"For me, the study of these laws is inseparable from a love of Nature in all its manifestations." - Murray Gell-Mann
When you take a glimpse into the deep Universe, beyond the gas, dust, stars and planets of our own galaxy, you enter the realm of the galaxies. In general, they come in two types: the spirals, with neat, orderly arms, and the ellipticals, with a symmetric, bulging shape. But for everything that exists in the Universe a particular way in general, there are exceptions.
In the 1960s, astronomer Halton Arp became fascinated with these exceptions, creating a catalog of 338 examples: the Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies. We now know that most of these are galaxy pairs or triplets in the process of major mergers, displaying features such as tidal disruption, stellar bridges, starbursts and occasionally a rare, ring shape.
What a shame. Forbes now insists on installing tracking tools (they call it "light advertising") before allowing the page to open.
No way. Forbes has been hacked at least twice to distribute malware that I recall. Now they want me to trust them?
Please move your images to a better site.
an agent from Forbes once range me asking if they could publish one of my poems
then they found out my political leanings and changed their minds
thought i was going to get my 15 seconds of fame. Oh well.
and before mr foulmouthed wow posts a comment one might read his lovely prose here:
Or get forbes to clear up their act.
A newspaper read doesn't force your eyes to read the advert and dial the number to register that you've seen it (on your dime!). So why must they make their web news site do it?
PS I seem to have attracted a psycho stalker, so sorry everyone for that retard's idiocy. It's short enough bile that it's easy to skip, though.
:-) not so easy to retract the things you have written is it mr wow
the psycho is you, the troll is you and you stalk everyone on the blog
i simply advise people to be aware of your nature and that they will learn that quickly and easily by reading what you have written here:
you can't escape your situation by playing kindergarten tricks
insidious little creature
"not so easy to retract the things you have written is it mr wow"
What the fuck do you mean there????
I'm not retracting shit.
The fact you're a psycho bitch stalking is something other people are being made to suffer through as well, so I am asserting my sympathy for them.
Now fuck off you psychotic deranged maniac.
deluded little monster aren't you
The 2002 National Victim Association Academy defines an additional form of stalking: The vengeance/terrorist stalker. Both the vengeance stalker and terrorist stalker (the latter sometimes called the political stalker) do not, in contrast with some of the aforementioned types of stalkers, seek a personal relationship with their victims but rather force them to emit a certain response. While the vengeance stalker's motive is "to get even" with the other person whom he/she perceives has done some wrong to them (e.g., an employee who believes is fired without justification from their job by their superior), the political stalker intends to accomplish a political agenda, also using threats and intimidation to force his/her target to refrain and/or become involved in some particular activity, regardless of the victim's consent. For example, most prosecutions in this stalking category have been against anti-abortionists who stalk doctors in an attempt to discourage the performance of abortions.
In contrast, resentful stalkers demonstrate an almost "pure culture of persecution," with delusional disorders of the paranoid type, paranoid personalities, and paranoid schizophrenia.
Laws on harassment and stalking
Every Australian state enacted laws prohibiting stalking during the 1990s, with Queensland being the first state to do so in 1994. The laws vary slightly from state to state, with Queensland's laws having the broadest scope, and South Australian laws the most restrictive. Punishments vary from a maximum of 10 years imprisonment in some states, to a fine for the lowest severity of stalking in others. Australian anti-stalking laws have some notable features. Unlike many US jurisdictions they do not require the victim to have felt fear or distress as a result of the behaviour, only that a reasonable person would have felt this way. In some states, the anti-stalking laws operate extra-territorially, meaning that an individual can be charged with stalking if either they or the victim are in the relevant state. Most Australian states provide the option of a restraining order in cases of stalking, breach of which is punishable as a criminal offence. There has been relatively little research into Australian court outcomes in stalking cases, although Freckelton (2001) found that in the state of Victoria, most stalkers received fines or community based dispositions.
