I like your avatar.

He may not pay for his crimes, but they don't disappear either.
......
......
......
unless I was wrong about the past being sealed....

but do you really think the politicians are going to be happy about it? — Sir2u

Are they ever happy about anything? Do they have the word in their vocabulary? Never mind... Forget I even brought it up.

All debts remain collectable. — BC

That remains to be seen.

So, like, they'll have to settle for John Oliver? I can live with that.

Run for president of the US. Once you've served a term, no matter how badly, you can absolve yourself from all crimes and all debts... or so i hear....

Is time travel into the future anymore complicated than time travel into the past? — BC

Considerably! The past is sealed. The future is still open to a million possible versions. The differences between them may be infinitesimal, but fine-tuning the navigation to land your astral body in one specific time-strand is a finicky, time-consuming operation. That's why forward trips are 3X the price per year of backward trips.

Why should we? It would all have to be made of the same components. Carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and hydrogen can only combine in a finite variety of configurations. How do you figure any life forms that arise in similar environments and conditions would look "unrelated" in a fossil record - especially as it would have required some considerable development to leave any fossil trace?
And yet again:
Just how does this particular quibble support your uniqueness conceit?

All the people who didn’t join to make up that “enough” will be held responsible, although just partly and indirectly, of those killed and imprisoned ones. — LFranc

And? When the counterrevolution finally succeeds, they'll be lined up against a wall and shot? Sure, some of 'em. Or some who are suspected collaborators/sympathizers/informants and some who are pointed out by spiteful neighbours and some who are standing in the wrong place at the wrong time, because once the mob is on the rampage, anyone can fall victim to its vengeance.
Can you take all the possible variants of the future into consideration when deciding to join or sit out a protest?

There is no neutral zone, because inaction is always also action. — LFranc

Absolutely! A profound judgment from the safe high bleachers of history. People on the ground tend to think of their children before their freedom.

how do you know that life would out compete any new life arising? — an-salad

I don't. It's a more reasonable speculation, according to what we know of life as it is, than to think existing species would meekly stand aside and watch a new genesis grow.

We would have evidence for that in the fossil record if it were true.

We do. The fossil record is not one of sweet tolerance and co-existence, but waves of proliferation, extinction, change, explosion, diversification and die-off.
Just how does this particular quibble support your uniqueness conceit theory ?

How do you know it only started once on this planet? Even if it was just the once on this one planet, having begun, it thrived, proliferated, evolved and filled every possible ecological niche of this planet. If your contention is that there was time for more life to start on Earth, that's unlikely, since what was already here didn't tolerate competition from any upstarts: any new life form would be consumed.

Every planet out there capable of supporting life only needs one moment of the right conditions to converge to start its own version of life. Nothing about 4 billion years suggests otherwise.

1) Does a Time Machine travel in time, or do only the passengers? If the Time Machine itself doesn't travel in time, what am I in when I arrive? Is there a live pilot or an auto pilot? How long will the trip take? Can I bring somebody back with me? — BC

No; nothing physical travels in time, because time has no physical locations. When you arrive, you are a disembodied consciousness; thus there is no risk of altering the past. There is an operator, who also monitors your body's vital signs while your astral body is absent. The trip will have a pre-set duration, equal in both present and other. Not a good idea to leave your body for more than a few hours at a time.
Of course you can't bring anyone or anything back; you can't even touch or talk to them.

2) I understand that one can select one's temporal destination down to the second, but how do I select the precise geographical location? I wouldn't want to end up stuck in a thick wall, or under water. — BC

The GPS locator is pretty accurate, and there is no chance of damage to the astral body if it does land in a wall or under water. Since you have no substance, air and gravity are not issues, either. By the same token, no eating, drinking, mating or any other of interaction with the environment is possible.

3) Will I still be "me" in 24 A.D.? — BC

You can't be anyone else, but in another time, you're nobody at all.

6) Will I arrive knowing first century Latin — BC

You should be able to understand everyone telepathically, but you can't communicate.

4) Will the Rome of 24 or Boston of 2224 be "real" or simulacrum? — BC

If you can't tell, what do you care?

Do I have to be at a very specific location (temporally and geographically) to return to the present? — BC

No, the silver cord yanks you back to your body when the time is up. (If it's died in the meanwhile, you're plum out of luck.)

On some of those zillions of planets orbiting all those bejillions of suns, of course there must be other life. And whatever form it takes, wherever it happens, that life would be alien to us. Moreover, I expect many of those aliens to be intelligent and organized. I don't believe it's possible for this to be a one-off or for us to be that God-blessed unique.

