Traveler

https://x.com/ramsnfl/status/1744139181109182816?s=46
Just broke the rookie receiving NFL record for receptions and yards.

From your links, it appears we're both right and both wrong.  It is not exactly a "reaction".  It is a process.  And it appears that neutrinos are involved in the process.
To answer your question, I had believed that the number of neutrinos:neutrons was roughly 1:1 or possibly 10:1.  Do you know of a source that gives a more specific number?

Fusion reactor, or could it be done in a fission reactor?  If the latter, Earth creates those naturally without humans, and maybe we got some gold that way?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor
 
(I understand a full 20% of this thread, which qualifies me to post here and sound smart.)
 

He seems to me to be a God of order.  I can't think of many blurry examples, except those blurred by man or lack of understanding.

Zechariah 5:9 Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.
D&C 138:39 And our glorious Mother Eve, with many of her faithful daughters who had lived through the ages and worshiped the true and living God.
https://bhroberts.org/records/jFuxrc-9SdpGb/zebedee_coltrin_recalls_an_account_of_joseph_smith_seeing_father_adam_and_mother_eve_in_a_vision
 

I really struggle with the concept of Priesthood, holding Priesthood, exercising Priesthood, Priesthood office, etc.   Just when I think I have a grasp, I read something that makes the edges blurry.  Maybe they're supposed to be blurry, I don't know.

By definition, angels are messengers from God. Angelic visitations recorded in scripture are almost always to prophets and devout believers (with Paul, Alma, and the sons of Mosiah standing out as stark exceptions). These visitations seem to me to have the quality of a Priesthood assignment, which might therefore be considered a Priesthood responsibility. This would explain why the angels we read of in these visitations are male.

This thread was started to prevent universal basic income.  I included a YouTube video from Milton Friedman expressing a universal basic income he called negative income tax.  I am not sure how much or what others think of such a concept – so I thought to point out a couple of other things in relation to negative income tax:
I have posted before about the 1960 census that determined that we would eliminate poverty by transferring a percentage (2%) of our nation’s wealth (GDP) to help the poor.  This has become the mantra of liberals and progressives.  It is the framework of our social program needs.  The percentage of 2% has constantly increased and today the percentage is very close to 30% of our GDP.
This country need to know that by all the data in support of our social programs that currently we are wasting 94% of our spending on social services.  This is how corrupt our social programs have become – and for the record I am not including any payoff of student loans.
I also feel that we have gone too far to protect dependent children in the workplace.  I would also suggest that with the negative income tax we could do away with minimum wage.  If a wage was not worth it anyone could rely on their negative income tax while looking and learning new wage opportunities.   We could also change our current social security to be exclusively retirement (removing job disabilities compensations).
Of course, many poor would still have needs, but the remaining needs could be met by private – local charities (including state not federal).   
I also like the idea that everyone pays taxes – including the poor.  Why give money to the poor and then make them pay taxes on that money?  Because the poor would then have skin in the game of government and would vote to keep their money except for actual necessities provided by the government.
In the almost 50 years since Friedman suggested his negative income tax – I have not seen or heard of anything better and lest wasteful.  My suggestion is if anyone knows of something better for government helping the poor (program) please let me know.  Otherwise, I suggest you learn more about Friedman’s negative income tax and inform your neighbor.
 
The Traveler 

A Neapolitan friend told me about this a week or two ago. I believe she's a pizza con ananas aficionada. There aren't many in Naples.

This thread was started to prevent universal basic income.  I included a YouTube video from Milton Friedman expressing a universal basic income he called negative income tax.  I am not sure how much or what others think of such a concept – so I thought to point out a couple of other things in relation to negative income tax:
I have posted before about the 1960 census that determined that we would eliminate poverty by transferring a percentage (2%) of our nation’s wealth (GDP) to help the poor.  This has become the mantra of liberals and progressives.  It is the framework of our social program needs.  The percentage of 2% has constantly increased and today the percentage is very close to 30% of our GDP.
This country need to know that by all the data in support of our social programs that currently we are wasting 94% of our spending on social services.  This is how corrupt our social programs have become – and for the record I am not including any payoff of student loans.
I also feel that we have gone too far to protect dependent children in the workplace.  I would also suggest that with the negative income tax we could do away with minimum wage.  If a wage was not worth it anyone could rely on their negative income tax while looking and learning new wage opportunities.   We could also change our current social security to be exclusively retirement (removing job disabilities compensations).
Of course, many poor would still have needs, but the remaining needs could be met by private – local charities (including state not federal).   
I also like the idea that everyone pays taxes – including the poor.  Why give money to the poor and then make them pay taxes on that money?  Because the poor would then have skin in the game of government and would vote to keep their money except for actual necessities provided by the government.
In the almost 50 years since Friedman suggested his negative income tax – I have not seen or heard of anything better and lest wasteful.  My suggestion is if anyone knows of something better for government helping the poor (program) please let me know.  Otherwise, I suggest you learn more about Friedman’s negative income tax and inform your neighbor.
 
