| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
World Community Grid Forums
Join "MyOnlineTeam" Today - Chapter 21 ![]() |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 895
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
From what I see, it looks like we're doing particularly well recently. Are the rest of you seeing dramatic improvements in points returned as ambient temperatures drop and our CPUs can do more work due to the drop in temperatures?
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
![]() ![]() ![]() CONGRATULATIONS SPIKEY_RICHIE ON REACHING 1,500,000 MOT POINTS!! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18667 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
From what I see, it looks like we're doing particularly well recently. Are the rest of you seeing dramatic improvements in points returned as ambient temperatures drop and our CPUs can do more work due to the drop in temperatures? We are undoubtedly doing better than "usual" lately. Keep in mind though that as we cool down towards winter, our teammates below the equator are warming up towards summer. Do the two cancel out? I doubt it but I think there are a number of factors in play. |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18667 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
So, in case you haven't all figured this out yet, I am technically retarded and am speeding towards the career path of "Absent-Minded Professor" at an alarming rate. As a self-confessed senile old fart, I can relate. Despite working in the tech industry, I by no means am technically adept, just a tad less "retarded" than average. |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18667 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Since I don't have your email, I'll throw out my last few thoughts in the forum and if they're too far afield of the forum's subject matter, feel free to delete them. My degree is actually and MTS (Masters in Theological Studies). Harvard offers two masters in religion degrees, the MTS (mine) and the MDiv (mostly for those who will pursue ordination in a religious organisation). I plan to get a PhD in philosophy later, so I don't think I'm likely to get ordained. As far as Descartes goes, his argument is called "The Wager." What it suggests is that the benefits of belief in God far outweigh the possible consequences of Hell if one does not believe. The problem is that it creates a rather poor faith. Imagine going up to the pearly gates and meeting St. Peter (someone's gotta correct me if I'm wrong on names). He asks why you believed in God and you answer "Well, the benefits outweighed the harms." I doubt he would be pleased. Now imagine that you are an unbeliever like myself (but a good unbeliever, one who volunteers and generally tries to alleviate human suffering) and you find yourself in the same position. I would say to St. Peter "I led my life by humanist principles. Didn't Jesus say "That you do to the least of these (referring to the poor and the sick), you do to me?" And besides, there simply wasn't enough evidence that God exists." I don't think that believers are irrational - I just think that there is no knowledge about the existence or non-existence of God. All we have are our opinions. And opinions are like... you know everyone has one. The point is, I lost track of my point a while back there. If you're really interested in this theology stuff, I just published an article entitled "God and 'The Problem of Evil.'" If you would like, I can email it to you. Best, JPF Personally, I tend to be pretty tolerant of topics for discussion in a thread. I try to acknowledge and respect the diversity of backgrounds, cultures and experiences of the WCG's crunching population. I have no monopoloy on knowledge or answers. Not all take the same approach. We have had conflicts and accusations fly at times in one thread or another. I don't expect any serious problems among our team members but there is nothing keeping others from joining in here (neither do I object to non-team members posting here) and I admit to being cautious if only to avoid disruptions in our own thread that could hurt our team. I think those who tend to religous extremism tend to work from definitions of God in their terms and not in God's terms. Apparently it is pretty common for folks to consider their beliefs and mortality at my age. I guess I'm not unusual in that respect though we all tend to have occasions to consider that sort of thing during the course of our lives. I am tending towards a more holistic approach I guess. I cannot believe that religion and science are irreconcilable. Interestingly, science is doing more to "prove" the existence of God than religion. Cosmologists can take our universe back to the instant of the Big Bang but then are left with the question of what caused the Big Bang. Recent theories on our universe as we know it simply being one dimension in a multi-dimensional universe and theories of parallel universes may be the start of taking thing beyond space and time to the timeless eternity beyond. Back in ancient times (mine at least), I had a high school math class in "analysis". We started with the definitions of a point, line and plane and built our existing mathmatical system from that. My inclination at this point is to define God as that which is omnicient, omnipotent and omnipresent and build from there. Interestingly, that would encompass all that exists within our space-time continuum but also all that exists outside it. So, one rather interesting aspect of that is that each of us is also a part of God. It's a bit like being one of the blind men feeling that elephant. Too many of us define right and wrong based on what we feel and thus, despite our describing what are just different aspects of the same elephant, we become mired in conflict instead of recognizing that Truth is in all our answers. We want Truth to be constrained by us when it is truly greater than us. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Actually, the one thing you don't really want to do is define God as omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good (incidently, this is called Classical Theism in the philosophical literature). If you do that, then you run smack dab into the problem of evil. If God really is all of those things, then it is hard to understand why he lets evil happen. And I don't mean just human evils (like rape and The Holocaust), but also natural evils, like a deer being struck my lightening and being left to die a painful death over several days, or babies born without sight, or limbs, or born only to die shortly after their birth of SIDS. I am not a religious extremist in any way. I personally do not believe in a God, but I do not discount the possibility of there being one. What does, however, seem clear to me is that if there is a God, he doesn't care about us very much. If there's a God, he clearly isn't omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good, or at least he stays his hand altogether too often. As far as this line of argument goes, this is the subject of my master's thesis, so I'd love any constructive criticism of it.
