text:
It's a bit hard to build a deck. There's so many cards I can barely think of an idea, or how I'm supposed to build one! Could anyone lend me a hand on this?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
closed as too broad by doppelgreener, Patters, bengoesboom, Pablo, Colin D Nov 22 '13 at 16:56
There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
How do I build a Pokémon TCG deck?
Deck building 101
What's the starting point from building a deck? Before deciding on this you must have clear what actually makes a deck win games.
I cannot stress this point enough. A consistent deck is one where every single card work towards a well focused strategy. Let's make some examples on this to explain this better.
I'll list a theme deck, say, Ice Shock from Boundaries Crossed:
Pokémon: 30
Trainers: 12
Energy: 18
Now, can you tell me the strategy this deck uses? Sure, one could go like "let's load a lot of energy thanks to my only Blastoise and attack!". But ask yourself the following:
When building a deck always make yourself these questions. If a card looks cool enough with a decent effect, but you aren't sure if this will help your strategy, think again or remove it entirely. At the end of this post there's a Blastoise/Keldeo-EX deck. Let's say we think Jellicent from the deck I just listed looks cool enough for inclusion. "Sure!", you might say. "It's a decent card and we can still give it lots of energy thanks to Blastoise!". And maybe it might be a good idea, but what is it doing to help us win, or better yet, how does it help our main strategy, which consists of fast and powerful attacks with Keldeo-EX? Personally I see no reason for it to be here.
On that regard, the deck I listed at the bottom of the post might not be the most optimal build, but at least it keeps a level of consistency in that no card is there for no reason.
You might have a consistent deck. It can be a REALLY consistent deck. But if it's not fast enough, consistency won't win games. Speed is important. You want to take a prize before your opponent does.
Keep in mind: one Stage 2 line removes from your speed. Don't think this means you shouldn't use Stage 2 cards, but be aware that two Stage 2 lines might be too slow. Back in the DP-on and MD-on era we even had a Stadium Card (Broken Time-Space) that allowed us to evolve Pokémon as fast as we wanted, meaning we could just skip the evolution constraints. Nowadays we don't have such a card and we can just rely on Rare Candy and maybe the newer Clefable. What we can do though is to use strong Basic Pokémon, like Pokémon-EX, to speed up things. Or, we can use Stage 2 Pokémon with little energy requirements and that can hit hard, such as Garchomp and Empoleon.
Speed is important. If you don't have speed in your deck, you might have a good strategy and be pulling it decently but your opponent might have already taken two or three prizes, meaning you're already losing.
Why would I want a strategy? I just play with my friends! And that's perfectly fine. If you're not going to play in tournaments and are completely fine with building a deck with your favorite cards and don't mind losing, it's perfectly fine. However, if what you want is to take a step forward, then a strategy is a must.
For choosing a strategy, choose a combination of two or more cards. Some good combinations are Eelektrik and Zekrom (Zekrom discards [L] energies you can retrieve with Eelektrik), Gabite, Garchomp and Altaria (Gabite searches for [D] Pokémon, Garchomp hits 60 for [F] and Altaria is a [D] Pokémon that adds 20 damage to [D] Pokémon when in play), Empoleon and Emolga (Emolga fills your bench and Empoleon deals damage with [W] and adds more damage the more Benched Pokémon you have, plus it lets you draw two cards by discarding one) and Blastoise and Keldeo-EX (which I'm going to talk about now).
Choosing a strategy
The first thing you should ask yourself is: "How do I want to win?" Let's double check the possible ways to win a game, since that's what you build your deck for.
You win a Pokémon TCG game by fulfilling one of the following conditions:
Keeping all of this in mind, we must choose one or more ways to win. For the sake of simplicity (and because most decks use this as a basis), we will use the first two winning conditions.
Choose a combination
The best way to see what cards would allow us to win in the way we've chosen, we must find a combination of two or more cards that would let us win in the fastest way possible. Why fastest? In the current format (BW-on), speed is important. There are so many Pokémon-EX we cannot just ignore speed. We must hit hard and fast before our opponent get a chance to use their Pokémon! And this doesn't just apply to Pokémon-EX but to any metagame. Even in the old days of Base Set/Jungle/Fossil we had to deal with this, namely the Haymaker deck which won many games hitting fast and hard.
There's a combination we can use for a simple deck (keep in mind this combo is actually being used): Blastoise (Boundaries Crossed) and Keldeo-EX. Why?
So, it's a Pokémon that allow us to attach as many [W] energy as we want to our Pokémon! Now let's see Keldeo-EX:
So, the idea is: we take out Blastoise, draw as many [W] energies as we need, attach them to Keldeo-EX and use Rush In to make it active. Great synergy!
Building the core
Now that we've decided our core strategy, we must now build the basic core! Just keep in mind we cannot place more than 4 cards of each type, except for Basic energies. Let's do it!
Pokémon: 16
Why 4 of each? Not only this is our core, but the cards we will be using the most. It's only natural we want the most of them!
But, do we really want 4 of each?
Firstly. How many Blastoise do we need in play? Only one. So maybe four Blastoise is a bit overhead. We can try reducing this to a smaller core (keeping four Squirtle in case of being catchered [Pokémon Catcher allows you to switch our opponent's Pokémon with any other of his or her bench]):
Pokémon: 16
We can still reduce the Wartortles with help from Rare Candy, which lets us evolve one of our Basic Pokémon to its Stage 2 card. If we include all four Rare Candies we can reduce Wartortles to just one (and one to avoid Item locks such as Gothitelle, which wouldn't allow us to play that card):
Pokémon: 12
Trainers: 4
It's still 16 cards, but now we can have Blastoise at turn 2 and be ready to attack. It's way faster than what we had before!
