<= [811][812][813][814][815][816][817][818][819][820] => |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
811) Arminius, 29.08.2015, 03:20, 03:53, 04:37, 04:51 (3680-3683)
My idea of a good time is the biggest problem facing the world today is mental health. If everybody had good mental health then all the other problems would be solved because in order to take care of mechanical and um practical problems you have to have good mental health in order to attack those problems. If people have motives that are not worth while then those bad motives are always going to creep into their activities then you see that everyday from the political people work, the people who are in just the position to have their minds functioning right then everything else would fall into line. Thats what Im after thats my dream. Now thats a dream thats probably not going to happen but thats my dream. - Frank Zappa.
Bullshit of a puppy.Puppy, it is your own and only your own problem when you are not capable of understanding. You are defeated by yourself.Concerning the name Arminius I have already told you what it stands for (and by the way: you do not know whether it is my real name!).Arminius wrote:
Stop being childish. Or at least: Stop being like a puppy - .... if you can.
James S. Saint wrote:
James S. Saint wrote:
Again: Is there hope? |
812) Arminius, 01.09.2015, 01:55, 01:57, 02:20, 16:50, 19:38, 20:55, 21:52 (3684-3690)
Phoneutria wrote:
Afterwards it is always easy to say said that those who die out are not the fittest, but that does not always prove or disprove the real fitness.What did, for example, Pol Pot do? He eliminated all intelligent humans in his country, because intelligence was antisocialistic, thus not allowed in his socialistic country. Were these humans really not the fittest (in your terms)? Intelligence is a sign of fitness, although not the only one. Pol Pot was one of many politicians who decided against the so-called natural selection by operating their own selection. According to them the people they murdered were not fit in the sense that they were not the fitted.James S. Saint wrote:
So the Darwinistic fitness concept is problematic and thus almost useless.James S. Saint wrote:
In many aspects the Neanderthals were fitter than all other species of the genus homo, but in spite of that fact the Neanderthatls died out. Yes.Phoneutria wrote:
So the Darwinistic fitness concept is problematic and thus almost useless.
Are you (**) ... what ...?
These physicists (**) believe that the black holes will bring us the revolution that will finish the rule of the time arrow.
James S. Saint wrote:
The German geologist, meteorologist, and polar explorer Alfred Wegener was the founder of the theory of the continental drift (1912). At first the people of the international institutes and symposia laughed at him, whereas another German scientist, the father of the nuclear fission (splitting of the atom), Otto Hahn, acknowledged Wegener's theory (cp. Was lehrt uns die Radioaktivität über die Geschichte der Erde?, 1926). Decades later the people of the international institutes and symposia accepted Wegener's theory, so that it became the most accepted theory of geology: the plate tectonics.There are other geotectonic theories, but they are not as well accepted as the theory of the continental drift (plate tectonics). Besides the theory of the continental drift (plate tectonics) there are the theory of contraction (Saussure, Sueß, Stille, a.o.), the theory of expansion (von Richthofen, Hilgenberg, a.o.), the theory of undercurrent and swallowing (Ampferer, Schwinner, Cloos, a.o.), the theory of stream-stretching (Gutenberg, Wiechert, a.o.), the theory of oscillation (Haarmann a.o.), the theory of thermal cycles (Joly a.o.), the theory of undation (Stille a.o.) and some other theories.The main fundamentals of thoughts in geology are (in alphabetical order): actualism, cataclysm (catastrophism), exceptionalism, theory of cycles. So the geotectonic theories are based on one or more than one of this fundamentals of thoughts. And of course: they all should be and are consistent with the fundamental knowledge of physics (cosmology / astronomy) and chemistry, because physics and chemistry are the two fundamental science branches of geology.
