[removed]

[removed]

So we think emotion and intelligence are linked and that neither are necessarily controlled by brain size, but surely it helps, right?do we think generally bigger animals are smarter than smaller animals? Are ants maybe geniuses?

[removed]

[removed]

It’s interesting, isn’t it? We humans like to classify things and give them clean, well defined labels. And we often have a good reason to, since there is obviously something going on. It’s not like these labels are entirely arbitrary. But pinning down the nature of the label is often exceedingly difficult. I suppose that’s the difference between ideals and reality. I mean, we all know the difference between a bowl and a vase, but where does one start and where does one end?

This is a common theme in any discipline that studies complex systems. Especially linguistics. It’s a bit of a tragedy of language science as many linguists confidently operate in notions that have very weak theoretical foundation. There is a lot of unspoken assumption, driven by tradition, in the linguistic theory, and not enough people question the tradition IMO. I mean, starting with such basic things like “meaning” or “word”.

[removed]

Really great reply thank you! I should have known it wouldn't be so clear cut. Thank you for your time, I'm going to dig into the sources you linked now.

Would Afrin be one of those? That stuff makes me able to breathe for about two hours .

"Ever" is a long time, but I don't think we will solve economics as it is defined today. Maybe if we reframe the problem somehow, and in the process change the way society deals with money and allocation of resources.

Another problem is that if it was "solved", who gets rich or poor would be predetermined and probably could be changed as we want. How could that work? Who would accept a system where the results of a lifetime of work are fixed and you cannot change them? Communism had a big problem with this, nobody bothered to do a good job at work, because it made no difference to your income or status or anything like that.

Is it though so obvious? Because herbivores have canines too. And like herbivores, we only have a small opening of the mouth, a non-scissoring opening of the mouth and the teeth line is unaligned with the articulation point of the jaws (which is how it is for herbivores). Also with regards to the mouth, we drink water by aspiration (like herbivores), whereas carnivores bring the water in with their tongue. We also don't need to get vitamin A directly from animals as we are able to synthesise it ourselves from vegies, like herbivores and unlike carnivores. So it seems to me that we are mainly plant eating machines with a certain but very small degree of meat processing capabilities. Thank you for the reply my friend!

Same question can be asked for politics.

If you say is the economy a science the answer would be: NO

If you say is the parliament or congress a science the answer would be: NO

But if you would ask is the reasoning behind certain actions, the way of working/thinking, the way of policy building, the way of managing, the different ideas and concepts in economics and politics are those science?: the answer would be: Yea

Because it would be as tiring as COVID to hear it on the news everyday.

The DOJ and the Biden administration are certainly NOT ignoring these kinds of problems because they are crucial in governing our modern states and economic systems. They just don’t feel like sharing every single detail, every single plan and everything single procedure with the masses. Because the masses have a bad record when it comes to reacting to stuff which they don’t fully understand or have a really strong but useless opinion about

Let me first start with the lobbyist part. This is part is mostly seen in systems where this is ingrained in political culture. The Netherlands for example has 1 time a year where lobbyists can go and talk to the political parties and representatives about their ideals. The rest of the year it can be seen as political fraud if handled in certain ways.

The USA Political system has a large portion of it ingrained in its economical standards. This means that it is not only ingrained but seen as normal by a lot of people, and certainly does who are in power or benefit from it. Lobbying is also part of our economical systems due to the influence on production these huge conglomerates have.

“Why haven’t we figured out a proper form of government”

I think the answer to that can be pretty short. People are and will always think different of things. If you benefit from something, then that system si great. If you do not benefit from it the system is terrible. There will always be a divide in race, class and wealth which influences our progression in political thinking

That is certainly a possibility.

We have seen in history that even the smallest differences in geographical location and population could have created different diseases. If we indeed find life on another planet then there is a big change that they have their own world of diseases, parasites and microorganisms

While I can not say a specific course, some YouTubers are pretty close to get a basic understanding of economics and everything that evolves around it.

Economics explained for example

[removed]

In addition to the other excellent coment, I'd like to point out that "emotions", along with other subjective experiences, even including consciousness itself, are extremely difficult to measure.

We can really only measure an organism's responses to stimuli (including, increasingly, physiological/neural responses). We can't really say for sure "this dog is experiencing loneliness because she was left home for two days", so much as we can say "this dog is whining, laying about, and staring off into space more and more the longer she's left alone". We can't even "prove" other humans experience consciousness the same way we do, as we don't actually kniw what causes it, but they act similarly, so the simplest explanation is that they do.

It's not hard to imagine an organism that experiences the same emotions as us, but that reacts to those feelings completely differently. In that case, how would we know what they're feeling? Similarly, how do we know trees don't have complex internal lives, but because they can't move, we've no idea?

Ultimately, we assume more complex nervous systems mean more complex consciousness and emotions, but the details aren't well established.

No, while there is some proof to say that he encouraged or even managed a insurrection on the 6th of January. We can’t really say that he is a “serial insurrectionist. It was as some political scientists call it a populist wave. Trump won the election due to a bad opponent and a lot of uncertainty knowing Obama would be gone, the wars in the Middle East not going great, economic dissatisfaction (even though the economy was largely fine) and China on the rise. But after those 4 years he lost immediately to Joe Biden, and the republicans even began to keep their distance, which says a lot about how “trump was the Republican Party”

[removed]

During history different kind of economic systems have been used, and we have now in our modern times found one which is until what we know the most effective in being managed, but also keeping up with the enormous economical growth.

It is that managing part which is the most important part, and you can see it fall apart the moment it does not happen. Like with corruption, bubbles, internal trading/communication and monopolies.

Economists all over the world are always trying to find improvements to the current model, or are even trying to create a new model. But a new model would require a mass transition which certainly not everybody would want or be prepared for

Everything everyone else said is correct but they haven't addressed the pheochromocytoma question yet. Simply it doesn't secrete dopamine at all, it secretes adrenaline and noradrenaline so wouldn't affect Parkinson's even if the blood brain barrier wasn't an issue.

You answered the question wonderfully. Thank you. Time dilation comes into play because of size of the massive object. Since the sun is 100x bigger than earth, time is perceived to go much slower. The passage of time happens based on gravitational potential and velocity, so when the sun says 10 billion years, its more like 100 million years of duration on earths time scale. But like you said, as long as there is a power source it won't end, so how does a star run out of hydrogen in an endless sea of it?

[removed]

Why is pi the value that it is and not some other value? Is there something inherent in the way that dimensions interact to produce this ratio of pi?