text:
- John Edser
- Sydney
- Australia
This conversation is closed.
Today's era is Post Modern. This means that a frame of refernce is not necessarily required or if one is employed it can be changed mid argument. IOW, today it appears valid to move your goal posts to kick a goal removing falsifiability from most arguments, even within the sciences. Mathematically this means that a defined constant to which all the variables within a theory must remain dependent is no longer required reducing Post Modern science to nothing more than reversible (tautological) mathematics. It was Galileo who proposed that only comparing variables without a constant to act as a falsifiable frame of reference prohibits any meaningful concept of cause and effect. We cannot tell if the sun goes around the earth or vice versa without a valid, i.e. constant frame of reference which of course, cannot change except via falsification allowing the evolution of a new theory contradictory to the old one. For example, Einstein's c, which Newton thought was just a variable was shown to be a constant reducing M and T (mass and time) to just variables within Special Relativity. Likewise, Darwin reduced species to evolving variables allowing a combination of survival and reproduction to be maximized providing a new falsifiable frame of reference for the biological sciences in contradiction to religious dogma.
In a world overburdened by massive debt, a science of climate change entirely dependent on mathematical modeling, theory within the physical sciences dominated by non falsifiable infinities and a Neo Darwinism that cannot be empirically falsified only non verified, I ask: what is your FALSIFIABLE frame of reference?
John Edser
Jun 12 2012: Bernard,
- +1
Yet again I cannot reply directly to your most recent posting so I will quote in within my text:
"My falsifiable frame of reference in this example: "all swans are white" is:
- An axiom (one of them by experience) that, there is white color (to be more specific) of something (should be >asserted), feathers, legs, or skin of swan = An axiom version of any possible falsifiable frame of reference = (IN ESSENCE) a complete (informative & consistent) version of any falsifiable frame of reference. In this case, a complete version (informative & consistent) of "white"."
My point: nobody can claim to know if a definition of "white" is "complete" BEFORE we test it empirically via NON reversibly linking each contesting definition to a subject e.g. "swan". All we can do is make an INDUCTIVE assumption (just a guess) of what we think a complete definition of white is and then go ahead and test this against nature. While contesting definitions of white cannot be falsified (because they are only tautological) irreversibly linking each to a subject makes each exclusive predicate minimally testable via each reverse contradiction: all white (things) are swans. This is easily empirically falsified bringing us back to our original definition of white. IOW, any search for absolute truth falls; all we can possibly do is provide many testable (constant) frames of reference and proceed to test them. In this case they are different definitions of white which must freely compete such that only NATURE is the final judge. In this way contesting but entirely falsifiable frames of reference evolve to better ones.
> Without a complete falsifiable frame of reference (informative & consistent), we are not pointing to anywhere.
JE:- "Sufficient", not "complete".
> ...(in my opinion) "all swan are white" is not a complete (informative & consistent) statement.
It is SUFFICIENT to falsify the predicate which acts as the frame of reference so it is sufficiently complete
Jun 12 2012: Hi
I am going to make summaries:
FFR = Falsifiable frame of reference
MRU = informative with Minimum Requirement for Understanding & consistent (TO MAKE CLEAR DISTINCTION FOR BETTER COMPARISON)
1. It doesn't mean "white" should be within complete definition. As i already mentioned, there isn't way we could make complete definition. "A complete version" as i told you, it should be informative (it has MRU)
2. An example:
People 1: all humans are THINKER (FFR) = H -> T
People 2: human is FOLLOWER = H then not -> T ?
People 3: "what? should it be like this, that follower are thinker? or what?
Above example, there is no MRU in FFR, generally. Since we don't have clear distinction of "think" compared to "follower". BUT IF THERE IS, THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED.
3. I am not criticizing "all swans are white". But i just made an additional assertions to this forum, that:
- Someday we could deal with FFR without MRU (generally), while we are making a conversation.
- And if someday we deal with this issue (for example: "thinker" as FFR without MRU) while making conversations, we could accept an alternate method to fulfill FFR with MRU
- one of the methods to give FFR with MRU, is by converting (redefine) an FFR as an axiom (ONLY IF WE CONSIDER IT HAS POSSIBILITY). Axiom has MRU, and again it could be considered consistent.
- I gave transitional explanation, how axiom could be adopted into the structure of falsifiability as FFR with MRU
The points are:
- There is an issue, (FFR without MRU)
- I proposed examples of axiom as FFR
- I gave transitional explanation, how to adopt axiom as FFR to conduct MRU.
4. Not for all FFR could be converted (defined) to axiom. Once we could convert (define) an FFR as an axiom, I myself, consider this as an FFR with MRU. I proposed this. It's an optional.
5. Falsifiability using axiom as falsifiable frame of reference (by redefine falsifiable frame of reference as an axiom) is possible
Jun 13 2012: MRU is not needed. A definition of "white" can be anything you like as long as it is logically valid. All that matters is that the definition remains irreversibly linked to the subject (swan).The definition stands minimally falsifiable via the simple, logical reverse. Poorer definitions quickly refute in favor of better ones. For example defining "white" as just a chosen color tone quickly falsifies in favor of "white" being the result the reflection of all light. As you know, the colors of objects are due to the wavelengths of light that they reflect. All objects absorb some wavelengths making them appear something less than perfect white, disallowing swans to be a perfect white. Better predicates (frames of reference) evolve from more primitive predicates, if and only if, they remain falsifiable (non tautological ) and are tested against nature without prejudice. This last requirement is the hardest because all of us are prejudiced for our own beliefs.
Completeness is not unlike the problem of induction. Just as nobody can claim to have observed every swan to verify that they are all white, nobody can reasonably claim to provide a complete definition of white. However, both of these problems CAN be solved via an application of the Traditional Square Of Opposition (TSO):
The A proposition (all swans are white) is obviously falsified via a verification of the O proposition (some swans are NOT white). No other proposition in the square can possibly falsify A because they have the same predicate. Falsification within the square absolutely requires the same S (swan) to become a valid deduction from a different and therefore contradictory predicate. The only falsification not included is the proper subset reversal of S and P. The fact that the predicate within O is not named does not matter. Allowing it removes both the problem of induction and definitional completeness via natural selection on contesting predicates.
Jun 13 2012: Hi
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/ A (left above) & O (right below) Yes, i agree with you :)
Thank you
It's great conversations
WarmestJun 10 2012: Bernard,
None of your recent posts can be directly replied to (no " reply" link appears in red at the top of any of your recent postings). This being the case, I can only reply using a separate posting. My comments to your most recent communication appear under my initials JE within your text (please write "then" not -> because it is more readable to all).
"x" -> "y" = "x" then "y"
all "x" -> "y" = all "x" then "y"
swan is white = if swan then white = if "x" -> "y" or if "s" -> "w"
No , it is the reverse: if "white" then "swan" as long as all the other criteria of a swan have been met. This is only because "white" predicates and therefore acts as a falsifiable frame of reference for "swan" which is a deduction from "white" (NOT the reverse). Unlike mathematics, subject and predicate within a proposed non tautology CANNOT be reversed.
there is black swan = if swan then not white = if "x" -> -"y" or if "s" -> - "w" or if "s" ->
Again you have this in reverse: there is observed a black swan requires as a prerequisite: if "white" then "swan " . The subject (swan) does NOT determine the predicate (white) the predicate determines the subject. Subjects are always a deduction from a predicate. The falsification requires "swan" to be a deduction from a DIFFERENT i.e. entirely contradictory predicate: e.g. "black". Note that the evolution of swans as both white and black was not at all possible until swans were only defined white on however, an entirely falsifiable basis. IOW, without a possible verification/non verification and at least one possible falsification the swan proposition is not reasonable (even if it was logical).
The critical difference between science and mathematics is that only science can provide falsifiable propositions; mathematics can only provide validity/invalidity.
Jun 11 2012: Hi
Actually, whether it's mathematics or any kind of symbolic structures for logical thinking is quite enough to conduct a reasoning. As i mentioned earliest, that whether we did mathematical reasoning, or scientific, or empirical observation, or spiritual observation, or anything else, eventually it will fall into logical structure, and we will decide logically, whether empirical observation, spiritual observation or anything else is true or not.
Besides, since both of maths & science are the field of knowledge, there shouldn't be a contradiction each other. One shouldn't against each other. We can use one of them to reach the same purpose. And it should be.
May be it's merely because "black swan", black -> swan. But in grammar (as i followed) "black swan" is swan with black of something (swan -> black). Good book, it doesn't mean "good" -> "book" (unless there is exception we assert it), but there is a book then -> good.
There is black swan, it doesn't have to be "there is black" then -> "swan", therefore there shouldn't be "there is white" then -> swan (unless someone asserts as it is, but in this case, it's not me).
That's why i am using notation to avoid misleading:
If your understanding to me : if "black" then "swan", therefore (as you said) if "white" then "swan", then the notation should be like this:
"x" < - > "y" = "x" then -> "y" & "y" then -> "x", ("x" is "sufficient condition" & "necessary condition" for "y").
And I am not using above notation. I am using, "x" (for swan) then -> "y" (for white), where "x" is "sufficient condition" for "y" and "y" is "necessary condition" for "x", but "x" is not a "necessary condition" for "y". Therefore it can't be reversed.
Jun 11 2012: Mathematics is not sufficient to conduct reasoning. The mathematician Kurt Godel proved mathematics will always remain insufficient disallowing a complete and consistent set of axioms for mathematics. The net result: a proposition NOT of mathematics is absolutely required to make sense of mathematics. This is not surprising because mathematics is entirely circular (an expanded tautology). Logic comes in two flavours: reversible and non reversible. Mathematics only employs the reversible type. Reasoning employs both where however, only NON reversible logic can possibly supply a minimal falsification (via a simple, subject/predicate reversal as previously discussed).
To be able to state ANYTHING that can be deemed reasonable a subject S must remain deductive from a predicate P such that their reversal provides a falsifying contradiction. Note that this does not apply to definitions which are entirely reversible. Of course, only providing a list of definitions is not reasonable. To make definitions reasonable at least two have to connect in a logically NON reversible way, e.g. " all swans are white" necessarily excluding "all white (things) are swans". This example non reversibly connects a definition of "swan" to a definition of "white" thereby allowing a falsification via the reverse. As previously discussed, the predicate from which the subject is always a deduction forms the falsifiable frame of reference. What this means is that while "white" must remain a constant the subject is allowed to vary e.g. while you can have many types of swans (as long as they are white) there is only one type of white. Allowing many whites allows anybody to "ad hoc" change their frame of reference fitting up the facts to the theory via removing falsifiability. Thus, any reasonable mathematical representation must provide an algebraic constant to which all defined variables remain dependent.
John Edser
Jun 11 2012: Hi
There is no way for any kind of methods whether maths, science, spirituality or any possible methods that could make a complete definition of anything.
It's because the element of definition should be compared to any possible existences to conduct complete definition, and it's impossible. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't make a definition.
Enough consistency would let us play around it, with enough awareness about what was happening around it.
I agree with you that maths is not sufficient to conduct reasoning (other methods having same problem). An axiom (not specifically) could be added for additional assertions on reasoning.
After this, disagreeing between us, perhaps it would be essentially different between us. But this is great conversations. That's what conversations are for, enriching each other.
This conversation enriches my knowledge. I look forward for possible next conversations.
Definitely, there is something from me that was lacking in understanding this conversation.
Please, refer to my explanation below, about smooth transitions between yours and my thinking. It's my last try to see whether we can be synchronized each other in this conversations.
Thank you
WarmestJun 11 2012: Hi
I will try to follow you.
I am going to make smooth transitions between yours and my thinking, so (hopefully) we can see the same structure in this reasoning.
You use this understanding:
- a proposition, ALL Subject has Predicate = for ALL Swan (Subject) has white (Predicate)
- but since there is Predicate as black, therefore white is not for ALL Swan = but since there is Predicate as black, therefore ALL Swan are not white.
- It's similar to this: All (x) then -> (y)
- but since there is Predicate as not (y), therefore (y) is not for ALL (x) = but since there is Predicate as not (y), therefore ALL (x) are not (y)
Just because we are dealing with symbol, that doesn't mean we can reverse it easily. Symbol is merely symbol without agreement (rules). Once we confirm for the rules behind the symbol, there shouldn't be anymore misleading.
But i replaced (x) and (y) with anything with an exception, no reverse. (x) -> (y)
Now consider these: swan is reality, and white is another reality. There are two realities in here, swan and white.
It would be like this:
- It's similar to this: All (1st reality) then -> (2nd reality)
- but since there is Predicate as not (2nd reality), therefore (2nd reality) is not for ALL (1st reality) = but since there is Predicate as not (2nd reality), therefore ALL (1st reality) are not (2nd reality)
"swan" and "axiom" are ideas within our mind. Those represent reality, but we shouldn't consider there will be a swan in our brain or besides us (when we are thinking about swan). Unless we are in the middle of the swan.
- It's similar to this: All (1st axiom) then -> (2nd axiom)
- but since there is Predicate as not (2nd axiom), therefore (2nd axiom) is not for ALL (1st axiom) = but since there is Predicate as not (2nd axiom), therefore ALL (1st axiom) are not (2nd axiom)
more ...Jun 11 2012: But perhaps we didn't familiar with swan as reality and white as reality in this case. Now i will put another way.
- a proposition, ALL Subject has Predicate = for ALL Swan (Subject) has white (Predicate)
- but since there is Predicate as black, therefore white is not for ALL Swan = but since there is Predicate as black, therefore ALL Swan are not white.
- a proposition, ALL Subject has Predicate = for ALL (People that looking at a swan and say it loud about the color of the swan) (Subject) has (an announcement to someone that there is white color on a swan) (Predicate)
- but since there is Predicate as (an announcement to someone that there is black color on a swan), therefore (an announcement to someone that there is white color on a swan) is not coming from ALL (People that looking at a swan and say it loud about the color of the swan) = but since there is Predicate as (an announcement to someone that there is black color on a swan), therefore ALL (People that looking at a swan and say it loud about the color of the swan) are not (an announcement to someone that there is white color on a swan).
- (People that looking at a swan and say it loud about the color of the swan) = a reality
- (an announcement to someone that there is white color on a swan) = a reality
- a proposition, ALL Subject has Predicate = for ALL Swan (Subject) has white (Predicate)
- but since there is Predicate as black, therefore white is not for ALL Swan = but since there is Predicate as black, therefore ALL Swan are not white.
All (P then -> Q) (no reverse)
If All (P then -> Q), then there will be no (P then not -> Q)
But there is (P then not -> Q), therefore All (P then -> Q) is falsified.
All (Swan then -> white) (no reverse)
If All (Swan then -> white), then there will be no (Swan then not -> white)
But there is (Swan then not -> white), therefore All (Swan then -> white) is falsified.
more ...
Jun 12 2012: At this point I must bring you back to the original question: with regards to "all swans are white" what is your proposed falsifiable frame of reference for this example ?
John Edser
Jun 12 2012: My falsifiable frame of reference in this example: "all swans are white" is:
- An axiom (one of them by experience) that, there is white color (to be more specific) of something (should be asserted), feathers, legs, or skin of swan = An axiom version of any possible falsifiable frame of reference = (IN ESSENCE) a complete (informative & consistent) version of any falsifiable frame of reference . In this case, a complete version (informative & consistent) of "white".
Without a complete falsifiable frame of reference (informative & consistent), we are not pointing to anywhere.
Because (in my opinion) "all swan are white" is not a complete (informative & consistent) statement. Whether we believe white is the color of something on swan, but for the reasoning, a statement should be formed closer to reality. It's just to make us easy to understand and to avoid misleading or to avoid any possible fallacy in reasoning.
Nice question, nice conversations.
Thank you
WarmestJun 11 2012: Hi
And i am using those structures on all of my examples. Is there any difference (in essence) that could lead this reasoning out of context as you mentioned? No. it's just the same.
The different is, that i modify for the set (Subject) and the proper subset (Predicate) and replace it with any of possible reality that has related each other (between S -> P). But it's not on reverse direction.
WarmestJun 7 2012: In your first example, you have not separated the difference between living and non living "existence". While it is true that all the non living are connected this remains untrue for living systems. Darwinism works via separate individuals competing and cooperating within evolving populations. Natural selection absolutely requires this separation. Nothingness within reality does not mean that reality is only nothingness because if it did this axiom only represents a tautology ( any circular argument) which cannot be used as a valid, falsifiable frame of reference.
A reality within a reality without end is also circular so it cannot present a valid frame of reference. Randomness, like all the other axioms you offered, has no possible cause and effect so it is only mathematical not scientific. My point is that mathematics, which is all you appear to be employing here, is not a science. This is because everything within mathematics is logically revresible. To provide a theory of science you must provide at least one non reversible (non tautological) proposition such as " all swans are white". This immediately plugs into the "square of opposition" allowing the falsiying contradiction "some swans are not white". The contrary proposition "no swan is white" does not falsify it only non verifies. This is because nobody can validly claim to have observed every swan (the problem of induction). Because "all swans are white prohibits " all white (things) are swans" the falsifying frame of reference in this instance is the predicate "white". The problem of induction is removed because the falsifying contradiction " some swans are not white" is allowed. IOW, only if a proposition completes a square of opposition can it be said to be reasonable. Mathematics is logical but it isn't reasonable because the axioms of mathematics cannot complete a square.
John Edser
Jun 7 2012: Hi
"therefore there is only reality within other reality", it isn't a circular or infinite. What i mean is, that "inside reality there is only reality" (in line with "there is no nothingness within reality").
There is scenario:
- There is proposition (should be tested whether it's true or not) = "all swans are white"
- Just one fact to prove (falsify) "that not all swans are white, but there are several swans are black"
What i mean is, whether scientific or not, or any other way to find another knowledge (induction or deduction), in essence, is the way to get a consistent knowledge.
And falsifying is a part of a way to find out whether a proposition is consistent (universally) or not. It's the essence. And we shouldn't limit falsifying by targeting through frame of reference.
Axiom is another way to falsify whether a knowledge is consistent or not. And in my opinion it's enough to be a tool to falsify. It just that i don't want to be trapped on limited falsifying.