The United States
The first state to criminalize stalking in the United States was California in 1990 as a result of numerous high-profile stalking cases in California, including the 1982 attempted murder of actress Theresa Saldana, the 1988 massacre by Richard Farley, the 1989 murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer, and five Orange County stalking murders, also in 1989. The first anti-stalking law in the United States, California Penal Code Section 646.9, was developed and proposed by Municipal Court Judge John Watson of Orange County. Watson with U.S. Congressman Ed Royce introduced the law in 1990. Also in 1990, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) began the United States' first Threat Management Unit, founded by LAPD Captain Robert Martin.
Within three years thereafter, every state in the United States followed suit to create the crime of stalking, under different names such as criminal harassment or criminal menace. The Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) was enacted in 1994 in response to numerous cases of a driver's information being abused for criminal activity, with prominent examples including the Saldana and Schaeffer stalking cases. The DPPA prohibits states from disclosing a driver's personal information without permission by State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). As of 2011, stalking is an offense under section 120a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The law took effect on 1 October 2007.
"Stalking is a controversial crime" because a conviction requires no physical harm. The anti-stalking statute of Illinois is particularly controversial. It is particularly restrictive, by the standards of this type of legislation.
a treatise on the physics skills and personality of mr wow - resident stalker and troll:
Sheeit, you can't even come up with your own accusations. I guess spamming "you're ugly" was the best you could manage on your own.
Hey, how about getting one of your "sons", how about that nuclear physicist, eh? Maybe they can work out what the hell you were talking about and explain what evidence, if any, there is for the claim. You were a wash-out, preferring to be outraged and now psychotic.
on the physics skills and personality of mr wow – resident stalker and troll:
LOL...The "Cyber Bully" Pot calling out a mythical Stalker Kettle (talk about delusional).
Living in a glass house wowzie? Perhaps you should be careful with the stone tossing.
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS
There is no legal definition of cyberbullying within UK law. However there are a number of existing laws that can be applied to cases of cyberbullying and online harassment, namely:
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
Malicious Communications Act 1988
Communications Act 2003
Breach of the Peace (Scotland)
Defamation Act 2013
Guidelines issued by the Crown Prosecution Service in Dec 2012 explain how cases of cyberbullying will be assessed under the current legislation.
Breach of the Peace (Scotland).
Firstly, it is important to define what breach of the peace is. Breach of the peace prior to the case of Smith v Donnelly, had been broadly defined in the case of Raffaelli v Heatly, per LJC Thomson:
"Where something is done in breach of public order or decorum which might reasonably be expected to lead the lieges being
tempted to make reprisals at their own hand, the circumstances are such to amount to a breach of the peace."
This broad definition showed that a charge of Breach of the Peace can arise from virtually any conduct which caused or (can generally be regarded as being reasonably likely to cause) either alarm, annoyance, upset or embarrassment to another person or person." This effectively means that you can be charged with breach of the peace for doing absobluty anything. Any person can has the power of arrest if there is grounds for someone commiting breach of the peace. It states on know your rights, "The police and any other person have a power of arrest where there are reasonable grounds for believing a breach of the peace is taking place or is imminent".
In fact LJG Emslie even went as far as to state that:
“There is no limit to the kind of conduct which may give rise to a charge of breach of the peace." (Montogomery v. Mc Leod) [1977 S.L.T. (Notes) 77].
One of the reasons why breach of the peace is such a broadly defined crime is that there is no precise conduct required for the actus reus. Instead the effect of what the accused did is taken into consideration and each case is judged on its individual facts and circumstances. Many claim that it is a tool of social control, a law specifically designed to make sure whenever the public threaten to behave in a manner that may be seen as unpeaceful, the police can intervene.
"LOL…The “Cyber Bully” Pot "
Yeah, see that bit where you need evidence? You missed it.
on evidence of mr wow being a cyber bully, troll and foul mouthed and dishonest monster
(a suitably designed google search of this blog will turn up sufficient evidence i have no doubt)
"on the physics skills and personality "
And what on them? Oh, come on, you feculant shitstain on the leper's arse, answer a question for the first time in your sad sorry existence.
