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: Peter T. Daniels on 1 Mar 2010 16:41 On Mar 1, 11:48 am, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:23:39 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" > <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > >On Feb 28, 9:50 pm, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: > >> > On Feb 28, 1:42 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: > >> >>> On Feb 26, 1:40 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote: > > >> >>>>> Do the Pacific states get the same coverage we do? > > >> >>>> Ignoring the various pay, satellite, and cable channels, there > >> >>>> are about twelve free-to-air locally broadcast channels. > >> >>>> One of the free-to-air channels (Prime) broadcasts Winter > >> >>>> Olympics every day nonstop from 5:30am to 6:30pm. Looking > >> >>>> at today's Friday schedule, apart from the half-hour WO news > >> >>>> at 5:30am and Cross Country skiing at 10:30-11:30am all the > >> >>>> events are live. > > >> >>>> If by "same coverage" you mean "identical programming" then > >> >>>> the answer is no. All commentators are either New Zealanders > >> >>>> or people who are aware of commenting for the downunder > >> >>>> or specifically kiwi audience. Now and then they interrupt > >> >>>> the program to switch to another competition to show > >> >>>> a kiwi athlete, who would we normally not see, perform > >> >>>> their shtick and then switch back. > > >> >>> Eh? You take "Pacific states" -- in the context of time zones -- to > >> >>> include New Zealand?? > > >> >> Whoops, sorry, I didn't realise that by "Pacific states" you meant > >> >> "US Pacific states". > > >> > We very, very, very rarely use "state" to mean 'independent nation'. > > >> And we very, very, very rarely use the expression "Pacific states" > >> which would exclude the majority of Pacific states (i.e. non-US > >> states in the Pacific). > > >"Pacific states" is a wel-established term -- sometimes it includes AK > >and HI, sometimes not. > > >> This just shows that no matter how hard I try I still sometimes > >> fail to correctly translate Merkin E. semantics to English E. > > >"State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving > >a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also > >in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany. > > Germany doesn't have states, it has laender. Which, in English, are called states. In preparation for my invited- lecture visit at the beginning of April, I'm looking at websites and today picked out a guidebook (ended up with Michelin), and they use "state."
From: Peter T. Daniels on 1 Mar 2010 16:43 On Mar 1, 11:45 am, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 04:51:09 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" > > <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > >In some states, we think Lincoln was pretty important, too. > > >We note that you moved to a part of the country where Lincoln is > >despised. > > But that is not the question at hand. > > >In case you can't remember, Lincoln was born on the very same day as > >Charles Darwin, and his birthday was a state holiday in each of the > >two states I lived in before 39 years ago.. > > What this has to do with the federal holiday of Washington's > Birthday escapes me. There is no longer a Lincoln's Birthday holiday (except, presumably, in Illinois -- just as Patriots' Day is observed in Massachusetts), because Lincoln and Washington were together packaged into Presidents' Day.
From: Hatunen on 1 Mar 2010 17:35 On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 13:43:07 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> wrote: >On Mar 1, 11:45�am, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 04:51:09 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" >> >> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: >> >In some states, we think Lincoln was pretty important, too. >> >> >We note that you moved to a part of the country where Lincoln is >> >despised. >> >> But that is not the question at hand. >> >> >In case you can't remember, Lincoln was born on the very same day as >> >Charles Darwin, and his birthday was a state holiday in each of the >> >two states I lived in before 39 years ago.. >> >> What this has to do with the federal holiday of Washington's >> Birthday escapes me. > >There is no longer a Lincoln's Birthday holiday (except, presumably, >in Illinois -- just as Patriots' Day is observed in Massachusetts), >because Lincoln and Washington were together packaged into Presidents' >Day. No. They weren't, save for perhaps a very few juridictions. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Hatunen on 1 Mar 2010 17:36 On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 13:41:15 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> wrote: >On Mar 1, 11:48�am, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:23:39 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" >> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: >> >On Feb 28, 9:50 pm, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: >> >> > On Feb 28, 1:42 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 26, 1:40 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote: >> >> >> >>>>> Do the Pacific states get the same coverage we do? >> >> >> >>>> Ignoring the various pay, satellite, and cable channels, there >> >> >>>> are about twelve free-to-air locally broadcast channels. >> >> >>>> One of the free-to-air channels (Prime) broadcasts Winter >> >> >>>> Olympics every day nonstop from 5:30am to 6:30pm. Looking >> >> >>>> at today's Friday schedule, apart from the half-hour WO news >> >> >>>> at 5:30am and Cross Country skiing at 10:30-11:30am all the >> >> >>>> events are live. >> >> >> >>>> If by "same coverage" you mean "identical programming" then >> >> >>>> the answer is no. All commentators are either New Zealanders >> >> >>>> or people who are aware of commenting for the downunder >> >> >>>> or specifically kiwi audience. Now and then they interrupt >> >> >>>> the program to switch to another competition to show >> >> >>>> a kiwi athlete, who would we normally not see, perform >> >> >>>> their shtick and then switch back. >> >> >> >>> Eh? You take "Pacific states" -- in the context of time zones -- to >> >> >>> include New Zealand?? >> >> >> >> Whoops, sorry, I didn't realise that by "Pacific states" you meant >> >> >> "US Pacific states". >> >> >> > We very, very, very rarely use "state" to mean 'independent nation'. >> >> >> And we very, very, very rarely use the expression "Pacific states" >> >> which would exclude the majority of Pacific states (i.e. non-US >> >> states in the Pacific). >> >> >"Pacific states" is a wel-established term -- sometimes it includes AK >> >and HI, sometimes not. >> >> >> This just shows that no matter how hard I try I still sometimes >> >> fail to correctly translate Merkin E. semantics to English E. >> >> >"State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving >> >a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also >> >in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany. >> >> Germany doesn't have states, it has laender. > >Which, in English, are called states. Which English? I've may have heard that a few times, but English-speakers calling them states doesn't make them states. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Nick on 1 Mar 2010 17:44
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> writes: > On Mar 1, 2:10 pm, Nick <3-nos...(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote: >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes: >> >> > On Mar 1, 2:59 am, Nick <3-nos...(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote: >> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes: >> >> >> > "State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving >> >> > a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also >> >> > in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany. >> >> >> So are you suggesting that "failed state" and "rogue state" are >> >> expressions that have no meaning in the US. >> >> > No, there is a difference between a bare noun and a qualified noun. Did >> > you not see that I used "nation-state" above? >> >> So "state" doesn't mean US state when qualified with - oh how about >> "Pacific". OK that's perfectly clear. ^ what happened there? I didn't put that in. > Wait a minute, you're posting from one of the mathematical groups and > you don't even understand first-year logic? No I'm not. > Don't you know the difference between converses and inverses versus > contrapositives? No I don't. I don't know why I'm doing this either. But let's try again. In the world according to you, "state" means a state of the US because that's what state always means when used by an American. Unless it's qualified. When it's qualified by "rogue" or "failed" then it means a country, but when it's qualified by "Pacific" it goes back to meaning a part of the US. So what rule applies? Is a "govinde state" part of the US or not? And how on earth are the rest of us meant to know? -- Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk |