Re: OT: Ron Paul Joins The Racist Republics Club

On Dec 31 2011, 10:28 pm, Ray Hall <raymond.ha...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
gereco wrote:

I don't ever doubt Feynman, but in real life he was a colourful
character. He makes a good read and was a brilliant mind. However, the
broad scientific concensus still holds doubts regarding viewing any
particle, as a 'particle' or as a 'wavelength', as they can be described
either way depending upon the mathematical treatment of them. After all,
nobody has ever seen an electron as named, but their existence and
behaviour is well explained. Nobody has ever seen any particle come to
that. We know of them because of their effects (mass, momentum, charge,
etc.).


Sounds right to me. That last sentence was brought home in several of
my readings.
Both Randall and Greene talked a little bit about this I seem to
recall.



Bosons is the collective name for all the force carriers, named after Bose.

I remember a reference also as the Bose-Einstein “condensation” (?)

 Besides Heidleberg, I
think Pauli nurtured his theories alongside Dirac and others at what I
view as the *Mecca* for science, The University of Cambridge in
England.
At least many of the more honored names in science are associated with
it.

Newton, of course being the original and most famous.


Yes! And didn’t Mr Hawking also (making sure to claim a ‘direct
descendancy’ from Newton because he was born on his (Newton’s)
birthday?

Don't forget that Australia has made contributions too, as well as NZ, and only last year
Brian Schmidt received the prize together with Adam Riess and Saul
Perlmutter (both American)


I read the names, but didn’t know that Schmidt was Australian.



for their work in physics which showed that
universe was expanding at an accelerating rate.


But. . . . am I remembering incorrectly that that was established many
years ago – actually by the
Hubble telescope? Maybe the "accelerating rate" is the clue.




I know who Paul Dirac was. What was Dirac's greatest mathematical
quandrum? Report back. Or better, perhaps not.

I’m not sure what could be called his “greatest mathematical
quandrum” (I’m in a sort of quandary about the meaning of “quandrum”),
although I do know that he disliked mathematics basically, though

Einstein wasn't too comfortable either, especially in Riemannian
geometry (needed for relativity pertaining to gravity, his general
theory). Fact is, most physicists aren't that comfortable with the
mathematics needed. It can be horrendously difficult. The vast number of
scientists, are quite happy making observations.

That’s not exactly a ”new” opinion to me. I seem to have run across
such an
“observation” in several recent science readings. ;-)



Their theoretical colleagues are the brilliant ones. I'm just one of the former type.


Congratulations. I feel so humbly privileged to have exchanged
these few comments with you.



Dirac used matrices to escape his problems, which in essence got rid of
having to find the square root of a number, and hence alleviate the
problem of a +- answer. Sheer brilliance.

THAT statement is going to be saved somewhere in my “25 Scientists”
folder. Graham Farmelo
(Dirac’s biographer and a scientist himself) never mentioned that! 



Did you miss that I own/have read the Halpern book?


No, but ["I" ?] didn't mention Halpern.

I think you did. Review your 2nd. or 3rd post to me.

My – you even know some of my tastes in pianists!  I would guess you
only go in for Sousphone solos

Replying with your caustic tone, hardly makes you immune from the
accusation of throwing cheap barbs.


I wouldn’t exactly classify *yours* as Johnnie Walker Black Label.



No, I prefer pianists with better
musical minds and better repertoire, not that pianists are my prime
concern.


Good thing, since you apparently can’t perceive that the Top Shelf
pianism of Argerich
could not proceed but from a Top Shelf musical mind.




I am an orchestral beast. I also play the pianner, however badly.


I am an huge lover of orchestral music since I was 7 years old
(beginning piano lessons).

Tell me what you play, or improvise - on the piano!


Iowa will be interesting. According to the TV, the pickers come from
Iowa. Good program.


Doesn’t look like Gingrich will fare well there, but Iowa has its
problems.


GC
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: death of the mind.
    ... > referring to mind, especially in philosophical discussions, let alone ... >>mind and mental effects as matters of science. ... > We don't care about poor philosophy that says "this cannot be ... cognitive scientists? ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Political Views All In The Mind
    ... Science reporter, BBC World Service ... the scientists were able to work out the degree ... someone's mind in a political debate. ... "You have people who are experiencing the world, ...
    (sci.med.psychobiology)
  • Re: Hoax of the century
    ... And YOU'D post 927 links to the same damn article if the scientists of ANY ... organization overwhelmingly changed their mind. ... the one stuck on stupid is you. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Gaywood S3E5 Falsememories
    ... right in one respect to compare religion with parapsychology: ... Why do you feel my opinion is worth less than yours? ... research (and scientists can't even decide on what consciousness IS - ... is the mind in the body ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • A Closer Look at the Higgs Boson - One theory proposed by British physicist Peter Higgs and team
    ... A Closer Look at the Higgs Boson ... Scientists working at the world's biggest atom smasher near Geneva ... particle" because its existence is fundamental to the creation of the ...
    (soc.culture.china)