Go on, WHAT "on the physics skills and personality"?
And how the hell do you think that your sad and pathetic song and dance routine here has anything other than the display of your incredible ignorance and spite on it?
POS:"If everything is connected to everything, Einstein got it wrong!"
Me: "Nope, everything being affected isn't what you think it is"
POS:"Then explain EXACTLY what inertia is!"
Me: "What the hell does that have to do with being able to reply to your bullshit? And what the hell does inertia have to do with your claim???"
POS:"YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY YOU UGLY ....."
So what the fuck do you think linking there is going to do other than annoy the arse off everyone?
If you want to win hearts and minds and get people to feel sympathy for your plight, that's really not the way to go around it, you moron.
Teabaggie doesn't give a shit, all that fuckwit wants is to hate on someone who doesn't fall for his bullshit myths and calls it what it is: a death cult.
"on evidence of mr wow being a cyber bully, troll and foul mouthed and dishonest monster"
Go on, which post, what statement, fuckwit?
keep digging, you'll prove to people you're not a moron i'm sure
attention seeking little creature aren't you
"keep digging, you’ll prove to people you’re not a moron i’m sure"
It's already well proven. YOU however have made a masterpiece of proving you are one.
"attention seeking little creature aren’t you"
Hey, you're the one insisting on talking to me and following me after every single post I make to pester me and demand my attention.
#13 New Zealand
December 21, 2015
on evidence of mr wow being a cyber bully, troll and foul mouthed and dishonest monster
December 21, 2015
keep digging, you’ll prove to people you’re not a moron i’m sure
attention seeking little creature aren’t you
it's simple - i'm ensuring, for now anyway, that anyone who happens to come to this site is forewarned about you and your behaviour - so every comment you make will illicit the same basic response - to point people to a nice succinct demonstration of your personality and behaviour
though the fact that you keep repeating your pattern of behaviour (eg "fucking retard") at every opportunity speaks for itself
nasty little creature aren't you
quite ugly - as i'm sure many who have been attacked by you might agree if they had bothered to stick around to be attacked by you
i wonder if you are this violent in real life or if you are either physically contained or simply a coward - throwing insults and cuss-words because you'd not have the balls to behave this way in life
you can't see how ugly you are
but i can:
Get a room!
Oh, Ethan already gave you guys one.
Please use it.
"it’s simple – i’m ensuring, for now anyway, that anyone who happens to come to this site is forewarned about you and your behaviour"
And all you're really doing is ensuring that you appear a complete psycho.
And linking to that page really doesn't help you.
2. if spooky action at a distance is real then everything is connected and if everything is connected then gravity (and acceleration, ie, inertia) aint what Einstein expected – when we push in the universe we push on the whole universe – maybe that’s what’s missing from all these approaches
#2 doesn’t work.
E.g. Just because the phone line is connected to the network doesn’t mean the phone line is connected to every house on the planet.
Just because there’s action at a distance doesn’t mean everything is connected to everything else.
if you can’t explain how inertia works (EXACTLY) then don’t bother to answer :-)
“so uh, what DOES it mean? Exactly?”
It means it’s not local. Doesn’t mean universal. Your local library isn’t every library in the world. The fact that you know some people outside your local area doesn’t mean you know everyone outside your local area.
And if you didn’t know what “Non-local” means, how the hell did you manage to come up with a reason to make your claim in #1?
“if you can’t explain how inertia works (EXACTLY)”
If you can’t explain why that is required before I am allowed to answer (EXACTLY!), then don’t bother making stupid-ass claims.
December 17, 2015
@1 – quantum mechanics is non-local. So we aren’t “missing” non-locality from fundamental physics, we’re just unable to integrate it fully with general relativity.