Supporting cards (not Supporter cards though)
Now that we have our core, we must focus on cards that will support our main strategy. Do not confuse the title with Supporter cards. We will add them here but I'm not talking exactly about these.
What do we need to take these Pokémon as fast as possible? Here you can be creative and add whatever cards you would think will help the strategy. I'll describe some cards you should consider when building a deck (and that might be useful for this particular deck):
If you notice, Trainer cards can be roughly classified as:
All in all, we shouldn't just include one of each and be done. What we must be pursuing is consistency. Our deck must be able to pursuit the goal we've defined before in all times and each and every card must help with this. Keeping all of this in mind, I've decided to include the following cards:
Pokémon: 12
Trainers: 29
29 trainers?! Isn't it a bit excessive? No. Actually no. Most of your deck should consist of Trainers, believe it or not.
Completing the deck and adding other cards
We have a solid deck but we're lacking two other things:
What's a tech? It's a card we include in order to deal with threats to our deck! What can threat our deck SO much???
Sigilyph can be easily dealt with: We load a Blastoise with energy, retreat a Keldeo, and send it to attack. A Blastoise with [W][W][W] attached will KO it in no time. The real problem is Mewtwo-EX. Sadly the best way to counter it is with another Mewtwo-EX. So, we will include two of these.
Now we have 43 cards in our deck. How about adding three more cards? I would bet for Energy Retrieval, which recovers two Basic Energy cards from our discard pile. So adding three of these will be great. The remainder of the deck will be water energies - limit yourself to no more than 18 Energy cards and that's for a deck that actually needs many of them.
The final deck
Pokémon: 14
Trainers: 32
Energy: 14
We've gone through building a deck from the very core of it to an actual full fledged deck. Keep in mind this might not be an optimal build, but I think it's enough to illustrate the point and to help starters getting going with their very own deck.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I have a Ribble Sportive Carbon road bike. The brake hoods are much smaller than most other bikes whihc makes them much less comfortable than other bikes (Scott, Specialised etc.) Can I just replace the hoods to make them more comfortable or put larger hoods over the top of my existing hoods?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
yep they come in different sized based on what brand the gears are, and what year or model.
Campagnolo, Sram and Shimano the 3 main manufacturer's.
Looking at the stock Ribble sportive bike i'm guessing you will need these:
or these
Campagnolo 10 speed, or modern 10 speed replacement hoods
Different makes and models of hoods are going to be different sizes, but as far as different sized rubber replacement hoods for a particular make and model of lever, I believe you are out of luck. The levers are designed with a particular hood shape in mind and I don't recall ever seeing a replacement that was of a different size.
There used to be a velcro wrap that was padded and wrapped around the brake hoods. I believe I got it from Bike Nashbar or Performance shops. It made the brake hood "rest" area larger as well as helped to cushion road vibrations. I don't see them available any longer and could find no other types of replacements online, but I'd say that you could use some "stick to itself velcro that has the "loop" surface on one side of the band and the "hook" surface on the opposite side, so it will stick to itself when wrapped. You could buy longer bulk strips, say 12" long by 3/4" to 1" wide and wrap the brake hoods to the desired size. You may even be able to place some sort of padding on the hoods before wrapping if desired. This would be more cost effective to try before replacing the brake hoods with a different style.


text:
Posting this here in the forum first.
We just received back a NN5L demo unit. This is a complete NN5L package which sells new for $399.95. Includes everything as stated on our order page (includes NN5 Lite with 10/12, 15/18, 45/60, 51.4/72 rings, CP, rail stops, hard shelled case).
You would be hard pressed to notice that it was even used.
If interested order the NN5L package from our website: http://nodalninja.com/order_nodal_ninja.html.
Send me a separate email to bill[at]nodalninja[dot]com directly after your purchase with [USED NN5L] in the subject line and I will refund $25 off your order. International orders please do not forget to select shipping option (in red).


text:
Entries in 'credit' (5)
Some 360 owners being offered free credit if they buy an Xbox One
Microsoft is dangling an Xbox One shaped carrot in the face of a few select Xbox 360 owners.
Blockbuster suspends postal rentals and online store but trade-in credit still valid
More services have been shut down by struggling retailer Blockbuster.
Blockbuster promises next-gen console pre-order refunds
Troubled UK retailer Blockbuster WILL refund customers who have paid for PS4 or Xbox One pre-orders.
Coinstar machines to start dishing out Xbox Live codes
Gamers will soon be able to convert all their loose change into Xbox Live credit in the US.
Ouya handing out free store credit
Owners of Android console Ouya have each been handed the princely sum of $13.37 to spend on the console's store.


text:
If a plane curve of degree n intersects an elliptic curve in 3n points, then do those points always sum to zero when added using the group law on the points of an elliptic curve ?
I assume that elliptic curve means a cubic curve $E$ with some base point $O$.
Then the answer to your question is yes if and only if the base point O for the group law is a flex point of $E$. (In many texts it is assumed that the base point of $E$ is a flex line, but to define the group law this is completely unnecessary, see Fulton's book on plane curves for the geometric definition of the group law in this case.) Fulton's geometric definition of the group law on a cubic is equivalent with
Assume first that $O$ is a flex point. Let g be polynomial defining the flex line, let $f$ be a polynomial defining $C$ and let $P_1,...P_{3n}$ be the $3n$ intersection points of $C$ and $E$. As David commented above we have $div(f/g^n)=P_1+..P_{3n}-3nO$, hence the points add up to zero.