As far as your points about the construction of the Universe and the birth of the Big Bang, you are right on point. The idea that somehow science was going to disprove God's existence is silly. Science simply doesn't assess metaphysical claims. That the Universe was created by the Big Bang hardly means that God doesn't exist. After all, how did the propitious conditions required for the occurance of the Big Bang come to be? God is one very reasonable answer. In fact many of my colleagues here at HDS define God as the originator of the Universe and have very liberal conceptions of him/her/it (i.e. God doesn't intercede in human life, but started the Universe). It goes to show you that different people define God in a variety of interesting ways. I think those who tend to religous extremism tend to work from definitions of God in their terms and not in God's terms. Apparently it is pretty common for folks to consider their beliefs and mortality at my age. I guess I'm not unusual in that respect though we all tend to have occasions to consider that sort of thing during the course of our lives. I am tending towards a more holistic approach I guess. I cannot believe that religion and science are irreconcilable. Interestingly, science is doing more to "prove" the existence of God than religion. Cosmologists can take our universe back to the instant of the Big Bang but then are left with the question of what caused the Big Bang. Recent theories on our universe as we know it simply being one dimension in a multi-dimensional universe and theories of parallel universes may be the start of taking thing beyond space and time to the timeless eternity beyond. Back in ancient times (mine at least), I had a high school math class in "analysis". We started with the definitions of a point, line and plane and built our existing mathmatical system from that. My inclination at this point is to define God as that which is omnicient, omnipotent and omnipresent and build from there. Interestingly, that would encompass all that exists within our space-time continuum but also all that exists outside it. So, one rather interesting aspect of that is that each of us is also a part of God. It's a bit like being one of the blind men feeling that elephant. Too many of us define right and wrong based on what we feel and thus, despite our describing what are just different aspects of the same elephant, we become mired in conflict instead of recognizing that Truth is in all our answers. We want Truth to be constrained by us when it is truly greater than us. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
PV jail is driving me nuts. I now have 18 WUs waiting to be validated, 14 of which are dddt WUs. It's enough to make you want to join SETI. Maybe not.
Congrats to the milestoners. ![]() |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
PV jail is driving me nuts. I now have 18 WUs waiting to be validated, 14 of which are dddt WUs. It's enough to make you want to join SETI. Maybe not. Congrats to the milestoners. ![]() I have 36 in the PV jail!!! Most of them are DDDT. That's why my numbers have been down. I had 3 invalids for AC@H but since then they have been OK. The new HCC WU sure run nicely; most are in and out in >8 hours. The time change has me stumbling around this morning. ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
Dataman
Ace Cruncher Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 4865 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
From what I see, it looks like we're doing particularly well recently. Are the rest of you seeing dramatic improvements in points returned as ambient temperatures drop and our CPUs can do more work due to the drop in temperatures? We are undoubtedly doing better than "usual" lately. Keep in mind though that as we cool down towards winter, our teammates below the equator are warming up towards summer. Do the two cancel out? I doubt it but I think there are a number of factors in play. Sorry folks, but temp/humidity has no bearing on "speed". As long as the devce does not exceed its upper/lower design boundries, it will run at a steady state. I would not recommend putting them in you deep freezer or wood stove though. ![]() ![]() |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
During the summer, my CPU temp was around 73 degrees - WAY too hot. As such, it was autothrottling back. It declocked itself from 3.6 ghz to 3.2 to deal with the heat. Now that the ambient temps are more like 50 degrees, my CPU runs at max potential full time. Gotta love intel P4s. They're like having little furnaces in your case.
|
||
|
|
|