All responsibility for such large collective actions as a war must be shared, but proportionately.
First: How did the leader get to be a leader? Some part of the citizenry must have followed him and supported him. That may have been a bent party apparatus rigging an election or a military junta or a revolutionary movement or a popular vote or a sneaky 3-step takeover as in Hitler's case.
The more popular support there was in his rise to power, the more citizens are directly responsible for his subsequent actions.

Second: In order to retain power, the leader must have a strong supporting organization of administrators and enforcers. They don't have to be competent; they just need wield a heavy hand, to get the leader's policies enacted, knock down any legal or ethical impediments, silence opposition and disable potential competitors. At the very least, he needs the military to respect his right to the office, protect him and obey his orders. To the extent that those orders contravene the constitution [or whatever principle] they had sworn to uphold, they are all - from generals down to privates - responsible for any illegal order they carry out. (It's not easy to refuse, as field executions used to be common. Now, at least in the US, they're supposed to get a court martial hearing.)

Keeping a dictatorship afloat domestically also requires some muscle, usually in the form of law-enforcement agencies. Every member of these agencies has sworn to uphold the law. If the new leader is seen to act contrary to to the law - as in ordering mass arrest of peaceful protesters, or the removal of flags, placards or other devices critical of the leader, or failing to defend the citizens' right to cast their vote unmolested - no police personnel should obey. Those who do are actively supporting him and therefore complicit in all his crimes. (Those who don't will soon be replaced by loyal thugs.)

Public protest against such a leader is perilous. It's easy to say "If enough people do thus and so..." Sure. But when you march on the street with sniper rifles pointed at you from the rooftops, do mounted cops prancing alongside and a phalanx of black shields ahead, do you know whether the numbers who join you will make up that 'enough'? Do you know whether you will be one of the 10% of protesters jailed indefinitely (beaten, humiliated, given wormy bread, your family not knowing what's happened to you) one of the 2% made an example of with a show-trial and long sentence in a frigid work-camp, or one the 0.5% shot down on the street and never heard from again? You don't: it's risk you take.

Each of those citizens is an individual, with personal responsibilities, dependents, affections, ambitions, hopes and fears. They're not all equally brave or dedicated to political reform. They don't all have the same degree of animosity to the leader. They don't all disagree with every decision he makes, or feel threatened by his every policy. The smartest, most socially aware ones usually leave the country as soon as such a leader comes to power, or even before, when the mood of the country indicates that he will. But there isn't always a more sympathetic regime that will take them in. So, a lot of ordinary citizens just hunker down, hoping to avoid attention and ride out whatever events befall. I don't think that makes them guilty of the leader's crimes.

I don't know , do momentarily pleasures take away long term pleasures of life? — No One

Of course not. You can have a happy life only by accumulating many, many small pleasures. They don't need to be luxuries - unless you count anything beyond bare subsistence as a luxury - but they do have to be moments out of the mundane. They can be as simple as the joy of receiving a present, a sense of accomplishment from completing a difficult task, the satisfaction of an excellent meal, the revelation of a truth you've been seeking, a useful insight, an inspiration to creativity, the affection of a companion, the enjoyment of a good laugh, awe at a beautiful landscape.... If such moments outnumber or outweigh the negative experiences, you have long-term happiness. (Which, btw, is not synonymous with pleasure.)

This is not meant rudely, but for me this is true. But I think it’s only because we haven’t interacted much and you’re often reasonable enough that your posts don’t stand out. And perhaps it’s something about your name — for some reason it blends with so many others that I have a hard time remembering. — Mikie

Not too many people are pissed off at me? That's just the way I prefer it. You know what happens to the nail that stands out, right?

So long as it doesn't go around accusing people of stupidity (even if it's literally true from its perspective) or self-deception (which is always more or less true, whether we're aware of our bias or not). I hope it takes its diplomatic cue from Data, rather than any imperfect human model.

Sometimes it's an advantage not knowing too much about other posters.

Thanks. I figure there's nothing to be gained by meanness; it could give one dyspepsia.

My anxiety is the master of the situation, or it's me. — MorningStar

The same can be said of depression, ambition, greed, desire to excel, etc. Mastery of one's state of mind is certainly a great boon, as is the ability to see alternative ways of behaving.