Suppose now that O is not a flex. Let $R$ be the third intersection point of $E$ with the tangent line of $E$ at $O$. Since $O$ is not a flex we have that $R\neq O$. To check whether these points add up to zero we have to calculate $O-O+O-O+R-O$ in $Pic^0(C)$. It is easy to see that this divisor is nonzero in $Pic^0(C)$.
Choose a flex as zero point. The sum of three points on a line is zero essentially by construction of the group law. Now the divisor cut on the elliptic curve by a curve of degree $n$ is linearly equivalent to the sum of $n$ hyperplane divisors, so the claim follows.


text:
Just upgraded to the last version of Posts 2 Posts plugin (I have the last WP version too) and I have the following error message on every dashboard page :
« Warning: Connection types without a 'name' parameter are deprecated. in /home/.../wp-content/plugins/posts-to-posts/core/api.php on line 59 »
Plus my website layout is destroyed.
How can I fix this ?


text:
People in Space: The Pioneers
13 of 18
John Glenn
In 1998, 36 years after being the first American to orbit the Earth, John Glenn went back into space aboard the space shuttle Discovery. At 77 years of age, Glenn was the oldest person to venture into space.
Photo source: NASA
Next: Dennis Tito
Provided by Infoplease—an authoritative, comprehensive reference website that offers an encyclopedia, a dictionary, an atlas, and several almanacs. Visit Infoplease.com to find more resources endorsed by teachers and librarians.


text:
R. Thomas Collins II, MD is an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics and Internal Medicine in the Division of Pediatric Cardiology of UAMS at ACH. Dr. Collins graduated from the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, and completed a combined residency program in Internal Medicine and Pediatrics at the University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center in Memphis. Upon completion of residency, he went on to complete his pediatric cardiology fellowship at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. He finished his subspecialty training with an advanced fellowship in adult congenital heart disease and non-invasive imaging.
In July 2010, Dr. Collins joined UAMS and ACH where he is the director of the Adult Congenital Heart Disease program. He is also the inaugural director of the Connective Tissue Disorders Program. He has a special interest in the cardiovascular abnormalities associated with Williams syndrome, and is considered a leading authority on the subject. Dr. Collins has published multiple papers and book chapters, and has presented his research at national and international meetings.
Dr. Collins is board certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Pediatrics, sub-board Cardiology.
Call Us: 501-364-1100 or TDD 501-364-1184


text:
6 Underrated Predators With Mind-Blowing Abilities
#3. Dragonfly Larvae Have Projectile Jaws
Most people consider dragonflies to be nothing more than happy indicators of summer. A dragonfly flitting by is visual shorthand for "beautiful summer day," but perhaps it should be shorthand for "Watch out: xenomorphic monsters crossing."
Adult dragonflies are the Harrier jets of the insect world -- they can fly at speeds of over 30 mph, hover, and even fly backward. Those massive eyes allow them to spot prey from over 100 yards away, and they're voracious eaters. But that's nothing compared to the dragonfly larva, which feeds by firing out its lower jaw like the monster from Aliens. Covered with spikes and spines too freaky to call "teeth," a dragonfly larva can extend its labium so quickly that it acts like a projectile weapon, stunning if not outright killing prospective prey.
It's such an effective hunting technique that dragonfly larvae can even catch minnows, some as large as themselves. But this is definitely a case of words and even still images utterly failing at their given task. You truly have to see that weird little insect fire its bladed chin gun at a passing fish in real time to understand that, if there's a God watching over this world, he's a huge horror nerd.
Langston University
"Y'know what the world could use? More nightmares."
#2. Dana Octopus Squids Use Flashbang Grenades
A few of the many fanged nightmares that lurk in the briny deep use bioluminescence to lure prey close, like that creepy fang-fish from Finding Nemo. Others use bioluminescence to signal mates, or even to ward off rivals. But nothing uses it like the Dana octopus squid: It's a predatory flasher.
BBC News
"Call it what you want. I know I look good."
No, these squids have not evolved to run up to bus stops with their balls hanging out of their chinos -- Japanese researchers filmed these gigantic invertebrates using their bioluminescence like a flashbang grenade. The man-sized squids will dash up to prey, splay their tentacles, and then set off a dizzying disco strobe light routine.
Royal Society via National Geographic
If you're looking to have some fun in the ocean, this is the guy to ask.
This sudden photonic onslaught, unleashed in the perpetual gloom and shadows of the tenebrous sea, stuns fish long enough for the tentacles to close, and boom: You've got yourself a squid effectively using urban warfare tactics. Sleep tight!
#1. Humpback Whales Fish With Nets
Humpbacks are a favorite of ocean lovers everywhere. Compared to the vicious-looking sperm whales (is it just us, or was someone a confusing kind of horny on "Whale-Naming Day"?), big ol' clumsy humpbacks are like your jolly, dumb cousin, all dancing stupidly for your amusement at family barbecues. But much like that time you caught Cousin Jethro hacking into the Pentagon, you are seriously underestimating these blubbery beasts. See, humpback whales have been known to use one of the most convoluted and ingenious hunting methods on the planet: the bubble net.
