Wednesday, August 31, 2016
A La Carte
Been a busy couple of days, So I'm lumping together some of my Facebook responses to make a single post here.
In response to a left-wing group posting the video snippet that declared that Sean Hannity had raged about those Republicans who refuse to support Trump, I responded:
Point 1: that's the calmest rage I've ever heard. Foolish exaggeration is the Republicans' territory. Democrats please don't wander into that room or I will be compelled to start jumping on you with both feet just like I do on the Republicans.
Point 2: Sean Hannity is not upset that people refuse to blindly follow Trump. Sean Hannity is upset because he just learned that if you pander you must go along with whatever the crowd commands. You don't get to lead. Panderer and leader are mutually exclusive concepts. Sean Hannity is upset that Sean Hannity can't issue orders and be obeyed. He thought he was making public opinion. He just realized that he's been caught in a riptide.
He don't like that.
in response to a post taking apart the arguments of gun worshiper John R. Lott, Jr.
(author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws), I posted:
A careful analysis of the easily falsifiable claims of one of the leading gun advocates in this nation. Everyone should read it. Conservatives and Republicans won't. This is because this is a set of facts which contradict their emotionally satisfying superstitious belief system. Those who advocate thoughtful gun control should read it because then they will know how to answer those who refuse to let facts interfere with their emotionally satisfying superstitious belief system.
In support of my friend, Charles in his dialogue with a conservative extremist after that individual condemned him for joining Alice in Wonderland, I posted:
I find it a delightful irony that those most divorced from reality and most insistent upon living in an alternate universe are those who most often accuse realists of being deluded.
Ask any UFO nut. He will decry your incredible stupidity and foolishness for not realizing that the aliens have been running the earth for centuries perhaps even millennia.
Hollow earth? Bigfoots? (Bigfeets? Bigfeet?). Hillary Clinton as super villain mass murderer par excellence?
What a fool you are, if you ignore the obvious facts!
I repeat an earlier post I made today:
“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.”
Two points: First, from what I read here there does seem to be a difference between a wormhole and quantum entanglement. Both ignore or at least dispense with the space part of the continuum. OK. But quantum entanglement does not permit one particle to change instantaneously in the future or in the past in response to a change made to its partner particle in the present (unless that explains the spooky action at a distance). Wormholes are time machines as much as they are transportation machines. That would seem to be a profound difference between a wormhole and quantum entanglement.
Second, I'm not sure why The author included the video "explanation" of the theory by the theorist. Undoubtedly it makes things crystal-clear to those who understand advanced mathematics. Since I have trouble with high school level geometry and algebra, he might as well have been speaking Mandarin or perhaps even Sanskrit. I expect anyone who viewed the article would be unlikely to be familiar with such advanced mathematics and so I wonder why it was included.
Which brings me to my own question regarding spooky action at a distance. Bobby, I assume you will be seeking a position at a University now that you have your PhD. I also assume you will make friends with everyone in sight as you usually do. If one of those people deals with quantum theory maybe you could ask him a question that's been bothering me. If we have multiple dimensions in excess of the four currently known and which are curled up into a very tiny state, is it not possible that the information which seemingly travels faster than light in a quantum entanglement situation is in fact traveling through one or more of those dimensions? Information traveling at the speed of light across such a tiny dimension would seem instantaneously transmitted
I assume this will result in an amused chuckle from said quantum physicist. That's OK. I don't deny my ignorance of quantum physics. I would just like to know why I'm wrong.