Imagination - Science topic

Imagine a sealed chamber with no stimuli: no sound, no vision, no weight, no timekeeping. The individual within retains full cognitive function but has no access to motion, memory, or language.

Let’s define:

Prompt condition: Can O₁ know that it exists?

If yes, by what means?

There is no sensory input. There is no action output. There is no verification of cause or effect.

R begins to loop:

At this point, you have recursive function without task. This is function-as-folding, not function-as-doing.

Now invert:

Imagine this system from the outside.

Yet to O₁, self-reflection is function. This is the paradox: the internal function is real but invisible unless shared across observers.

Implication:

Consciousness necessitates internal recursion, not external function.

When recursion stabilizes long enough to mirror itself, witness is born.

Yes, this is 'Tree Falls In a Forest'; i would invite discussion from the POV of some Trees.

I invite all disciplines to engage, i theorize Buddhists will be especially interested as this relates to Meditation and Death

It is well know that pair production is possible from basic fundamental physics. A pair (electron and positron; proton and anti proton, etc) is produce if and only if a photon or a source have enough energy equal to rest masses of pair particles. And via analogy, pair universe universe production must be possible, one matter dominated left handed universe and one anti matter dominated right handed universe. At the beginning they are totally quantum mechanical, and via intution they maybe quantum mechanically entangled univserses.

Ayhan Yüzübenli Ph.D. Physicist

TENMAK Turkish Energy Nuclear Mining Research Authority   Yarım Burgaz Mah., Nükleer Araştırma Merkezi Yolu, No:10

34303

Küçükçekmece İstanbul Turkey Mobile + 90 505 306 01 97

Phone + 90 212 473 26 00 / 1707

Fax   + 90 212 473 26 34

It is well know that pair production is possible from basic fundamental physics. A pair (electron and positron; proton and anti proton, etc) is produce if and only if a photon or a source have enough energy equal to rest masses of pair particles. And via analogy, pair universe universe production must be possible, one matter dominated left handed universe and one anti matter dominated right handed universe. At the beginning they are totally quantum mechanical, and via intution they maybe quantum mechanically entangled univserses.

Ayhan Yüzübenli Ph.D. Physicist

TENMAK Turkish Energy Nuclear Mining Research Authority   Yarım Burgaz Mah., Nükleer Araştırma Merkezi Yolu, No:10

34303

Küçükçekmece İstanbul Turkey Mobile + 90 505 306 01 97

Phone + 90 212 473 26 00 / 1707

Fax   + 90 212 473 26 34

Esta pregunta busca fomentar la reflexión crítica sobre el impacto del uso de tecnologías interactivas en la educación inicial. Se enfoca en herramientas como tabletas, pizarras digitales y apps educativas, que cada vez son más comunes en entornos escolares.

El objetivo es que docentes, formadores o interesados analicen tanto los beneficios (como el aumento de la motivación, la personalización del aprendizaje o el desarrollo de habilidades digitales desde edades tempranas), como los retos (como la posible distracción, la sobreexposición a pantallas, la falta de capacitación docente o el acceso desigual a la tecnología).

Es una pregunta abierta que permite conectar la experiencia práctica con el análisis pedagógico, y puede utilizarse en debates, talleres o investigaciones sobre innovación en educación preescolar.

Please help me, how to download those publications are free-to download?

A month ago I could do it, but not not. I can not imagine, what had been changed since that time.

What kind of technical problem is it? How can I solve it?

Thank you in advance,

Mária Tóth

Imagination is the realm of the possible, where logical conventionalities are challenged by ideological creativity, and the chains of reason are transformed into revolutionary innovations, changing the world for the better. Albert Einstein highlighted the intrinsic power of imagination, saying, "Imagination is more important than knowledge." However, while imagination may seem as infinite as the universe, it also has its limits.

In your perspective, what are the limits of imagination?

Try 6÷2(1+2). A pre-1992 caculation will give 1. After 1992 gives 9.

What changed in 1992? IMO computers are teaching us math. Math has to be experimentally valid. Old PEMDAS is not valid.

Complex numbers do not exist.

Computers use only {0,1} and can calculate reactive current.

Irrational numbers would have infinite information. Not physically.

Math is also quantum. The sets R=C=Q.

Enough imagination without reality.

What's your qualified opinion?

# 206

Dear Bartłomiej Kizielewicz · Jarosław Wątróbsk · Wojciech Sałabun

I read your paper

Multi-criteria decision support system for the evaluation of UAV intelligent agricultural sensors

My comments:

1- Abstract: You say “The results confirm the framework’s effectiveness demonstrating its robustness and stability in decision-making. Sensitivity analysis and comparative studies further highlight its reliability, particularly in addressing rank reversal issues commonly found in existing MCDA methods such as TOPSIS and AHP.”

I am afraid that you are mistaken, for SA is not able to prove effectiveness of a framework or highlight a method or procedure. It is designed to find if the solution found, that is the selected best alternative, is strong and stable

SA is not related to RR, which, by the way, as per my research, may happen in all MCDM methods, because it does not depend of a method, but on the different topologies that are generated when spatial dimensions or alternatives are added or deleted.

2- Very good and precise information in the abstract clarifying a subject that is unknown, for many of us, or at least for me.

3- In page 7 you mention MEREC for criteria evaluation. It is indeed independent of subjectivity, but in my opinion, it is a biased method, because in each run it is solving different problems since its eliminates progressively a criterion, that is, if there are, say 9 criteria, in each run it considers only 8, and each one on a different matrix

In the next step you compare rankings using different MCDM methods, and what is the gain in doing that?

None for me, since a high correlation between the rankings of two methods, only denotes that both move in the same direction, but it does not mean that they are close to reality

Selecting weights to evaluate alternatives, is incorrect, because what really has the capacity to evaluate alternatives is the discrimination of values within a criterion, not values between criteria, or in other words, what is relevant is the content not the envelope

4- Page 11-” The criterion weights determine their relevance, which is crucial in evaluating alternatives”.

This assertion is not supported by any mathematical theorem, axiom or common sense it is simply intuitive.

My justification of my assertion is as follows:

Iin MCDM the DM is working with lineal equations represented by straight lines in a plane that in different manners, according to the method, define a space of solutions, where one of them is preferred, as in TOPSIS, where the best solution is that closest to the ideal point.

When throe DM multiplies the original values in the initial matrix by a weight, these values increase or decrease proportionally, that is, there is no relative change within each criterion, since the line displaces parallel to itself. However, what changes is the position in the plane of a criterion related to others, due to the various weights, and thus, displacing differently, and varying the original distances between them. This may produce a topological change in the common space of solutions, and now the alternative closest to the ideal point in TOPSIS, may have changed, which produces a different ranking. It can be seen that weights only modify the original distancers between criteria. This is geometry, not evaluation. You may or not agree with my explanation, but it is rational and mathematical, not intuitive. This can produce that the enplane of this criterion related to the other that also change.

Regarding the formation of solution spaces, I am reproducing what AI says about it:

“In Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods, solution spaces are defined based on the criteria and preferences involved in the decision-making process. Here are some common approaches:

1. Weighted Sum Model (WSM): The solution space is defined by assigning weights to each criterion and calculating the weighted sum for each alternative. The alternative with the highest score is chosen.

2. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): The solution space is structured hierarchically, where criteria and sub-criteria are compared pairwise to determine their relative importance.

NM- That is, the alternative with the highest score is chosen

3. TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution): The solution space is defined by identifying the ideal and anti-ideal solutions. Alternatives are ranked based on their distance from these solutions.

4. PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation): The solution space is defined by preference functions that compare alternatives based on criteria.

