If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Take a look at what is happening in the freedom loving states.
Yes, take a look at deaths per million, compare New York to Florida. Florida recently took the step of monoclonal antibodies to avoid progression to hospitalization for the infected more than we can say for Canada that simply call basic things one can do to protect themselves like Vitamin D3 as "fake science" and insist on Covid recovered taking a failed and unsafe experimental therapy.
Ok, this is your viewpoint, but it is not provable that "before" the Big Bang, there was no matter or energy.
Either existence has always been, or it began. If it has always been then one could theoretically go back in time to infinity. If existence began, then if one went far enough back in time one would come to the beginning. But either way existence comes from nothing, for whatever explanation you give requires a farther explanation ad infinitum. To put it another way, existence cannot come from something, for that something would be already existant, thus in the final analysis existence comes from nothing, and it has no explanation, whether it has always been and thus never began (which seems absurd to me for how could something that is never have come to be?) or it came to be. It seems to me it must be one or the other, but the infinite regress seems absurd to me, therefore I conclude that existence came to be, or began, from nothing and without explanation.
Either existence has always been, or it began. If it has always been then one could theoretically go back in time to infinity. If existence began, then if one went far enough back in time one would come to the beginning. But either way existence comes from nothing, for whatever explanation you give requires a farther explanation ad infinitum. To put it another way, existence cannot come from something, for that something would be already existant, thus in the final analysis existence comes from nothing, and it has no explanation, whether it has always been and thus never began (which seems absurd to me for how could something that is never have come to be?) or it came to be. It seems to me it must be one or the other, but the infinite regress seems absurd to me, therefore I conclude that existence came to be, or began, from nothing and without explanation.
Surely you can agree that infinite regress is POSSIBLE even if the notion seems absurd to you. If not, then how can you explain a void surrounding the universe, a void in which there is no such thing as space? Can you imagine no such thing as space?
We accept by faith alone that infinity can go forward -- in time, in the number of digits in Pi, and in temperature and density, for at the singularity both density and temperature were infinite. Since infinite means basically without limit, then temperature being infinite means matter is all travelling at infinite speed. That means all matter is covering infinite space per unit time, no matter how small the unit of time. Many accept by faith that God will exist forever AND that God has always existed. What is your opinion on this, if you don't believe existence can go infinitely backward?
Also, if existence came about from nothing, wouldn't it be much much simpler?
1. God exists always, not in time.
2. There was a Void initially - no time or space.
3. God exploded the Void by energy, creating matter and anti-matter.
4. The Universe is expanding, but will eventually contract.
5. When the contraction is finished, the two opposite matters will integrate, both will go out of existence, and the Void will be once again.
6. All life has a Spirit - they will be in an existence of timelessness, in which God will deign to become present to them.
I'd be glad to hear opposing views, or where I've got scientific facts wrong.
... I do have to correct you Bob, because on this one point Sid is correct. In an ideal world, the vaccines would stop infection and transmission, but we are nowhere near that ideal world. The vaccines were meant above all to stop the virus from taking over the host, i.e. to stop hospitalizations and deaths. Even if you asked the scientists who formulated the vaccines, they would tell you the vaccines do not stop infection. The virus still enters the host and begins to take over. ...
Semantics.....I do realize that the vaccines do not prevent the virus from entering the body. The vaccines fight against the virus only after the host has been invaded. So, let me replace "stop" with "fight".
You are now lecturing me on exactly how a virus evolves? You don't know the first thing about it.
No need to get hostile Sid. I am just presenting an alternative viewpoint.
I acknowledge, the efficacy of the vaccines are reduced against Delta variant. Everyone agrees.
But Delta is a variant, so my understanding is that it is a mutation of the original virus.
As such, with my crude understanding of evolution, the DNA of Delta would be very close to the original virus. Is this not true?
If so, I would expect (hope that) the vaccine would still be effective against Delta. Is this not a reasonable expectation?
The overwhelming evidence appears to support my position. Doesn't it?
If not, how do you explain that hospitals are filling up mostly with unvaccinated people?
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Monday, 13th September, 2021, 08:59 AM.
1. God exists always, not in time.
2. There was a Void initially - no time or space.
3. God exploded the Void by energy, creating matter and anti-matter.
4. The Universe is expanding, but will eventually contract.
5. When the contraction is finished, the two opposite matters will integrate, both will go out of existence, and the Void will be once again.
6. All life has a Spirit - they will be in an existence of timelessness, in which God will deign to become present to them.
I'd be glad to hear opposing views, or where I've got scientific facts wrong.
Bob
Okay, maybe, maybe not.
But when I consider the vastness of everything I don't understand, I shall not offer an opinion.
Heading out for my morning coffee at Tim's, maybe it will all be clear then. :)
Surely you can agree that infinite regress is POSSIBLE even if the notion seems absurd to you. If not, then how can you explain a void surrounding the universe, a void in which there is no such thing as space? Can you imagine no such thing as space?
We accept by faith alone that infinity can go forward -- in time, in the number of digits in Pi, and in temperature and density, for at the singularity both density and temperature were infinite. Since infinite means basically without limit, then temperature being infinite means matter is all travelling at infinite speed. That means all matter is covering infinite space per unit time, no matter how small the unit of time. Many accept by faith that God will exist forever AND that God has always existed. What is your opinion on this, if you don't believe existence can go infinitely backward?
Also, if existence came about from nothing, wouldn't it be much much simpler?
With respect to the infinite regress, if you went backward in time from now, no matter how far back you went it would always be a fniite number. A void is nothing, so there is nothing surrounding the universe. I do not believe that space exists independently of time, space is simply time considered from a different perspective. I do not believe in the existence of matter. Yes, God has always existed, but this does not demonstrate the infinite regress, rather, God had a beginning, this is the Big Bang when He appeared from nothing.