Somehow, we could use falsify to justify: "he was good", but when he did mistake, then he is bad, and similar to this. It's debatable, & we just stop there, and we couldn't understand the essence of something.
The point is (about falsifiability): that we should understand falsifying and see the essence of it and if possible try to move to a higher capability that give better capability to expand the area of certainty. That's why i choose axiom as another way to falsify. It leads us to a better understanding, the essence, so we can do a proper act within our life. And it could be considered (in my opinion) falsifying but much better.
Sorry, for having conversation on a different line, but that's falsifiability on my side (since, known and formal falsifiability could lead to chaotic as i mentioned). Hopefully we have the same purpose, having the essence.
Jun 7 2012: The main falsifiable point that Darinism makes is that the fitness of individuals that are competing and cooperating within the same population, must differ to allow any natural selection. This absolutely requires a complete separation of all biological individuals, e.g. I can't eat or breath for you. Life is very unlike non life because all living individuals remain biologically separate. This is why physics alone cannot explain life. Allowing a reality within another is tautological if the proposed realities are proposed equal. If they are different then you must say how exactly.
My swan example was provided to demonstrate how a falsifiabe frame of reference differs to your axiomatic frames; axioms are not falsifiable only non verifiable. With regards to your argument for consistency I would like to point out that while every tautology is consistent, none of them can be falsified. Reason requires much more than self conintency, i.e. while all reasoning must be consistent not all logically consistent propositions are reasonable. When something is shown inconsistent (proffers a contradiction) this does NOT falsify the proposition simply because there was no proposition. All it can do is prove the proposition invalid. Falsifiability is a term reserved for comparing at least two self consistent propositions via experiment in order to discover which one remains empirically correct. There is no higher capability than falsification simply because all falsifications are verifications of a contradictory proposition. In my swan example the predicate "white" provided the frame of reference. This can be empirically falsified by the obervation of just a single non white swan. As you suggested, this means a black, red or some other colored swan has to be observed as a verification of a contradictory proposition. Unfortunately Karl Popper, the father of falsifiability, failed to understand this leading him to discount the value of verification.
John EdserJun 7 2012: Hi,
Axiom is not always related to mathematics, the fact "that we are aware therefore we are exist", it is an axiom. But when something empirical observation can not be replaced by the axiom through mathematics, while being pulled down to its most basic, we often use the axioms of mathematics.
There are several things for me:
- That something that can be falsified, can't be considered empirically falsified if we never found a chance to falsify. Although it is possible according to its proposition.
The statement "all swans are white" that can be empirically falsified through further observation to find out whether there is just one "swan with black color (or other color), and it will be meaningless if there is someone for the entire life could not see a black swan.
- As well as for the axiom, as far as we understand the axiom as a representative of a reality, and explore the structure of the axioms is the same as exploring the possibilities of reality, then the axiom can also be falsified if there is a chance for it.
The points are:
- I'd rather thinking about falsifiability as: "something regarded as a universal truth and could be considered as axiom, at first", and verify it through empirical observation (or may be represented by other axiom) "
- As generally known about falsifiability, while i see the meaning of "falsifiability" is not specifically related to a form of reasoning. Axiom can justify and can be justified (falsified). It's similar to empirical observation that can justify and can be justified.
- Since the term of empirical could be different to others, therefore, consistency could be reasonable or not, scientific could be widen or not, and falsifiability could be different to others. It's relative to people's experience.
Jun 8 2012: The test for falsifiability is not difficult: if you state something such that when the subject S and predicate P are reversed this changes the meaning entirely then the proposition is minimally falsifiable via this reversal. For example, you proposed " we are aware therefore we exist" (as a non mathematical axiom ). Does "we exist therefore we are aware" mean the same ? If so, then the axiom is not falsifiable because it is absolutely self referential. If the meaning is not the same then reversing the proposition provides a contradiction such that if it is observed in nature it falsifies your proposition.
Your point that faslsifiability is entirely subjective is not true. The reason why science can be clearly understood in any culture demonstrates this.
John Edser
Jun 8 2012: Hi
It's not subjective, but it's subjective within advanced, deepening, or widen. It's like the way we manage ourselves are subjective, but the purpose may be just the same.
It's the way we use (in practice) that it is different to others, but the structure (in essence) is just the same.
Please refer to my answer below.
WarmestJun 7 2012: Perhaps, this could describe my structure of thinking on this case:
- all S(wan) -> (therefore, asserts) y (white)
- If all S(wan) -> y, then there shouldn't be an existence of S(wan) -> -y (black)
* But there is S(wan) -> -y, therefore it's falsified
- all (axiom, x) -> asserts (an axiom, y)
- If all (axiom, x) -> asserts (an axiom, y), then there shouldn't be an existence of (an axiom, x) -> asserts (an axiom, -y)
* But there is (an axiom - x) -> asserts that (an axiom, -y), therefore it's falsified
- all ( f(x) = x^n ) -> asserts (a graph is symmetric to the y-axis)
- If all ( f(x) = x^n ) -> asserts (a graph is symmetric to the y-axis), then there shouldn't be an existence of ( f(x) = x^n ) -> asserts (a graph is not symmetric to the y-axis)
* But there is ( f(x) = x^n ) (where "n" is an odd number) -> asserts (a graph is not symmetric to the y-axis), therefore it's falsified.
We shouldn't confuse with axiom & swan, where "S" for any Swan, but for axiom(s) as different animals, but it's incorrect. Actually, "S" for any Swan (typical), and for axiom(s) as (typical) the same animal.
Where "S" and "the function" is typical as the swan, where the swan is the same animal but it could be conditional (different) at the specific situation. Just the same as this axiom, that it has differences ("^n") to others but still within typical of a function ("x^n").
Jun 8 2012: You are employing mathematical notation to make your point. This is not a mathematical discussion group. Please rewrite what you mean in words so that all of us can understand your argument
I do not understand your last sentence which summed up your main point. Are you saying that it is not necessary to provide another axiom that contradicts in order to falsify a proposed axiom?
John Edser
Jun 8 2012: Hi
If necessary, we can use an axiom to verify a possible contradiction at the final node of form of axiom as a falsifying (if we agree that such this way could be considered valid as we do empirical observation). Or, if we disagree, we could contradict an axiom at the final node of form of axiom with reality (if we have a chance for it).
I will try to explain form of axiom using examples:
//If we touch something then we touch an existence, but axiom asserts there is only zero distance or there is a distance, therefore we never touch existence//
- all (we touch something, x) -> asserts (we touch an existence, y)
- if all (that we touch, x) -> asserts (we touch an existence, y),
--- then there shouldn't be an event of (that we touch, x) -> asserts (we don't touch an existence, -y)
-- but there is (we have no distance to what we touch - x) -> asserts that (we never touch an existence, -y), Therefore form of axiom COMPLETELY falsifiedJun 8 2012: Another example:
//Every dream is unrealistic, but axiom asserts that there is no nothingness within reality (inside reality there is only reality), and a dream is just another reality, unless we accept our awareness of being accused as something that is not real//
- all (someone is dreaming about someone's self, x) -> asserts (in someone's dream, someone is not real, y)
- if all (someone is dreaming about someone's self, x) -> asserts (in someone's dream, someone is not real, y),
--- then there shouldn't be an even of (someone is dreaming about someone's self, x) -> asserts (in someone's dream, someone is real, -y)
--- but there is (someone is dreaming about someone's self, - x) -> asserts that (in someone's dream, someone is real, since someone considered within real world, -y), or
--- but there is (someone is dreaming about someone's self - x) -> asserts that (in someone's dream, someone is ENTIRELY real, since someone's awareness and someone's body inside dream is considered just another "me" and those are real in someone's sense, -y),
* Therefore it's falsified. In this case, our assertion is an axiom itself. People might argue that "myself entirely while dreaming was real in my own perception"
--- but there is (someone is dreaming about someone's self - x) -> asserts that (in someone's dream, NOT ENTIRELY someone is not real, since someone's awareness is the only real one that someone believe, -y)
* Therefore it's falsified, where, one of someone's self (someone's awareness) is the real one. In this case, our assertion is an axiom itself. People might argue that our awareness while dreaming was real, but it wasn't for our hand (nose, etc).Jun 8 2012: Further example:
//Randomness is everywhere, but axiom asserts its consistency (certainty)//
- (event is coincident, x) -> asserts (there is inconsistency, y)
- all (event is coincident, x) -> asserts (there is no consistency, y)
- if all (event is coincident, x) -> asserts (there is no consistency, y),
--- then there shouldn't be an existence of (event is random, x) -> asserts (there is a pattern, -y)
--- but there is (randomness in an event of computer programming - x) -> asserts that (randomness in computer programming was produced based on pattern - since this pattern could be produced using complicated function, it's lack of predictability, -y), therefore falsified.
WarmestJun 8 2012: Bernard,
For some reason no facility is displayed on my computer for me to be able to reply to any of your recent posts. I repeat, I cannot understand your notation. For example I do not know what -> -y means.
Jun 9 2012: Hi
Forgive me. Thank you for being patience.
"x" -> "y" = "x" then "y"
all "x" -> "y" = all "x" then "y"
swan is white = if swan then white = if "x" -> "y" or if "s" -> "w"
there is black swan = if swan then not white = if "x" -> -"y" or if "s" -> - "w" or if "s" -> "b"
To be more specific:
- if (there was someone looking at a swan) then -> (it caused) (there was someone told us that there was white color of something on a swan) = why did he/she say there was white color of something on a swan? yes, because he/she already saw white of something on a swan
- one day (there was someone looking at a swan) but then -> (it caused) (there was someone told us that there wasn't white color but black color of something on a swan) = why did he/she say there wasn't white color but black color of something on a swan? yes, because he/she already saw another black color of something on another swan
- therefore, we conclude there were black and white of something on swans = there were black color of something on a swan, or there might be a white color of something on different swan.
WarmestJun 6 2012: Just saying that evolution on a macro scale could be disproved on earth if say we found a 3 billion year old hedgehog or rabbit.
Jun 7 2012: Unfortunately, such an amazing observation only constitutes a non verification. While Darwinism does indeed argue that such an observation should not be made, systematics has to be reviewed continually. This is because Darwin demonstrated that one species grades into another so species are only a variable not a constant. Retracing such a complex phylogeny backwards hundreds of millions of years is notoriously difficult (so it must be continuously revised). However, given such an observation it is much more likely that it was produced via another cause, e.g. fraud or represents a false observation. The only way that Darwinism can be empirically falsified has been outlined by myself in the moderated discussion group:
sci bio evolution
Reversing the Darwinian process of natural selection is indeed possible. This experimental process must halt all Darwinian evolution for as long as it can be maintained. If evolution is not stopped entirely, then Darwinism stands falsified. This can only be tested experimentally via artificially holding the TOTAL number of ADULT (fertile) forms reproduced via each parent in ONE population, EQUAL. This reproductive total per parent per population is absolutely critical because it alone represents a Total Darwinian Fitness (TDF) fitness CONSTANT providing a falsifiable frame of reference for evolutionary theory. The big problem: this has not been realized within Neo Darwinism.
Timo X
Jun 7 2012: While it is true that a finding that conflicts with extant and often-verified theories is usually not taken as absolute evidence against them, this does not mean that the theory is in fact non-falsifiable. According to Popper, falsification has to be only possible in principle (whatever that means, I prefer testability). Concerning your second paragraph, I neither understand why conducting such an experiment would be the only way to falsify evolutionary theory, nor do I understand how it could do so in the first place. Remember also that natural selection is not the only mechanism that drives evolution.
- 0
You mention causality in the opening post. Seeing that you are so critical of the supposed infalsifiability of modern science, how do you figure you go around proving causality?
Jun 8 2012: The most important point to make is that Darwinian evolutionary theory is not dependent on fossil evidence. While fossils can provide amazing evidence that is highly motivational, falsifiability lies elsewhere. The reason why TDF remains crucial is because it alone can provide a falsifying fitness constant for evolutionary theory. My proposed, simple, reproductive total of adults reproduced per parent per population represents what has to be compared within a population in order to provide a FINAL selective result. Neo Darwinism never provides a FINAL result because it does not allow a single fitness constant, i.e. it only compares variables with other variables to produce natural selection. To be falsifiable, it must provide at least one fitness constant to act as a frame of reference.
Natural selection is the only falsifiable cause of evolution that has been proposed. Darwinism argues that random mutation withiin organisms provides what is termed "heritable variation". This is acted on by non random natural selection to produce the evolution of populations of organisms. The other random force is sampling error, i.e. what is termed "genetic drift". Neither of these are causative to evolution; they are only causative to the heritable variation on which non random natural selection acts. Clearly, any evolution predicated on a random process acting alone, cannot be falsified.
John Edser
Timo X
Jun 8 2012: Perhaps I still misunderstand, but I do not see how the experiment you specify is able to (dis)prove anything. If evolution would not occur under environmental conditions that are constant for a long time, this would be in line with the mechanism of natural selection. If evolution would occur under environmental conditions that are constant for a long time, this would mean that natural selection is not the only mechanism by which evolution works - and this fact, as you also point out, is already recognized and incorporated into the theory of evolution.
- 0
I think it is admirable that you try to formulate an experiment that can falsify evolutionary theory. However, I think you are on the wrong track. Evolutionary theory is not very suitable for predictions and this poses a problem for scientists who think falsifiable predictions are the hallmark of science (see e.g. Popper's initial rejection of natural selection). This does not mean that evolutionary theory is pseudoscience: it is quite possible to gather clear evidence for and against it.
Jun 8 2012: The experiment that I proposed artificially maintains the final fitness of each parent within an experimental population to remain the same. This could be done with the fruit fly by only allowing each parent to raise a single young to fertile adulthood. When this is accomplished each parent would be removed. Each fly would be able to breed freely but exactly the same situation is repeated for as long as each member of the population successfully raises a single replacement. The experiment terminates when just a single member of the population fails to raise an adult replacement allowing selection to finally act. Darwinian selection is the result of a simple default comparison of each parents Darwinian fitness (the total number of adults reproduced per parent per population) such that only the parent with the largest fitness is naturally selected. While the experiment lasts, each parent has a TDF of 1. Since flys are sexual this means each pair must raise two adult forms into the next generation. The reason why immatures are NOT counted (they are within Neo Darwinism) is because they cannot possibly pass on any of their genes because they remain sterile until reaching adulthood. What I predict terminates the experiment is the random action of genetic drift and mutation. Eventually genomes not subject to selection will become more and more degenerate eventually resulting in a single pair not being able to raise the required two offspring to adulthood. Neo Darwinists continue to insist that drift and mutation are evolutionary forces on a par with selection reducing evolutionary theory to non falsifiable simply because random forces cannot be halted. The experimental population is controlled by a population treated similarly except an intense form of selection is provided e.g. a trait for eye color is selected for. At the termination of the experiment the prediction is that the experimental population does not evolve.
John EdserJun 6 2012: Your invitation to attend the Relativist's Convention, scheduled for August, October or December depending upon how you view it, is hereby revoked.
What do you do with the argument that says axioms are merely statements or propositions which are unproven and are based upon "common acceptance" of the claim that they are not falsifiable, which is, in turn, based upon them being hertofore unfalsified? For example, is it possible that Euclid was wrong about things which are identical to another thing being identical to one another? How do you prove that Euclid's Axiom cannot be falsified without claiming to have proven a negative? Did Euclid have a falsifiable frame of reference? Thank you for your relevant and provocative post, Mr. Edser.Jun 6 2012: Exploring the structures of axioms is equal to exploring reality itself. Even more we can explore the final frontier of reality through axioms.
Axiom shows us reality as it is, but the problem is since someone might think our axiom doesn't make sense (subjective), therefore we need to find out something that can be considered axiom.
Once we found it (axiom), there we found reality.
Anything that can be considered as true but it could be proved as an opposite of an axiom, then anything should be failed and something is already falsified.
What if we will test an axiom by banging it on another axioma? Then we should choose an axiom as a tester (a standardization of specific truth of specific reality) among axioms that really simple to us to be understood.
Since we might trapped within false axiom. We thought it was axiom but it wasn't. Therefore we should find axiom and we could understand it easily.
If we may think involving axioms are not equal as involving reality, empirically, but what we did in the past (now & in the future) was nothing but tracking from one node to other nodes that represent of something (that we considered as reality, empiric). We might be touch, hear or see something, but finally we believe it as we think of it logically.
The point is, whether we do empirically or anything that can be considered more realistic, scientific, but it's just the beginning or in the middle, and at the end, we would accept it after passing our thinking logically. Any of our works converted into forms of logical that can be tested logically.
Therefore, i choose axioms, because it's mobility (it's miniature of reality), strictly & easy to manage within our thinking as we did to something else.
A key success using axioms is, whether we use axioms that derived through math or anything else, but further, axioms that came out, should be "very easily to understand it, as easy as we think of something very easily".
Outside this is just even worse than subjectivity.
John Edser
Jun 6 2012: Am I correct in assuming that "axioms" represent your offered falsifiable frame of reference? If so, please provide an example including the falsification. If an axiom is not your offered frame of reference what is?
- +1
John Edser
Jun 6 2012: Hi
These are examples:
If we touch something then we touch an existence, but axiom asserts there is only zero distance or there is a distance, therefore we never touch existence.
Every dream is unrealistic, but axiom asserts that there is no nothingness within reality, or, nothingness can't separate reality, therefore there is only reality within another reality (inside reality there is only reality), and a dream is just another reality, unless we accept our awareness of being accused as something that is not real.
Randomness is everywhere, but axiom asserts its consistency (certainty)
Less or more ...