Having said that, Wow is right that non-locality doesn’t mean that a particle’s influence is significant or even nonzero everywhere. One example that shows this are QM drawings of electron orbitals for p, d, and f shell elections; if you understand what they’re showing you, you’ll see that the shapes are nonlocal but that probabilities drop to close to zero very quickly, while some of the orbitals also have nodes of zero probability (not just “very low” probability, mathematically zero).
wow! go google “personality disorder”
read a bit before you reply – if you can’t help making some sort of reply then QED
Mach’s principle, spinning buckets, inertia etc – should not cause someone to spit the dummy unless there’s something really wrong with them – like reduced executive function
such problems are likely to be a strain on family
but if that’s your problem you will never tell them (because that’s your problem) but they already know
Yeah, doesn’t fit, retard.
And I can DEFEND that claim of retard too. You proclaimed “read a bit before you reply”, yet you replied with “Mach’s principle”, which CANNOT be the process you were alluding to because it doesn’t and cannot form the scenario you proscribed for it.
Go read the wiki if you’re unwilling to read the links and quotes I provided.
here’s a challenge for you
go ask someone you respect (if such a person could possibly exist)
You have a challenge first, idiot.
When you can tear yourself from your entertainment of insulting everyone you speak to and decide to actually answer anything proposed to you, let everyone know and we’ll take note of this miracle and listen with baited breath.
What there is going to complete your *claimed* aim?
Because all that is proving is that you made a claim and instead of defending it, demanded something explained to you.
Then instead of saying why, you then span stories of how brilliant you are.
Then when you were asked again, faked concern.
NOWHERE did you EVER answer a claim.
Not even explain any you promoted.
So how the hell is that supposed to help you?
"Get a room!
Oh, Ethan already gave you guys one."
Fuck, I tried.
Little shitstain won't go there, but insists on stalking me everywhere.
Ethan did give a room, but this moron won't stay there and wants to spread it all around.
*I* tried. Go check.
Go check, Hank.
And check what happened, for example in the Santa thread.
Re: POS: See above.
interesting how you play the victim
ugly little creature
proof? well, gee, everywhere on this blog but here it's quite succinct:
really, you want to try THAT? NOW? After all that shite?
mr wow on starts with a bang:
i'm sure a more thought out search would provide a greater range of profane and insulting behaviour but it's a start
you're a really dreadful little man aren't you
what's your problem, really, are you constrained to a wheelchair with MS or something and have no other way to scream at the universe than to hang out here and rule the roost?
Ethan must be an incredibly open minded sort
ps, mr wow's most cited published thesis:
So, this is christmas,
and what have we here?
a character called POP(PY),
who shits in our ear.
Well, I would be correct in saying Santa will not be visiting you ! Ever !
Most of us have had a runin or two with WOW; we are still here, learning what we can. But, you will find, we don't all spend our time shitcanning each other.
Go away & learn some manners, then try and offer some good science.
To all out there,
have a safe break.
As far as Forbes... just opened the link, and on FF with Adblocker.. I didn't even get a quote of the day with countdown.. went straight to the article and worked great. Maybe Forbes cleaned the site.. or something else.. but at the moment works on my end.
As for POP...
dude.. stop spamming every single article with one single thing or take it all to
otherwise we would ask that you be banned which is extreme.. but you have been hijacking everty article continuosly for the last 4-5 days at least.
we all abide by the guidelines on posting and so should you.
are the guidelines ones that encourage foul attacks on people?
or that support psychotic behaviour?
or that promulgate an approach to visitors that discourage involvement?
perhaps you sanction behavior like mr wow's?
tolerating a vile windbag because you think he should be accepted based on his nebulous depth in physics might be ok if it was the occasional outburst of a genius with limited social skills but a quick google search will show that mr wow's vile behavior is his norm
and what you are doing is no better. we all saw the link when you first posted it, the rest 20+ times were pure spam.. same as in the comment you just made.
that link has no bearing on the article in question, as the case with other articles you spammed in. so consider this a warning, either have a debate with Wow in the "you are responsible..." thread, or ignore him or whatever... but please stop the spam.
mr wow lurks here to comment on almost every post. Anything he doesn't like/respect (whatever) is met with derision
if lurking, waiting to pounce on anyone - and doing so with what seems to be some sort of glee - is a behaviour you tacitly agree with - perhaps you know mr wow personally?