Phoneutria wrote:
That is a false quotation. You should quote my text correctly, Phoneutria. I said (see above): ... that does not always prove or disorove the real fitness. So I do not claim or demand a prove or a disprove, the reverse is the case: the Darwinists and nobody else have to prove or disprove, if they want their theory to be accepted. If the Darwinists want their theory to be accepted, then it is up to them to prove or to disprove. And if it is not possible to prove or to disprove a theory, then this theory has nothing to do with science.Phoneutria wrote:
Who said that there was a fitness in present time that is above all others?Phoneutria wrote:
The knowledge of the fittest can almost always also not happen after the fact. You contradict yourself. First you say there's no »proving the real fitness«, then you say knowledge of 'the fittest' can only happen after the fact.I understand proving and knowledge in a scientific sense here.Nobody really knows the fittest. There are too many parameters.Phoneutria wrote:
No. Maybe that you follow to the obvious conclusion that intelligence is the greatest indicator of fitness. But I do not:I wrote:
I said: not the only one. Did you not notice that?If there is fitness, then there must be indicators of fitness, otherwise the concept of fitness can never be taken seriously.The excuse of the Darwinists is, for example, that fitness is more than fitness. So they do not want to be taken seriously.Phoneutria wrote:
Yeah. Do you consider cockroaches as the fittest?Phoneutria wrote:
Again: Nobody really knows the fittest, Phoneutria.One can only say after some facts that this or that living being fitted. There are some indicators of fitness, as I already said, but in some cases (for example in the case of the human social selection) this indicators can also be used as if they were indicadors of unfitness.The Darwinistic fitness concept is problematic, the Darwinistic selection principle is partly false, and that includes the possibility of being totally false but also being partly right. I would like to save the right parts of that theory, because I think that it is going to be completely eliminated, if nobody will have eliminated its false parts in order to save its right parts.
The Italian Book.Last week I bought a book in Italy. The cashier got hundred Euros and gave me twice as much and five cents more back than my entitlement was. Obviously the cashier had confused the amount in euros with the amount in cents.How expensive was the book?
In philosophy as a thinking system there are two general ways of thinking: (1) a restricted way of thinking, (2) an elaborated way of thinking. Both are philosophy - the former in a primitive way and the latter in a progressed way. If someone uses the former one, then this does not necessarily mean that this someone is stupid but probably not much interested in philosophy. So Frank Zappa, who was intelligent, used his philosophical statements not in the sense of the elaborated way of thinking. When a man like Zappa says that the biggest problem facing the world today is mental health, then this statement represents his way of thinking, because he uses the restricted way of thinking. That is typical for one who is more interested in science than in philosophy, although both have much to do with each other. That one does not want to be a great philosopher but probably knows that it is almost impossible to not think and that thinking becomes philosophy, if it is systematically exercised. |
813) Arminius, 02.09.2015, 14:04, 20:23, 21:03, 21:12, 21:12, 21:30 (3691-3696)
Nine Eleven sounds almost like Two Twenty-Seven.
Topic: Geology.Geology is an earth science comprising the study of solid Earth, the rocks of which it is composed, and the processes by which they change.What do you think about geology as science, about its history, its methods, its dating methods, the geological structures, the geological time, the geological development, the geological history of the Earth?The geological history of Earth follows the major events in Earth's past based on the geologic time scale, a system of chronological measurement based on the study of the planet's rock layers (stratigraphy).The geological time scale is based on fossil evidence in Earths rocks and the age of the rocks.What do you think about the development of the Earth's crust?Do you think that it moves or not, and, if yes, how and why?Wegener's theory of the continental drift (plate tectonics) is the currently valid theory.The tectonic plates of the Earth:
Topic: Riddles.You may post your riddles in this thread.
Here is one: A bridge between Germany and Switzerland has two parts: a German and a Swiss part - duh. There is a difference between them in height, namely: 54 cm. Why?
James S. Saint wrote:
As I said: the amount in cents (euro cents - of course).
Phoneutria wrote:
That is false. |
814) Arminius, 03.09.2015, 01:12, 02:43, 03:16, 04:33, 01:00, 01:00, 01:00, 01:00, 01:00, 01:00 (3697-3699)
James S. Saint wrote:
The cashier got hundred euros (for you: dollars) and gave me twice as much (back as my entitlement was) and five cents more back than my entitlement was. Obviously the cashier had confused the amount in euros (for you: dollars) with the amount in cents (of the change).