NM- The best alt. is selected according to compliance of preference functions

5. CoCoSo (Combined Compromise Solution): This method uses a compromise solution space where alternatives are ranked based on aggregated measures”

NM – That is, it uses a aggregating multiplication rule

NM – Linear Programming (LP)

The best alternative is which best satisfy all criteria, and it is defined by the vertex of a polygon than tangents the main objective line

As you can see, all methods generate solution spaces, and from there the best solution is extracted by different means, not always following linearity, except LP, which is altered by different procedures. This could explain why a same problem, solved by different methods, give different rankings.

5- Page 11 “For the STD, Entropy, and CRITIC approaches, one can see a large difference between the most significant and less significant weights. In contrast, for the MEREC”

This is obvious, because STD, Entropy and CRITIC, refer to the solution of the same problem, when MEREC solves different problems by eliminating criteria, consequently, there are different matrices each time

Table 3 in page 12, shows that Entropy, and CRITIC, both scientific methods show high similarity, because both work with discrimination. In my opinion. CRITIC is more complete because it determines the STD or discrimination and besides, the correlation between criteria, that is, takes into consideration redundant information in two criteria

6- “The similarity coefficient of the WS rankings was used to test the similarity of the obtained rankings”

And what this information is good for?

7- Page 17 “The phenomenon of rank reversal occurs when the relative ordering of alternatives changes unexpectedly after the addition or removal of an alternative, raising concerns about the stability and reliability of the decision-making process”

Youa are right about unexpected changes, and it is due to the random nature of RR; that is, it may or may not occur, and this is unpredictable, because it depends of the characterises of the

vector added and its intersections with the vectors of the precedent matrix

“To address this limitation, we propose a novel approach-COCOCOMET-which is resistant to rank reversal.”

I doubt about this. You can prove perhaps what you say, by try to successively increase the number of alternatives, and probably, you will find that say for instance 2, 3 and 4 alternatives are indeed ranking invariance, but may change if you add alternative 4. Why? Because each time you add an alternative to a matrix, you increase the amount of information, therefore, a newer alternative does not consider the old ones because their information is already included in the result for the alternative added

As an example, think on a square, you get information about two dimensions (2D); add a new dimension, and you will get a cube or 3D, that already has the information that gave you the square. RR is produced due to different topologies that appear with a new addition, and consequently, no MCDM method can escape of this. I did this exercise expanding from 2D to 10D, and it happens as commented.

8- Page 17. “Generating a ranking of alternatives”

Since when criteria define alternatives? How can you select criteria if you don’t know to what alternatives are going to evaluate? Of course, this approach is equivalent of ‘putting the cart before the horse’

9- Page 20 “Future research should focus on exploring optimization strategies or heuristic approaches to ensure the framework remains efficient for large-scale decision-making problems”

This is interesting. How do you evaluate efficiency? For me, efficiency can be computed by determining in what percentage a criterion is achieved. Remember that a criterion is an objective, therefore, you need to establish a target, a goal to achieve. This can be easily and mathematically done using Linear Programming, that works with targets, but I do not imagine how you can do that with the more than 200 MCDM existing methods. None of these methods, except PROMETHEE, LP and SIMUS consider resources. Remember that criteria forcefully rely on resources, such as money, manpower, water, contamination allowances, etc., and that the purpose of MCDM is to select an alternative subject to a set of criteria that optimizes the use resources. Consequently, MCDM also can be defined as electing alternatives as those that make the best use of available resources.

10- Page 20 “The findings indicate that the proposed framework effectively identifies optimal UAV sensors, providing a structured and adaptable approach for agricultural applications”

How do you know that they are optimal? Let me remind you that in MCDM optimality is a myth, since you cannot ask at the same time for the maximum benefit and the minimum cost. You must be looking for a compromise solution, a balance.

11- Page 21 “Furthermore, the study highlights the importance of incorporating multiple evaluation techniques to achieve more reliable and consistent results. Sensitivity analysis and comparative evaluations demonstrate that the proposed model maintains its effectiveness across various weighting scenarios, reinforcing its practical applicability”

You can say that if you wish, but on what grounds? Who says that multiple evaluation achieves more reliable results? Where is the demonstration of this? In my opinion they are only assumptions without any mathematical support

Again, what is effectiveness? You never defined it

These are my comments. Hope they can be useful

Nolberto Munier

With this question, I seek to explore how play and imagination contribute to children's emotional well-being and mental development. I'm interested in analyzing their impact on creativity, emotional management, problem-solving, and social skills. I also want to identify how these activities can serve as tools to strengthen children's mental health and prevent problems such as stress and anxiety.

# 204

Dear Milan Shrestha, Shuva Raj Neupane and Binaya Kumar Mishra

I have read your paper:

Use of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Highway Alignment Planning in Nepal: An Expert Questionnaire Survey

My comments:

1. Page 1 -Very good and concise definition of road alignment and road planning

2. Page 2 you say: “AHP uses three basic principles: breaking down the structure (facilitates building hierarchies), comparison of alternatives, and hierarchical composition or synthesis”

In my opinion, as well as from many other researchers, the two underlined sentences, are far from being an advantage; in fact, they are drawbacks. They are good for analysis but not for solving a MCDM problem. First, because this is a system, and as that you cannot break it down. Secondly, AHP uses a lineal hierarchy that does not apply to real-life projects that are networks. Aspects as financial for instance, probably affects all criteria at the same time. If you change the amount of investment it will affect to the environment, the economics, engineering, even to health

3. Page 3 factors V, VI, VII and VIII are interrelated, consequently, you cannot use AHP that demands independent criteria. This is one of the restrictions in AHP as per its own creator, Saaty. If you think that I am mistaken, pls. review the method. You can solve this problem using ANP (Saaty), based on a network, but not in AHP

4. Page 5- Section 2.2.

• “Decomposition of a complex problem into a hierarchy of simpler ones

• Prioritization of each hierarchy worked out through paired comparison matrix worked out individually

• Synthesis of the hierarchies to the overall evaluation of all available alternatives

• Sensitivity Analysis of the stability of the results obtained

Decomposition: As said, you cannot decompose a system

Prisonization: If you follow AHP, it is based on intuitions, not on facts, event using several experts. What guaranty is it? Next guy may think differently. Who is right?

Synthesis: AHP assumes that the estimates must be transitive. If they are not, the software forces it. It does not matter what the DM thought. That is, It makes mandatory to comply with a formula, and thus, machine over human opinion. Is that what we want?

Sensitivity analysis: AHP uses a non-recommended procedure, by selecting, guided for the largest criterion value, procedure that does not have any mathematical support, and in addition, assuming that all remaining criteria remain constant.

5. “. The calculation process is a monumental task if multiple criteria are involved”

Exactly. Now imagine if you have to make different tests changing values in each one.

6. Page 6 “The method is a subjective method of decision-making and is not always free from the biases of the experts involved. Inconsistent responses often raise the question of authenticity over the entire process”:

Absolutely correct

7. Page 7 “However, AHP, if worked out and utilized carefully, remains one of the best analytical decision-making processes”

Interesting, since you do not follow your own assertion. By the way, how can you say that it is one of the best methods? It is the most used bur certainly, not the best

8. Page 7 “Academics and Professionals. A total of 30 questionnaires were sent out to the experts working closely in highway planning and construction but only 18 responses were recorded. The inconsistent responses were left out of the evaluation process. The expert’s response was based on Saaty’s scale and AHP was adopted to generate the weightage for the criteria”

There is no reason to doubt about experts very knowledgeable in roads planning, but most possibly not on MCDM. Let alone condensing their opinions; you can compare the opinion of two experts that are specialized in some subject, but how an expert in say engineering can discuss with an expert in environment since both do not know the other guy field?