It's simple - for now, while i have access to a computer, whenever mr wow pops up in the comments section i'll play whack-a-mole to enlighten anyone who is unaware of where interaction with him might go
you might call this "spam" - that's your prerogative though spam usually refers to unsolicited email and/or posters trying to get people to click on a link etc
perhaps mr wow will begin to understand that on a blog by an academic it's not suitable behaviour to call anyone a "retard" etc
it's interesting that people can use the "repeat it until it becomes truth" approach (calling it spam, or as mr wow does "stalking") as an attempt to control/subdue/bully someone using a parallel technique to deal with what i see as a real problem (nasty lurker attacking people he does not know simply because he has been allowed to get away with it)
too many bullies on places like this - maybe they should try their hand in the comments section of somewhere like zerohedge.com where thousands of lurkers lie in wait to pounce on you for saying anything (silly or otherwise)
"have a nice day"
I really enjoyed this article. Thinking about these interactions gives me a little feeling of the numinous, just because of the vast scale, and knowing how much must be happening across such vast reaches of space and time, and how little of it we, or anyone else, will ever see.
"mr wow lurks here to comment on almost every post."
OH NOES! SOMEONE CALL INTERNATIONAL RESCUE!!!! SOMEONE IS POSTING ON A BLOG!!!!!
Look shit-for-brains, this is a blog, it gets posted on. That is what it is for. Try posting something relevant. If you can't, fuck off.
"are the guidelines ones that encourage foul attacks on people?"
No, but you do it anyway, moron, don't you..
real genius aren't you
"Wow" really needs to get laid... Every time I've ever browsed the comments on any of Ethan's posts, Wow is always there, whining about something. My guess is that he's not whining about getting too much pussy.
so consider this a warning, either have a debate with Wow in the “you are responsible…” thread, or ignore him or whatever…
One might suggest that W. do the same rather than simply compounding the problem.
Turn off the ad blocker, then, as soon as you are in, turn it on again.
"“Wow” really needs to get laid"
Wow, sexist much? And how the hell do you come to your "conclusion"?
Tell you what, Bri, you leave your imagination to yourself, it really doesn't deserve being aired in public.
"One might suggest that W. do the same rather than simply compounding the problem."
One might suggest that Nads doesn't add to the problem or at least shows equal disproval of the antics, rather than provide such acrimony to only one party, thereby proving that the problem isn't that stated, but his only aim is to denigrate and dogpile because it things that I'm a top dog, and he wants that position.
But I won't do that.
amazingly unaware little fool aren't you
ugly, quite quite ugly
“One might suggest that W. do the same rather than simply compounding the problem.”
One might suggest that Nads doesn’t add to the problem or at least shows equal disproval of the antics, rather than provide such acrimony to only one party....
I already expressed my disapproval. Unlike you, I feel no compulsion to incessantly feed the troll.
thereby proving that the problem isn’t that stated, but his only aim is to denigrate and dogpile because it things that I’m a top dog, and he wants that position.
I neither know nor care what specific corner of your persecution complex or its superstructure that this bit of derangement actually came from. I've been ignoring the whole mess since the comment linked above until the one that you replied to.
I'm mildly interested in the overall management decisions, but not in the slightest in your bad trip.
"I already expressed my disapproval. "
Thought you were talking to me.
"I neither know nor care what specific corner of your persecution complex "
Check over your comments talking and abetting Poe here before his threadbombing would illuminate the evidence you have retconned....
Just popping my head around the door....actually I was making my way down to where the cmb anomaly thing was going down, but there's so many new buildings and streets that weren't there before, I think I must have become disorientated and if I'm honest, completely lost. But I'm still profound. And I don't feel. I'm on the bus now actually, if you're a stalker and wish to follow me; just jump on bus no. 63 and get off at the CMB; I'm gonna intoolectually rip your head off and it won't rymme