Does being anxious help me with anything? — MorningStar

Yes. It's an early warning system. It alerts you to potential dangers and occasions for failure, disappointment, heartbreak. Once you've identified the source of the anxiety and figured out how you can avoid the bad outcome, the anxiety disappears.

We weren't around, so what you and I say about them is a guess. — BC

It was guessed by some fairly well-established anthropologists, and is borne out by what Europeans learned about the 'primitive' cultures they conquered.

My guess is that they didn't EXCHANGE horizontal organization for a vertical one. Verticality was imposed upon them. — BC

In North America, yes. But South American, African and Asian empires existed before the Europens and their superior weapons arrived. In order to impose its organization on other cultures, a people need to be powerful. Some civilization had to be the first to wield that power; other followed suit.

"Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States" and suggest that grain was the bait and exploitation of the farmers by the 'elite' was the trap. — BC

I can believe that. But persuasion - even manipulation - do not amount to force. Free men can't be trapped by grain or anything else if they don't want the benefits.

Even so, people have maintained horizontal organization at various levels — BC

In small numbers of related or interdependent people. Not on the scale of thousands or millions.

I can't decide whether you are profoundly pessimistic or deeply realistic. — BC

Observant.

(and who do we count as "the people" and who are the evil "them"?) — BC

I haven't identified factions, or used the word 'evil' (big can o' worms, that word). I said humans reorganized into new configurations of their own accord, because they perceived an advantage or benefit in doing so. They still do. It doesn't always backfire, but humans are not collectively very far-sighted.

Exploitation (to create capital) is probably a necessary step to material progress. — BC

I disagree with 'necessary', but I'm sure it speeds some forms of material progress.

Yeah it's just a matter of keeping the power on the people's hands rather than giving ultimate power to the governments or the ones with the wealth. — Ege

Uh-hu

Actually, it's quite simple, and people were able to do it for thousands of years. But when they opted for large, diverse populations (very useful for defence, innovation and productivity), they gave up horizontal social organization for a vertical one, and thus instituted governance, hierarchy, class stratification, specialization and the concentration of wealth and power.
Maybe, after the collapse, whoever is left will reinvent tribes.

actually around the time Atatürk was alive he had made many improvements to give power to the people rather than focusing more on power to the government. — Ege

Sure, so did lots of reformers in lots of countries since then.
But it takes years to make the improvements, and when the other kind of administration comes to power, which it always does, it takes them hardly any time at all to tear it all down again. Ultimately, the wealth and power never stays with the people.

"The real owner and master of Turkey is the people, who is the real producer. Therefore, it is the people who is entitled to and deserves more prosperity, happiness and wealth than anyone else." — Ege

Nice words, heard in nations the world over, over and over in history.
Heard.... but never seen.
The people "taxing us to death" are doing so to provide more tax cuts, exemptions and deferments for the very, very rich who produce nothing at all.

I doubt most members think of me at all. The writers know I read and review everything; the deep philosophers probably see me as a simplistic naive realist; the scientists have never heard from me, since I stay away from topics on which I'm stone ignorant; the politcos know that I'm a raving socialist who wants to blow up the whole capitalist edifice - or else an idiot who just doesn't understand the Free Market Ideal.

No, it is not proper to talk about the point before the beginning of time — MoK

Tsk, tsk, you just did.

you need another time to investigate the state of affairs before the beginning of the former time — MoK

Another time Before the beginning of Former time!?? Now you have three iterations of the impropriety of pre-time affairs. I think you should stop painting that floor.

(PS I don't need any of this nonsense)

Fully confess, I'm to blame for the end of humanity. Sorry folks. Working on it. — Fire Ologist

Don't beat yourself up. Let us.

Wife wants me to put gherkins in the potato salad! — Banno

Pickles would be better, but gherkins will do in a pinch. Chop them very small. See if there are some capers handy, and chives.

There has been a series of threads of this sort recently. — Banno

It's winter. Lots of people are suffering from cabin fever.

Im not talking about short term goals, Im talking about long term life changing goals. — HardWorker

i wish you every success.

Things can be created or come into existence once there is a time. — MoK

No. The timelessness that existed before the beginning of time would put that "before" state in a time-frame. The beginning of time would have been a change from timelessness, and change cannot take place in the absence of time. Therefore, time cannot have begun.

That is not possible as well since we are dealing with an infinite regress in time. — MoK

Right. It is impossible for time to have begun, since a beginning is an event and time is necessary for anything to change and any event is a change. It is impossible for something to have begun existing, because that would have been an event.
Therefore, logically, nothing exists.
OK

The Focus, I think, the focus is needed for happy live, happy moments. — MorningStar

It's also called mindfulness: paying attention to and being aware of where you are, with whom, why and what doing.