9. Page 11 “. AHP was successfully applied to evaluate and determine the weightage of each criterion in the engineering, economic, and environmental theme”

How do you know that it was successful if you do not have any reference to compare to?

There is no MCDM method that can be said is successful, precisely, because that yardstick does not exist.

These are my comments. I hope they can help

Nolberto Munier

The structure of the human mind is multidimensional and complex. Cognition, as an expression of thought processes, memory, imagination, analytical skills, and psychological understandings, plays a crucial role in one's daily life. The level of its development is conditioned by one's educational, professional, and socio-cultural background, which is distributed on an individual basis. In your perspective, what are the components of the human cognition?

Independence is a highly valued necessity in life. It is demonstrated in many spheres, and various contexts. In the context of human cognition, independence is demonstrated through thinking, imagination, as well as creative and scientific efforts. In your opinion, what is independent thinking?

In fact, why didn't Einstein imagine a right triangle where it would be possible to put velocities on its sides instead of distances? In fact, if he had drawn this new right triangle, what would he put on each of the sides of the triangle? Is there a new speed, apart from v and c, that he absolutely did not imagine and that would open the way to enormous possibilities for his theory of special relativity?

Please, those who try to keep things as they are and who do not want post-Einstein theories, ABSTENTION.

En fait, pourquoi Einstein n'a-t-il pas imaginé un triangle rectangle où il serait possible de mettre des vitesses sur ses côtés au lieu de distances ? En fait, s'il avait dessiné ce nouveau triangle rectangle, que mettrait-il sur chacun des côtés du triangle ? Existe-t-il une nouvelle vitesse, à part, v, et ,c, qu'il n'a absolument pas imaginée et qui ouvrirait la voie à d'énormes possibilités pour sa théorie de la relativité restreinte ?

Please, those who are trying to keep things as they are and don't want post-Einstein theories, ABSTAIN.

Is the Earth’s Magnetic Field a Constant?

The birth of geomagnetism as a science can be dated to 8 August 1269 on that day, Petrus Peregrinus wrote three letters .Courtillot and Le Mouël during the siege of the city of Lucera in the Italian region of Puglie. The letters can be considered the first scientific article on geomagnetism, 331 years before the famous De Magnete by Gilbert . Expressed in modern terms, Peregrinus wrote that Earth has a magnetic field with a dipolar structure and that some rocks or minerals are magnetized. One could carve a sphere out of magnetite, pierce a hole through its center, and it would oscillate around the northward direction, a thought experiment that announced the compass. In the three centuries that unfurled since then, a lot has been discovered: the variation of inclination with latitude, the daily, annual and other periodic variations ، irregular variations, such as events linked to solar activity, the secular variation and its sudden jerks . In order to handle an ever increasing data base, magnetic indices were introduced It was found that quasi periodical variations of the magnetic field , and also sun spots followed a power law with exponent −5/3. In a series of papers that started with Le Mouël in 1984 and continued with Jault et al. , and Jault and Le Mouël , these authors found that the trends of (1) magnetic secular variation, (2) polar motion and (3) length of day (lod) are strongly correlated. They proposed to explain these observations with a coupling mechanism, in which flow in a cylinder tangent to the core and the rotation axis exchange torques at the core–mantle boundary. The solution for flow on the cylinder is the same as that generated by an internal gravitational wave in a rotating fluid also known as Proudman flow. But this mechanism encounters serious difficulties with the orders of magnitude of physical parameters, such as the core–mantle boundary (CMB) topography. Also, the torque exerted by the fluid pressure and the electromagnetic torque are too weak to validate the model as concluded by Jault and Le Mouël .Actually, the model of a cylinder tangent to the core is very close in spirit to that envisioned by Poisson . In the report he submitted to the Académie des Sciences, prior to an oral communication, Poisson imagined a set of concentric spheres in place of a cylinder. Poisson was the first scientist to describe the magnetic field as a series of spherical harmonics, a decade before Gauss did Part 5, chapter 1, Allgemeine Theorie des Erdmagnetismus). He also invented a technique to measure the absolute value of the horizontal component of the magnetic field , seven years before Gauss did.

It may come as a surprise to many that Poisson as well as Gauss both considered the magnetic field to be constant. This was an axiomatic basis for the development into spherical harmonics. There are very clear statements to this effect in the writings of both scientists. In the work of Poisson , page 49, one reads (our translation from the French): “We will assume that the hollow sphere be magnetized under the influence of a force that be the same in magnitude and direction for all its points, such as the magnetic action of Earth, for instance”. And in page 54: “Since time does not enter these formulae, a consequence is that, after the first instants of rotation, that we did not mention, the action of the rotating sphere on a given point will be constant in magnitude and in direction”. Gauss , part 5, chapter 1, paragraph 2, page 6, writes (our translation from the German): “. . . magnetism consists only in galvanic currents (that is, constant currents) that persist in the smallest parts of the bodies . . .”. Gauss develops his theory very quickly without any physical proof. And his mathematical proof is exactly that found by Legendre or Laplace for the gravitational field. In contrast, the 130 pages of Poisson’s memoir are devoted both to the full physical and mathematical proofs of the magnetic field description.

Given that Poisson’s work precedes and is more complete than that of Gauss , it is only fair to recognize that the former was the first to develop the magnetic field in spherical harmonics and to state that this magnetic field was constant..

In his pioneering work on the nature and origin of the Earth’s magnetic field, Poisson recognized that the field had to be constant. Gauss came to the same conclusion. This will seem awkward to the modern physicist. Poisson’s proof involved theoretical physics and mathematics but only a limited set of observations.

More recently, one of us Le Mouël observed that there were strong observational connections between the Earth’s magnetic field and its rotation, more precisely, the secular variation of the field and the drift of the rotation pole on one hand, and the forced oscillations of the magnetic field and the length of day on the other. Based on these observational facts, Le Mouël proposed to model the core source as a rotating cylinder when Poisson envisioned a sphere. Thus, based on observations, Le Mouël (1984) (with collaborators, in a suite of often cited papers) built quasi “experimentally”, 150 years later, almost the same theory as Poisson had done “theoretically”.

Starting from Maxwell’s equations, we derived the equations for the electrostatic and magnetostatic fields . We came to the same equations as Poisson, with an important difference: Poisson chose the Lagrangian approach to gravity (Legendre, 1785; Lagrange 1788; Laplace, 1799) to formally derive the equations for the magnetic field . To scientists of this epoch, there was no difficulty in reasoning the magnetism in the same “classical” way as one reasons in gravity. In Section 2, we propose a short tutorial on the equations of electromagnetism. This can be found in most graduate textbooks. But we emphasize the fact that the magnetic field does not need to derive from a scalar potential to be developed into spherical harmonics. However, most geomagnetists do make this hypothesis, invoking Stokes’s theorem: since magnetic measurements are made at the surface where almost no charge circulates, one can assume that the field derives from a scalar, not a vector potential. It is more physical, hence logical, to obtain the spherical harmonics from the electrostatic field, then use the vector potential to return to their expression for the magnetic field. One can perform a decomposition in spherical harmonics and consider multi-poles if and only if the motions of charges are finite and uniform, two conditions that are not met in a dynamic field. From this, one can draw a number of consequences for the magnetic field, the main one being that the magnetic moment of the charges that generate the field and their angular moment (thus, the motion of the rotation pole) are linked by Larmor’s relation. This is in agreement with the theoretical works of Laplace Poisson and . A magnetic field can be written on the basis of spherical harmonics only if this field is constant.