Otherwise known as the ringworm of the sea.
While they're largely solitary, humpback whales do hunt in groups. When they find a school of tasty fish, the group breaks formation and encircles the prey in a deadly ring of humps. As one, the whales suddenly breathe out, and the ensuing bubbles are so thick and numerous that they form a net of force that the fish cannot swim through. Thus trapped in the bubble ring, the fish are then driven to the surface by a group of "shepherd" whales that swim up from below. Still other whales will scream at the scrambling fish. Yeah, all that beautiful, mournful singing? Turns out it's not all about communication or mating. Some of that caterwauling is straight up banshee-style sonic warfare: The noise disorients and even stuns fish, driving them further into the trap. Finally, when all the fish have been corralled, herded, and shrieked into a stupor, the entire group of humpbacks will bull rush the school from below, swallowing thousands of fish in a single gulp.
Brill, via Science Daily
Leave some for the rest of us, mooches.
Researchers don't think this is recently learned behavior either, which means that humpback whales were probably fishing with nets long before human beings ever thought of it.
So yeah, maybe it's time to rethink that whole "whaling" thing. Not for any ethical reason -- it just might not be a great idea to piss off the 40-ton, sonic-warfare-wielding master tacticians of the ocean, y'know?
"We can body-check tanks. Something to keep in mind."
Monte Richard writes all kinds of stuffs for all kinds of people, but mostly he rambles aimlessly here.
For more reasons why none of us stand a chance, check out The 6 Deadliest Creatures (That Can Fit In Your Shoe) and 5 Lovable Animals You Didn't Know Are Secretly Terrifying.


text:
How many Samurai killed themselves compared to the actual number of Samurai and how many Samurai were dishonored but did not kill themselves?
Well, there is something on the internet.
I found an article which deals with the classification of samurai suicides by their motivations (along the lines of the discussion I had with Anixx in the comments). The authors have also compiled some statistics from a survey of Japanese literary sources (chronicles etc., I presume). They rightly call this methodology "impressionistic" but it's a start. I don't know if the archives of the Tokugawa shogunate have survived; if yes, they might hold more answers.
I do not have numbers but I am quite sure that in most cases the samurais killed themselves either when ordered to do so by the superiors or expected the superiors to order so.
In fact the samurais in Japan enjoyed one privilege that the lower classes did not: they had the right to "honorably" commit suicide instead of being dishonorably executed. So instead of just execute a samurai, his superior would order him to kill himself.
If he refused to do so, then the soldiers of the superior would come, capture the samurai and execute him.
The family of a samurai who was executed forcefully would be stripped of privileges and possessions. So often the superior just sent a letter to the samurai from which it was clear that he wanted him to commit suicide. The letter could be kept secret. The samurai then committed suicide as if it was voluntary. But he knew that if he did not do so, he would be killed anyway and his family suffer.
I think (in my research) that there were numerous suicides and yes it was for honor and dishonor, but I think there were at least 2,000 suicides or more.
Why Samurai Killed Themselves
Suicide is not a great survival tactic. Successful suicide is invariably fatal. Animals, including humans, have a strong instinct for survival, and will avoid death under almost all circumstances. Why then, was suicide amongst Japanese samurai so popular and considered so noble?
It is true of course that people who are profoundly depressed to the point of insanity will sometimes kill themselves to escape the misery of their existence. History does not tell us that samurai were all morbidly depressed, however. Sometimes it even records that they died smiling. It also records that the mothers of samurai, who learned that their sons had killed themselves, smiled with joy at the news, hearing of how their sons had met such an honourable death. History is the official version. One might well imagine that these smiling mothers were heart-broken inside, and cried a lot when no one was looking.
Society rewards sacrifice. It does this for its own good. Society at large applauds people who help the poor, or pull people from burning buildings, because it saves the rest of us having to do these things. We all benefit from the sacrifices of others, so we all encourage each other to be self-sacrificing for the sake of society at large. Was this the force at work, making samurai commit suicide?
In feudal Japan, families were important. Honour was important too, as was status. Shame and dishonour affected the whole family. Families share genes. If one noble samurai lord became widely known to have done something shameful, this would affect the prospects of his whole family. His daughters would not marry so well. His brothers would have to work much harder to achieve any position of influence and power. Genes drive women to put a great deal of effort into finding the best mates, and men to seek to be as high status as possible, because high status men have more children (at least, before contraception they did). It seems logical, then, that genes might also drive us to police the behaviour of anyone whose behaviour might affect the chances of our finding good mates and reaching high status.
I suggest that the reason samurai went in for suicide so readily, is that their families instilled in them a strong sense of duty. Families, not wishing to be harmed by the actions of one rogue family member, would for the sake of their genes demand that the one erring member should kill himself rather than damage the whole family gene pool. Suicide is proof of a recognition of guilt and shame, and of a strong resolve to do something about that guilt. That it wipes the sins from the family of the dead man means that it is a sacrifice which has some good effect on the world, and thus this makes the suicide honourable.
This death would be, of course, a very high price to pay. The person dying would often be a high status healthy male, and perhaps father to a few children. This is no small loss, and so it would be a cost which could be borne only in special circumstances. These circumstances would include:
A society in which the shame of one man rubs off on his whole family. The society does not want shameful acts in its midst, and so obliges families to police themselves by insisting that shamed members kill themselves. It does this by shunning families which harbour shamed men. The society which behaved this way in feudal Japan was the aristocracy, which wanted aristocrats to behave aristocratically, and not let the side down by appearing ignoble in the eyes of the peasants. An aristocracy which could self-police so impressively would more easily be able to stay in power.