text:
Eternal Japan: From Tokyo to Kyoto
Go off the beaten path and explore Japan in depth, learning about its rich traditions as you take part in a traditional tea ceremony, meet with a preeminent calligrapher, and stroll through Miyakawacho, a geisha neighborhood.
Tour Details
This Smithsonian Journeys trip exceeded my expectations. The quality of leadership and their narratives, the hotels, and local guides make my trip rich beyond words. Thank you Smithsonian for a special life experience."
Cheryl B.
- A Tailor-Made Journey to India and Nepal
- The Forbidden City: Official Spaces and Private Quarters
- Journey from Bangkok to Bali: Following the Spirits
- Haydn Seek
This tour is specially designed for a small group of 16 to 24 Smithsonian travelers and offers outstanding travel value. Prices include airfare, airline taxes, fuel surcharges, and departure fees.
Historically a land of sublime art, rich traditions, and unsurpassed natural beauty, Japan is also known for its bustling commerce and modernity. Experience fascinating aspects of Japanese culture, from a traditional tea ceremony and meeting with a preeminent calligrapher to a gallery visit and stay in a ryokan. You'll delight in the natural beauty of Kanazawa's famous Kenrokuen Garden, the majesty of Mt. Fuji, and a relaxing cruise on scenic Ashi Lake. See the highlights of cosmopolitan Tokyo, including the Shinto Meiji Shrine, the Edo-Tokyo Museum, and Tokyo's oldest temple, Buddhist Asakusa Kannon.
Go off the beaten path to lovely Takayama in the Japanese Alps to experience the narrow medieval streets of the San-machisuji district and enjoy a sake tasting. Visit Shirakawa-go Gassho-zukuri Village, a World Heritage site showcasing a unique style of traditional architecture. Then conclude in Kyoto, Japan's cultural capital, where highlights include the lakeside Temple of the Golden Pavilion, Nijo Castle, and a walk through lively Nishiki Market. From Kyoto you'll also take a day trip to the World Heritage sites in nearby Nara.
Days 1 & 2 — U.S., Tokyo, Japan
Depart the U.S. for Japan. After arriving in Tokyo, Japan's financial, commercial, and political capital this evening, transfer to your hotel where you learn about the journey ahead at a briefing with your tour director.
Day 3 — Tokyo
Spend the morning touring this amazing city that comprises 23 wards and covers a staggering 840 miles. Focus on a smaller area as you visit some of Tokyo's top sights including Shinto Meiji Shrine, a peaceful enclave of temples and gardens; the Edo-Tokyo Museum, a historical presentation of Edo (the city from c. 1600 until 1868) and Tokyo (the new Edo from 1868 until the present); and historic Imperial Palace, surrounded by moats and ramparts, and home of the Imperial Family. Next visit Tokyo's oldest temple, Buddhist Asakusa Kannon, followed by the Nakamise Shopping arcade. This afternoon is at leisure; dine tonight at a local restaurant specializing in kushiage, kabobs of meat, fish, and vegetables breaded and cooked on a bamboo skewer. (B,D)
Day 4 — Tokyo
Visit the gallery of preeminent calligrapher Koshun Masunaga, where you learn about this ancient art and browse the collection. Then embark on a motorcoach tour of Ginza, Tokyo's famed shopping, dining, and entertainment district boasting Japan's most expensive real estate. The remainder of the day is at leisure to visit some of Ginza's department stores, boutiques, or galleries, or to set off in a new direction. (B)
Day 5 — Tokyo, Mt. Fuji-Hakone Isu National Park, Suwa
Japan's pastoral side is on tap as you leave Tokyo for Mt. Fuji-Hakone-Izu National Park. Here sits imposing Mt. Fuji, a dormant volcano (it last erupted in 1707) with a perfectly symmetrical cone that rises to 12,388 feet. The mountain's majesty is breathtaking, as artists and writers have attested for centuries. Take a cable car ride where, weather permitting, you'll enjoy breathtaking panoramic views; then descend for a relaxing cruise on scenic Ashi Lake. Leaving the park, travel to the town of Suwa where you spend the night at a ryokan, a traditional Japanese inn where you take off your shoes upon entering and sleep on a futon. (B,D)
Day 6 — Suwa and Takayama
Today travel to lovely Takayama in the Japanese Alps, considered one of the country's most attractive towns with its 16th-century castle and old-style buildings. Your explorations center on three narrow streets in the San-machi-suji district where, in feudal times, merchants lived amid the authentically preserved small inns, teahouses, and sake breweries that you see here. Enjoy a sake tasting then have free time to visit local shops that sell the region's unique lacquerware and prized carvings of yew wood. (B,D)
Day 7 — Takayama, Shirakawago, Kanazawa
Pay an early visit to the river side Miyagawa morning market selling flowers, fruit, and vegetables, a blaze of dazzling colors and exotic foodstuffs then leave Takayama for the World Heritage site of Shirakawago Gassho-Zukuri Village. Comprising buildings relocated from authentic villages nearby that were razed for a dam, the village is also a vibrant community whose residents work together to preserve the unique traditional architecture here known as Gassho style. Next visit that dam – Miboro – the largest dam constructed using "rock-fill technology": just stones and clay. Late afternoon reach the castle town of Kanazawa, an alluring coastal city that survived the ravages of World War II. (B,L)
Day 8 — Kanazawa
Today's tour of this culturally rich city features renowned Kenrokuen Garden, a national landmark whose origins date to 1676. Also see Ishikawa Gate, the only remaining section of the town's original castle; the Gold Leaf Museum celebrating the art and craft of gold leaf technology; and the Higashi Chayagai tea house and geisha area. Your last stop is the Nagamachi Samurai district, where the ruling family's samurai warriors lived. (B,D)
Day 9 — Kanazawa and Kyoto
This morning board the train for Kyoto, once Japan's Imperial Capital and now the country's cultural and artistic center. With its many temples, shrines, artful gardens, and well-preserved wooden architecture, Kyoto embodies Japan's rich culture and complex history. Upon arrival, visit Kyoto National Museum, a premier institution featuring pre-modern Japanese and Asian art and artifacts, then continue on to Unrakugama, a workshop specializing in prized Kiyomizu pottery. (B,D)
Day 10 — Kyoto
Today's tour reveals the highlights of Kyoto, which was spared destruction during World War II. Highlights include 16th-century Ryoan-ji Temple, with the dry garden of sand and rocks (kare-sansui), a marvel of classic Japanese design; and Kinkaku-ji, the lakeside Temple of the Golden Pavilion set on pillars suspended over the water. Also visit ostentatious Nijo Castle (c. 1603), where the shogun asserted control over the city and its people. Next, attend a traditional Japanese tea ceremony - an historic, ritualized ceremony of form, grace, and spirituality. (B)
Day 11 — Nara
Today, enjoy an excursion to Nara, Japan's ancient capital. After a short train ride from Kyoto, see the Kasuga Taisha Shrine and Todaiji Temple, both World Heritage sites, and Nara National Museum on a walking tour. Return to Kyoto late afternoon. (B)
Day 12 — Kyoto
See the sights today from a slightly different perspective as you embark on a cycling tour visiting the important Heian Jingu Shinto shrine; Nishiki Market, "Kyoto's Kitchen" selling foodstuffs of all kinds; and the Gion district where geishas gather. Tonight enjoy a farewell dinner at a local restaurant. (B,D)
Day 13 — Depart Kyoto for U.S.
This morning travel by train to Osaka, to board your return flight to the U.S. (B)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Terms & Conditions.
Some product exclusions may apply. See product page details for more information. Clearance items are final sale. Price matching does not apply to this or any promotion. Offer is valid until September 13 at 11:59 PM PST. May not be combined with any other offer/discount (unless specified), including invitation credits, promotional gift cards and/or special discount links. Discount applied upon checkout. Log in to your account to see your savings.
Stock up on drool-worthy jewelry. The Teapot Layer Necklace Short features a themed trio of pendants that will put a smile on your face. The longest chain holds a delicate teaspoon, complete with intricate details on the handle. The middle chain displays a dainty teacup, and the shortest chain shows a tiny teapot with feet. Brewing up sculptural art with tongue-in-cheek humor, this piece will make life delicious.
Longest layer is 24". Teapot charm is .75" wide. Lobster clasp closure.
Sora Designs began as a creative outlet for Taiwanese artist Yueh-Wen Chang while studying educational psychology. After working for the Judicial Council of California, Chang threw herself into crafting. Today, she creates whimsical jewelry from her Bay Area home studio with a focus on vintage elements, custom wedding designs, and foodie-friendly silhouettes.
This product has no reviews yet. Be the first to review this product. Write a review
Enjoy 10% off your first order*


text:
The Power of Easter
Our Easter greetings through the words of Klaus Hemmerle[more]
Our Easter greetings through the words of Klaus Hemmerle[more]
Join us for this year's Midwest Mariapolis![more]
During the opening of the Cause of Beatification and Canonization of Chiara Lubich at the Cathedral of Frascati, a surprise message arrives from Pope Francis![more]
The ceremony will take place on a 27 January at 4 p.m. in the Cathedral of Frascati, Italy.[more]
Young Focolare Members Offer:
"Would you like to bring Baby Jesus home with you?"
With a message to challenge and cheer adults, children world-wide offer Baby Jesus figurines to hurried Christmas shoppers.
"I wish everyone a Christmas full of gifts and joy, especially gifts from Heaven. With gratitude in my heart for this year that is ending, I would like 2015 to be "the year of the Yes!" ~ Maria Voce (Emmaus)[more]
Right before Thanksgiving, an experience of service for our brothers and sisters in need[more]


text:
Mousa Broch
Iron Age broch tower
The browser you are using is out of date and is no longer supported. To view and use this site correctly, please update your browser to the latest version.
Iron Age broch tower
Region – Shetland
Access to the island is via ferry. Details regarding sailing times for the Mousa Ferry can be found at www.mousa.co.uk. Please note there is a now a new departure point for the ferry with revised sailing times.
For additional information on visiting the site, telephone 01856 841815 (Skara Brae).


