@agesilas.bsky.social
No, the consensus is that he became very religious, and that this tainted his logic. I understand your point of course: how a mathematician and logician as great as Pascal could fall for such an obvious fallacy. But that's what ideology can do. Even to the smartest people. Sadly.
February 7, 2025 at 8:57 AM
No, the consensus is that he became very religious, and that this tainted his logic. I understand your point of course: how a mathematician and logician as great as Pascal could fall for such an obvious fallacy. But that's what ideology can do. Even to the smartest people. Sadly.
… he says, he actually does almost nothing of what he says. But he wants to look like the polar opposite. Pretending is all that matter. That's how he keeps getting money. The valuation of his businesses is so totally disconnected from fundamentals, it's a joke. It's all about the projected imaged.
February 6, 2025 at 8:34 AM
… he says, he actually does almost nothing of what he says. But he wants to look like the polar opposite. Pretending is all that matter. That's how he keeps getting money. The valuation of his businesses is so totally disconnected from fundamentals, it's a joke. It's all about the projected imaged.
He seems very keen on never ever looking like he was wrong ever. Look at the colonisation of Mars, hyperloop, his pods in tunnels under cities, Starship, etc. He has kept repeating the same bullshit for over 10 years by now. So if by "not that much a man of his word", you mean he does not do what …
February 6, 2025 at 8:32 AM
He seems very keen on never ever looking like he was wrong ever. Look at the colonisation of Mars, hyperloop, his pods in tunnels under cities, Starship, etc. He has kept repeating the same bullshit for over 10 years by now. So if by "not that much a man of his word", you mean he does not do what …
And in the process, he is likely to do a lot of harm, I agree with that part.
February 5, 2025 at 5:05 PM
And in the process, he is likely to do a lot of harm, I agree with that part.
The problem of course is that he painted himself in a corner when he said he could cut the budget by $2 trillions. The only way to do that would be to savagely slash medicaid, medicare, and defence. But his ego is on the line now, so he will at least pretend to try.
February 5, 2025 at 5:05 PM
The problem of course is that he painted himself in a corner when he said he could cut the budget by $2 trillions. The only way to do that would be to savagely slash medicaid, medicare, and defence. But his ego is on the line now, so he will at least pretend to try.
Well, on the positive side, he has amply proven that he is totally incompetent. We are watching Will E. Coyote here! Still big risks he breaks important government tools beyond repair of course.
February 5, 2025 at 7:55 AM
Well, on the positive side, he has amply proven that he is totally incompetent. We are watching Will E. Coyote here! Still big risks he breaks important government tools beyond repair of course.
Hi Forrest, this is Luc Bourhis from Facebook but you already know that since you followed me I guess!
February 5, 2025 at 7:53 AM
Hi Forrest, this is Luc Bourhis from Facebook but you already know that since you followed me I guess!
Same as when he says migrants are the leading cause of crime in the US. Same about absolutely everything. His followers live in a fantasy world.
January 29, 2025 at 11:35 AM
Same as when he says migrants are the leading cause of crime in the US. Same about absolutely everything. His followers live in a fantasy world.
The tech bros built their fortune on top of science developed decades before they started their business. Hilarious Musk is a long-termist, and all he can show is how short-termist he is.
January 28, 2025 at 9:49 AM
The tech bros built their fortune on top of science developed decades before they started their business. Hilarious Musk is a long-termist, and all he can show is how short-termist he is.
Luc Bourhis here! My icon features Einstein's equation (from General Relativity). I mean…
January 28, 2025 at 9:46 AM
Luc Bourhis here! My icon features Einstein's equation (from General Relativity). I mean…
yes, I know, I am playing the devil's advocate. Those 3 are actually a recollection from a paper authored by Jérôme Martin who works in one of my former university, 😉 where he goes through a list of such criticisms, and argues against.
January 24, 2025 at 10:16 PM
yes, I know, I am playing the devil's advocate. Those 3 are actually a recollection from a paper authored by Jérôme Martin who works in one of my former university, 😉 where he goes through a list of such criticisms, and argues against.
An example from the top of my head: a model with
V(Φ) ∼ λ Φ⁴
requires the dimensionless parameter λ ∼ 10⁻¹² to fit CMBR data (not completely sure of the exact exponent but it is in that range from memory!). It seems protracted, doesn't it? 2/2
V(Φ) ∼ λ Φ⁴
requires the dimensionless parameter λ ∼ 10⁻¹² to fit CMBR data (not completely sure of the exact exponent but it is in that range from memory!). It seems protracted, doesn't it? 2/2
January 24, 2025 at 9:52 AM
An example from the top of my head: a model with
V(Φ) ∼ λ Φ⁴
requires the dimensionless parameter λ ∼ 10⁻¹² to fit CMBR data (not completely sure of the exact exponent but it is in that range from memory!). It seems protracted, doesn't it? 2/2
V(Φ) ∼ λ Φ⁴
requires the dimensionless parameter λ ∼ 10⁻¹² to fit CMBR data (not completely sure of the exact exponent but it is in that range from memory!). It seems protracted, doesn't it? 2/2
What does remain of the traditional criticisms against inflation as of tody? I am thinking of: (1) an inflation phase is hard to start, and requires fine-tuned initial conditions; (2) how large inhomogeneities can inflation smooth out? Leading to another fine-tuning argument. 1/2
January 24, 2025 at 9:48 AM
What does remain of the traditional criticisms against inflation as of tody? I am thinking of: (1) an inflation phase is hard to start, and requires fine-tuned initial conditions; (2) how large inhomogeneities can inflation smooth out? Leading to another fine-tuning argument. 1/2
Good point indeed. Those large telescopes would be international collaborations. What percentage did the US plan to fund? If there is any such plan!
January 21, 2025 at 7:38 PM
Good point indeed. Those large telescopes would be international collaborations. What percentage did the US plan to fund? If there is any such plan!
Satellite constellations will need to be put under the dampener though for ground-based telescope not to waste observation time. No sign of that to happen, especially not now! (I am Luc Bourhis from the Astronomy & Cosmology group on Facebook by the way!)
January 21, 2025 at 4:24 PM
Satellite constellations will need to be put under the dampener though for ground-based telescope not to waste observation time. No sign of that to happen, especially not now! (I am Luc Bourhis from the Astronomy & Cosmology group on Facebook by the way!)
Better if the slides are in English! 11/12
January 21, 2025 at 12:49 PM
Better if the slides are in English! 11/12
I was gonna say welcome but I am about as new as you, so it would be a bit silly!
January 21, 2025 at 8:34 AM
I was gonna say welcome but I am about as new as you, so it would be a bit silly!
A decrease of aerosol concentrations!
January 21, 2025 at 8:33 AM
A decrease of aerosol concentrations!
yeah, if you scroll a bit, you will see a post where I announce that I recycled !!!
January 20, 2025 at 9:30 PM
yeah, if you scroll a bit, you will see a post where I announce that I recycled !!!
Second part ⤵️ 10/n, n=10
January 20, 2025 at 1:12 PM
Second part ⤵️ 10/n, n=10