« first day (165 days earlier)      last day (1475 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 23:00

12:51 AM
@snailboat @CopperKettle I think we can't really put that there, unless we want a different meaning. I haven't really read the sentence, or the comments, but I think I read the sentence differently from stangdon and StoneyB. (Reading it differently from two native speakers who've got many upvotes in their comments could be worrying!)
> It could also mean that Putin still hopes to be part of a larger coalition in Syria, or that he still wants a role in whatever Western diplomatic effort might eventually bring the war to an end.
http://ell.stackexchange.com/q/74417/3281
I read it as: It could mean [that A], or [that B] might eventually bring the war to an end.
I'm sure I'd want to reread that again soon.
 
@DamkerngT. I think it would be strange putting that there.
 
I haven't checked the context, but that was how I would read it at first sight.
BTW, good evening!
 
In Given the alternatives is a weird way to begin a sentence. This doesn't look like it was carefully proofread.
Good evening!
> It could also mean
> ​ [that Putin still hopes to be part of a larger coalition in Syria],
> or (it could also mean)
> ​ [that he still wants a role in whatever Western diplomatic effort might eventually bring the war to an end].
 
@snailboat nods (I just had a look at the original: it's written like that.)
Hmm... parsing it like that, I think that before might would be fine.
 
whatever Western diplomatic effort might eventually bring the war to an end is a free relative (what CGEL calls a fused relative), essentially a relative clause that is functionally similar to a noun phrase.
See CGEL p.1068
 
1:02 AM
Diplomacy leads to free relatives; who knew?
 
Now the problem is whether or not adding that before might is really fine.
Come to think of it, I think CookieMonster posted a similar question (but maybe it's not obvious that they're similar) earlier this year.
I'm pretty sure that I practically won't be able to find it if I search.
 
@DamkerngT. Well, I still don't think you can really insert that there.
You can get some other opinions :-)
 
nods -- Thanks for the feedback anyway. :D
Hmm...
I just noticed that in all examples on CGEL p.1068, whatevers stand for the objects in subordinate clauses.
I guess I thought whatever X that sounds plausible (and probably CookieMonster though the same but had a stronger feeling: that it's mandatory) because our whatever is the subject of the subordinate clause.
> a) I like whatever moves.
b) I like whatever that moves.
 
1:23 AM
*anything
 
@snailboat or they might be considered theorems with the most trivial of proofs
or they could be nontrivial theorems in another system (that has other axioms)
 
But isn't an axiom "just is"?
 
yes.
but an arbitrary choice.
 
nods
 
not totally arbitrary (one chooses them based on experience about where is the best place to stop).
but one can come to doubt them (in the sense that the axiom choice doesn't reflect what you want or doesn't fit the application)
 
 
4 hours later…
5:36 AM
BTW, have you heard about many editions of Fowler's book?
> 1926: First irascible version of Fowler's "Dictionary of Modern English Usage" published. Owing to the author's idiosyncrasies and clear-headed prescriptions, it earns a place on every writer's shelf.

1965: An new edition comes out, edited by Sir Ernest Gowers. Most people believe Gowers only brought the language up-to-date where absolutely necessary, keeping the spirit of the original intact. In other words, this revision was hailed as welcome and necessary.

1996: Massive overhaul of the text published, edited by the famous Robert W. Burchfield. Burchfield thoroughly changes the langua
Now I'm confused which one I should buy!
I remember that some say 3rd is the best, but now I'm not sure.
 
I don't know that much about the different editions
 
2
Q: Is the adjective or noun form of 'pathogen' needed in this phrase?

embioIs the adjective or noun form of 'pathogen' needed in this phrase: Seed-borne fungal pathogen infection on the rice crop is an interesting subject of research. Pathogen or pathogenic? "Seedborne pathogenic fungi can greatly affect seed quality and cause diseases that impact seedling produc...

These alternate pairs could be another big problem for learners.
I'm not sure which to use myself at times!
 
6:00 AM
The OP's comment and edit make the question unclear to me.
 