text:
Reiser og pakketilbud
- Bryllup og bryllupsreise
- Golf
- Leie bil
- Medicinsk turisme
- Meditasjon
- Oppdag kulturen
- Økoturisme
- Seiling og cruise
- Shopping
- Spa og velvære
- Utdanningsaktiviteter
- Utendørs- og opplevelsesaktiviteter – i luften
- Utendørs- og opplevelsesaktiviteter – på land
- Vannaktiviteter
Tour Overview :
Go deep into Thailand's Northern hills and meet hill tribes in their villages to learn more about the lives of these fascinating people.
Highlight :
|Hike to a hill tribe village and learn the traditions and customs of its inhabitants
|Learn about mahout (elephant keeping) skills and ride your elephant through a bamboo forest
|Take a bamboo raft journey along the river to visit the Shan hill tribe
Departure Date :
All year - Daily
Tour Inclusion :
|Accommodation with daily breakfast at selected hotels
|Private tours, transfers and all services as mentioned in the itinerary
|Services of a private driver and air-conditioned vehicles
|Service of English speaking guides in every location
|Entrance fees for all mentioned sights visited
|Meals as mentioned in the itinerary
Tour Exclusion :
|Domestic & international flights
|Departure taxes if applicable
|Meals other than those mentioned in the itinerary
|Early check-in and late check-out at hotels.
|Personal expenses (such as laundry, telephone, drinks, etc.)
|Tips for guides and drivers
|Personal travel insurance
|Visa fees (contact us for further information)
Day by Day Itinerary :
Date 1 : Chiang Mai - MAE JOK
Transfer by private vehicle from your hotel in Chiang Mai to the mountains north of the city. We'll take a stop to join the locals at Mae Malai market: don't forget to haggle!
Date 2 : MAE JOK - PA KHAOLAM
Breakfast will be served in the early morning, after which we'll walk beneath the jungle canopy to the Karen elephant camp. The Karen are famous for their mahout, or elephant keeping heritage and their history together reaches back for hundreds of years.
Date 3 : PA KHAOLAM - CHIANG MAI
After breakfast, board a bamboo raft and glide along with the current to the Shan village of Sop Kai. The Shan get their name from the Shan plateau of Myanmar which they are believed to have inhabited as far back as the 10th century. We'll pass other hill tribe villages as our raft floats downstream past the riverbanks.