The Traveler 

This is actually a mentality I teach in my preparedness lessons.  I tell people to be in tune with the spirit and let that guide their activities as they engage in preparedness plans and actions.

"To me, this is like a Wright brothers moment," said Walter de Heer, Regents' Professor of Physics at Georgia Techde, who led this development.  Interestingly, this newly built tech could be used to advance quantum computing. 
Is everything written by AI these days? Is this the future we leave to our posterity? I'm cringing at the thought.

https://x.com/pronounced_kyle/status/1742588127628361809?s=46
Round #2
And
https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/first-ever-functional-graphene-semiconductor?utm_source=tldrnewsletter
 

As a young missionary I dealt with the reference in 3Nephi and wondered how it was possible that anything could not be expressed.  For all my pursuit there was no reasonable answer.  For me, there has always been a process as I explained previously.  Answers come as impressions in thoughts that usually come as a process themselves.  Sometimes the thought process is that I am not ready (worthy).  Sometimes I understand things will not be made known until later – as thought there is a time and a season.  Sometimes I understand in part with the impression that more will come over time.
However, there was nothing concerning the 3Nephi conundrum.   I eventually forgot about it and moved on to other things.  Many years later I found myself overridden with life, work and callings.  I was way in over my head attempting to stay above water with my young growing family, critical requirements in my work and challenges in my calling.  Any one of the challenges would have been too much but with all that was going on – I was realizing that I was not contributing sufficiently anywhere.
Circumstances were such that I had the privilege of being in the Celestial room of a temple for the dedication.  As best as I can describe my experience – during the dedication it was as though the temple walls and celling became transparent.  There is no possible way I could describe what I heard and saw and especially what I was able to perceive.  The spirit reminded me of my searching years before, letting me understand that what I was experiencing was an answer to my questions concerning 3Nephi.  I was also impressed that the reason for my experience was, in part, because of my willingness to remain loyal to my covenants.  I am often reminded (though not always) of this experience when I visit the temples or hear (sing) certain hymns. 
The impression I have of Ezra’s Eagle is that I will be better prepared for things to come by paying greater attention to other things I have been given.
 
The Traveler

You have touched on several problems with ancient text – especially scripture.  It can be difficult for even two individuals well versed in their first language to be present and listen to a third person (also speaking in the same language) to have the same understanding to what was spoken.  One of the most difficult problems with scriptural text is that few are expert enough to translate from the original text.  Of those experts, there is often an agenda that is contrary to what is being written in the text. 
I have determined (also suggested in my patriarchal blessing) that the single best tool for understanding is the Gift of the Holy Ghost.  The single worse tool for understanding is to have a preset (prejudice) conclusion that is intended to achieve.  The Doctrine and Covenants outlines for us a very workable method that includes study – which includes the gathering of information, cataloging the information, meditating (thinking out logical possibilities), creating a consensus and then praying about the entire process and especially the consensus.  I believe there is one more step that is not explicitly stated but implied – that is to listen for a response.  For example, many got to the temple and pray for an answer.  So busy are they praying that they never hear a response.  I am of the mind that listening to the spirit is a discipline to be learned – not a difficult discipline for a small child is often more capable of listening discipline than adults.
I believe there is a problem in that some would think all that is necessary is that we pray and ask; then whatever it is that we then believe is all that is necessary.  Sometime my personal prayers have not been answered for several years – so long that I had forgotten my prayers and had to be reminded by the spirit.  For me, most often, understanding does not come all at once.  Usually, I have to engage and take baby steps of understanding through action and experience while remaining loyal to covenants.  Often, greater dedications are needed towards covenants before things become clearer.   Side note here – it amazes me that, for example, any effort to better keep the Sabbath Day holy is most met with ridicule is from those compartmented Saints that think no one should attempt a more holy Sabbath Day than them.
There is one other critical element – it would seem that understanding is most often specific to myself and when I share it generally it is not well understood or accepted – yet there are a few (some family and some very close friends) that are trustworthy to share.  Sometimes on rare occasions this forum.  Then to my surprise my new found understandings are old things they have known for a long time – and so they welcome me to my new understandings.
 