My guess: Seed-borne pathogenic fungus infection
 
6:20 AM
0
Q: What are the differences between the usage of words that end with "ing" and those which do not?

Yummy SushiTo my knowledge, when native speakers are using gerunds as a noun, they would prefer words that end with "-ment" rather than those that end with "ing." Is it just a personal preference, or a grammatical phenomenon? Specifically, can the suffix "-ing" add some subtle meanings to a word in English...

Another challenging subject. Everything that is related to choices or alternatives is always challenging. It's difficult to explain how, why, or just even what is the right choice.
Probably too-broad, but someone may be able to come up with a rule of thumb.
 
6:44 AM
Derivation is much less regular than inflection.
Verbs have an -ing inflection, and nouns can be productively derived from this form.
But often, we already have a noun corresponding to a verb.
Sometimes the existence of that noun in the lexicon blocks the production of a new one.
Or, sometimes we might say the new form is possible but less idiomatic than the established one.
The -ment suffix is a less productive way of deriving nouns, but we've already got a bunch of them in the lexicon pre-formed.
 
nods -- I think -tion is probably more common than -ment nouns.
 
Also, once something is in the lexicon, it can take on its own meaning and usage, and that meaning can shift.
Sometimes we can derive a new noun from the same verb in a different way, but we end up using the two nouns differently.
At any rate, deriving nouns from the -ing form of a verb is really very productive. I think you can find some discussion in CGEL in Chapter 19.
 
Thanks for the pointer!
 
CGEL focuses much more on syntax than morphology, though that's to be expected, given how much more syntax than morphology English has.
 
(A funny set of derivatives: condiment, condition, conditioning, conditioner. :-)
 
6:50 AM
Page 1702
Oh, I wouldn't have thought of condiment as related
Hmm, looks like they come from different roots
 
Well, I usually think of condiments as conditioners for food. :P
 
Con- is the same! :-)
 
Ah, interesting pairs: completion/completing, postponement/postponing, removal/removing
I think we have more pairs/sets that each derivative will have a different meaning than the pairs/sets that each derivative could be used interchangeably.
1
Q: What's the deciding factor for which form of a word you choose before the word "skill"?

Ghaith AlrestomI wanted to tell my friend that I had skills in persuading people. I stood for 5 minutes just thinking whether I should say "persuading skills", "persuasive skills", or "persuasion skills". To decide which one to use, I went searching online dictionaries, and it just created further confusion. ...

It's compounding!
 
7:16 AM
4
Q: Why is my plaster covered ceiling magnetic?

dave mankofftldr; Why do magnets stick to my ceiling? I have an old house, built in 1905 in the Boston area. I want to install a light fixture in a room that does not currently have one. I tried using my stud finder to find the joists, but it proved futile. I switched to trying to use some neodymium magnet...

Interesting question! But I think he meant metallic rather than magnetic in the title.
 
It sounds to me like they meant magnetic.
> tldr; Why do magnets stick to my ceiling?
But!
 
2
Q: What's grammatically wrong in this sentence?

Vikas Kumar Why China has less population than India? Shouldn't it be like: Why has China less population than India? OR Why do China has less population than India?

An interesting question
 
You could argue that it doesn't make sense, even though I think they meant it :-)
 
"Why has China less population than India?" -- would this be grammatical?
 
Only for a shrinking minority of speakers for whom possessive have is auxiliary.
For most speakers it's lexical, so you want to add do-support, which means putting have in bare infinitive form and inverting the subject with does
> Why does China have a smaller population than India?
 
7:27 AM
"Why China has less population than India?" - so this would be non-standard too?
 
Right, because it's a main clause interrogative, and the interrogative phrase is not in subject position, so it should be marked by subject-auxiliary inversion
The uninverted form is grammatical, but only works in a very limited range of circumstances.
You're familiar with echo questions?
 
@snailboat Is interrogative phrase in the subject position here: "What China has to offer to the world?"
 
"I'm talking about why China has less population than India." "Why China has less population than India? Wouldn't it be better if you said a smaller population?"
@CopperKettle Nope!
 
