The perpetual calendar
in [Math]
|
Prev: THE MIND OF MATHEMATICIANS PART 7 " SPATIAL MATHEMATICS , VALUE OF 1 and 3
Next: Exactly why the theories of relativity are complete nonsense- the basic mistake exposed!
From: Robert Bannister on 26 Feb 2010 18:40 Peter T. Daniels wrote: > On Feb 25, 8:44 pm, Robert Bannister <robb...(a)bigpond.com> wrote: >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: >>> On Feb 23, 8:12 pm, Robert Bannister <robb...(a)bigpond.com> wrote: >>>> Adam Funk wrote: >>>>> On 2010-02-23, Ant nio Marques wrote: > >>>>>> "Roman Catholic" ISN'T AN OFFICIAL SELF-DESIGNATION. ANYWHERE. >>>>> Are you going to write to all the churches in the UK with "St ____'s >>>>> Roman Catholic Church" or "St ____'s R. C. Church" on their signs, >>>>> newsletters, websites, etc., to tell them that they are wrong? (I >>>>> think this is common in much of the USA too.) >>>> I won't try to claim such signs don't exist, but I don't remember ever >>>> seeing one. The only way I can tell a church is RC is by the >>>> architecture and usually by the name (saint I've never heard of or >>>> long-winded way of saying Mary). >>> Do you only visit villages so small that they have only one church, or >>> so homogeneous that they only have a sprinkling of Protestant churches? >> I don't see what you are getting at. The only churches I notice that >> actually stipulate their denomination on their own signs are the ones >> that are neither Anglican nor Catholic. The latter appear to assume that >> anyone interested will know, and usually, they are right. As I said >> above, I won't try to claim that no "Roman Catholic" or "Church of >> England" signs exist - just that I haven't noticed them in the same way >> I notice Lutheran or whatever. > > It's the Episcopalians who put up signs at the intersections for > blocks around guiding passersby to their church -- with, of course, > their familiar insignia. > > Do try to remember that we have no state religion -- there is no such > thing as an "unmarked" (in the technical linguistic sense) church here. I must say I had forgotten those little signs on street corners saying "Serbian Orthodox Church Sv. Nicola" or whatever - there are some pointing you to the nearest RC or Anglican or you-name-it church, but I thought we were discussing signs on the church grounds. -- Rob Bannister
From: Dr. HotSalt on 26 Feb 2010 18:42 On Feb 26, 2:24 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <y...(a)theworld.com> wrote: > On Feb 26, 3:10 pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On 2010-02-24, Michael Press wrote: > > > > In article <hlvvbr$50...(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > > "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> I would prefer if every 24 hour day was made longer by one > > >> hour, i.e. 25 hours long. I know it would cause some strife > > >> for many people but I for one and people like me wouldn't have > > >> to suffer the pain of advancing my slow circadian rhythm clock > > >> by an hour every morning. > > > > There is a reason our circadian period is ~25 hour. > > > It is easier to reset a physical oscillator before > > > its natural end of cycle, than just after; much, > > > much easier. A free running 25 hour period allows > > > for enough stochastic variation to keep the period > > > longer than 24 hour. > > > The earth's rotation has been slowing down faster than we've been > > evolving. > > AFAIK the previous explanation is more accepted. also it is said to be > an adaption to have activity at all times, at some point. but htta is > just something I( had read a long time ago. I'd like to see a description of the alleged oscillator. Dr. Hot"Engaland swing like a pendulum do"Salt
