Magnetic Synthesizer

google result: ''Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events. A random sequence of events, symbols or steps has no order and does not follow an intelligible pattern or combination.'' Question: 1. Is randomness a total lack of pattern or predictability in events? (following 1): 2. Is it still randomness if it's not devoid of pattern or predictability? (following 2)3 Is the eveness of randomness a form of pattern or predicatibility or is not not randomness to begin with? I had another question not following 1, but I forgot about it. Proposed answer (a definition of randomness): truth=reality Randomness is the absolute abscence of predicitability in an event. Given truth/reality, if there is no absolute predictability in an event, the event is random (has randomness). Randomness is a component that when isolated is the absolute absence of predictability for each result. Randomness must be isolated from it's deterministic components: limitations to the pool of possible results.

Some debunker pointed out that high quantities where detected due to the sludge in one of the reports. I will put it aside for now.

''https://en.wikipedia...perament_Sorter Find your type with the wikipedia page by using the sorter descriptions ( ''Understanding the sorter descriptions'') For answer format, scroll down to ''Temperaments and intelligence types'' '' I would like to know your answer, maybe 75% of the answers mostly don't understand the instructions.

Or you could use the instructions provided in my thread. There's a reason I did not choose a test, I know no better one.

Awesome, are their such things for silver too?

did you try with the descriptions on the wiki?

How to do it better and faster?

I stopped reading once it derailed off my question. I will chip in my position on the issue of causality. ->The universe, truth and reality always were. Also, in an entertaining fashion, With god, not everything in ''this'' world needs causality from 'this' world. The fossils and evidence for evolution were not caused by the world, and did not cause you. they were inserted to test your faith .

You're very ressourceful in general, thank you. With the passing of time, do you think the ammount of dissaproval will increase in younger generations or decrease? (as the old age and die, so would their statistical weight). In other words, will it increase in new generations?

In my economy 101 class, the teacher mentioned that business owners hired mercanaries (''with basebal bats'') to attack the people on strike. Is this true? I would be suprised. Also, how prevalent. Anyone with a good basis on this?

Do you think an IQ poll would be biased because people with less IQ won't vote? 1. The poll is anonymous. 2. Voting accordingly will reduce stereotypes and promote fair consideration. I hope no one is attaching themselves to words like ''rational'' and answering differently due to that. It's ironic how I desire no outcome for this poll. If it's balanced (proportional to population) it's good for the cause, otherwise it's bad. the reason for imbalance, is elitist fantazies, I hope they are fantazies because of the previous sentence. If I put myself in any answer's shooes, I won't be biased, but other's view of this may vary. I hope not. Possible fails:

I think you are sarcastic. I'm focusing on the MBTI theory.

I put spoilers because I think it's more compact and convenient with big threads. Purpose: Answer to discontent with theory: Disclaimer: I also suspect that with self knowledge and etc here, individuals have a much more developped and wide usage of their mind. Being able to adopt both sides does not exclude the possibility of a preference. Please, bare with me. Considered methodology: I will then use another methodology (seeing as the previous ain't coming back) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keirsey_Temperament_Sorter Find your type with the wikipedia page by using the sorter descriptions ( ''Understanding the sorter descriptions'') For answer format, scroll down to ''Temperaments and intelligence types'' I think the weakest link is The third ring: directive (proactive) versus informative (reactive) Here are some extra questions: proactive = J , reactive = P. To eliminate cultural and reality context, answer from the perspective of an ideal world for each activity. For example, would you like to plan in a world ideal for planning or adapt in a world ideal for adapting? Do you prefer to have things settled and proactively follow and stay on the track of a plan(J) ? or do you prefer to keep your options open and adapt readily (P)? What is a higher priority: Form conclusions (J) or further explore possibility while not settled yet(P) ? You can give the type by the name of the KTS role (ex: Inspector) or by the MBTI format if you know that. If one apsect is too unsettled, exclude it by mentioning a more unprecise answer (ex: NTJ or Guardian) For example, I am an ENTJ field marshall. If anyone finds this interesting and would like to know more, there is neuroscientific research into this (brain recording) by Dario Nardi, here are some free ''excerpts'' http://savipra.tumblr.com/post/69436625479/dario-nardis-neuroscience-of-personality Methodology in this thread IS NOT based on the empirical research. Background:

I also got into FDR by Story of your enslavement. Probably was in the right panel of recommended videos, after watching history of the federal reserve. My initial impression was that it was a financed video by a group who wasn't acitvely involved in anything this significant. A while later, I came back to it and susbcribed.

What is your age? At what age have you started actively listening to FDR content? I posted this a few days ago, it disappeared, I contacted FDR with no response. It was suggested to me to try again. edit: added poll for 2nd question.

Would be kool to have an expert on that place and time, to explain how common or uncommon the use of old paper was and wether the special scenario would have any incidence on that.

A definition of determinism alone cannot decide wether its compabtible with free-will. Because it depends on the definition of freewill, which right now am only aware of 2 that are internally fully consistent.

Disclaimer: I have a significantly superior ability to deal with variety in writing styles as a reader. It's only a problem when multiple different meanings can come out of writing. Otherwise you can know what he means.. I see it as either blatant incompetency or ethno-centrism -> imposing ones writing standards and reading standards. There is both a historic and intellectual reason to that ability of mine. 'Natural cognitive temperament' - I rely on critical logic (identifying the logical components of words) and theory RATHER THAN common sense (which is demographic dependent) and (a set of bs slightly relating to emotional analysis, like the order in which the informaiton/ideas are presented). This makes me relatively unaffected by unprioritzed and disorganized writing. I am patient and willing too. Historic - I am fluent in 3 languages (not a master in any of them), learned in a multicultural enviornement and dealt with a variety of evaluators.

They are well hidden by our soceity. Our society helps them hide. why is it a risk to life?

I've had my eyes on survivor ship bias for a long time. I plan on being a survivor Informaiton bias, like watching too much FDR and such. Fail ostrich investors (suprised)

I agree and have no problem understanding it. You are right.

Is it because you cannot simultenously record both information? I cannot judge your choice of words because I don't know what is being talked about .

"if there are always multiple interpretations of the reality that exists in people's minds, then there is no process by which the ultimate truth or falsity of the contractions can be determined." summary: "if there are always multiple interpretations of the reality that exists in people's minds, then the ultimate truth cannot be determined." Sounds to me like, because you can be wrong, there is no right. Now I do hold a wide skeptic view and am less aggressive/more patient with conclusions on knowledge. But I think there's a fundamental issue with the above attitude. It's an attitude of research that leads to a fog where knowledge and opinion are confused and where biases (Group think) wins. Especially group think. ---- I agree with your analysis of the situation consistently. Except for ''A method in which a researcher gathers subjective information from a very small group people or even a single person, then presents a subjective interpretation of that information.'' It might be a contextual observation (that most qualitative research is done on small samples) But I don't think qualitative research brainstorming is supposed to be done on small samples. If you ment exclusivity to small samples, I disagree. kool post op, gald to know the developpement of noobism. Looks like the phenomena where performance and competency degrades in central planning (lack of market forces on the workers) I theraby invent a new word: Political Correctivism. A phenomena where an intellectual erea degrades due to market forces being replaced with political and emo-social forces. Come on, It's an awesome word!

Are you sure you ment the above as opposed to : The more you know about the one, the more certain becomes the other ? /Scientific curiosity