Do you mean what you linguistically described, or what you lingusitically and mathematically described, or what you mathematically described?Shall I tell more?
James S. Saint wrote:
The kneading effect is important, yes, but the radioactivity in the inner core of the Earth is much more important, the radioactivity in the inner core of the Earth is much more important, at least when it comes to cause convection currents in the mantle of the Earth and thus the continental drift (plate tectonics).James S. Saint wrote:
Remember this:Arminius wrote:
The following picture shows the bridge across the Álfagjá rift valley in southwest Iceland, that is part of the boundary between the Eurasian and North American continental tectonic plates.Alfred L. Wegener, the father of the continental drift (plate tectonics) theory:
I estimate that the probability that your problem with my task is no pure text comprehension problem is about 90%.A linguistical hint:According to the text the cashier did not confuse one thing with itself.A linguistical-mathematical hint:If the cashier confuses two things, then they have to be considered as two things in a mathematical sense too.A mathematical hint:There is merely one unknown in your equations. |
815) Arminius, 04.09.2015, 00:42, 04:08, 15:17, 19:00 (3701-3704)
Phoneutria wrote:
It means not your change but my change.Entitlements means my change, thus the money I would have got back from her (it was a woman), if she had not miscounted it, and miscounted means in this case: confused euro with cent.Phoneutria wrote:
(1) The information in the first tab (with the linguistical hint) is not very much more than in the original text, because the main problem with the task in it is mostly not a language (text understanding, translation and so on) problem. So the problem James and you seem to have with my task is probably (I estimated a probability of 90%) no language problem. (2) The information in the second tab (with the linguistical-mathematical hint) is already a key, because the main problem with the said task is the conversion / transformation from a linguistic text into a mathematic text (equations and so on). (3) And the information in the third tab (with the mathematical hint) contains already a reference to the first mathematic step in order to attain the whole solution of the task.Phoneutria wrote:
No. Let me say: If you mean it as your own example, then you are right - of course -, but my story is more complicated than that example. So you are on the wrong way. Please read my text one more time.Phoneutria wrote:
No. Let me say: If you mean it as your own example, then you are right - of course -, but if you referred it to my story, then it would be false. Again: My example is more complicated than your example. So you are on the wrong way. Please read my text one more time.Phoneutria wrote:
No. Let me say: According to your example, but not according to my example. So you are on the wrong way. Please read my text one more time.Phoneutria wrote:
If that was right, then coffee would help, because in that example you have at least considered the 5 cents.Phoneutria wrote:
Yes. That is wrong.Phoneutria wrote:
Again: The he was a woman, and she gave me (not you) twice as much (back as my entitlement [for you: change] was) and five cents more back than my entitlement was. .... Comprende?Good luck!
Phoneutria wrote:
No, Phoneutria. You are wrong. Laws are like the instructional parts of any dogmatism and made for dictatorships. I do not care whether some people want to name them laws, because (at least to me) laws are superordinated rules and should not have anything to do with science, otherwise science would become a religion (and - unfortunately - it has already partly become a religion).Phoneutria wrote:
But I know some people who want it to be a law and why they want it to be a law.Phoneutria wrote:
The accent lies on the term is up to Darwinists not on the word what. If I want to convince you, then it is up to me to prove my statements or to disprove their negation.Concerning your what I already said several times: (1) selection, (2) fitness.During the period of Realism and Naturalism (radical realism) almost everything was related to nature, based on nature - it was a reaction to the previous period: Idealism and Romantic.Phoneutria wrote:
One can say it, but that does not necessarily prove our fitness or disprove our unfitness. So it is nonsensical to say it as if it were something like the truth or a law (see above). If you have won a game, then that fact does not necessarily prove your fitness or disprove your unfitness. You may have had much luck or/and help.Phoneutria wrote:
Survival is no sufficient indicator of fitness.Phoneutria wrote:
The so-called fittest!Phoneutria wrote:
I have already given several examples. This time I am not going to quote again. .... Sorry.Phoneutria wrote:
Let me ask you: Is your term survival as in perpetuation an objection?