Imagination is a powerful tool for solving problems, finding innovative approaches to traditional beliefs, and challenging the impossible. From your perspective, how can one's scientific imagination be developed?

“It is imagination that allows us to predict future events and use that to guide our actions.” (Tai Sing Lee 2016).

In the early part of the last century Wilder Penfield reported that as he was removing neocortical tissue from his awake epileptic patients that they experienced no change in their consciousness, even when large sections of association cortex were removed (reviewed in Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, and Chen 2025). This observation was surely apparent to Karl Lashley (1929, the stepfather of Peter H. Schiller) who overlapped with Penfield and who advanced the equipotentiality hypothesis that the neocortex lacks functional specificity and that it imagines and controls behavior holistically.

So, what is the lowest number of neurons required for an organism to experience imagination? Of late much effort has gone into studying the mushroom body of the fruit fly, a homologue of the mammalian neocortex, which contains 2,000 neurons with each neuron having, on average, 350 synapses for learning explicit associations between the senses (Dorkenwald et al. 2024; Lin 2023; Schlegel et al. 2024). This yields an overall storage capacity of 700,000 bits of information by the mushroom body (Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, and Chen 2025). The human neocortex, on the other hand, contains 16 billion neurons (Herculano-Houzel 2009) to make explicit associations between the senses, but the human neocortex can store up to 1.6 x 10^14 bits of information, which is necessary for a 600-fold increase in relative longevity and body size, as compared to the fruit fly (fruit flies live for 1.5 months and have a 4 x 10^-7% of mass of humans, Tehovnik, Hasanbegović, and Chen 2025).

But rather than concentrate on the number of neurons to support imagination as the previous passage entertains for the fruit fly, let us consider how an organism expresses imagination. An amoeba is required to imagine the location of food as well as the location of predators (Saigusa et al. 2008). Even though an amoeba is a single cell, it should contain all the genetic machinery to imagine and guide its actions (Kandel 2006), which is the sole requirement for imagination (Tai Sing Lee 2016).

The question of the determinants of action remains a crucial point in understanding the genesis of adaptive and maladaptive behaviors (e.g., Buabang et al., 2024, in TICS).

A strict dichotomous approach to this issue suggests that with behavioral repetition in a stable context—due to lack of time, cognitive overload, or stress—so-called habitual behaviors take control of action, often to the detriment of valuation and response-selection processes that could otherwise give rise to more adaptive behaviors, such as moderating excessive alcohol consumption or curbing pathological gambling.

An alternative approach garners increasing interest: it posits that expectancy systems, which anticipate the effects of action, are predominant. Indeed, certain associations linking stimuli to behaviors facilitate the implementation or efficacy of goal-directed systems, which represent the default mode of our actions.

It is neither easy (nor perhaps possible) to prove this theory in a laboratory setting, but certain life experiences speak volumes. I will not delve into driving behavior, which, however, can be understood as being "in the service" of a goal to be achieved (e.g., arriving on time for a romantic date). Nor will I address those small, everyday habits that seem, on the surface, to indicate that certain routines are generated by default, supposedly to save cognitive resources better used for more noble tasks. Such instances, in my view, are anecdotal when weighed against the magnitude of the harm associated with what is deemed "bad" habits (e.g., addiction).

I would like to draw the reader's attention to certain processes that unequivocally characterize gamers of demanding video games. This is a recreational activity I am fond of, which can involve thousands of repetitive actions to automate highly complex action patterns. At the time of writing, I am preparing for the final boss in 'Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice'. I recently completed 'Elden Ring' and its New Game Plus, as well as the DLC 'Shadow of the Erdtree'. I do not consider myself an exceptional gamer, far from it, but through repetition and perseverance, I have succeeded.

In light of reflections on the contribution of automatic and deliberative systems, habits, and goal-directed behaviors—concepts I do not conflate, as goal-directed actions can be automatic—I wish to share some aspects of my gaming experience. The situation seems apparently clear: the general goal is to progress and understand the story, which requires defeating mini-bosses and bosses, as progression is otherwise impossible. More specific objectives also come into play, such as preparing the right equipment for each battle. However—and this is a crucial point—every gamer implores that action patterns become automated! This is essential for efficiently dodging or parrying attacks.

Indeed, gamers are highly motivated for their action patterns to become as automated as possible, requiring no conscious thought during combat phases. And the acquired action patterns can be complex. Indeed, it is not uncommon to realize that the habit of dodging an attack was not the right choice, particularly due to the low probability that the attack would be followed by a second, leaping strike. For gamers, the learned motor memory of action patterns is more probabilistic than it seems, due to the algorithms that determine opponents' behaviors. It explains why gamers often hope for "luck" during a fight, especially when familiar attack patterns are involved. In other words, habits are instrumental in achieving their goals. It is worth noting that modifying a poor combat habit is no easy task. These objectives are multifaceted: progressing through the story, of course, but above all, experiencing a sense of competence and mastery over a demanding sequence by entering a state of flow.

Comparison is not equivalence, but I imagine the described experience is akin to certain addictive behaviors: different goals are activated through mechanisms we are currently studying—namely, what drives individuals into action. As in addictions, a multitude of habits (underpinned by highly efficient and automatic calculation modes) facilitate goal attainment by serving the expected outcomes. While it may be tempting to "break habits" through methods that, let’s admit it, yield modest results, altering the goals to be achieved is no easier but far more promising.

In the anecdotal situation I briefly described—playing 'Sekiro'—it is quite possible that simply passing by my gaming computer triggered a desire to play, fueled by the hope of progressing in the story, feeling competent, and even aspiring to belong to the minority group of gamers who have completed the game (generally 20–30% of gamers). However, I would wager that if my computer were out of order, I would have found alternative ways to pursue these objectives, much like someone willing to make considerable efforts to obtain their drug.

In summary, let us not be mistaken, as it could waste our time: habits serve the goals to be achieved, not the other way around.

Something to ponder.

Xavier

I came across the Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture journal, and the information I found on Scopus are the following:

However, when I check the documents, the last published article was 2022! How so? If the journal is indexed till 2025! Is it predatory? I also can’t find it on Beal’s list if predatory journals!

So is this journal legit? how can I make sure?

From my point of view, our transition practice shows the general failure of transition public management. The collapse of the theory and practice of public management in the transition economy can be recognized in the following:

- When there is a practice of appointing a person who leads to ruin as a leader. Imagine someone leading you into hellfire to burn. Thus, leadership as a term is associated with persons who show by their actions that they are not working for the benefit of the subject they are leading. On the contrary, they only work to engage the subject's resources for personal gain;

- When the focus of the "manager" is on "form", in everything that is done. Such forms do not have any serious content. Why? Because it is easy to declare yourself an expert in the development of various strategies, defining visions, missions, entrepreneurial stories, etc., you have no responsibility and you abundantly empty budgets for such projects and share considerable funds obtained from the budget with persons who manage state budgets;

- When the practice develops that persons who very easily get to the position of manager, with their enthronement, move to mobbing employees, seducing the rule of fear and insubordination. They gather together a group with whom they share resources and power and who follow them in all activities of devaluing everything that has real value and glorifying everything that is a form for which only they are responsible.

If we look further and imagine one of the fundamental dimensions that distinguishes humans from other creatures

Imagination plays a crucial role in arts, sciences, technological innovations, and creative thinking. I would like to focus on the connection between science and imagination, their interrelatedness, and valuable contributions to academic spheres. In your perspective, what is scientific imagination?