text:
Take Care (Explicit)
Preview tracks
by Drake
Released: Nov 2011
Label: Cash Money Records/Young Money Ent./Universal Rec.
For Take Care, Drake re-ups the lush R&B romanticism of 2010's Thank Me Later, albeit with a twist. "I know I exaggerated things/ But now I got it like that," he says on "Headlines," where he threatens to use his bodyguards on haters. (What happened to Gang Starr's "Suckas Need Bodyguards"?) Big cars, pliant women and deliciously ambient beats from Boi-1da and Noah "40" Shebib inspire this tastefully appointed exercise in debauchery. But Drake's not too famous to beg to girls on "Marvin's Room" and the title track, even if it sounds more like a booty call than true love.


text:
- Home »
- News and Events »
- Sophomores to the Metropolitan Museum
Sophomores to the Metropolitan Museum
By John Carlson '14
On Wednesday, May 2, the sophomore class visited the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. While the walk through Central Park was a little dreary from the rain, the inside of the museum radiated its typical warmth and brightness. This annual trip is part of the Western Culture II curriculum and gives students a chance to see some of the works of art they discuss in class in person. After viewing the pieces covered in class, students scattered all over the museum to discover and explore their artistic tastes to their hearts' content.
Although there was an exciting world of art and expression before us, we eventually had to draw our time inside the museum to a close. Despite being scattered all over the gigantic building, almost every student simultaneously decided that it was time to go home and assembled in the lobby. We ended that day a little bit wiser to the world and its art, grateful for this firsthand experience.
Sophomore Class Photo


text:
---------- Post added at 03:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:23 PM ----------
Sylvania was another that came back often. Maybe they've worked the bugs out of them more recently? I haven't worked retail in something like 8 years, so I'm definitely out of the loop these days...
After browsing at sears, bestbuy, walmart, sams and target , I decided to go with a 50" vizio lcd. For my price range and size i was looking for , the vizio had the best picture out of all the units I looked at, plus my brother got me a 10% employee discount. The leds put off too much glare for my liking and the whites weren't as clean as the lcd/leds. I might try a plasma next time I need a bedroom/den tv.
I hooked it up and it is a beautiful picture, has plenty of hookups for me. I almost need sunglasses to watch it, can't believe how bad shape my sony was in. After reading lockes post, I guess i'll have to cross my fingers or maybe go back and get the 3 year warranty, though i have never bought or needed a warranty on anything electronics wise. Thanks again for everybody's input.
Ive always loved Sharp..So that's all I got.
Deshaun Watson is the TRUTH!
i bought a 46" LED TV.. Horrible Horrible Sound. the tv was so cool in the store because it was paper thin. IT sounded like the noise was coming from a baby mouse or something. make sure When you buy your TV you actually listen to it. I returned the LED (amazing picture) and bought a 55" LCD panasonic. I suggest LCD just because the speakers seem to be thicker so the sound is better. Good luck on your venture.
Glad you haven't had any problem with yours John. I like Daytona Fin never ever paid for the extended warranty before but needless to say losing this one so quickly changed my mind. All I am suggesting is for the money I would make sure to have some coverage beyond the standard one year warranty Vizio offers.