A society which for the sake of order and conservatism, believed that suicide was a sacrifice which wiped the sins of the dead man from his family.
A society full of families which were very fearful of losing status, and where a loss of status would be catastrophic to the chances of genes replicating.
The man killing himself would not be highly valued for his physical labour or his ability to produce food to feed his family.
These circumstances all existed amongst the nobility of feudal Japan. By contrast the attitude to suicide amongst the general peasantry was very different. It was considered a crime. A peasant man was valued for his ability to feed his family. Whereas a noble could be confident that someone would look after his children, and that there was no danger of their starving, a peasant was not in this position. A peasant who killed himself would be significantly harming the chances of his children to grow up properly fed. The nobles relied for their income on the labours of the poor in their area, so they didn't want their peasants killing themselves off.
A good example reason why a Japanese noble might kill himself, is alleged disloyalty to the Emperor. It is easy to understand that a family tainted with disloyalty to the highest authority in the land might suffer. The particular favoured method of suicide was hara-kiri or "belly cutting" (the word seppuku refers to the formal ritual ceremony of suicide), which involved the man's slitting himself wide open across the belly. This is a very difficult and painful way to commit suicide, and so all the more proof of the quality of the man doing it, and his genuine intentions.
I am sure that it is no coincidence that the unusual circumstances which would create an environment in which a gene's chances of replication would be increased by the suicide of the gene's host body, just happen to be those circumstances in which we find "noble" suicide. In Britain, things are different. Suicide is either the cowards way out, or, more often these days, a sad reflection on our society's failure to make its members happy.
In World War Two, the British and Japanese had opposite attitudes to suicide. The British saw it as a foolish and cowardly way out of having to suffer imprisonment as a prisoner of war. The Japanese saw it as brave and self-sacrificing. This was the first time that the noble art of suicide had been extended to the masses, and suicide in Japan, though still by world standards popular, has not been so common since. Amazingly enough, the common Japanese soldier believed that his Emperor was a god, and that common soldiers could elevate themselves to higher after-world status by suicide. This is not a long-term stable state of affairs, first because people will eventually work out that they are being manipulated and sacrificed by and for the upper classes, and secondly because it is not a behaviour which is to the benefit of the genes of those exhibiting that behaviour. One could say that the modern Japanese might be less gullible than their grandparent's generation, because the most gullible men killed themselves more often during the war. In the long long term, this selection process would breed a peasant class who would never be fooled by anything the nobles tried to get them to do.
Here I have used evolutionary theory to explain a bizarre behaviour exhibited by humans. A social anthropologist would have put it all down to "culture". Genes react to environment. Genes created the social environment to a great extent, and within that particular environment, they favoured certain behaviours. One might argue that for the behaviour of suicide to evolve amongst an aristocracy, that the aristocracy would have to be living in that particular unusual way for a very long time indeed. My belief is that the instincts for self sacrifice were much older than feudal Japan, but that feudal Japan brought them out. Even in the Pleistocene, the chances of a brother's breeding well would be harmed if his brother were well known to be a bad example of humanity. This would put pressure on people to distance themselves from bad relatives, for their own good. Suicide is just a very extreme result of this behaviour. The suicide may appear at first to be due to the self-sacrificing behaviour of the man killing himself, but actually its roots are in the fact that the family of the sacrificing man are putting pressure on him one way or another to do the deed. We did not evolve to kill ourselves so much as to punish the bad behaviour of relatives.
If I knew more about the Indian practice of suttee (wives throwing themselves on the funeral pyres of husbands), then I'm sure that I could eventually work out an explanation for that too.


text:
Vinnie Ditello is the kitchen manager at The Jeep Grill, a caf� located inside the Central Chrysler Jeep Dodge of Norwood showroom at 56 Providence Highway, Norwood. The restaurant opened in December 2011 and offers a variety of sandwiches, soups, salads and daily specials. The Jeep Grill is open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday to Friday, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday and 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday.
What is it like being the chef at a restaurant inside a car dealership?
It is a very unique experience. It�s kind of like being a personal chef for 200 people. You have people who come eat here every day. You want to give them as many choices as possible.
How is working as a chef at The Jeep Grill different from working as a chef at a more traditional establishment?
I�ve worked everywhere from California to Massachusetts. Here, I�m able to communicate with the customer, face-to-face. I can see them, I can talk to them. I can ask if they want their sandwich in multigrain bread or if they want a side of broccoli. You get to know them and can identify them by what they eat.
Why should people come try The Jeep Grill?
We definitely exceed the expectations of people who come here. We have a number of people who come for lunch, including quite a few from University Avenue. We serve fresh food, everything is made from scratch and the quality is good. It will exceed a lot of restaurants.
What is the typical first reaction from someone coming to The Jeep Grill?
The initial response is �Wow- I didn�t know you have a caf� here.� While we�ve been in business two and a half years, there are a lot of people who come in from everywhere. The initial response is �When did you guys do this?�
What is your favorite meal on the menu?
For me, it varies everyday, with our specials. In the fall, we do a lot of beef stew, and that is one of my favorites. You can also get a red leaf salad with fresh salmon, and that tastes excellent.