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Monday, 13th September, 2021, 12:04 PM.
1. God exists always, not in time.
2. There was a Void initially - no time or space.
3. God exploded the Void by energy, creating matter and anti-matter.
4. The Universe is expanding, but will eventually contract.
5. When the contraction is finished, the two opposite matters will integrate, both will go out of existence, and the Void will be once again.
6. All life has a Spirit - they will be in an existence of timelessness, in which God will deign to become present to them.
I'd be glad to hear opposing views, or where I've got scientific facts wrong.
Bob
God exists always, yes, be IN time, or rather AS time in my view. The substance of existence is time. God is Father Time. He changes permanently. Material substance does not exist, only minds exist. I place no faith in science at all. Science begins with the false presumption of the existence of material substance and then tries to explain everything without the need for conscious input, as if everything can be explained mechanistically and deterministically. Science of course has practical value but it is no avenue to truth.
With respect to the infinite regress, if you went backward in time from now, no matter how far back you went it would always be a fniite number. A void is nothing, so there is nothing surrounding the universe. I do not believe that space exists independently of time, space is simply time considered from a different perspective. I do not believe in the existence of matter. Yes, God has always existed, but this does not demonstrate the infinite regress, rather, God had a beginning, this is the Big Bang when He appeared from nothing.
Yes, whether going forward or backward, at any point you have only gone a finite distance. This does not change the possibility that time keeps on going forward or backward for infinity. It only means we can never know infinity.
Fractals demonstrate that something can go on forever both forwards and backwards.
Similarly, we can never know the nothing of the void surrounding the universe. To even say that it surrounds the universe gives it space, but it has no space. We humans can imagine a void containing no matter, or even a void containing no time, but we cannot fathom a void containing no space. If it contains no space, then it is not even there. It is nowhere.
Perhaps the void does in fact have space but no time, so that the entity known as spacetime doesn't exist in the void. As the universe expands, it is not creating matter or energy, it is creating the entity known as spacetime. Einstein was the first to recognize that spacetime is a THING. If somewhere in the universe we could create a perfect vacuum, in which there was not even a trace of energy nor a single sub-atomic particle, not even a single string from string theory, that vacuum still contains spacetime.
Semantics.....I do realize that the vaccines do not prevent the virus from entering the body. The vaccines fight against the virus only after the host has been invaded. So, let me replace "stop" with "fight".
Ok, but if you are saying that once the vaccines fight against the virus, the host cannot transmit the virus to others, that is way more than semantics, and the evidence, which Sid would know much better than I, seems to say otherwise. If you have other data showing that vaccinated people transmitting the virus to others does not happen, share it with us please.
And how long does this fight go on? That, too, is a 64 million dollar question.
No need to get hostile Sid. I am just presenting an alternative viewpoint.
I acknowledge, the efficacy of the vaccines are reduced against Delta variant. Everyone agrees.
But Delta is a variant, so my understanding is that it is a mutation of the original virus.
As such, with my crude understanding of evolution, the DNA of Delta would be very close to the original virus. Is this not true?
If so, I would expect (hope that) the vaccine would still be effective against Delta. Is this not a reasonable expectation?
The overwhelming evidence appears to support my position. Doesn't it?
If not, how do you explain that hospitals are filling up mostly with unvaccinated people?
my crude understanding of evolution, the DNA of Delta would be very close to the original virus. Is this not true?
No, it is not true at all.
1) A single point mutation ie( single nucleotide) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_mutation can make the difference between having cancer and not having cancer, for example.
It is not like horseshoes.
2) Where we can get accurate data the efficacy of the vaccine in Israel (the flagship Country for Pfizer and the most vaccinated country in the world) has weakened to the point that 85%-95% of patients hospitalized with severe COVID are vaccinated. This interview coincides with the data from the Isreal Ministry of Health. The interviewee is a Dr at one of the large hospitals and also
is with the Israeli Ministry of Health.
The overwhelming evidence appears to support my position. Doesn't it?
THe evidence in both Israel and the Uk are overwhelming evidence of a vaccine that is almost completely obsolete. This is data from Governments that wish it
was something else.
4)
If not, how do you explain that hospitals are filling up mostly with unvaccinated people?
Because selling a vaccine is greater priority than not falsifying data in North America. Heathcare workers are now whistleblowers in North America for this.
Here is an example of a leaked zoom meeting video example of identified Dr's and marketing executives at a hospital meeting in North Carolina with respect to reporting data.
Ok, but if you are saying that once the vaccines fight against the virus, the host cannot transmit the virus to others, .....
Oh no, I don't believe I ever said that. Check my posts if you wish, but I don't believe I ever said that.
That may have been expectation at some point in time, if the vaccine protects you from the virus, why would it not also prevent you from spreading the virus?
But, to my surprise, the evidence appears to be exactly that.
The Delta variant is very effective in delivering a strong viral load to the nasal cavity, and thus easy to spread to others. Damn it.
So those who chose to get the vaccine, are protecting themselves against severe infection, but still need to wear a mask to protect others.
Here is an example of a leaked zoom meeting video example of identified Dr's and marketing executives at a hospital meeting in North Carolina with respect to reporting data.
Sid, I don't consider this leaked video to be the smoking gun you think it is.
Yes, one lady expresses frustration towards those who won't get vaccinated. She asks about patients who have been moved off the COVID floor, and the fellow explains they are treated as recovered even though they are still in hospital. Okay, should these people still be treated as active COVID cases or considered recovered? It is a legitimate debatable point. I am sure these innocent conversations take place worldwide, and not every jurisdiction will come to the same conclusions. Not a conspiracy.
Tweet
Comment