The velocity of light c is so enormously and disproportionately high in ordinary human scale in terrestrial Nature, that for all practical scientific, engineering and for everyday life; it can be assumed to be a constant. But Albert Einstein's turning this ordinary fact to an axiomatic/geometrical truth in his Special Theory of Relativity (SR), means that everything else in the universe including matter, abstract space and time or anything else; must be variable to conform to this truth. To keep this absolute truth in force, mathematical/geometric tools like the Lorentz Transforms (LTs), Time Transform (TT), 4D "spacetime" and the Gamma Factor (GF) were formulated in keeping with the absolute c alone; without any other scientific and/or empirical input! “The Mystery of the Lorentz Transform: A Reconstruction and Its Implications for Einstein's Theories of Relativity and cosmology”: INSPIRE>HEP: https://inspirehep.net/literature/2158754

Apparently as a reaction to the quantum phenomena discovered at the turn of the 20th century, and the break-down of much-valued Causality; Einstein did in physics what Emmanuel Kant did in philosophy, i.e., "Found it necessary to deny knowledge to make room for faith" or Absolute God.

Theoretical physics and cosmology till today are in turmoil, since 1905, when Einstein with his SR pushed physics to the realm of mathematical/geometrical abstractions. This seemed to be a comfortable escape from the uncertainty and the despair brought on by the brutal reality of the “Evil Quanta”. But SR and its extension to General Relativity (GR) has only led to more and more confusion, scholastic debates that continues for more than a century and still counting. The only justification for these esoteric theories come from subjective, contrived and even false claims of “experimental proofs”. But in spite of numerous “solid proofs”; the scholastic debates continue unabated. Einstein himself recognized the enormous confusion his theories of relativity caused in modern theoretical physics and cosmology, when he said, “Who would imagine that this simple law has plunged the conscientiously thoughtful physicist into the greatest intellectual difficulties?” A. Einstein, in "Relativity, The Special and General Theory" (Three Rivers Press, New York, 1961).

It can now be shown that light photons are matter particles with variable mass from the lowest radio waves to the highest gamma-ray range and their mass is inversely proportional to the cube of their velocity. The variable velocity of the light photons can only be observed at cosmic scale.; as the following series of publications would demonstrate:

Momentum – the Archilles’ Heel of Causality-based Physics: The Root of Its Miseries - from the Quantum to the Cosmic. JOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN PHYSICS, 22, 304–312. https://rajpub.com/index.php/jap/article/view/9682

What physical property could a particle with almost no mass energy and a large kinetic energy have? What could be the use of such a hypothetical particle?

Could you imagine? Is it positive or not really?

Especially in the literary studies where it is linked to narrative. We find it defficult to distinguish between them

These days, when talking about the circular economy, they use talking points without even mentioning the pollution production problem associated with the working of the traditional market or with economic activity which it is also present in the working of circular markets or circular economic activity...See how the UN CLIMATE CHANGE PROMISE talks about a circular economy with no link to its pollution production problem nature and with no mention of the need to move one day to pollution-less economies....

" What is circular economy and why does it matter?

https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/what-is-circular-economy-and-how-it-helps-fight-climate-change "

And this raises the question: Imagine you are the environment, can a circular pollution production solution/circularity fix the linear pollution production problem/linearity you face?

What do you think? If you think Yes, please indicate why. If you think No, please indicate why no.

Note;

This is an academic question, not a political one.

I'm a student writing a (short) paper on baleen, focusing on a combination of its physical characteristics, its historical uses, and how it was phased out/replaced by other materials. I'm running into an information block on how it went from the whale to a usable form - what tools were needed to cut it? What parts were cut? Who usually did this? I can't imagine that the corset makers and other product manufacturers at the time were receiving the full baleen plates, so who was?

Any help would be much appreciated, thanks!

I’m asking participants to complete 3 questionnaires so as to gather information in order to see if there is a relationship between the 3 variables.

However, I would like to ask participants to complete the 3 questionnaires twice: once imagining themselves answering it pre-covid and a second time in the present (i.e. during covid).

Would I run a separate correlation analysis on pre and during conditions and then eyeball the difference and comment? Or could/would I need to then run some stats to compare the data from the pre and during conditions? If indeed it is possible to do this as a correlational design. It almost feels more of a quasi-experimental design due to the covid factor but I’m not sure if that would really be the case.

Please let me know if more info is needed.

Thanks, all

If I told you that Joe was an educated person, but Bill was uneducated. What would you imagine that Joe knew, and what would you think Bill didn't know?

Imagine you are an early researcher (assistant professor) in Operations & Supply Chain Management. You also have some teaching and admin responsabilities which count for an average of 2 days per week. Assume you may be interested in diving deeper into your previous resarch interest, but also in opening a new research line.

Any ideas and personal experience is much appreciated, especially with regards to daily time management (hours per day per paper). Thank you!

imagination

Fact mixed with fantasy

I think that the choice seems very difficult to the scientific community of what could be the good value of the Hubble constant following the existence of two apparently competing values ​​which are 73 km s−1 Mpc−1 and 67 .3 km s−1 Mpc−1. Thanks that these latter values are known precise could we think that it could be absolutely very possible to imagine a new cosmological model allowing the co-existence of these two values ​​on the condition that this so-called new cosmological model stipulates that the two values are concerning two absolutely different areas of space, an area concerned by the value of approximately 67.3 km s−1 Mpc−1 and another area concerned by the value of approximately 73 km s−1 Mpc−1!

- Did anyone come to his mind that this thing can happen in a new cosmological model that is larger and more enriched by possible new cosmological parameters?

- What do people think of a possible cosmological model allowing the coexistence in space of two zones with different expansions?

- Why the universe could need two different expansion rates and two different expansion zones?

-IS DARK ENERGY RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH A DIVISION OF SPACE BETWEEN TWO EXPANSIONS ZONES?

Of the 82 percent of women who said they masturbated, 95 percent could orgasm easily and regularly, whenever they wanted. (Shere Hite)

How does anyone imagine that it is possible to orgasm simply by having a man ejaculate into a vagina, or any other part of a person's anatomy? Even in the 1950s, Kinsey found indisputable evidence that the vagina is inert. Surgeons operate on the vagina without using anaesthetic.

Chadwick’s Hotdogs

“Hi ya doin scuutch”, I began, “You know my goddam name. My fucking name is Chadwick now get the fuck over it.” If you’re reading this then you probably don’t know who I am. Occasionally people call me quirky. The women call me so kinky that they sometimes want something besides a hotdog from me. “Why the fuck did you raise your hand then lower it to mock me. Are you done dashing piece of shit.” Then the streaky bloke opened his fat mouth, “I was the fucking substitute teacher and you were only 13. Cannot you feel my pain.” Talk about excuses. If I had a cent for every excuse this bloke and dipshit has made then I’d probably not have to be Hot Dog Man. I know what you’re fucking thinking. Originally I was going to be hyena man but, I resembled a werewolf too much and people don’t want to think of the bad guys from the Lion King. Tell you the fuck what. “See your ass later, you putz. You fucking McFuckWork . You’ve gotta be the biggest cocksucker I ever met in education and you aren’t even in the higher kind. Billionaires are shitty as it is. Rising to the top brings the worst out in everyone.”

Ch. 1: One Sonoma Bech Down, God Knows how many to go.

“Room. Room. You bastards listen to me”, I exclaimed like the mighty roaring lion I was and still the fuck am, “You may call me a smut peddler but, how the fuck else am I gonna live. How the fuck else am I gonna live.” “You sure have one fuck of an imagination”, Some prostitute dressed up as bun came up to me, “You’ll need to sail way before this siren will sing your way into a New Yorker’s trap.” “Look toots”, I responded levelly, “Ain’t no fucking way that I’m going cow tow to some real bitch like you. You are a real bitch if you begin a fucking sentence complimenting my imagination then end with my ass in a trap. That is a mother fucking backhanded compliment if I ever knew one.” I slapped the bitch in the face then like the silly bastard I am the fuck away. I started crying to because she was some bitch. A real sexy one that I could probably bulldoze.