Is there a particular restaurant you�d like to see us visit? Do you have a favorite bartender you�d like us to interview? Send us suggestions by emailing email@example.com. Staff writer Brad Cole can be reached at 781-433-8339 or email@example.com. Like The Norwood Transcript and Bulletin on Facebook and follow @bradcolewrites and @NorwoodTranscri on Twitter.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
User Comments for Week 15 WR Rankings
Dez Bryant not listed - i know his status is uncertain but he hasn't been ruled out and has stated he wants to play - he'll probably tape it up and go play
ceever 12/11/12 07:14 PM
HELP!!! Playoffs in a non-PPR league. Start 3, Decker, J. Nelson (maybe injured), D. Moore, Fitzgerald, Blackmon, Givens, A. Brown, and I picked up Alshon Jeffrey. 10 team league and I've dropped all my subs trying to get a decent WR matchup. Jeffrey came through for me on week 14, but Givens gave me 4.2 pts and 2 of that was a 2pt conversion. I thought I'd be invincible with Foster and Peterson as RB's, and Fitzgerald, Nelson and Decker as WR's. Got bit on my WR's all year. D. Moore picked up the slack, but He hasn't helped much recently. I'm open to help here.
longbear99 12/11/12 10:01 PM
yo longbear - you are in the GM chair - take charge brother - asking for help is like AJ Smith trying to channel Al Davis
ceever 12/11/12 11:26 PM
Hey Ceever, thanks for the vote of confidence. I'm leaning towards Decker, Blackmon, and Givens.
longbear99 12/11/12 11:38 PM
Week 15 Starters_NON PPR/10 Team/Standard Scoring League
Pick 2 RB's>(Jamaal Charles),(Alfred Morris),(Bryce Brown)also(LeSean McCoy)?
Pick 2 WR's>(Andre Johnson),(Josh Gordon),(Danario Alexander),(Mike Williams)also(Jordy Nelson)?
Also Pick Flex(RB/WR) from players listed above?
Six19R_OG-Mobsta 12/12/12 05:42 AM
Jason Avant?
kmorrisesq2 12/12/12 11:33 AM
I am the underdog in my league! At 5 win record I shouldn't be in the playoffs. I won last week with the Seahawks defense! Playing 12 win team! Only question PPR league WR pick 2 Decker, Amendola, Austin, Givens or TY Hilton? Thanks a bunch! I will have one for you if I win! :)
Hgriff1 12/12/12 05:51 PM
Hey what's up all. Danario or Nicks? And Heath miller or Myers? PPR
billaxx 12/12/12 10:10 PM
Also. Josh Gordon or Golden Tate Ppr
billaxx 12/12/12 10:11 PM
Need help with Playoffs ! I have a tough opponent !
QB - Peyton or Freeman - i chose Peyton
DEF - Broncos or Dolphins - i chose Broncos
2 RB - Rice or Matthews or Ridley - i chose Rice & Matthews
3 WR - J Gordon or TY Hilton or T.Smith or L.Moore - i chose Gordon/Hilton/Moore
DjJojo 12/13/12 01:27 PM
Miles Austin, Greg Jennings, James Jones or TY Hilton???
Fniette 12/14/12 06:59 PM
I like the Gordon play too
ceever 12/16/12 12:07 AM


text:
- Jena Economic Resea...
- Volume 3
- Fundamental Uncerta...
- author
Universität Jena (FSU), Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät (BRD)
- Published
- Thu Oct 15 2009
- Number of discussion paper
- keyword(s)
bounded rationality
fundamental uncertainty
liquidity preference
portfolio choice
- abstract
One of Keynes' core issues in his liquidity preference theory is how fundamental uncertainty affects the propensity to hold money as a liquid asset. The paper critically assesses various formal representations of fundamental uncertainty and provides an argument for a more boundedly rational approach to portfolio choice between liquidity and risky assets. The choice is made on the basis of individual beliefs which are subject to mental representations of the underlying economic structure. Self-consciousness arises when the agent is aware of the fact that beliefs are dispersed among agents due to the absence of a "true" model. Responding to this fact by increasing liquidity preference is rationalized by the higher ex post performance of choice. Moreover, we analyze the case that the portfolio is partially financed by debt. It is explored how fundamental uncertainty affects the volume of the portfolio and hence money and credit demand as well as the probability of debt failures.
- article pub. typess JER
- Research article
- article languages JER
- Englisch
- article research fields JER
- economics
- JEL-Classification for JER
- G11 - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions ; D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty ; E41 - Demand for Money ; B31 - Individuals


text:
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics — like the Copenhagen interpretation in particular — require the existence of an observer. The role of the observer is a bit mysterious. After all, observers are not needed in classical mechanics. Which physically acceptable interpretations of quantum mechanics do not require the existence of any observer at all? By that, I mean they would continue to make sense even in the absence of any observer. The many worlds interpretations appears to require an observer to subjectively determine which branch is selected.
Which physically acceptable quantum interpretations do not require the existence of any observer at all?
For the Penrose interpretation, quoting Wikipedia:
You can check more about objective collapse theories here, and more about the referred Penrose interpretation here.
Also, the Wikipedia article on the double-slit experiment slightly mentions about the novel experiments that goes on the corners of the measument problem and the wave-particle duality. For this you should look for "Unsharp particle-wave duality in a photon split-beam experiment", "Simultaneous wave and particle knowledge in a neutron interferometer", "Afshar experiment" and other related experiments and its critiques.
Also, quoting Heisenberg on "Physics and Philosophy":
Which may give you another view for the term observer.