The Traveler

She’s doing great!   After meeting her, it’s disappointing that she isn’t allowed here anymore.  
 
She brought her family and they were awesome to visit with.  

If people are getting their information from videos like this rather than reading the vision itself in II Esdras - and I keep getting the impression that no one is reading it - it's no wonder there's confusion surrounding it.  The video in the above thread has the guy saying "the right side, the good side" - there is nothing whatsoever in the text of the vision to suggest the right side is good (yes, I know, it's frequent in scripture, but not in this vision).  The only indication of meaning for the right side is that it represents the place of rulers (the wings go there ("arise") when they rule).  People are assuming an eagle with two wings, one on the left and another on the right, but the vision doesn't read like that at all - it has 12 feathered wings1 and three heads, and "out of her wings there grew [8] other wings over against them;".  Usually, "over against them" means "across from them" or "on the opposite side" - suggesting there are 12 wings on one side of the eagle and 8 on the other.  (Some translations have the 8 "opposed" or "contrary" to the 12 (and growing out of the feathers of the bird rather than the wings).)  Given that the ones that rule always "arise" or "rise up" or are "set up" on the right side, and sides aren't otherwise mentioned, I don't think we can assume anything except that the right side is a place of authority.
Anyway, he talks about how these two little wings "were on the right side, the good side, they're gonna break over to the bad side" - but the vision says: "...lo, two little wings divided themselves from the six, and remained under the head that was upon the right side..."  Um, so they didn't go from the "right side, the good side, ...to the bad side" - they went from some undefined place (but possibly the left side) to the head on the right.  Dude just read those verses aloud before saying the exact opposite of what the verses say.  What the, huh?  How can I be the only one to catch these things?
Good grief.  Dude is claiming the vision says things it doesn't!  It's like this guy never read the Old Testament and doesn't know the way they spoke / wrote.  It's also like he never read chapter 12. (And he's crappy at making videos - using a pointer that doesn't show on the recording and doesn't edit the video to add visual markers.  Grrr.  Why would anyone pay attention to this dude?  I can't bear to watch more.)
1Wouldn't it be funny if this should have been translated as "twelve-feathered wings".  Then there would be 24 "big" feathers and 8 little feathers.  But alas, I don't know Latin, Armenian, Ethiopian, or Gregorian (the languages of the oldest versions of this text), so I can't go try to figure it out.  Apparently it's universally accepted as 12 wings, so, nevermind. It was fun while it lasted...

Since I brought up the fact that Joseph was a carpenter, I know someone is going to raise a point of order.
The Greek word (Tekton) means "craftsman."  This could be a stone mason, a carpenter, or a number of other professions.  This has caused many to believe that Joseph was actually a stone mason.  Possible.  But by no means obvious.  And it would have been historically less likely.
If you go to Greece today and say that Carborendum is a tekton, people would normally default to think "stone mason."  Absent any adjectives, modifiers, or context, that is the default meaning of such "craftsmen."  If you did the same thing in 1 AD, the default meaning of tekton would be "carpenter."
We find an analog in the English word "artist."  If we say Carborendum is an artist, without modifiers or context, people would default to "painter" or possibly "sculptor."  But there are many other types of artists.  In the record industry, contracts are drafted to call the singer or musician "the artist."  Hence "The Artist formerly known as Prince."  And it would not be wrong to call a photographer an artist or any other number of professions.
So, could he have been a stone mason?  Yes, it is possible.  But given the state of the Greek language of 1 AD, and that there was no context or modifier to specify, the word most likely would have referred to a carpenter.
And this, BTW, is why I give less credence to Apocryphal scriptures which refer to Joseph as a stone mason (viz. The Gospel of Mary).

This is also used to determine the first day in the ancient Hebrew calendar as well as Passover.  Many believe this was the method of establishing the first day of the year in many ancient calendars.  For some examples: the Enoch calendar used in the Book of Enoch, the most accepted calendar of Stonehenge and the Mayan calendar.
One of the problems with such methods has to do with spring storms, especially those with heavy clouds lasting for weeks obstructing sun rises (and sets) and phases of the moon.   The ancient saying among the Hebrews when there were heavy clouds obstructing the views of heavenly signs, was that “No man knows the day, not even the angles of heaven”.   Though the saying was intended to make a point there were “experts” (similar to @Vort)that carefully and explicitly followed the signs in the heavens and knew when the day (Easter) would be, much in advance – even without the code indicated by @zil2.
On another note – the code to calculate Easter is significantly simpler than code to predetermine how to have a rocket that will place a satellite in geocentric orbit or sending a rocket to the moon or mars or especially the rather unique orbit of the James Webb Telescope.
 