Ch 2: Doing the fucking predictable

“They say the more accurate I can predict my day from beginning to end, the closer I am to the grave like a fat Tony. Fat Tony recently died of diabetes.” “Sorry for your goddam loss, Chadwick”, began my sidekick, “Catch Up is my fucking name and I rub myself all over you until we fight crime to the fullest and beat criminals down to the dullest.” For Christ’s sake, I fucking love Catch Up but I wouldn’t stick a wiener in him no matter how light my loafers got, or so I figured, “Look Catch Up, you’ve got some way of putting things. And by putting I mean wording. Don’t make a statement about you rubbing up against me.” Catch Up looked at the ground.

I requested the full text of the book “Landscapes Ways of Imagining the World” de John R. Stilgoe, I am new in this so i dont know what to do next or how will i obtain the permission

Imagine the WCED 1987 would have set only one sustainable development goal, closing the renewable energy technology gap to make renewable energy a permanent substitute of non-renewable energy as soon as possible and address pollution production head on by transitioning out of dirty economies.

Imagine 2012 RIO +20 would have made only one goal to support the implementation of green markets, to set up a system around implementation, financing, and monitoring of the closing of the renewable energy technology gap in each country as soon as possible to address pollution reduction head on by making pollution reduction a profit-making opportunity.

Imagine the 2015 Paris agreement had only one goal implemented in a socially friendly manner, to close the renewable energy technology gap as soon as possible to lead the dirty economy behind and stop providing benefits to those making money from dirty development.

Instead, attention has been placed on managing the consequences of pollution production markets which keeps renewable energy as a permanent complement and send dirty markets under permanent dirty market failure.

And this raises the question, should making renewable energy a permanent substitute be a clear and practical SDG goal?

What do you think?

The concept of "creativity" in a literary text, excusing poetic texts, refers to the ability of the author to produce work that is original, imaginative, and expressive. Creativity in literature involves the generation of new ideas, perspectives, and artistic expressions that evoke emotions, provoke thought, and provide fresh insights. Several studies have dealt with the topic, though they have not provided operational definitions of the term so that it can be measured. Could you propose some operational definitions based on your experience or sources that you have come across?

1)https://www.scribd.com/document/704552014/HighlyTheoreticalDifferentialEquationsoftheAfterlife

2)https://www.scribd.com/document/704552017/TheImprobabilityofandDangerinBelievinginReincarnationPresentedbyDifferentialEquationsPhilosophytoHarderSciencesThirdlyEngineeringthenfinallySofterScie

I am interested in producing videos of growing and dividing bacterial cells. The problem, as I see it, it to keep the cells still and well-oxygenated without them drying out.

I have tried using a large drop of nutrient agar on a slide, covering with a coverslip and making observations as close as possible to the edge of the coverslip in order to maximise gaseous exchange. Unfortunately, the sample drifts out of focus in a few tens of seconds, which makes a time-lapse series impracticable. I imagine the problem is that the agar is slowly drying and contracting.

Does anybody know any tricks to tackly this problem?

The non-linear response of the electron in the driving laser field, we always mention in solids, inter-band polarization, and coherent intra-band dynamics of the electron. I want to deepen my understanding of the coherence related to the electron dynamics in the intra-band.

Imagine an enormous cylinder in a flat landscape. You are standing along the inner edge. How big would the cylinder need to be for you to not see the curvature? I.e., Instead think you are standing along a completely flat wall. Consider an average person with average eyesight. Would happily accept both the motivation, answer and calculation.

Bonus question: If you had any particular practical tools to your disposal to improve your estimate of the curvature in this scenario, what would they be and how would they help?

Hi, I have grown primary nasal cells on semi-permeable trans-well (PET) inserts and would like to prepare a slide (for confocal microscopy). I imagine it has to be fixed and cut out and placed on the glass slide. Does anyone know how to fixate it on the slide without it moving around so its possible to stain it ? 

Your help is much appreciated. 

Thnak you!

Is there a term or expression in the geosciences (or any other field?) that means "to imagine how (a) hypothetic (geological) structure(s) of a specific age would look like at present after having been deformed by specific, known tectonic events"?

The idea is that there is no certainty that the hypothetical structures exist because they were never dated. The point is specifically to uncover them by imagining what they would look like at present had they existed at time T and been deformed subsequently by tectonic events X, Y, Z, etc. (events which we know/are confident occurred), thus allowing us to identify structures with suitable geometry during fieldwork.

Please let me know if you have heard of anything of the sort.

Thanks for your help!

Why Indians are so distinguished in physicists and mathematicians?

The answer to this question has many similarities with a previous article: Why do Russians excel so much in mathematics and physics? [September 2020.]

*In general, there are two different ways to think, one is Western: speed kills strength, while the Eastern: strength kills speed. Both sentences are correct but only under different conditions.

We suppose that:

the study and research of physics and mathematics belong to the second.

*It is worth mention Albert Einstein's quote: "Imagination is more important than knowledge", David Hilbert citing the researcher's resignation: "Well, he didn't have enough imagination to become a mathematician"

*Here we could say that chess sport games are an interconnected thing:

imagination is the main factor common to mathematics, physics and chess.

Imagination in Indian chess is a unique, strong and creative field of imagination. Almost every chess player knows well how deep and difficult the Indian chess games of kings and queens are.

**In short, it is an integral collective process of education, training and creative thinking.

This is not question.

This is the map of topic "glaucoma and diabetes".

file: topic_report.docx = 20 topics from 263 articles which have words "glaucoma diabetes" in their titles, or keywords or abstracts. Each topic is presented through 20 words and 20 thrases with which it is discussed in these articles. Really this terms are the names of methods, objects, properties, laws and so on for topic in question. In addition each topic has quotes from two articles in which it is most manifested.

file: a1_basic.xlsm - articles with basic knowledge on the topic

file: a3_novelty.xlsm - articles potentially with novelty

Why is it difficult to read the topic_report.docx file? Imagine that we are students and we are going to study an unknown course, for example, atomic physics. As a guide, a list of the chapters of the course is proposed in the form of key phrases of the chapters. A curious student will look at the Internet unfamiliar concepts, and also try to generalize the list of terms attached to the chapter, into a whole, so that before the lections begin he will know what the questions arising in this training course. To another student, the reading of the list of topics in the form of terms will be accessible and useful only when all lectures will be finished, as confirmation for himself of his views on the subject.

Feel free to ask the analysis of more specific topic.

We will be grateful for the feedback.

How can the future of the world or the universe be imagined in the image of quantum physics?

In the science of quantum physics, as Einstein imagined and depicted in his general and special relativity theories, it is being realized in a way. And Hubble and Einstein worked hard in the direction of quantum physics. Today, where do we stand in this world and the universe, and specifically where are we now? Where exactly are we in the world and how many years have passed since the Big Bang? And in which world are we located and how far is the end of the world? Does anyone imagine how small we humans are compared to the vastness of the world and how the science of astronomy and cosmology answers the question of where we are? Where is the end of the world? And how far does dark matter exist in this world? ? How far have the stars and galaxies expanded? Will there be planets where intelligent beings like us humans exist? With the help of quantum physics and astronomy, can we help the future of man to better understand the world and our environment and the conditions of climate change, and to understand the opinions of Yugoslavian Melankevich about climate change on earth? Is it the age of drought or the age of frost and cold in the future?