|
3704 |
I guess the USA's national religion, »Human Secularism« is classified under »Other Religions« in those charts. I have to wonder why they speculate that it will grow so slowly. **
816) Arminius, 05.09.2015, 02:12, 02:17, 03:02, 19:34, 23:22 (3705-3709)
There are some analogyies between the time reckoning of Christianity and the time reckoning of the big bang theory:Both times start at zero.
|
3706 |
3707 |
3708 |
The largest net movement is expected to be out of Christianity (66 million people), including the net departure of twice as many men (44 million) as women (22 million). Similarly, net gains among the unaffiliated (61 million) are projected to be more than twice as large for men (43 million) as for women (19 million). Muslims and followers of folk religions and other religions are expected to experience modest gains due to religious switching. Jews and Buddhists are expected to experience modest net losses through religious switching. **
3709 |
During the next few decades, the number of religiously unaffiliated people around the world is projected to grow modestly, rising from about 1.1 billion in 2010 to a peak of more than 1.2 billion in 2040 and then dropping back slightly.42 Over the same 40-year period, however, the overall global population is expected to increase at a much faster pace. As a result, the percentage of the worlds population that is unaffiliated is expected to drop, from 16% of the worlds total population in 2010 to 13% in 2050. **
Projected Population Change in Countries With Largest Unaffiliated Populations in 2010All 10 countries on this list are expected to see their overall populations decline as a share of the worlds population. Collectively, these countries held 33% of the worlds population in 2010. By 2050, their share of the global population is expected to decline to 25%. China alone is expected to shift from having nearly 20% of the worlds population in 2010 to 14% in 2050.
In six of these countries (Japan, the United States, Vietnam, Germany, France and the United Kingdom), the share of the population that is unaffiliated is expected to increase in the coming decades. But the potential growth of the unaffiliated is constrained by the fact that these are all countries with overall populations that are shrinking as a share of the worlds people.
The religiously unaffiliated are heavily concentrated in relatively few countries. As of 2010, about 86% lived in the 10 countries with the largest unaffiliated populations. Consequently, the demographic trajectory of these countries will help shape the projected size of the global unaffiliated population in the decades to come.
In 2010, more than six-in-ten (62%) of the worlds religiously unaffiliated people lived in China. The next largest religiously unaffiliated populations were in Japan (6% of the global total), the United States (5%), Vietnam (2%) and Russia (2%).
In 2050, China is expected to remain home to a majority (54%) of the worlds unaffiliated population. The United States is expected to have the worlds second-largest unaffiliated population (8%), surpassing Japan (6%). **
Age Distribution, 2010Globally, the religiously unaffiliated population was older (median age of 34) than the overall population (median age of 28) as of 2010. In Asia and the Pacific, where most of the unaffiliated live, the median age of the unaffiliated (35) was six years higher than the regional median (29). While sub-Saharan Africa is the region with the youngest median age of religiously unaffiliated people (20), the regions overall median age is even younger (18).
Age Distribution of Unaffiliated by Region, 2010In other regions, the unaffiliated tend to be younger than the general population. In North America, the median age of the unaffiliated (30) is seven years younger than the regional median (37). In Europe, the median age of the unaffiliated (37) is three years below the overall median (40). And in Latin America and the Caribbean, the median age of the unaffiliated (26) is one year younger than the regional median (27). **
817) Arminius, 06.09.2015, 01:14, 19:03, 20:57, 23:28 (3710-3713)
The people of the so-called PEW Research Center (**) do not stop their projections at the year 2050:
In the following videos the German Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl explains what neutrionos have to do with the expansion of the Earth: ** **
James S. Saint wrote:
According to Meyl the weight in the inner core of the Earth is zero; so the inner core of the Earth is like the outer space. Meyl says that the Earth is growing because the inner core of the Earth is collecting neutrinos, and a neutrino is oscillating between the size and the property of an electron and a positron; that means: if it is always oscillating that one time it is positively charged and the next time it is negatively charged; in average the charge is zero, but only the average is zero; the effective value is not zero; but what can be measured only is the average, not the oscillations; and this is why they say »the charge of a neutrino is zero«, but this is wrong (Konstantin Meyl **).
I quoted Meyl, and Meyl is not a clown. (Beware! The devil wears the mask of a clown.)James S. Saint wrote:
It is not irrelevant. And it is especially not irrelevant when it comes to understand why some of them interact more than others of them.James S. Saint wrote:
This is no serious argument against Meyl's argument, because Meyl said nearly the same.James S. Saint wrote:
So it can osillate - as Meyl said.James S. Saint wrote:
Oscillating is a part of its nature and can be required.James S. Saint wrote:
I know that RM:AO does not allow absolute charge neutrality. And that does not make Meyl's theory false, because Meyl says that the neutrino can be both positively and negatively charged.James S. Saint wrote:
It is not irrelevant whether the weight in a center of a mass is zero or not, because, for example, where weightlessness is there are conditions like in the outer space. |
818) Arminius, 07.09.2015, 00:00, 00:00, 03:27 (3714-3716)
James S. Saint wrote:
But you are sqying this (for example):James S. Saint wrote:
Right?
If the theory of thermal cycles as a compromise between Earth-expansion and Earth-contraction is not false, then the Earth is something like a geological heart.
The title of the said text of the PEW Research Center is: The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2050 (**). Its subtitle is: Why Muslims Are Rising Fastest and the Unaffiliated Are Shrinking as a Share of the Worlds Population (**). If until 2050 the Muslims will rise fastest and the Unaffiliated shrink as a share of the world population, then we will probably not get a syncretistic religion before 2050 but war before 2050, because additionally the Christians as a share of the world population will neither rise nor shrink (2010: 31.4% ; 2050: 31.4%), the Jews as a share of the world population will neither rise nor shrink (2010: 0.2% ; 2050: 0.2%), the Hindus as a share of the world population will shrink (2010: 15.0% ; 2050: 14.9%), the Other Religions as a share of the world population will shrink (2010: 0.8% ; 2050: 0.7%), the Folk Religions as a share of the world population will shrink (2010: 5.9% ; 2050: 4.8%), the Buddhists as a share of the world population will shrink (2010: 7.1%; 2050: 5.2%), and - as I already said - the Unaffiliated as a share of the world population will shrink (2010: 16.4% ; 2050: 13.2%). So merely the Muslims will rise both absolutely (2010: 1.6 billions; 2050: 2.76 billions) and relatively, thus as a share of the world population (2010: 23.2; 2050: 29.7). That will not necessarily but probably lead to war, namely to more war than we already have. |
819) Arminius, 08.09.2015, 01:25, 01:30, 01:31, 01:32, 03:49, 04:23, 06:06, 15:54, 16:11, 16:24, 18:55, 22:34 (3717-3728)
Most of the global population growth comes from the least developed countries:
I want to give you some links, because they may be interesting for this thread too: ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Copied post in another thread.
Copied post in another thread.
Kant's transcendental idealism / transcendental philosophy is to be understood as a methodological reflection on the cognitive capacity of rational beings and as a response to the dispute between empiricism and rationalism.Empiricists are of the opinion that only the sensual perception delivers knowledge, cognition; without this the mind is a blank sheet of paper, a tabula rasa. The rationalists - initially Kant himself was also a rationalist - assume that only the mind is capable of delivering deception-free knowledge, cognition. In his Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Critique of Pure Reason) Kant objected both empirists and rationalists, although his solution was: both ... and ..., because knowledge (cognition) needs both the empirical way and the rational way.Gedanken ohne Inhalt sind leer, Anschauungen ohne Begriffe sind blind. (Immanuel Kant).It is crucial for the Kantian epistemology that one does not directly perceive the reality of objects but forms the appearances of objects in the consciousness. Real is the appearance (phenomenon), while the world and their individual objects remain unknowable as a Ding an sich (thing as such or thing in itself, noumenon). The Ding an sich is unknowable.According to Kant transcendental refers to the knowledge (cognition) of the conditions of the knowledge (cognition) itself, which is prior to all experience.So there is both a both ... and ... and a versus.If it comes to the human possibility of knowledge (cognition), then knowledge (cognition) needs both the rational way and the empirical way; but if it comes to the Ding an sich, then knowledge (cognition) is not possible.