The Traveler

@Grunt, @Traveler
This is old, tongue in cheek but actually a great lesson on economics and the differences between the two schools.

And the actor who plays Keynes looks oddly familiar. 
 
I’m 100% on team Hayek. 

The plot thickens

Note that this is the ecclesiastical full moon ("Paschal full moon"), not the astronomical full moon. In some (relatively rare) cases, this might not be the same date. The ecclesiastical full moon is a calculated point in time based on very old calculations, while the astronomical full moon is an actual event, a moment in time which can be calculated to a small fraction of a second. But again, these two moments are not (necessarily) the same day.

First Sunday after 
First full moon after
Vernal equinox 

I think that within the religious community that it is not uncommon for someone to be somewhat confused with believing, hoping, exercising faith and having knowledge.  So here is a thread to explorer what we think concerning these terms.  I think that these terms are most often confused, especially with youth while expressing their testimony during Fast and Testimony meeting that is part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  I do not intend to criticize anyone – but rather express my personal inability to understand certain expressions.
Though all the terms are related I will attempt to express what each means to me:
Belief: Sometimes I believe what a person expresses concerning their religious belief and what they really think and do is not consistent.  But the reality is that what we believe is what we do.  There is a saying – “What you do thunders so loudly in my ears that I can hear a word you say expressing what you believe.”  If a person is honest (especially to themselves) I am of the notion that when expressing their testimony – what they believe is the most powerful expression and the most profound connection to G-d.  Our belief is developed throughout our entire experiences and is more of what we are than we tend to realize.  I think that expressing one’s belief is good to do – even to write down our belief is important to clarify, especially to ourselves, what exactly it is that we believe.  You cannot believe in paying a full tithing unless you pay a full tithing.  You cannot believe in mercy unless you are merciful.  You cannot believe in truth and tell little white lies.
Hope:  I think that hope is often confused with faith.  I think the reason for this is because (I think) hope is the first step of faith.  When we utter a first prayer – I believe it is because he have hope that our prayer will be heard.  Some think that such a step is a “leap of faith”.  I do not like that term, “Leap of faith”.  I think it would be better expressed as a “Leap of hope”.  For me hope is a desire or intent to discover what is or what we think possible.  Having hope and a good think and a powerful tool that can get us to do things we would not otherwise.  I do not think we should ever be ashamed of hoping for good things.
Faith:  Perhaps I have a different idea about faith.  I do not think there is much of a difference between faith and knowledge.  Because the line is so fine, I think many confuse themselves thinking their faith is knowledge and that what they think is knowledge is in reality faith.  I will use an example and use as a symbol of faith with a reference to electrons (electricity).  Some study electrons and think they know what an electron is – but in truth no one has ever seen an electron.  But we have all had lots of experiences with something that we all call electrons (electricity).  Our faith is so strong in electrons that we never doubt that electrons exist and work.  If we hit a switch to a light and the light does not come on – no one ever thinks, “Oh no electrons (electricity) no longer works”.  Rather we think the light bulb has burned out.  If we replace the light bult and the light still does not come on – we think the switch has quite working, or a breaker and shut off the electricity – or after we have checked everything in our home then we think the power is off.  No one ever loses faith in electricity.  We continue to “hope” we will find out why the light does not come on.  But our faith in electrons persists.   But note that in order to have faith – some knowledge, hope and belief is required.
Knowledge: I am expressing my understanding.  Knowledge as I understand is the divine revelation that that what we experience is true.  The problem with knowledge is that it is fleeting and can be lost and become a uncertain memory.  I do not believe someone can know a thing unless it is true, and G-d has made that truth known by the power of the Holy Ghost.  This means that the only way a person can know or have knowledge is to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (by covenant) and then to be loyal to that covenant.  As soon as one disconnects from their covenant, doubt will muddle their thinking and their knowledge of the truth will be become uncertain.  This is why it is impossible to know truth without a witness of Christ in that truth.  It is why all truth gives witness of Christ.  The caveat to this is that for whatever principle of truth someone discovers – they discover something of Christ.  But if they have not herd the truth of Christ they may not realize that they are learning of Christ.   Thus, someone can know a truth and deny that they know anything concerning Christ.  Because they do not understand that they only deny their false understanding of Christ.
 
The Traveler