Seeker

Member
  • Content count

    483
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Seeker

  • Rank
    Desperately seeking something.
  • Birthday 04/02/1960

Helpful Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Marital Status
    Still Hopeful
  • Location
    Location, Location

Friendly Details

  • MBTI
    INTP
  • Interests
    Music
    Fractals
    RPG
    Philosophy
    Space
    Weirdage
    Travel
  • Your Motto
    All things in moderations - *especially* moderation.
  • Doctrine /Affiliation
    Agnostic / Quaker / Discordian

Other Details

  • Occupation
    Layabout / Digital Artist
  • Website URL
    http://almonaster.deviantart.com/gallery/

Recent Profile Visitors

1,562 profile views
  1. Seeker

    Recognised Church In England

    As I read this, it is concerned with buildings, and their usage. It is nothing to do with the recognition of the faith.
  2. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    The alignment of the beam splitter appears incorrect to me, but we really have strayed well off topic.
  3. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    Speed is distance divided by time. They measured the distance, and they measured the time.
  4. You can adjust the print size in your browser.
  5. Typing all in capitals is seen as SHOUTING, and is generally considered rude.
  6. Seeker

    Apple 8, X....new watch

    If you are planning on building from anyone else's code, make sure you get the full source code including any libraries, and check what information it is collecting and transmitting about your users.
  7. Doctrinally, I don't think it is a change of course, but I would agree that it's a very welcome change of emphasis.

  8. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    The new standard is objective and verifiable. You seem to be deliberately ignoring what I said. "Your stick is good enough for all practical purposes." You don't need an atomic clock to boil an egg, and I am not suggesting you record your mileage in fractions of a light-second. However, when you and a friend both have metre sticks, which each of you think are accurate, but are of slightly different lengths, what then? The normal solution is to have a reference stick which is manufactured to higher tolerances, and it used to calibrate the everyday measures. You then have the same problem again if two of those reference measures disagree, and so on up the chain. The 19th century method which you seem to be advocating is to have a single physical object to which all the high-level references are compared. Unfortunately, physical objects vary with temperature, humidity, corrosion, wear-and-tear, etc. The modern approach is to tie the standards directly to fundamental elements of the Universe. Please note that there is none of your implied drift off into intellectual la-la land here. The comparisons are tricky, sure, but the derivation is measurement-by-measurement, not just inference-by-inference.
  9. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    Yes. Your stick is good enough for all practical purposes. However for many scientific purposes it is necessary to be ridiculously precise, and so the scientific "stick" is chosen in a way which makes it consistent in as many circumstances as possible. If you raise or lower the temperature for example, your stick will be slightly longer or shorter, whereas a light-second and hence a scientific metre will remain constant. As to changing the speedos, remember I said 0.02 parts per billion? That's the equivalent of measuring the entire width of the continental US and being out by less that the width of a hair. The length of the SI metre been more accurately defined, but lies within the limits of accuracy of previous standards. No adjustment necessary.
  10. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    But that presupposes that "dog" and "horse" have fixed referents. If everyone called the riding animal a dog and the domestic pet a horse there would be no communication difficulty. Units of measurement need a defined reference or they are meaningless. The metre was originally defined as 1/10,000 of the distance between the Equator and the North Pole measuring along the meridian which passed through Paris. That's a little difficult to use when you are measuring cloth, so a measuring stick was created which was as close as they could make it to the desired length, and then copies were made (to varying degrees of accuracy) and distributed, and copied, and distributed, and used for practical measurements. It doesn't matter whether you call it a metre or a sticklength or a horse, the important thing is the underlying unit. In the case of the speed of light, we have a physical constant (c), measured in units of distance over time. Representatives of the scientific community got together (hence bypassing your linguistic quibble) and decided that rather than defining c in terms of the metre and the second, they would instead define the the metre in terms of c and the second. The relationship between the 3 remains the same in the real world, but it means that the length of the metre is now fixed unless either c or the definition of the second changes. If the real-world value of c were discovered to have changed, then the length of the si metre would by definition change. It's like inflation. If the value of the dollar falls, the value of the cent falls with it. Unlike inflation, though, we're pretty sure that c is a constant.
  11. Seeker

    a common atheist fallacy

    There is some good info in the measurement section of the Wikipedia speed of light article. The metre is now defined relative to the speed of light, so the speed of light in m/s is now 100% accurate by definition. The value of the second has a separate source, so it is still meaningful to ask how accurate the measurements are. Prior to adopting the current definitions, the accuracy was around 0.02 parts per billion.
  12. So this wag wants to know which tailIban?
  13. Seeker

    James Webb Space Telescope

    Same basic idea, but I thought it was "weakly interacting massive particle". They contrast with MACHOs (massive astrophysical compact halo objects) as rival explanations for dark matter.
  14. Seeker

    Sunrise, sunset.....

    In terms of atmospherics the two overlap, so it is not generally possible to definitively tell the two apart from a photo of an unknown location. However... activity during the day (both natural and human) tends to produce a lot of dust, so sunsets are typically redder but more hazy, whereas sunrises are usually clearer and brighter. That means you can often make a good guess as to which is which.
  15. I've never even seen them for sale. Do you know of any which are available online?