Doug Morris

I'll be back later.

whYNOT ignores this excerpt from the article he linked. Yes, the unvaccinated are the primary drivers of the surge.

Sounds like when the effects of the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccines wane, they still reduce the probability of spread. Do these statistics take into account the reduced chance of getting infected in the first place? These data also support the need for boosters.

Perhaps I would have made myself clearer if I had said "be concerned" instead of "worry".

No, I am saying that if enough people get vaccinated, the situation will improve to the point that most people will have no good reason to worry. Worry is a secondary concern at most. The extent to which people have reason to worry is one way of measuring success in dealing with a problem.

Getting to where most people didn't have to worry much about COVID-19 and could go back to normal. If you're concerned, maybe you should inquire with the retailers and the local health department. Ask detailed questions.

I didn't say you wrote eradication of the virus. You wrote eradication of transmission and of viral mutations, and I questioned whether anyone has claimed either, and I pointed out the point is significant reduction, not eradication. Better late than never. Nonsense. The purpose is not eradication of spread or of anything else, but significant reduction of spread and of the potential for viral mutation. How good is "so good" and why are you trying to make an issue of it? No one is claiming that vaccination completely eliminates anything. It significantly reduces the chances of infection and spread. In those cases where infection still takes place, it greatly reduces the risk of hospitalization and death. I am not advocating lockdowns, which are a much more drastic step. The biggest reason vaccines have not accomplished as much as hoped is that a lot of people haven't gotten vaccinated. Four excerpts from the article you linked: even small pockets of unvaccinated people can drive transmission. In Ireland's population of 5 million, around a million are still not protected. Ireland's deputy Prime Minister Leo Varadkar told CNN that unprotected people are "causing a lot of the trouble" -- and that Ireland "wouldn't be imposing the restrictions we are imposing now" if everyone was vaccinated. The difference between vaccination rates of 70% and 80% is huge, experts say, because each extra percentile further isolates the virus and eases pressure on hospitals. But McConkey said that given the transmissibility of the current Delta variant, no country can truly consider themselves "highly vaccinated" -- he argued that until they inoculate a percentage in the mid-90s of their total population, unvaccinated pockets of society would still drive transmission. Vaccines continue to dramatically reduce the likelihood of serious illness and death, he noted -- and they have therefore changed the make-up of those needing treatment in intensive care units. There are far fewer admissions than in previous waves, and "it's now mostly unvaccinated young people, or very elderly people,"

Does anybody claim eradication? The point is that vaccination significantly reduces transmissions and viral mutations. There are people talking that way, and they are wrong. The relevant point is that we are protecting individuals.

Presumably Rand thought it would be better to have Galt do something fundamental and accomplish a revolution in physics rather than just find a clever way to be the first to do something known to be possible. It might help if we had more information on what Rand thought the motor was and wasn't. Although I'm not an expert, isn't an exploitable electrical potential gradient in the atmosphere different from static electricity?

As I understand it, Galt's motor is impossible according to our current understanding of physics. But the novel makes clear that Galt accomplished a revolution in physics in order to invent the motor.

Stephen, can you clarify the relationship between the wave of de Broglie's note and the wave functions in quantum descriptions of the behavior of electrons in atoms?

Please clarify what "centered on the electron" means.

Thank you, Stephen, for providing a lot of helpful clarification.

A USA Today fact check says this is not true. An editorial claimed the death toll should be about 4K, but the Italian authorities have not changed their count.

Stephen, what is your reaction to William's statement that atoms are mostly empty space?

Boydstun, can you help us out with whether two electrons, as waves, can occupy the same space?

I don't think this reflects the reality of quantum mechanical waves, but again we need a physicist to help us out here.

Not having studied quantum mechanics, I'm not in a good position to answer this. We need a physicist to help us out here. But I was speaking of the wave properties of electrons and meant to say that two waves can occupy the same space, not that two particles can occupy the same point.

Subatomic particles can share the same space as long as they have different quantum states.

If that's the case, why isn't everything invisible? My understanding of the science is that at a subatomic level wave-particle duality is important, and the electrons are waves which fill the atom. However, there is empty space between the air molecules. The way the air molecules keep bouncing off each other keeps the air from collapsing. To really understand why some substances are transparent and others are not requires quantum mechanics, which I haven't studied.

Thank you.

Does anyone know a good source for refuting the following? I checked Greenspan's article on the gold standard in CTUI and it didn't seem to address this particular point. This is from a 10/19 Mensa brainwave article by Mensa member Pascal Su. In antebellum America, a network of about 8,000 loosely regulated, mostly state-chartered banks flooded the economy with more than 10,000 different types of unique and legal bank notes, which made any economic transactions exceedingly difficult. Banks could choose how much money to issue based on their holdings, and notes were often traded at discounts to their face values due to individual bank default risks. Counterfeiting and fraud were rampant, and banks that issued worthless currency backed by questionable security (commonly known as wildcat banks) became a symbol of this chaotic time. This free banking wild west period was brought to an end by the National Bank Act of 1863, and a single national currency backed by the federal government brought financial stability to the system. Transaction costs became lower as people no longer needed to assess the financial strengths of individual issuing banks, and values were easily determined by referencing a single standard.

Physicists are at an early stage of understanding space, but have learned enough to suggest that our concept of space may need to be informed by the physics.

When Ayn Rand's ideas are widely enough understood and accepted that they dominate public discussion.

If workers commute daily from orbit to the Martian surface and back and wear protective pressure suits the whole time they're down there, we won't need habitats on Mats at all. If either of those is not feasible, we'll need some sort of provision for habitable spaces on Mars.