@snailboat I'll read up on this.
 
> what China has __ to offer to the world
 
7:30 AM
@snailboat I see now! Thanks!
 
Here, China is in subject position.
What has been pulled out of that gap indicated by the blank following have.
It's been moved to the front of the sentence before the subject.
> I'd like to talk about [what China has __ to offer to the world].
This is a subordinate interrogative clause. We don't invert the subject and auxiliary in subordinate interrogatives.
Only in main clause interrogatives.
That's an example of Ross's Penthouse Principle.
I seem to recall you learning that term at some point, so I thought I'd bring it up again :-)
If we want to make it a main clause interrogative, we should add do-support and invert do with China:
 
@snailboat Yes. (0:
 
> What does China have __ to offer to the world?
> China has many things to offer to the world.
 
"Who is there?" -- is now the interrogative in subject position?
 
Yes, I think so.
 
7:35 AM
Thank you!
 
> Who is responsible for this mess!? ← no gap
> I'm responsible for this mess! And I'm quite proud of it.
When you're forming a question, if the interrogative phrase is in subject position – and that means a wh-word is part or all of the subject – then it's already at the front of the sentence, so you don't need to move anything to the front.
So it doesn't leave a gap behind like in our other example.
 
nods
 
And you don't need to invert anything, either.
So forming a question when the wh-phrase is in subject position is pretty simple! :-)
 
For some reason, "Why China has less population than India?" seemed okay to me. I hope I'll remember that it's not.
 
It's fairly typical of certain non-native varieties of English.
 
7:40 AM
I recalled "But go on, why had you to go?" (Iris Murdoch)
4
Q: "Why had you to" or "why did you have to"

CopperKettleI was solving a test on modals and there was the following line: What was the problem? Why _ leave early? The proposed fill-in combinations were: had you to did you have to must you you had to I picked 1 and 2, but the key to the test contained only choice 2. I've consulted Quirk et ...

 
So,
Have can be lexical or auxiliary, depending on its meaning and the dialect of the speaker.
 
Thank you for the explanation! Okay, I have to go now.
 
In all of its stative meanings (including both possessive have, discussed a few minutes ago, and the obligation have, as in have to do something, as in your latest example), it's a lexical verb for most speakers, but it's still an auxiliary verb for some older British English speakers.
But as time passes, that is less and less true.
 
Maybe I should point at this discussion in the comments to the question.
Bye, Snails!
 
Some older British English speakers treat that have as an auxiliary, so they say things like Have I to sign both forms? Most speakers treat it as a lexical verb, though, so they say Do I have to sign both forms? (A Student's Introduction to English Grammar, p.40.) — snailboat Nov 22 at 23:25
Have a good, um, whichever time of day is the right one!
Time zones are hard.
 
7:44 AM
It's 12:45 a.m. (or is it already p.m.?)
(0:
 
Have a good afternoon! :-)
I'll assume it's the latter, since it's 23:45 here.
 
Have a good night!
(0:
 
8:10 AM
Hi all.
 
Hi!
Welcome to the room!
 
Thanks
 
8:40 AM
Hmm... maybe, for 'X skills', it depends on how we internalize it: what skills? (or skills of what?) vs. skills for what?
Negotiation skills ~ skills of negotiation
Negotiating skills ~ skills for negotiating (in a given situation)
 
I honestly can't think of a difference in meaning between the two in this case
 
Problem-solving skills ~ skills for solving problems
Persuasion skills ~ skills of persuasion
 
I doubt many people say "problem-solution skills" :-)
 
nods -- Unless someone makes it real!
But solution-finding skills could be a thing? (I haven't checked)
LOL -- It's used in Marketing For Dummies. :-)
 
 
3 hours later…
11:43 AM
Is that "how" a little strange? so.....you know how I was supposed to take Daveed and Angelika to get a pet fish
 
It is not strange.
Replacing it with that is possible, but changes the meaning a bit.
I see what you mean, though.
 