Bcs bad attention is bad for "get done good job", "delivery the performence" — MorningStar

I don't care so much about that. Some jobs produce beneficial results and ought to be done well. But many assigned tasks only seem important in the moment, and are forgotten or discarded the next day, next week. Many tasks can be done with minimal attention, while the imagination is free to roam. Many are simply not worth doing at all, or even harmful in the longer term.

Be the good listener for your partner and friend. — MorningStar

That is important. But it doesn't take a lot of effort or particular skill, if you're truly interested in your partner and your friend.

Be a better in school. — MorningStar

Yes, I can see that being important to a student.

Every humans now are like ADHD. — MorningStar

Well, that's an overstatement, but a great many people are stressed, rushed, unable to concentrate on the present, because they are anxious about the future; can't give their full attention to the task in hand, because they have to finish on a deadline and get on with the next task and the next. So many don't seem even to have time to articulate a thought or question: they talk far too fast for me to understand.

I wonder whether this may have come about because people are so get-it-done focussed that they can't take the time to live at a healthy, mindful pace.

Today I think i will drink in the work only the quality black tea or white teas... — MorningStar

Okay, that means less caffeine, but if you have two cups of black tea, you're back to coffee level. Less, if you don't steep it very long.

A standard 8-ounce cup of coffee contains about 95 milligrams of caffeine, while a cup of black tea has about 50 milligrams, and green tea has about 30 milligrams.

Therefore, nothing to something is logically impossible. — MoK

Which means there must always have been something and time never started.

Exactly! I'm sure not wasting it striving after silly short-term goals that will mean nothing six month or a year after I attain them.

All those idiots protesting and pushing for nuclear disarmament for all those decades, screaming about how a nuclear war would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? — Mikie

Not yet.
I wonder how many weapons have been invented through human history that were used as a deterrent only and never deployed.
The protesting idiots were unsuccessful in their plea for disarmament; the nuclear arsenals kept on proliferating, spreading to less stable small regimes even while the big ones attained increasingly deranged leadership, casting off pups, such as dirty bombs, gravity bombs, artillery shells, land mines, depth charges, and torpedoes and soon, portable nukes. Now, any old terrorist organization can have them. In a mere 80 years, the threat has grown from a conflict between two superpowers to a free-for-all.
But that's okay, because whatever hasn't happened can't possibly happen, ever....
I nearly got run over by a fire engine once. It didn't happen. Therefore I am immortal.
.... until it does.

that is why I think unionization should happen. — Ege

Yeh. 'S why workers did it in the 1920's, broken heads 'an' all.
In Europe, they still have trade unions with some clout. In the US, Reagan started union-busting on the large scale

Thursday marks 40 years since former President Ronald Reagan fired more than 11,000 striking air traffic controllers. That dealt a serious blow to the American labor movement.

Now, of course, it's widely legislated https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/right-to-work-states/
and conservative candidates are going after the teachers, postal workers and nurses, while private enterprise is trying to dismantle building trades and food service.

We are fighting fire with fire and instead we should put out this fire of hatred in all of us by showing love,kindness and understanding and soon others will follow. — Ege

Like they always have. That commie rabble-rouser, Jesus of Nazareth learned his lesson....

If you have food in the refrigerator, clothes on your back, a roof over your head and a place to sleep, then you are richer than 75 per cent of this world. — Agree-to-Disagree

And still in no position to reverse the trends or stop the wars or turn off the gas. Meanwhile other 75...76....77...78....79% are coming for your clothes and food. Even in the top 8%, your vote doesn't count.

How much money do you need to have to qualify as "megarich". — Agree-to-Disagree

at least $10 billion in assets
https://www.celebritynetworth.com/list/top-100-richest-people-in-the-world/

Are you willing to give up most of your wealth and live on the average amount of wealth in the world? — Agree-to-Disagree

It wouldn't help anybody much. It wouldn't change the system that impoverishes and disenfranchises and marginalizes the majority. It wouldn't reduce carbon and methane emissions. It wouldn't provide food and medicine to third world countries. It wouldn't reinstate trustworthy journalism to news media. It wouldn't put the glaciers back.

While this is true there still is time left on the matter and unless we work together as one in this society we won't be able to stop our Inevitable end. — Ege

You see any two nations or any two political parties in one nation working together? I don't.

