Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-31-2005, 08:08 PM
|
Replies: 2
Views: 42,427
Re: Frequentists and Opponents of Bayes
Bayes's theorem is a theorem, after all, so it has to be true, but it's so simplistic that it's essentially trivial. The interesting thing about Bayes's theorem is that it indicates we should update...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-29-2005, 05:55 PM
|
Replies: 35
Views: 12,888
Re: Catholic v. Christian
[ QUOTE ]
Yes... and 100s is 100-200 years after Christ, and 200s is 200-300 years after Christ. Year 299 = 3rd Century = 299 years after Christ = 200-300 years after Christ.
[/ QUOTE ]
I...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-28-2005, 03:15 AM
|
Replies: 10
Views: 1,306
Re: Tossing this question up
[ QUOTE ]
Why do humans feel sympathy for the pain and suffering of other life forms?
[/ QUOTE ]
Do you feel sympathy for ants? What about ferns? Sponges? Paramecia? We kill bacteria by...
|
Forum: Other Other Topics
12-24-2005, 04:56 PM
|
Replies: 13
Views: 1,577
Re: Chess tournament with two games
Miguel Najdorf played 45 opponents in a simultaneous blindfold exhibition in 1940. He scored +39-2=4.
You played the first game well, but White played terribly. There must have been something...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-21-2005, 09:27 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-20-2005, 11:30 PM
|
Replies: 116
Views: 16,156
|
Forum: Other Other Topics
12-20-2005, 06:56 PM
|
Replies: 15
Views: 5,974
Re: Improving my chess game
[ QUOTE ]
Disagree. The crux of de la Maza's plan is studying tactics, which gets much more bang for the buck than studying opening theory or rare endgames.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think studying tactics...
|
Forum: Other Other Topics
12-20-2005, 05:47 PM
|
Replies: 15
Views: 5,974
Re: Improving my chess game
I am familiar with de la Maza's study plan. I don't particularly like it and don't recommend it. It worked well for him, but anyone with the discipline to study the same number of hours as de la...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-19-2005, 09:26 PM
|
Replies: 30
Views: 1,601
Re: Agree or Disagree? Why?
This one is good too:
"Since we proposed punctuated equilibrium to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists - whether through design or stupidity, I do not...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-19-2005, 09:22 PM
|
Replies: 30
Views: 1,601
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-19-2005, 04:06 PM
|
Replies: 87
Views: 5,221
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-19-2005, 03:33 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-19-2005, 01:57 AM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-18-2005, 05:17 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-18-2005, 04:46 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-18-2005, 02:27 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-17-2005, 05:01 PM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-17-2005, 01:13 AM
|
Replies: 83
Views: 5,108
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-16-2005, 06:29 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what it's called, but it's obviously fallacious.
Since atoms don't have a mother, you don't have a mother. Since atoms don't have a beautiful singing voice, Mariah Carey...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-16-2005, 05:48 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
Well, the example wasn't particularly rigorous, just meant to shed some light on the subject. Even if it is valid, the assumption (that all processes are reducible to fundamental particles) is...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-15-2005, 08:48 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
I don't know exactly who holds which beliefs. I'm not terribly keen on keeping track of people's religious beliefs. Religion and determinism are definitely compatible, and, I would say, not really...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-15-2005, 08:20 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
Okay, this is a good objection to determinism, but your excerpt doesn't explain why PSR is a poor objection. What it does is explain our psychological motivation for assuming PSR. To conclude from...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-15-2005, 08:13 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
[ QUOTE ]
The only only way the ball can rise again is if the neurons inside my brain fire (my FREE WILL), in order to toss it again.
[/ QUOTE ]
But why are the neurons firing in your brain...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-15-2005, 01:52 AM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
Well, I don't think motion is a requisite, but I get what you're saying. The car is a bad example, though, because although it's "stopped", it's still in motion. There are forces acting on it, the...
|
Forum: Science, Math, and Philosophy
12-14-2005, 07:11 PM
|
Replies: 40
Views: 4,175
Re: Why is Randomness so Hard to Prove?
[ QUOTE ]
Why can't we just use the throwing of dice? Or any other method where results are unpredictable, uncalculatable, and seeingly perfectly random? What about random number generators in...
|