From: sjdevnull on 26 Feb 2010 18:45 On Feb 26, 3:51 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > On Feb 26, 2:30 pm, "sjdevn...(a)yahoo.com" <sjdevn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 26, 12:52 pm, mstem...(a)walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) > > wrote: > > > > In article <7uomssFvk...(a)mid.individual.net>, Robert Bannister <robb....(a)bigpond.com> writes: > > > >tony cooper wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:14:04 +0800, Robert Bannister <robb...(a)bigpond.com> wrote: > > > >>> Ant nio Marques wrote: > > > > >>>> It's not what you think. Either the Church's message is universal and > > > >>>> Christ did found one Church, or it isn't. > > > >>> Now there's a new one: the first I've heard that Jesus founded or even > > > >>> wanted a church. > > > > >> I thought he delegated the job to Peter. > > > > >I don't think so. I believe he did ask Peter and the others to keep on > > > >spreading the word, but I have seen no mention of churches, priests, > > > >buildings, vestments or choir boys in the New Testament. > > > > Try Mt 16:17-18. > > > The closest I see there is the word "build": > >  17And Jesus answering said to him, `Happy art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, > > because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to thee, but my Father who > > is in the heavens. > >  18`And I also say to thee, that thou art a rock, and upon this rock I > > will build my assembly, and gates of Hades shall not prevail against > > it; > > (Young's Literal Translation) > > > Note that "ecclesia" is sometimes mistranslated as "church"; in > > reality it meant "assembly"--the most well-known "ecclesia" prior to > > the writing of Matthew would have been the democratic gatherings of > > Athens, which went under that name.  There's no reason to think that > > it meant anything like the organized hierarchy of the modern Church.- > > What the hell is "Young's Literal Translation"? Is that one of those > misguided efforts to render every word of the Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek the > same way in English every time it appears? When was it done? It's a literal translation of the Bible, done in 1862. The particular credentials of Young's aren't important in this case, because plenty of other scholarly translations (e.g the 1997 version of the American Standard Version, Darby's) render the passage the same way, but more importantly because the word in question is easily verified as "εκκληÏιαν" or "ecclesia" and you can easily research the history of that word yourself without having to rely on someone else's translation abilities; at the time of writing, it meant "assembly", and it wasn't until later that it acquired the second meaning of "church".
From: Robert Bannister on 26 Feb 2010 18:46 Peter T. Daniels wrote: > On Feb 26, 11:13 am, R H Draney <dadoc...(a)spamcop.net> wrote: >> Peter T. Daniels filted: >> >> >> >>> On Feb 25, 1:29=A0pm, Adam Funk <a24...(a)ducksburg.com> wrote: >>>> "archaeoastronomy" >>> No, that's speculation about the alignments of Stonehenge or the Nasca >>> figures or whatever. >>> Which is different from the sort of _recorded_ observations made from >>> at least the early first millennium BCE in Mesopotamia (and from some >>> point in China) down to the time of Tycho Brahe, on the basis of >>> nothing but whose naked-eye observations, Kepler worked out the theory >>> of elliptical planetary orbits. >> Impressive, true, but I once got my hands on a book on celestial mechanics that >> derived the fact of elliptical orbits (and the "equal areas in equal times" >> principle) starting with nothing but the fact that gravity is in inverse-square >> proportion to distance....r > > Kepler would have had it so much easier if he had lived after Newtion! It's often easier to get "there" if you start from somewhere else. -- Rob Bannister
From: spudnik on 26 Feb 2010 18:49
"all [of] their creeds are an admonition in [JS's] sight" -- I like it, but waht did he mean? thus: so, what is this "diode" supposed to be connected to? > 3) Diamond has a negative electron work function into vacuum. > 4) Osmium has a 5.92 eV electron work function into vacuum. > US Pat. 5283501 > Chem. Mater. 20(21) 6871 (2008) > Diamond and Related Materials, 15(11-12) 2082 (2006) > Electron Comm Jpn Pt 2, 82(8) 42 (1999) thus: that was the paragraph before their patented new ****. > here:http://www.bloomenergy.com/products/solid-oxide-fuel-cell/. thus: that is an "H2," you say, with 100mpg using *what* kind of engine?... the Bradley fughting Vehicles was said to be big peice of **** by the military, then GM sold it to us as a SUV via the pre- Governeurateur! so, what is the sustainable rate of "fossilized (TM)" fuel production, anyway?... or, what is the "current" rate of its production? --les OEUvres! http://wlym.com --Stop Cheeny, Rice, Pendergast and the ICC's 3rd British invasion of Sudan! http://larouchepub.com |