text:
The optional quadband GSM telephone module offers convenience and excellent reception. With a SIM inserted directly into the integral SIM card reader of the PCM system, calls can be made using the hands-free facility. For even more convenience, the Bluetooth® capability of a mobile phone can be used to make calls via the SIM Access Profile (SAP). Once the connection has been established automatically, the mobile phone's aerial is switched off to conserve battery charge and the phone operates via the car aerial. Depending on the mobile phone model, this gives access not only to the numbers on the SIM card, but also to the phone's internal memory. Depending on the phone, it can also be controlled using PCM, the optional multifunction steering wheel or the optional voice control system, without it ever leaving your pocket.
The telephone module also enables you to establish a Bluetooth® link with those mobile phones that support only the Handsfree Profile (HFP). In this case, the GSM connection is always established through the aerial of the mobile phone. PCM acts as a hands-free system and you can leave the mobile phone tucked away.
On request, a Bluetooth® handset for the telephone module is also available. Stored in the centre console, it features a display and keypad. However, the handset cannot be used for Bluetooth® links established using the Handsfree Profile (HFP).
Mobile phone preparation is available as an option so that a Bluetooth® connection can be established with those mobile phones that support only the Handsfree Profile (HFP). This function also enables you to leave your mobile phone tucked away. The PCM system is able to control only the basic functions of the mobile phone. The GSM connection is established through the aerial of the mobile phone.
* Mobile phone preparation or telephone module in HFP mode: The use of a mobile phone inside a car may cause an increase in the interior electromagnetic field strength and, accordingly, in the electromagnetic radiation to which passengers are exposed. If a cradle is used to mount the mobile phone, the field strength in the passenger compartment can be reduced because your phone can be connected up to the external aerial (feature depends on how specific mobile phones connect to the cradle). For information about the availability of a cradle for your mobile phone, please contact an independent accessories retailer. The use of the telephone module for PCM via Bluetooth® SAP connection or with inserted SIM card prevents exposure to electromagnetic radiation as only the car's external aerial is ever used.
© 2015 Porsche Cars North America, Inc. Legal notice. Privacy Policy.


text:
ShawnieMikes Radio Review [Lincoln]
Lincoln .... Let me first say if you are not a fan of "History" if your not a fan of "Period Pieces" and if your a fan of "Special Effects" and Hollywood "Glam" then skip this movie! With that said if it's the opposite for you , then you going to watch a masterpiece! This movie basically follows President Lincoln and his Staff as they try to radify the 13th Amendment to the Constitution


text:
Style #: 28411836
Our 4" heel Casey sandal is now even more fierce, with this pyramid-studded ankle strap. Luxe Italian suede in black and natural tones adds an air of sophistication to this stunning shoe.
Club Monaco is a subsidiary of the
Ralph Lauren Corporation. You will now be
directed to the Ralph Lauren career site.


text:
Step 1: What You will need
Tape (Electrical works well)
2 Bar Magnets (or a lot of disc magnets)
(I used the surplus from www.kjmagnetics.com)
Lego Pieces: (if you decide to make it using Lego)
1 9V Motor
1 9V Battery Box
1 Lego Cable
1 6 x 8
2 6 x 10
4 1 x 2 (the ones which have the slots to hold a motor)
12 1 x 8
4 1 x 2
2 1 x 6
4 1 x 8
6 1 x 10
1 Crown Gear 24teeth
2 24 tooth gears
2 8 tooth gears
Some bushings and pins to connect it all
I actually prefer the ovoid (egg) shaped ones, as the bottom of my some of my mugs are not flat in the middle and the other stir bars don't spin as fast. Plus, they are small enough that they work in all sizes of cups.
Teflon is non-reactive (for high acidity drinks like orange juice) as well as highly resistant to heat (coffee) although the magnet doesn't like the hot temperatures... But they are cheap enough and even with abuse they last for years and years.


text:
Jourdan Bookcase
Inspired by an antique Directoire-style daybed, this collection was created using all the design details of the original. Jourdan's stylized ornamentation and geometric motifs are hallmarks of French Directoire style – a return to classical forms of order and symmetry that lend a feeling of simplicity and strength.
Show product details...
- Overall: 39"W x 15"D x 59"H
- Shelf: 36"W x 12½"D
- Drawer Interior: 31½"W x 12½"D x 7½"H
- Weight: 114 lbs.
Shown in vintage buttercream.
Jourdan Bookcase


text:
Mary Ruth Prather of Lubbock, Texas, passed away on Friday, Dec. 23, at the age of 77. She was born on March 10, 1934 to W.B. and Ruth Brown in Longworth, Texas. She attended schools in Sylvester and Roby, graduating from Roby High School in 1951. She attended DraughonŌĆÖs Business College in Abilene, but later found her true calling as an in-home child care provider. She married Gerald Prather on Nov. 23, 1954, in San Angelo, Texas. They moved to Sweetwater in 1958, where they raised their family and lived until 2008 when they moved to Lubbock.
Avondale Baptist Church
Merry Christmas┬Āto all from the Avondale Baptist Church family!┬Ā┬ĀWe would like to invite everyone to come and worship with us.┬ĀFor this Sunday only we will only have one service.┬ĀWe will have morning worship at 10:50 a.m.┬ĀThis will be the only service we will have on Christmas Day.┬ĀWe are located at 1405 Hoyt Street.
Our regular Sunday schedule is coffee fellowship at 9:20 a.m., Bible study at 9:45 a.m., worship services at 10:50 a.m. and 6 p.m., choir practice at 7 p.m. On Wednesday evening we have On-Mission groups for all ages at 7 p.m.
Broadway Baptist Church
It was two weeks before Christmas and all through the house, not a creature was stirring except for Wranger the dog. He was crouched under the Christmas tree sniffing at all the packages that were already under the tree. He knew that one or more of them would be for him. He just couldnŌĆÖt tell which presents were his.
Wranger knew he was mostly good this year and especially during this holiday season. His ŌĆ£motherŌĆØ had to scold him only once so far because he had gotten a candy cane stuck in his white Shi-Tzu fur. She just had to snip a little of the fur to get the sticky bits out.
The Sweetwater girls basketball team won third place at BallingerŌĆÖs tournament held in early December and the players and coaches posed afternward with their trophy. Sweetwater will resume play at a three-day tournament in Breckenridge this Wednesday through Friday. The Sweetwater boys are at Anson the same three days.
SweetwaterŌĆÖs Candice Hernandez, left, and Alicia Finn were named to the all-tournament team at BallingerŌĆÖs three-day event held earlier this month.
Residents of Nolan Nursing and Rehab have been enjoying many activity events this year. A surprise visit during Nolan's December Birthday Party was made. Pictured at left is Lee Cantu, Lala Cantu and special guests Mr. and Mrs. Santa Claus.
Sweetwater Intermediate School students hosted their Christmas program on Monday, Dec. 19 at the Sweetwater High School Auditorium
The Sweetwater Jaycees held their annual Christmas party for MHMR on Thursday night, Dec. 8, 2011 at the Sweetwater Elks Lodge. The Jaycees prepared and served a chicken strip meal and dessert to all in attendance.
The group ushered in the appearance of Santa by singing "Santa Claus is Coming to Town." Santa distributed gifts to each person and was greeted with handshakes and hugs from the clients.
The East Ridge Elementary School second grade presented "Holly Jolly Christmas" to parents, family and friends on Tuesday evening, Dec. 20, 2011, at the Sweetwater High School auditorium. A full array of Christmas classics were sung by the children along with holiday jokes and laughter.
Sitting in the midst of the crowd during the Sweetwater Healthcare Center Christmas party on Wednesday afternoon, December 21, is a man donning yellow sunglasses and a Santa hat.
But the hat is only a glimpse into the persona that the man, Herman Winslett, portrayed for the past 35 years.
Mr. Winslett is taking a break from being Santa Claus--the suit doesn't quite fit as well as it once did. Right next to his side is his bride of 41 years, Wynelle, who also took on the role of Mrs. Claus.