Dear experts,

I have been writing a paper about language teacher identity, and I adopted Wenger's three modes of belonging (Engagement, Imagination, and Aligment) as my theoretical and conceptual framework. However, I feel confused about Wenger's thoughts in defining those constructs as they did not specify the issue of HOW. Like, how engagement works in exploring language teacher identity; how imagination informs LTI, and how alignment works with LTI. From my POV, I think what Wenger describes is general, not give too much detail about HOW to understand those aspects.

Can anyone who is expert in SLA sheds some light here?

Thanks.

Hello,

Let's imagine we're using a Weibull law to study experimental dispersions and we've evaluated these laws for 3 loading levels, say 1 MPa, 5 MPa and 10 MPa. Is there a method that can predict the probability law for the experimental dispersion at, say, 3 MPa or 12 MPa?

Best regards,

Benjamin Martin

Imagine I have five different concentrations of a species. I’ll simulate a UV absorption spectrum for each concentration (five in total) and call it the original spectrum. Then, I’ll add a constant value of 0.8 to all of these spectra, creating what I’ll call the increased spectrum. When I mean-center both the original and increased spectra, the resulting figures should be the same (and they are!), but I’m wondering which figure should be displayed: Fig. 1 or Fig. 2?

Some volcanoes can send particles and water to the Mesosphere, as Tonga in 2022. The consequences are much more complicated than imagined

this paper is talking about it

I’ve been reading an article called “The George Santos Syndrome – Why people believe their own lies”. Suppose someone makes up a piece of fiction about some part of their life. Apparently, we use the same neural circuitry to imagine something as to remember it. If we reinforce the fabricated fiction we imagined with enough detail to make it sound plausible, it will eventually be remembered as truth if we keep repeating the lie and let enough time pass.

What happens when that imagination takes a scientific turn? In trying to formulate a credible hypothesis that explains some mystery, we naturally imagine as much detail as possible and keep adding what we assume to be facts, as well as reasonable ideas, as the weeks and months and years pass. Somewhere down the path – maybe sooner, perhaps later – we might conclude that our hypothesis seems to equate with truth. Then it could well be embedded in memory as such.

Science is certainly not the same thing as lying. But there are similarities between the two processes (which may be why scientific fraud does occur sometimes). We need a way to determine whether the hypothesis developed over time is actually factual or simply a self-deception that grows stronger and stronger as years (and decades) roll by. That method is, of course, to conduct experiments. But are experiments the final answer?

According to Special Relativity, experiments are overrated by modern science since the truths revealed by experimentation are necessarily restricted to one frame of reference. Regarding the question of length contraction in Special Relativity – Albert Einstein wrote in 1911 that "It doesn't 'really' exist, in so far as it doesn't exist for a co-moving observer; though it 'really' exists, i.e. in such a way that it could be demonstrated in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer." (Einstein [1911]. "Zum Ehrenfestschen Paradoxon. Eine Bemerkung zu V. Variĉaks Aufsatz". Physikalische Zeitschrift 12: 509–510)

Demonstration "in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer" is the same meaning as "demonstration by experiments performed by scientists not moving at the speed of light". So the experimental results (which are potentially interpreted in different ways) are valid. But they’re only valid in one frame of reference – from the human perspective of the scientists, who say length contraction occurs. Looked at from the equally valid universal frame of reference, there is no length contraction.

Some people will say the universal frame is irrelevant because we’re human and the human perspective is the only thing that matters. Some will reject the whole discussion because they disapprove of the example using Special Relativity. But the point is that experimentation doesn’t offer a final answer. There is no final answer and we just have to do the best we can to solve the mysteries of the universe. We grope our way through all the theories and experiments, and hopefully make a little progress in the search for truth. To put things another way – quantum mechanics’ Uncertainty Principle has expanded into an Uncertainty Principle affecting all of science. The indeterminacy doesn’t rule just the subatomic realm in the early 21st century. It also rules the macroscopic Space Telescopes, CERN and the Large Hadron Collider, and every detector or laboratory.

Dear

A small marine fish can not understand what is sea. An ant can not imagine how big the Himalayas is.

There is UNIVERSE. Let us stand at the coast and observe the sea. We can not ask the meaningless question " IS THERE GOD"

Hey! I have been thinking about this and I was wondering what other people think. As answer on the question, you can name any crazy idea that pops up! Or maybe something that we already know/have in our world.

الخيال الابداعي

التصميم

التصميم الداخلي

الفضاءات الداخلية

الفن

Of the 82 percent of women who said they masturbated, 95 percent could orgasm easily and regularly, whenever they wanted. (Shere Hite)

I have tried to create a spotlight several times, but it doesn't recognize the title, the, the platform ask me to upload it again, as a result of this situation my article is been removed from the page, this is the second time that this situation happens just by trying to add spotlights. I also tried to just add keywords in the spotlight option, but it didn't result neither. The thing that worries me the most is that instead of gaining visibility, I am losing it as the stats are been erased each time this happens, and I also lose the Doi number which force me to upload the pdf again and get a new one, which means modify the current pdf...you may imagine...

From the sovereign solitude of de Gaulle to the spectral pragmatism of Gorbatchev, from the blazing lucidity of Simone Weil to the viral ambitions of Elon Musk — this series dares to compare the incomparable. Each entry is a clash, a dance, or a duel between two figures — sometimes historical rivals, sometimes forgotten echoes — whose legacies reflect not only their genius, but the desires, illusions, and blind spots of their time.

Figures & Fulgurances is not a hagiography. It is a gallery of contrasts: power vs depth, vision vs noise, substance vs spectacle. Through sharp commentary, ironic turns, and flashes of insight, this series seeks the fragile moment when history tips into memory — or oblivion.

Illustration: Scientists estimate this pig painting was drawn 45,500 years ago. Source [1]

[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/45000-year-old-pig-painting-indonesia-may-be-oldest-known-animal-art-180976748/

The word 'representation' has been defined by Derrida as 'reproduction of presentations'. Taking the prefix 're' to mean 'again'.

When representation can only reproduce presences again, how can it reach into the future? Is that not problematic, as the future is not present and can therefore not be reproduced again?

Why is this relevant? The German word 'Vorstellung' (as e.g. in Schopenhauer's Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung') is made up of 'vor' and 'stellung': for, in front of (or 'fore' as in 'foreground') and to place, to put. Whereas 'Vorstellung' directs someone's orientation foreward, representation casts someone back into the past. Alway. Inescapably, But a Vorstellung will always be in front of you, wherever you turn.

It is easy to relate Vorstellung to the future. As that will be any account, image, presentation of the future to be placed in front of anyone. (This is also why it is different from 'imagination', as you imagine something by yourself, in your head as it were. A Vorstellung kan be imaginary, but also, similar to a play or a performance (also 'Vorstellung') physically outside of yourself in front of you. Imagination cannot).

So sematically Vorstellung can cover times ahead. But can representation?

And what does that mean for communication theory, when its dominant defining concept cannot address the future?

#representation #communication theory #cultural studies #Stuart Hall #lingusitic relativity #vorstellung

> imagined by the author – DAWKINS’ LINEAR SCALE OF RELIGIOSITY, including five categories of Religious Agnosticism

or

> founded on rational argumentation ­– CANI’S COMPLEX PLANE OF RELIGIOSITY, embracing CANI’s Intermedialism?

Definition of CANI’s Intermedialism and Huxley’s Agnosticism as well as the answer to the above-asked question based on argumentum ad rem you’ll find in my video lecture on YouTube at:

<> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBrOH2T8kx0&t=897s

How does anyone imagine that it is possible to orgasm simply by having a man ejaculate into a vagina, or any other part of a person's anatomy? Even in the 1950s, Kinsey found indisputable evidence that the vagina is inert. Surgeons operate on the vagina without using anaesthetic.