Kriswest wrote:
Kriswest wrote:
Because no real ruler wants then to have peace. Humans can never be the same, so the real rulers and their functionaries are always saying "humans must be the same to have peace", because the real rulers know that that is impossible. It has always to do with the control of the 99%.
Is that riddle too difficult to solve?This hint may help:Germany and Switzerland have a different height reference. Germany's height system is referred to the water level of the North Sea, whereas the Switzerland's height system is referred to the water level of the Mediterranean Sea. Of course: the responsible planners of the said bridge knew this fact and took it into account: a height difference of 27 cm. But then the Swiss made a msitake. Which mistake did the Swiss make?
James S. Saint wrote:
That is a good joke.
Phoneutria wrote:
Yes.Phoneutria wrote:
No. I did not make fun of them for that. It is a true story.The name of the city where this happened (2003-2004) is Laufenburg, and this city has two parts: a German (**) and a Swiss (**) part.I did not find any English text about that said bridge with the Swiss construction fault. Those who can understand German may use the following link: **.The following photos were taken before the Swiss construction fault of 2003-2004 (see above), namely in 1864 (the first one) and in 2000 (the second one):This photo was taken in 1864. You can also see a part of the oldest existing bridge of Laufenburg. This bridge was build in the Middle Ages.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This photo was taken in 2000.
Nietzsche was not a Slav.And this thread should not be derailed. This thread is about the Great Slav Musician Frank Zappa and his philosophy. So, please, stick to the topic.
James S. Saint wrote:
As I already (indirectly) said:You need one unknown for the euros and one unknown for the cents, because they are confused by the cashier, and you need them on both sides of the equation, James. The word confused is the most important word in that said text (The Italian Book [**|**]) when it comes to translate the lingusitic text into a mathematic text (equations and so on).Good luck!Or should I give the whole solution?
James S. Saint wrote:
Again: There is no text problem.James S. Saint wrote:
Okay, James.According to the said story it is right that if the proper entitlement is x, e is the received euros, and c is the received cents, then 2x + 5 = e + c (**), and it is also right that if the received euros and received cents were confused, then the proper entitlement is, x = e/100 + c*100 (**).You wanted me to answer your question, and I have just answered your question. Is that alright for you?I wish you success!I think your next post will contain the right solution. |
820) Arminius, 09.09.2015, 03:11, 04:03, 17:21, 17:37 (3729-3732)
James S. Saint wrote:
Those equations you mentioned work, but note: they are merely abstract examples and not the solution for my concrete example. I hope you know that. You asked me to answer your question, then I answered your question. Now I hope you do not confuse my answer with the complete solution of the said task. Note: I merely answered your question.As i said several times: You need to have both e and c on both sides of the equation, and then you have to find out which number (amount) the only correct one for the example is. Please note: You have both euros and cents, and your basis should be cents (just for the sake of convenience, because if you used euros as basis, then you would have to change the number 5 in your equation). Your equations work. You do not have the right numbers. In my concrete example are merely two whole numbers for e and c possible.Good luck!
The next riddle:There are three persons hidden.
James, please read what I wrote in my last post again:Arminius wrote:
What has been holding us both up is more the fact that you did not take my advice. For example this:Arminius wrote:
That must be a whole number.Arminius wrote:
Do you (**) think so?The three persons are famous philosophers. You know them, and I think you have something in common with them. |
==>
|