text:
I am in class 11 and what I am feeling is a struggle between schooling and coaching in the arena of IIT entrance... : Young Adult » Read
It will take less than 1 minute.
Forgotten your password? Have it emailed to you by clicking here.
Experiencing other login problems? We can help.
Not a Member Yet?Sign Up - It's Free
Why Join?
Booksie offers you a global platform for sharing your writing, getting read, and getting noticed. Booksie enables you to:
To learn more about Booksie, please read About Us.


text:
Arosa boasts a sunny location in the beautiful Schanfigg Valley and the largest ski area in Graubunden thanks to its new link with Lenzerheide. Families will enjoy the peaceful location and compact size of the resort, as well as the three toboggan runs and horse-drawn sleigh rides. In total, 225 km of pistes across the Arosa and Lenzerheide areas are served by more than 40 lifts, with 70km of those pistes and a 30km freeride area on the Arosa side. Non-skiers can explore the 60km of winter walking trails, some of which lead up the mountain, or take a snow-shoe tour with the ski school.
Arosa is as close to an alpine fairy-tale as you can get. A single road and train track wind their way up the va... read full
Absolutely lovely ski holiday in Arosa. It's a magical place with many positive aspects.
Nice and small skii... read full
Arosa is near to the ski resort of Davos-Klosters and also Flims and the White Arena ski area, reachable by road.
The main attraction of Arosa is the other activities that are on offer, particularly for non skiers, such as winter walks on cleared paths, sleigh rides, curling and skating, all of which makes Arosa an ideal family ski holiday location. There are also 30km of fantastic cross-country ski trails on offer in Arosa.
You do not currently have any holidays in your shortlist.
You currently have in your shortlist.
"I was so impressed with the way Laura handled my initial call that as soon as I got home I decided to forget all of the other agents and companies and call her straight back and book the holiday. Thank you again Iglu for being so user friendly and more importantly thank you to Laura for being such an asset to your company and the sales profession."


text:
*WARNING : Please beware of phishing scams that promote work-at-home opportunities and which may also pose as legitimate companies. Please be advised that an Anthem recruiter will never ask you for a credit card or any type of payment as part of consideration for a role with our company. All of our careers require that you first complete an online application.
In compliance with federal law, all persons hired will be required to verify identity and eligibility to work in the United States and to complete the required employment eligibility verification document form upon hire.
Search for available positions now and discover the difference your talents can make here with us at Anthem, Inc.
One-Click-Join our Talent Community and let us find a great job for you.


text:
The Director of National Intelligence recently recognized Department of Energy for its swift processing of security clearances. The Office of Personnel and Facility Clearances, part of NNSA's Office of Defense Nuclear Security, handles the majority of DOE's Q clearances and frequently exceeds established national timeliness goals for initiating and adjudicating them. In 90% of cases, OPFC adjudicates and grants initial security clearances in an average of 10 days once the completed security questionnaire is received, cutting in half the national requirement of 20 days.
OPFC cites several factors that contribute to its successful and timely support to the NNSA and DOE mission, including: utilizing six sigma methods to improve processes, formalizing standard operating procedures with ISO 9001 in mind, and developing a clearly defined strategic mission, vision and operational plan.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's Vulcan supercomputer is now available for collaborative work with industry and research universities. Operating at 5 petaflops (quadrillion floating point operations per second), Vulcan raises the amount of computing at LLNL available for external collaborations by an order of magnitude.
Named the world's sixth fastest high performance computing system by the Top500 list in November 2012, Vulcan will allow large systems to be simulated over longer time periods with greater fidelity and resolution. It addition, it will contribute to work being done by scientists, engineers and computer scientists to solve high-impact problems across a broad range of scientific, technological and business fields.
Read more.
Ron McIntosh, the Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico (SNL/NM) Classification Officer, was recently awarded the Department of Energy's Classification Award of Excellence for 2013.
McIntosh joined the SNL/NM Classification Office in 2002 and quickly demonstrated his vast knowledge of nuclear weapons classification. His excellent management and leadership skills led to his appointment as the Classification Officer for SNL/NM. As a leader in the classification community, his innovative thinking brought numerous improvements to the classification process throughout NNSA and DOE. McIntosh is an excellent example of the high quality of personnel within NNSA and continues set the bar high, as NNSA classification officials have received the award eight of the last ten years.
Los Alamos National Laboratory has launched its first app for iPhones and iPads as part of the lab's yearlong celebration of 70 years serving the nation. The free application is available from the Apple Store (search for Los Alamos National Lab).
The app enables users to learn more about LANL's national security mission, cutting edge research, unique history, top-flight scientists and the many other people who work at the Lab.
Read more.
Newly appointed Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz (seated) visited the Y-12 National Security Complex this week. Before touring production and storage facilities at the site, Moniz held an All Hands meeting with Y-12, ORNL and Federal employees at Y-12's New Hope Center. Joining him at the meeting was U.S. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann.
Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz (at right) tours the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility during his visit Monday to the Y-12 National Security Complex. Joining him are (from left) B&W Y-12 President and General Manager Chuck Spencer, Julie Huff of B&W Y-12's Materials Management Organization, B&W Y-12 Senior Vice President of Security Rod Johnson, and NNSA Production Office Manager Steve Erhart. Moniz toured storage and production facilities at the site after holding an All Hands meeting with Y-12, ORNL and federal employees at Y-12's New Hope Center.
Pantex wildlife biologist Jim Ray will be teaming up with York University researcher Dr. Kevin Fraser from Toronto this weekend to help study the movements and behaviors of Purple Martins.
Ray, Fraser and several volunteers will be capturing the Martins, which are the largest member of the swallow family in North America, and affixing small geolocator tracking devices to help expand scientific knowledge about the birds. The geolocators were provided by the Department of Energy and Pantex in connection with a Presidential directive to help study and preserve migratory birds.
See more.
About the photos:
Pantex Wildlife Biologist Jim Ray prepares to release a Purple Martin after it was captured and fitted with a tiny geolocator tracking device this weekend. Ray teamed up with Dr. Kevin Fraser from York University in Toronto to study the Martins, which were captured in birdhouses Ray maintains at his home.
Ray said Purple Martins have been popular among bird watchers since early settlers found Native Americans creating living quarters for the birds in hollowed-out gourds. Providing birdhouses has been a popular pastime for birders ever since. However, the birds are in decline in some areas of the United States, which makes preserving them an important effort.
Nick Williams, a retired engineer and science presenter from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, not only has done a fine job of conveying the concept of time to 11-year-olds, he's being recognized for it. Williams took top honors in the written category of the Flame Challenge, a global science contest run by actor and science afficionado Alan Alda and by the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science at Stony Brook University.
The contest challenges scientists to explain complex scientific principles in simple terms so they could be clearly understood by a 5th grade student. In 2012 the question put to scientists was "What is a flame?" This year the question was "What is time?
See more.
About the photo:
From left: Steve Maguire, who won in the video category of the 2013 Flame Challenge, Alan Alda and Nick Williams, who won in the written category.
Representatives from the Y-12 National Security Complex; the University of Tennessee, Knoxville; and Stanley Healthcare recently signed a cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) during the Tennessee Valley Corridor's National Technology Summit at Y-12's New Hope Center in Oak Ridge. The three entities are sharing their expertise to fast-track commercialization of an intelligent interactive dashboard that can be used to increase efficiency in manufacturing, maintenance or the service industry.
About the photo:
(From left) Taylor Eighmy, UT's vice chancellor for research and engagement; Van Mauney, B&W Y-12 vice president of program management; and Scott McFarland, senior vice president of sales at Stanley Healthcare, sign the formal agreement.
The NNSA will host an Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program update on June 12, 2013, from 8:45 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Room 1E-245 in the Forrestal Building in Washington, D.C.
Speakers from NNSA, the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore and Sandia national laboratories will provide overviews during the event. Technical speakers will present success stories and project examples benefiting the DOE/NNSA national security missions and missions of other federal agencies. In addition, technical posters will be displayed throughout the day highlighting science, technology, and engineering from the labs, the plants, and NNSS. The event will consist of three separate two-hour sessions and participants are free to attend one, two or all three.
Click here for more information.