I'm not sure I really understand that "how". :-)
Was it used like in How wonderful she is!?
 
I'm digging for a reference.
 
Thanks!
 
> Qualifying a verb: In what way, manner, condition, etc.; by what means. (Formerly often followed by that.) a. in dependence on verbs of telling, asking, thinking, perceiving, etc.
The know may be attracting it.
> With weakened meaning, introducing an indirect statement, after verbs of saying, perceiving, and the like
> 1844 Dickens Christmas Carol iii, ― Bob Cratchit told them how he had a situation in his eye for Master Peter.
I think it's that one.
 
11:49 AM
Ah, the example by Dickens is easier to understand.
 
It’s a very old use, one that's been with us since Old English.
> C. 1000 Ælfric Josh. ii. 10 ― We ʒehirdon··hu ʒe ofsloʒon··Seon and Og.
C. 1250 Gen. & Ex. 2732 ― We witen wel quat is bi-tid, Quuow ȝister-dai was slaȝen and hid.
13·· K. Alis. 1565 ― He··saide to the kyng, How his fadir hette Felip.
C. 1386 Chaucer Knt.’s T. 526 ― Hym thoughte how that the wynged god Mercurie Biforn hym stood.
1548 Hall Chron., Hen. VIII 57 ― A letter was brought··certefiyng him how he was elected to be a Cardinal.
1571 Satir. Poems Reform. xxix. 3 ― Seing quhow all erdly thingis wor subiect to mutatioun.
 
It's sort of like "how things come and go" in the situation. (Not sure if it works in English, "how things come and go" is a lit. expression in my first language.
Oh, lots of examples! Many thanks!!
 
I still think know how correlates often enough.
> 11. Chiefly qualifying an adj. or adv. (also with verb like, etc.): To what extent; in what degree.

C. 1000 Ags. Gosp. Matt. xxvii. 13 ― Ne ʒehyrst þu hu fela saʒena hiʒ onʒen þe secgeað?
C. 1175 Lamb. Hom. 5 ― Ȝe hi hered hu muchel edmodnesce ure drihten dude for us.
C. 1300 Havelok 287 ― Quanne the Erl··herde··hw wel she ferde, Hw wis sho was, w chaste, hw fayr.
C. 1400 Maundev. (Roxb.) xxxiv. 153 ― Seez how gude a man þis was.
1563 Winȝet Wks. (1890) II. 21 ― It is··furthschawin, quhoumekle calamitie is inbrocht.
 
I think I get it now. Anyhow, I still feel a little weird to construe how in the sense of in what way/manner in you know how I was supposed to take Daveed and Angelika to get a pet fish.
It was probably used a hint: I was supposed to take them to get a pet fish [as in a real pet fish, and that's how].
 
It's used there to introduce a story.
 
11:55 AM
nods
 
> You know about the fact that . . .
Something like that.
 
Must be similar to this definition: how: 5 used for referring to a particular fact that you want to mention. Isn’t it strange how no one ever mentions his name nowadays?
 
12:14 PM
I think your dialogue is based on this article, which is about this series of texting (with image). -- I wasn't sure the part you didn't understand until I noticed that the way that how is used is not quite as common as I thought. I don't know how to explain it. It's unlike "How did you do it?" "I did it like this..." Its meaning is more like that. — Damkerng T. 3 mins ago
(con't) And you can actually understand it as a that. Actually, a dictionary defines this sense of how precisely as that (sense 4). Another dictionary defines it more explicitly as "5. used for referring to a particular fact that you want to mention", with a similar how in one example: Isn’t it strange how no one ever mentions his name nowadays?Damkerng T. 32 secs ago
That's probably as far as I would go.
 
That's good.
 
Thanks!
 
 
4 hours later…
4:31 PM
@DamkerngT. Not 'fishy' at all for me.
 
4:45 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. So it's not strange to you how people use how for that everywhere?
 