Also, Feynman says on his Feynman Lectures on Physics:
and later on:
When he says, "Nature does not know what you are looking at, and she behaves the way she is going to behave whether you bother to take down the data or not", I think he's ruling out the common sense for observers.
Well if such interpretation existed it would be useless because it would be unable to make predictions for observations by any existing observer.
That said, you correctly noted the many-worlds interpretation. While it needs observers to explain observations, it still has a concept of so-called "universal wave function", a wave function of the entire Universe, that does not correspond to any observer and which undergoes unitary evolution from the very beginning of Universe. The problem with it is that nobody ever can measure it :-) It is just postulated that Universal Wave Function exists, but it is unobservable and at best corresponds to an infinitely distant (in both space and time) "observer".
Moreover. In this work it was shown that universally valid theory is impossible. That is however good a theory is invented the observer could not use it to predict the future of a system that contains himself. This result means that however well a theory predicts future of any observed external objects, the observer himself is excluded from normal application of the theory's laws. As the whole universe inevitably includes the observer himself, this means that no theory can be used predict the future of the universe as a whole because inevitably there is a point in the universe where the theory's laws are broken.
Surprisingly, in some of his writings Feynman seemed to lean towards an observer-free interpretation of quantum theory in which objects as small as atoms or particles replace observers by acting as event recorders (memories). Two relevant Feynman quotes are below; Chico in his answer noted several other relevant and related Feynman quotes.
Vol. III, Sec. 3-3 Scattering from a crystal, p.3-9, first full paragraph, talking about whether a neutron will interact with a crystal as a wave or as a particle:
Vol. III, Sec. 3-4, Identical particles, audio version only:
In the first quote, Feynman pretty much says that what counts is whether the event got recorded by an atom, regardless of whether an observer looks at it or not. That's remarkable if you think about it, since it does not even acknowledge the view that a conscious observer must always participate.[1]
Instead, Feynman employed the idea that an atom that is capable of being struck by a neutron is all the "observer" needed to make an individual neutron bifurcate between the two possible paths of remaining quantum (where it leaves no specific information trace is left in the crystal, and the neutron continues as a wave) or becoming classical (where it leaves a small but clear mark on a single atom within the crystal, and ceases to behave like a wave.)
In the second quote, Feynman uses this same concept of information signatures to define the difference between quantum (interfering) and classical situations. Only those situations that fail to leave such an information trace remain quantum. (In current terminology, this would be called the decoherence problem.)
While I really like Feynman's approach to such thought experiments, I must also point out that to the best of my knowledge he never made any attempt to expand such ideas into an explicitly quantified approach. Furthermore, since Feynman clearly did feel that there was such a thing as a universal wave function, and that the concept of wave collapse was "magic" (in a QED footnote I think), it's possible that he was simply making a subtle distinction between "simple" and easily reversible forms of wave functions (the neutron diffracting) and "complicated" wave functions that were far less likely to be reversible (the neutron colliding with one atom). John Bell had a marvelous essay on just that point,[2] in which he showed how very careful one must be when assuming that a "clearly classical" event had no wave representation.
For my part, I like the pragmatic simplicity of Feynman's "did it leave a trace?" rule very much, even if it lacks the formal depth and elaboration of other more abstract frameworks. Quantum events by this rule simply become the ones that don't leave information traces... period. In fact, if you are familiar with Feynman's QED framework and think about it a bit, you will see that Feynman's marvelously accurate and predictive integrals of all possible histories are just the flip side of the same idea.
That is, those many possible histories become significant precisely because no classical event has occurred yet that would contradict them. The absence of classical information traces allows such whispers of worlds that could be to take on a certain degree of measurable reality, if only as vanishingly tiny parts of a wave that is the sum of all such not-yet-forbidden worlds.
[1] Feynman was very much aware of the conscious-observer viewpoint, since his PhD adviser John Archibald Wheeler was one of its main advocates.
[2] John Bell, Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics.
There is always an observer in the sense that someone has to decide what experimental apparatus to construct, what data to collect, what statistics or other multivariate functions of the data to construct from that data, and what theoretical model to compare the data to. That was and is equally true of classical Physics as it is of quantum theory.
There are as many Copenhagen interpretations as there are people who've written about what it is. A recent paper by James R. Henderson, "Classes of Copenhagen interpretations: Mechanisms of collapse as typologically determinative", Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 41(2010)1–8, doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2009.08.001 (sorry, I couldn't find a non-paywall version to link to), discusses three people's approaches,
On the second page, Henderson suggests that, for a measurement to happen,
One can take issue with any such classification of the evolving history of the Copenhagen interpretation over the last 80 years, but in relation to your Question I suggest that there is enough to justify a claim that some varieties of the Copenhagen interpretation do not require an observer.
On another front, one of the claimed advantages of the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation is that it is observer-independent in the same sense as classical dynamics (which for some people is desirable enough that they are willing to accept other aspects of that interpretation).
Adding to the answer by paper_chico,
There are various views including quantum bayesianism, penrose interpretation(objective collapse theory), information-based quantum mechanics, many-world interpretation or relational quantum mechanics according to my knowledge. Personally I like Penrose interpretation, which is based on objective collapse theory and removes the supremacy of observer.