I do believe that money is just a concept now more than a physical thing, as Most of the global gold reserves don't even exist or don't equate to the money in circulation. — Ege

It's not about gold reserves - and hasn't been for some time. What I mean is, the super-rich are putting their assets in tangible and intangible forms that can be sequestered, whether in a yacht, vault or data base. That money (shorthand for the resource+energy+labour+transport that resulted in a product that van be exchanged between people) is not going back into the economy (shorthand for goods and services, tax revenue and infrastructure, employment, production and transaction).

While I think this is true, I think that Everything stays, right where you left it. — Ege

you're welcome to it.

I remember reading about a line that once crossed, you can't come back from in the matter of global warming. — Ege

We've crossed it The permafrost is no longer permanent and the polar ice sheets are calving like demented rabbits. Meanwhile, PM Trudeau is rabidly attacked for a little barely-effectual carbon tax. What's been done by private enterprise is more hype than change.

Also, I have noticed that more and more people are becoming seperated from their own self and get locked up in their mind instead of seeing what is infront of them, really slowly driving most individuals into insanity without them even realizing it. — Ege

The rich and powerful are having an attack of closing panic - gobble up more of what's still left of power and wealth than the next guy before it all collapses. The middle class is deep inside its own cloaca in denial - if you squeeze your eyes shut and keep saying la-la-la-la loudly enough, the status quo will hold. The plebians take up flags and pitchforks and angry slogans, rushing after one scapegoat or another - if you just kill the witch, the curse will be broken. The very poor migrate hither and yon, displaced, rejected, dammed up behind walls - until there are so many that no wall can contain them.

This made me think that it could result in a major breakdown of society as we know it. — Ege

Couple of other factors: the debt-driven capitalist economy is global now and inescapable; resources are running out; interdependent species are extirpated at an accelerating pace; arable lands are increasingly susceptible to drought, flood, tornado, erosion and chemical degradation. The ever-fewer, ever-richer megarich are burying their treasure in luxury vaults and bunkers against the end times, steadily siphoning money out of circulation. Conservative governments cut taxes for business, driving profits up and government revenue down. Meanwhile, the permafrost and environmental degradation are releasing more unknown, unprepared-for pathogens and global connections spread disease faster than ever before, overwhelming already stressed-to-the-limit health care systems. Demagogues with something to prove and little time to do it in rattle bigger and deadlier sabers, hurl bigger and deadlier challenges at one another.

What could be the result of this if it were to spread to the majority of the globe along with the matter of global warming kept in mind? — Ege

It has, and we are about to see.
Our best hope is that the economy will break down first and sweep away the current makers of public policy and public opinion. Possibly, this would also ruin the war industries, depriving those demagogues of their WMD's. It would certainly bring down many bad governments. That leaves only the mobs to do damage - which still means a good deal of burning and bloodshed, but not megadeath.
If the political and monetary system keep deteriorating and survive long enough to start WWIII, relatively small numbers of people will be left alive, in widely separated pockets.
This means that if the grandfather of all pandemics comes before the economic collapse, it will hasten that collapse but leave more people alive. If it comes after the war to end all, it won't be able to spread to all populations and leave more of the people alive.
In either case, the planet will be difficult to live on, and the survivors will have to be very resourceful, indeed - just like our distant ancestors had to be. Odds are, there will be a human race to start over.

Many of us didn't think we'd make it to the year 2000. — Tom Storm

All those same situations still exist; none have been addressed effectively; most have escalated and magnified and concentrated since the 80's. At that time, the worst catastrophe could possibly still have been averted, had nations taken the decisive actions advised by the people who knew what they were talking about, but didn't wield power - although it was already pretty late. Prolonging the complacent okayhood of a prosperous minority for a few extra decades is not quite the same as "it didn't happen then, so it can't happen now" which is what I've been hearing more and more frequently since the 1960's.
I'm sure the same wisdom was repeated in every great defunct empire.
Everything ends. Not if, but when.

All through my childhood the doomsday clock was sitting at 5 minutes to 12 (fears about nuclear war between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R) — Agree-to-Disagree

It's kept on ticking.






.

I don't want to be too universal, but I'd say my own suicidal ideations -- at least from my perspective -- are the most irrational part of my thinking patterns. — Moliere

That's probably because you don't want to die. there is a whole world of feeling, thinking, imagining between not liking one's life the way it is and wishing to die. Death is a very real act/thing/gate/event that cannot be reversed. Everything this side of it is open to the possibility of change.