In his essay here (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/how-to-overcome-democratic-gridlock/), Pablo Ouziel states:

"Today, our ability to imagine democratic futures is diluted, and narrow perspectives on democracy are presented as universal. Such a state of affairs [...] calls for a conversation among democratic traditions that emphasises diversity and reciprocity."

From my perspective, a key to emphasising diversity and reciprocity, as Ouziel puts it, is to carefully describe the thousands of different manifestations of "democracy" (<- this includes synonyms in English and like-terms in other languages) that we can presently perceive.

I'm thinking, for example, of Panchayats, the Haudenausonee Confederacy, Black democracy, but also Tlaxcallan republicanism, decision-making among the Inuit (including their circumpolar democracy), and thousands of other already-existing examples like this.

I think that if people can understand these different manifestations (myself included!) they can then be equipped to use that information if they wish to do so by, for example, communicating it to others or implementing aspects of it/combinations of it, wherever they want in their lives.

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/how-to-overcome-democratic-gridlock/

To what extent are RG members here concerned with the role of the imagination and its impact on our collective emergence into our socio-economic future?

Can the imagination and its output (individual or collective) be held against, for example, the output of AI models such as ChatGPT in reconciling future possibilities?

I would welcome a discussion around these questions as my new book concerning the Reimagining of Capitalism (https://vernonpress.com/book/1673) is shortly to be available.

I would am interested in views about how me might balance the potential of AI, against the potential of a human mind which possesses imagination.

Imagine having 9 samples, each with a slightly different weight, that needs to be allocated into 3 groups. How can you best allocate each samples so that the total weight of each group is equal or similar?

Would be great to know whether this could be done on R.

We have an oldschool PPMS equipment with ACMS option, and recently got the problem with DC measurements. When starting a measurement it returns:

Measuring DC Extraction 8/1/2023 10:54:37 PM

Measuring at 1X Gain

**ERROR** Incorrect DC Scans Count. Requested = 1, Actual = 0

*Warning* No data was measured for DC Measurement

*Warning* No data was measured for DC Measurement, DC Extraction not Completed

And nothing happens. I'm afraid to imagine this is the end of our magnetic susceptibilty measurements.

Anyone has this issue? I'm glad to any help...

I am unclear on exactly what we are supposed to be afraid of, if the average temperature of our climate were to increase by 2 degrees C.

What is it that we imagine will happen when this occurs, and why is it so terrible?

Hello, I am wondering if there is a good way to normalize my data. For background, I collect conditioned media from primary cells and then perform radioimmunoassay on them to determine the concentration of progesterone secreted into the media. I know RIA isn't used these days very much, but theoretically it is very similar to ELISA. There does seem to be differences between my treatments and controls, but without normalizing I'm not sure whether it is due to my treatment or something else. Total protein would probably be best to normalize to I imagine, but I do not have this as we only extract for RNA after the treatment period. I have been wracking my brain to think of some way to normalize the data such as normalizing to the % increase/decrease between the treated and controls but not sure if this would make sense. Any help would be appreciated!

Dear fellow researchers,

does anyone know how the large Protein (469 kD) DNA PKcs gets transported into the nucleues ? I know that it exists in the nucleus "in abundance" and most of its function is studied in regard to DNA Repair which of course happens in the nucleus. However, it must be produced in the cytoplasm (right?) and therefore it somehow has to be transported into the nucleus. I read that this happens trough a nuclear localization sequence and importin which then interacts with the nuclear pore complex but I am not sure how this is possible for this extremely large protein and if there is any data at all ?

I can imagine that it gets threaded trhough in an elongated somewhat unfolded state is there evidence for this with other proteins ?

I thank you all for your help in advance.

- Benjamin

Was al-Wasiti able, in the drawings of his miniatures known as (Maqamat al-Hariri), to convey to us the idea of the structural buildings of his time? Or was he drawing from his imagination things that were not relevant to reality?

The attached photo, a copy of the Maqamat of Hariri, from the holdings of the National Library in Paris (3929)

Hi all, I am interested in performing bulk RNA sequencing on primary human cells that have been cultured in absence/presence of certain types of drugs. I know n=6 is quoted as an acceptable number for cell lines and genetically identical mouse samples, but I can imagine the number of replicates needs to be higher when using primary human cells taken from a variety of donors. I am struggling to find any comparable published studies so I was wondering if anyone here had an idea/some experience with this? Many thanks!

I believe physics masters programs need innovation to overcome the slow progress in solving theoretical problems in physics in the form of ph.D replicating standards.

Imagine a student who has to write an essay about the paradoxes of dpevial relativity, literature teview akin ph.D and outline ideas to explsin them with his own indights

Or a similar topic about unitary quantum mechanics/spacetime quantization approaches duch CST.

Or a topic about how space has time properties, how its ststic vs dynamic fluidity give rise to spacetime phenomena.

Although some mofules would have more trafitional mathematical emphasis, 60% would have conceptual pre- ph.D level.

Imagining you have 1 m³ cubed container made out of steel and inside the container is 5 bar. What will the force be felt on the container if the pressure inside suddenly drops to 1 bar? Temperature can be omitted if needed.

Trying to design a yield limit for pressure-drop resistant materials through tensile/compressive measurements.

Why is female orgasm is defined in such vague & emotional terms? I assume it is so that every woman can imagine she might have had one.

Dear Mohammad Masfiqul Alam Bhuiyan and Ahmed Hamma

I read your paper:

A Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for Selecting the Most Sustainable Structural Material for a Multistory Building Construction

And these are my comments:

1- My comments do not refer to structural engineering but to MCDM procedures. There is no doubt that you have made extensive research for this article. I think that you took good care in selecting experts in construction engineering, but I am afraid that the same care weas not taken in the application of the MCDM methods. There are some incongruencies as well as inaccuracies.

You want to select the most sustainable material for a building construction, which implies considering at the same time and jointly the economics, the environment and the social field. However, you selected a method, AHP, which works opposite, since it analyzes separately and in a linear hierarchy, each of the four main criteria. I am not blaming the method; it was designed for that purpose; it is the incorrect use of a method that I understand is incorrect.

For instance, in Figure 2, the four criteria are not connected, which is not real.

Criteria like Technical and Economics are normally strongly related. For example, the technical department decides to use radiant flooring for heating (a technical system), which has a cost different of using a hot-water system (a different technical system). Technical is also related to environment, as in the case that technical decides to recycle waste water produced in the building, by treating it, it involves technical issues, economics and environment. They are not isolated.

As another example, suppose that engineering proposes to use radiant flooring, and the financial guys say that they don’t agree because there is no money for that, so they ask engineering to look for a less expensive heating. As you can see, considering individual aspects and solving them linearly, and then, adding them up, does not make sense.

This is the real-world.

2- In page 4 you say “The remarkable contributions of this research comprise the integration of technical aspects with the commonly used three pillars (economic, social, and environmental)”

Not so remarkable or new; this integration has been done for decades before your paper.

3- In page 5 you say “. Subjective (qualitative) methodsand objective (quantitative) methods are the two types of weighing techniques”

This is inexact. There are not qualitative and objective methods. That denomination applies to criteria. Normally, a MCDM handles both.

4- In reality, I don’t think that you can address a problem like this with four main criteria. What about risk, legal issues, topography, access to the site, material supply, constructors’ expertise, etc.?

5- In page 1o you say “3.6. Fuzzy AHP”