5:06 PM
@DamkerngT. for that matter, it's not strange to me either
 
Thanks for the feedback. Good for you all. :-)
It's quite strange to me, using how to mean that that doesn't mean how (as in how much, how good, how wonderful, how it's like, in what way, etc.)
 
shrugs I don't appreciate English all that much. It's a silly language only useful for talking to folks who don't speak my language :-)
Not that my language is any better, but I have my bias
 
Well, it's obvious that we don't share the same opinion, though appreciate is probably not my choice of word.
 
Did you know that I was rapped on my tiny knuckles when I spelt 'beautiful' as 'butiful'? I thought it was straightforward following 'dutiful'! (10 year old me says so)
 
I guess nobody wouldn't notice that.
 
5:14 PM
Good evening!
 
In any case, I don't pronounce the two words the same way anyway.
Evening!
 
Hey @CopperKettle
 
5:48 PM
sigh -- Sometimes I read messages in other chat rooms, but something is going on, and I don't want to say or do anything that unintentionally makes things worse.
So I'd better keep myself hanging here.
(Or go read some pages in CGEL)
 
6:16 PM
Who pronounces "metal", "mettle", "medal", and "meddle" all the same?
almost every AmE speaker?
 
What? Americans roll on the Ds the same way as Ts?
 
6:37 PM
hi
 
@S.R.I Yes, in the right phonetic context, both /t/ and /d/ can turn into a "flapped" sound (written [ɾ] in IPA).
A flap is similar to a "rolled" (trilled) sound with only one contact.
What happens is the tongue very briefly touches the tip of the mouth, but it doesn't stay there long enough for air to build up like it does in [t] and [d] sounds.
 
Flapping is extremely common (but not obligatory) in American English.
 
Oh, I see
 
Hello @Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. whats up!?
 
6:46 PM
Today I realized I was mistaken; [dʒ] certainly exists in Arabic, at least phonetically.
@Ahmad Studying stuff.
 
you said you are in highschool?
 
Yes.
 
می خواهی چکاره بشی
نمی دونستم این سوال به انگلیسی چی می شه
 
@Ahmad "What do you plan to be in the future?"
Answer: A man
 
not what , what job
what job do you plan to take in the future
 
6:53 PM
@Ahmad Pharmacist, prolly. Or doctor. Or something related to chemistry. Or . . .
 
then you study in experimental field :)
 
Yeah.
I'm really good at math though.
 
I've heard doctors have high salary, even to 100 millions per mounth
 
No matter what profession you choose, if you're the best, money will come.
 
but I don't know from the first time I chose mathematics, I never thought I can be a doctor too
 
6:56 PM
Mind if I ask, what's your current profession?
 
Professor
however, I still didn't get my p.hd, I mean university instructor ;)
 
In what field?
 
computer engineering
 
my M.Sc was in Artificial Intelligence
 
6:58 PM
Awesome.
Well, I'd love to become a prof.
 
programming and working with computer sometimes is tiredsome, but I do like the field
yeah that is good too,
I mean to be a prof., leave aside the researching duty, the education part is not that hard task
you have many off days
 
My biggest love is chem of course, but over time, I've grown some love for languages. I'm not interested in bio that much, except for the biochem, zoology and anatomy part.
Of course, I could try being a translator or a TeX'er as well. :)
 
great!
 
(Good evening again)
 
I just felt you are a genuis man for your age. then you can be successful in any job you take.
 
7:08 PM
nods
He's brilliant in English.
 
computer science may be intresting for you!
 
Or biotech. (0:
 
@CopperKettle yeah he is a very young man!
Sorry @Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. but I never liked chem.
 
@Ahmad Did you study any chem yourself, outside the scope of school lessons?
 
I wish I could like chemistry. I probably lack the imagination.
 
7:10 PM
I am more inclined to abstract things
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Never, and I think as I wasn't good at it, or maybe our teacher wasn't good, I wasn't intrested
 
@Ahmad That's why.
High school chem is basically . . . gibberish.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Do you mean "paper study" or "doing experiments"?
I wondered what attracts people to chemistry.
 