Penrose interpretation: This interpretation assumes that a particle can stay at multiple places at the same time, but since every particle bends space-time around it, it requires some energy to sustain its 'gravitational field' ( space-time curvature,precisely). So, depending upon the energy levels the object can stay at various places.While understanding this, one must rip off the concept of 'wavefunction collapse' from his head. This also explains why macroscopic objects can't exist at multiple places, just by saying that the energy difference is so large, that the objects can't stay there for measurable time. Quoting Wiki:
In Einstein's theory, any object that has mass causes a warp in the structure of space and time around it. This warping produces the effect we experience as gravity. Penrose points out that tiny objects, such as dust specks, atoms and electrons, produce space-time warps as well. Ignoring these warps is where most physicists go awry. If a dust speck is in two locations at the same time, each one should create its own distortions in space-time, yielding two superposed gravitational fields. According to Penrose's theory, it takes energy to sustain these dual fields. The stability of a system depends on the amount of energy involved: the higher the energy required to sustain a system, the less stable it is. Over time, an unstable system tends to settle back to its simplest, lowest-energy state: in this case, one object in one location producing one gravitational field. If Penrose is right, gravity yanks objects back into a single location, without any need to invoke observers or parallel universes. Loosely put, it explains the wavefunction collapse in the following way:
Wavefunctions do collapse, not because of some observer observing it(Copenhagen interpretation), but they will collapse just after the curvature in space-time attains a particular threshold level. If the energy of the particle does not allow the it to stay in different states, it'll collapse to one state.
I'm not an expert in this field, however, I've shared what I know about it. If anyone has better views on this topic, or a deeper insight, please discuss.
Quantum Mechanics is almost certainly as flawed as every other physical theory that has come and gone. That statement gets on the nerves of a lot of physicists - many of whom think that 'This Time its Different'.
Take Newton's gravity for example. Newton knew that the whole instantaneous transmission of gravitational force did not make sense, yet the theory was wildly accurate and is still used today for 99% of things like space flight. Yet the theory is fundamentally flawed from a conceptual viewpoint.
With QM - where is the problem? It is likely in the transition from the microscopic realm to the macroscopic realm, where the 'large hand wave' called waveform collapse comes into the theory. So getting to the question: Here are some possibilities:
Re: This time its different: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8973.html


text:
Our last food stop in South Carolina was in the town of Anderson. The Pompous Pig. By this point all of us were getting rather full. We almost missed the place. They have no street visibility and their door is on the side of a small plaza. We smelled the food before we ate. Always a good sign.
This place is really clean open and airy. Its almost too clean. For me a BBQ joint needs to have a certain vibe to it. I will admit it makes no real sense but I like a little grease on the window panes, a little smokiness on the walls and I don't really prefer walking into a joint that I could eat off the floors. I guess you could call it the grunge factor. Not dirty just a little bbq grunge.
From their website:
The History of The Pompous Pig IT ALL STARTED with a Big Green Egg smoker and our passion for entertaining friends and family. One egg became two, and after repeated requests from friends to provide barbeque for their special events our Atlanta-based catering business was born. A trailered competition pit smoker was added as the business grew, which was soon followed by another trailered 500-pound capacity commercial smoker. When are you going to open a restaurant ? " became the battle cry of our customers. After snowballing growth from customer referrals, we decided the time was right to open our first restaurant and that Kim's hometown of Anderson was the right place to do it. Thank you, Anderson, for giving us this opportunity to fulfill our dream. We will strive to serve you with the best barbeque, homemade sides and desserts, and provide friendly service in a fun atmosphere. We appreciate your support and look forward to serving you in the days and years to come. Enjoy!
Kim & Chet Newsrom
After reviewing their menu we once again asked if we could sample a bit of everything from their meats and some of their sides. The Pompous pig has only been open 2 years.
We thoroughly enjoyed everything they had to offer. Even after we didn't think we could eat anything more we were still nibbling away. Succulent ribs with an excellent bark on them, delicious pork and some seriously awesome cornbread with honey butter slathered on.
The collard greens were one of my favorites. They still had definition- they were really well cooked. I love collard greens and these were great. The chicken was moist and delicious the broccoli apple salad full of great texture and crunch everything was really yummy. They have lots of sides at this place all complimentary to their wonderful BBQ offerings. They use Southern Prides for all their meats.
I fell in love with their apple cider vinegar sauce. I bought the largest container they had. All of their sauces had great flavor.
Their staff was super friendly and happy to have us. I really admired some of the pictures they have on their walls:
We were a bunch of happy happy meat coma people by this point. If you are in the area you stop by The Pompous Pig. Its delicious. I know for sure that we enjoyed our time in South Carolina and had a great time enjoying all of the places we ate at.
Tuesday – Thursday 11:00 am – 8:00 pm
Friday & Saturday 11:00 am – 9:00 pm
Sunday 11:00 am – 3:00 pm
Mondays we are CLOSED – We will be OPEN MONDAY SEPT. 6th for Labor Day


text:
When women light shabbat candles I often see them making hand gestures. These look like two or perhaps three circles around in the air. What is the source for this practice? Is it a law or custom? Is the candle lighting kosher without the gestures?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
The principles are:
1) Tradition has it that women accept Shabbos when they say the blessing on the candles.
2) Blessings on mitzvos should be done before the mitzvo is performed.
See Kitzur Shulchan Oruch 75(4).
Because of (1), once the woman has said the blessing, it becomes Shabbos and she can no longer light the candles.
So what the women do is
This has always been my understanding.
(Answer 2)
But see the Chabad.org article procedure where the hand movements "usher in a special guest, the Shabbat Queen." After the third hand movement, the woman covers her eyes with her hands and recites the blessing.
I would like to know if there is any support for my first understanding.