the design, not the coding (usually...some exceptions apply).
In a society where we are faced with self-driving cars and machines that care for sick, young and elderly, the type of "coding" (based on layers of algorithms developed back in the 60's..including errors) will not be sufficient. Committee-work will not make it better.
Goedel? Who cares? Somewhere there is an original thinker who can traverse the wall of logical abstraction that will allow us to prove programs correct in multiple domains. When that happens, "coding" will be demonstrated in craft fairs instead of professional offices.
I am surprised that more people are not better at Math, since language is almost entirely Math. Think of the words we use that denote math terms: Quantity (more, less, many, one, few, all, none, etc.), space (large, small, besides, etc.), relationships (on, in, with, by, all, included, etc.),
I strongly recommend a book called, "What Linguists Always Wanted to Know About Logic..* (*But were Ashamed to Ask!)" by McCawley.
Incidentally, this book has one of the BEST descriptions of Lambda Calculus I've seen so far.
I can easily see the disconnect between language and programming; it s pretty much the same as the disconnect between language and good thinking. Language contains many distortions, deletions and generalizations the people who know the language process unconsciously (sometime to their detriment) to complete their understanding of the communication. Computers cannot, at this time, do a good job of imputing the missing components to fully complete the instruction.
Good programmers are simply better at complete and precise thinking.
Back in 1996 there was a warehouse in Cam Ranh Bay that had large amounts of goods continually disappearing at night. AP patrols with dogs didn't stop the theft, so the K9 guys attack-trained a half dozen monkeys (about 30 lbs each). They would keep the monkeys in a CONEX container and back it up to the entry door in the eveneing, and when they opened the CONEX the monkeys would race into the warehouse. The next morning they would back the empty CONEX to the door and bang on the back wall; the monkeys would then race into the CONEX to get food. From that point on, nothing disappeared from the warehouse at night.
ATT points out that the demand for wireless services will increase 8 times (800 percent for those of you who don't undrstand math) from December 2013 through December 2018. Most of this increase will be the continued rise of phones as internet devices. (2014 is the first year that demand for internet to phone devices exceeds internet to desktop computers.) A large trend is the demand for inter-connectivity between devices; Vehicle-to-vehicle, phone-to-computer, wearable gear-to-desktop and cloud. Thesity will be increasing ly replaced by virtualization ande are all crating demand for wireless services. Data pipes will be like oil piplines untill the infrastructure catches up. Worse, where we have hardware connectivity will be replaced by virtualization and software-defined device emulation and virtual networks, so errors and breakages will be more disruptive.
There is a good argument that the Roman Empire succumbed to an energy crises: They couldn't get enough firewood to even keep their cookfires going. Those famous Roman Roads were hauling firewood from as far away as Northern Gaul and the Danish coast. It was expensive and not the least timely. The hills around Rome were denuded of trees, and Romans spread out. Soon there was a lack of cohesiveness in Roman Society.
Pompey and Caesar were not the only rulers to make the mistake of thinking that public works construction was equivalent to productive employment; this fallacy is prevalent even in the USA today. Infrastructure on the other hand, such as the roads and harbor, greatly increased the trade in the area.
And lastly, concrete was used in Egypt a couple thousand years earlier than it was employed in the Roman Empire.
Again, the issue is not a matter of Black or White.
My relatives in Canada are constantly commenting on the delays and inefficincies of the heal care system. I have a some relatives who came down to the USA for bypass operations and transplants because they could get treated in a week or two instead of 6 months or more.
My relatives in Sweden have similar complaints.
My 96-year-old Mother might not be alive if she had to depend on Canada's National Health Service. At 92 she had a mitral valve replacement. In Canada, because of her age, she would have been put on a low priority. At 96 she drives herself everywhere, does her own shopping, goes to Writer's group, and has a pretty good life. She thinks that's better than being forced to die from lack of oxygen and energy over a period of a year or two.
The issue is not insurance. The issue is health care distribution for the most people, at the highest quality possible. For the last 30 years the USA has been the "Gold Standard" for health care. In just one year Obamacare has tarnished the standard, and, based on the experience in Sweden, UK, and Canada, it doesn't look like it will ever regain its luster.
There are a couple of moral questions that bother me: 1. Is it moral to steal from others (in the form of taxes) for your own benefit? And 2. Who has the right to make decisions on your health care?
Of course, even in the most Socialist countries the bureaucrats are going to be cared for even if the common populace is given short shrift.