@CopperKettle Anything.
@CopperKettle For me, it was since I could explain and see what's happening around me.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. I was sometimes fascinated by Modern Physics (Einstein theories..), but not much for chemistery, however they have overlap, right?
 
The milk overflows faster than water. Why?
 
7:14 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. It expands faster with the rising temperature?
 
@Ahmad They overlap a lot in anything quantum chem and comp chem.
@CopperKettle No. Nothing like that.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. But it seems you don't mean that overlapping part.
 
I liked programming in school because you could fiddle with something and then launch and see it work.
 
@CopperKettle Exactly, I am a programmer too, beside my teachining in University
 
@CopperKettle The micelles in milk trap some air in them that can't break free due to the layer of fat on the top.
 
7:16 PM
A micelle (/maɪˈsɛl/) or micella (/maɪˈsɛlə/) (plural micelles or micellae, respectively) is an aggregate of surfactant molecules dispersed in a liquid colloid. A typical micelle in aqueous solution forms an aggregate with the hydrophilic "head" regions in contact with surrounding solvent, sequestering the hydrophobic single-tail regions in the micelle centre. This phase is caused by the packing behavior of single-tail lipids in a bilayer. The difficulty filling all the volume of the interior of a bilayer, while accommodating the area per head group forced on the molecule by the hydration of the...
 
@CopperKettle But programming in school is boring too.
 
Oh, I know this word. I was translating some stuff about nano-particles, and they use micelle-like constructions.
 
All of the school lessons are boring. :/
No real science/practice going on.
@CopperKettle Yeah that micelle.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. It didn't seem boring to me. Computers seemed magical to me at that time. (0:
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. programming could be just a mean, you can make great algorithms, imagine you write a program which can win you in chess!
@CopperKettle but not now?
 
7:18 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Yes. I remember we did a hypothermic experiment once, with a glass of chemicals dercreasing in temperature and freezing to a wooden palet. (0:
 
I see programming as a tool to help you do stuff easier. I like those.
 
@Ahmad No, not now. I've gotten dumber. (0:
 
@CopperKettle Yawns Did you ever mix glycerin and potassium permanganate?
 
Maybe I should try programming again.
 
@CopperKettle Why not now? could I ask what is your job?
 
7:19 PM
@Ahmad Translator. (0:
 
What field did you study?
 
@Ahmad Information technology in business, but then dropped out.
 
I must say I do like language too, one my wish was to make computers understand our language
 
I did some basic study-level C++ programming and some database building (Access, VB, easy stuff)
 
in computer staff, artificial intelligence is more intersting to me
 
7:22 PM
@Ahmad It must be a very tough field.
 
being just a software developer, after you got its main concepts (like OOP) could become boring! but makeing intelligent systems could be intersting
@CopperKettle yes, that could make our future
 
But could one person grasp the architechture of an AI system? It might be vast. Maybe you'd be only one of a hundred programmers toiling on it.
 
@CopperKettle it has some basics like any other science but it is very vast, Artificial Neural Networks, Fuzzy systems, Genetic algorithms... are some of the courses
 
I read about statistical learning etc, but only at "news article" level.
 
yeah I must add machine learning, NLP, machine vision,....
The mission is intesting to me, to make something intelligent like a human or even more
 
7:26 PM
nods
 
the jobs that seem easy to us, are difficult for machines, like the chat we already have
 
I guess it will be done, a human-level AI, someday.
@Ahmad Yes, because AI has no "world model" to carry on a logical conversation.
 
Yeah the growth of science is fast, then they can make it. However, I should say 50 years ago, they thought they could acheive it in 10 years, but later found its not that easy
 
That too.
Films from 1980 picture us shaking hands with green guys from the other side of the galaxy.
 
Yeah AI seems promising, but after choosing it you may stuck in limitted parts and algorithms, many researches just study in certian scopes, like NLP, Machine learning....
 
7:31 PM
@Ahmad yes, if it's hard for experts to predict, I'll not venture. (0:
 
for example suppose I want to build a translator for English to Persian, or Persian to English, while even the Google wasn't successful at it!!!
 
Maybe Google will hire you!
 
but anyway, to get what are the obstacles, how to model, how to try, how to close fill your time for awhile
@CopperKettle I said that would be a foolish ambition
if Google struggles yet
They need big teams,
for a single person that would be huge job
I've heard making Windows 98 was the biggest project human ever done, even above building the pyramids
 
A real translating mechanism will possess human-level AI, I guess.
@Ahmad Even above Windows 8 and 10?
 
Simulating human is one approach in AI, but there are other approaches, the human are sophsiticated creatures! intelligent but emotional too
@CopperKettle probably because those time they had less tools and it was the basic for new OSs
 
7:38 PM
ah, I see.
 
the good point about computer software is that they could build incrementally
 
@Ahmad Some say that "emotion is fast cognition", thus AI could be possibly even more emotional.
 
I hear that from you! good point
the emotion could be result of a very vast and sophisticated insight
@CopperKettle then you say more genues people are more emotional?
 
I read that there's this hypothesis that emotions basically serve to provide fast but stereotypical and unprecise reaction.
@Ahmad Could be so. But overlying this is an even stronger cortex that allows them to control their emotions.
 
Yeah machine could be programmed to act in certain ways, like maybe the way babies know how to suck milk, but they could learn like the way we learn
@CopperKettle Again good point, yeah genuis people may suffer from deep emotions but they could overcome too
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. Why you left the discussion?
 
7:45 PM
@Ahmad I'm watching.
And studying biology.
And reading CGEL.
And reviewing at chem.
 
I was hopeful to make you intrested in AI. However, I should warn you, computers could make one addicted and less social.....
 
And looking at meta.SE questions.
 
Geniuses are often multitaskers. (0:
 
@Ahmad I am interested in AI, because I like knowing.
 
I feel an idiot when talking about AI, because I know that I would need to lay heaps of textbooks around me and study for a year in order just to begin to understand what is the situation in the field.
 
7:47 PM
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. good, as I am intrested in, but really not to this wold but the philosopphy of this wold, and our destiny
I always thought what is a good behaviour! and the phsychology
 
Yeah I like those stuff too.
But not the technical version.
 
questions like what am I? what are others? what is our relation? is there God....
As I said I like Einstein theories. What is time, what is mass.... parallel universe and the .... However I know they are tough stuff
but I am not much interested to know why water boils or what is the result of mixing salt and another thing. because they are more surface
 
"I long for scenes where man hath never trod
A place where woman never smiled or wept
There to abide with my Creator, God,
And sleep as I in childhood sweetly slept"
 
@Ahmad *more surface. You should say "more superficial" or something like that.
@Ahmad But I do. Since that's what's happening in real life.
 
@Ϻ.Λ.Ʀ. thanks superficial, but thats not real life
we even don't know what is mass
what is atom, or molecule
 
7:54 PM
@Ahmad *what is mass. You should say "what mass is".
Weird English clauses.
 
anyway
 
Thing is, when we get to that level, there's no need to know what it is.
 
We don't know about real life
 
The penthouse principle, a term in syntax coined by John R. Ross in 1973, describes the fact that many syntactic phenomena treat matrix (or main) clauses differently from embedded (or subordinate) clauses: The penthouse principle: The rules are different if you live in the penthouse. The penthouse named in the principle is the top-floor of a highrise apartment building, and is a metaphor for the matrix clause in a multi-clause structure (which, when diagrammed in usual phrase marker notation, contains the highest clause node in the structure). Perhaps the best-known example of a penthouse principle...
 
to which level?
but we usually can't get there when we don't pass the higher levels
 
7:57 PM
You're never really buying an exact 2 kilograms of tomato when going to the store, but you buy it, it happens, life goes on.
 
OK but they are superficial as being busy to a simple program, or chatting here on such a topic
 
Nothing is superficial.
 
they are all equal games to me, when I don't know the essence of many things
 
Everything, every thing that happens, exist, existed or will exist plays a key role in the order that there is in this universe.
 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 23:00

« first day (165 days earlier)      last day (1475 days later) »