from
https://futurism.com/the-byte/royal-astronomer-elon-musks-mars-plan

Paul Marotta via Getty / Futurism
RED PLANET
TOP ASTRONOMER WARNS THAT ELON MUSK'S MARS PLANS ARE A DANGEROUS DELUSION
“I DON’T THINK IT’S REALISTIC..."
PAUL MAROTTA VIA GETTY / FUTURISM
Mars Attack
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has said he plans to put a million people on Mars
by 2050 — with his ex-girlfriend Grimes presumably being one of those
colonizers.

But Martin Rees, respected astrophysicist and member of the Royal
Households of the United Kingdom under the lofty title of "Astronomer
Royal," is saying not so fast — and calling Musk's plans a "dangerous
illusion."

He made his bold-face remarks for the House of Lords' podcast Lord
Speaker’s Corner, as spotted by The Telegraph, in which he also called
Musk an "extraordinary figure” who has a "rather strange personality,"
alluding to Musk's increasingly erratic behavior.

"I don’t think it’s realistic and we’ve got to solve those problems here
on Earth," he said. "Dealing with climate change on Earth is a doddle
compared to making Mars habitable. So I don’t think we should hold that
out as a long-term aim at all."

"I think there might be a few crazy pioneers living on Mars, just like
there are people living at the South Pole, although it’s far less
hospitable than the South Pole," he said. "But the idea of mass
migration to avoid the Earth’s problems, which he and a few other space
enthusiasts adopt, that, I think, is a dangerous illusion."

Hazy Future
Rees instead proposed that any human exploration of space should be
funded privately and not with public money, like the close collaboration
between NASA and Musk's SpaceX, because governments "got to be very
safety conscious and that makes it very expensive," he said.

Instead, Rees proposed remote-controlled robots do the bulk of
exploration — and heavy lifting of building structures out in space —
while "only people who really have a high appetite for risk should be
going into space, and they should be privately funded, not by the rest
of us."

NASA is already exploring commercial partners, including SpaceX, for
getting to Mars, which will undoubtably cost countless gobs of money.

These are practical points Rees has raised, because our bodies are just
not equipped to withstand longterm space travel due to the low gravity
and cosmic radiation, among other harmful factors.

And in a bigger sense, maybe he's right that we should fix up the
problems we've caused here on Earth before forging out to mess up
another planet.

More on Mars and Elon Musk: Elon Musk: My Main Goal is to Get Humanity
to Mars Before I Die

Le 2024-03-31 à 16:30, a425couple a écrit :
> from
> https://futurism.com/the-byte/royal-astronomer-elon-musks-mars-plan
>
> Paul Marotta via Getty / Futurism
> RED PLANET
> TOP ASTRONOMER WARNS THAT ELON MUSK'S MARS PLANS ARE A DANGEROUS DELUSION
> “I DON’T THINK IT’S REALISTIC..."
> PAUL MAROTTA VIA GETTY / FUTURISM
> Mars Attack
> SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has said he plans to put a million people on Mars
> by 2050 — with his ex-girlfriend Grimes presumably being one of those
> colonizers.
>
> But Martin Rees, respected astrophysicist and member of the Royal
> Households of the United Kingdom under the lofty title of "Astronomer
> Royal," is saying not so fast — and calling Musk's plans a "dangerous
> illusion."
>
> He made his bold-face remarks for the House of Lords' podcast Lord
> Speaker’s Corner, as spotted by The Telegraph, in which he also called
> Musk an "extraordinary figure” who has a "rather strange personality,"
> alluding to Musk's increasingly erratic behavior.
>
> "I don’t think it’s realistic and we’ve got to solve those problems here
> on Earth," he said. "Dealing with climate change on Earth is a doddle
> compared to making Mars habitable. So I don’t think we should hold that
> out as a long-term aim at all."
>
> "I think there might be a few crazy pioneers living on Mars, just like
> there are people living at the South Pole, although it’s far less
> hospitable than the South Pole," he said. "But the idea of mass
> migration to avoid the Earth’s problems, which he and a few other space
> enthusiasts adopt, that, I think, is a dangerous illusion."
>
> Hazy Future
> Rees instead proposed that any human exploration of space should be
> funded privately and not with public money, like the close collaboration
> between NASA and Musk's SpaceX, because governments "got to be very
> safety conscious and that makes it very expensive," he said.
>
> Instead, Rees proposed remote-controlled robots do the bulk of
> exploration — and heavy lifting of building structures out in space —
> while "only people who really have a high appetite for risk should be
> going into space, and they should be privately funded, not by the rest
> of us."
>
> NASA is already exploring commercial partners, including SpaceX, for
> getting to Mars, which will undoubtably cost countless gobs of money.
>
> These are practical points Rees has raised, because our bodies are just
> not equipped to withstand longterm space travel due to the low gravity
> and cosmic radiation, among other harmful factors.
>
> And in a bigger sense, maybe he's right that we should fix up the
> problems we've caused here on Earth before forging out to mess up
> another planet.
>
> More on Mars and Elon Musk: Elon Musk: My Main Goal is to Get Humanity
> to Mars Before I Die
>

Given that Mars radius is about 0.6 times that of the Earth and it have
about the same average density, it's mass is 0.6^3 that of the Earth, or
0.216 Earth mass. So, the surface gravity is 0.6 Earth's gravity and
it's escape velocity 0.36 that of the Earth.
The result ? Even with a magnetic field as strong as that of the Earth,
Mars would still have lost it's atmosphere, only at a slightly slower
pace. With a strong magnetic field, at best, Mars would barely have 10%
more atmosphere left than it currently have.
Living on Mars is worst than living at the summit of Mount Everest, IF
Mount Everest was relocated near one of the poles.

On 4/1/24 07:11, Kualinar wrote:
> Le 2024-03-31 à 16:30, a425couple a écrit :
>> from
>> https://futurism.com/the-byte/royal-astronomer-elon-musks-mars-plan
>>
>> Paul Marotta via Getty / Futurism
>> RED PLANET
>> TOP ASTRONOMER WARNS THAT ELON MUSK'S MARS PLANS ARE A DANGEROUS DELUSION
>> “I DON’T THINK IT’S REALISTIC..."
>> PAUL MAROTTA VIA GETTY / FUTURISM
>> Mars Attack
>> SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has said he plans to put a million people on Mars
>> by 2050 — with his ex-girlfriend Grimes presumably being one of those
>> colonizers.
>>
>> But Martin Rees, respected astrophysicist and member of the Royal
>> Households of the United Kingdom under the lofty title of "Astronomer
>> Royal," is saying not so fast — and calling Musk's plans a "dangerous
>> illusion."
>>
>> He made his bold-face remarks for the House of Lords' podcast Lord
>> Speaker’s Corner, as spotted by The Telegraph, in which he also called
>> Musk an "extraordinary figure” who has a "rather strange personality,"
>> alluding to Musk's increasingly erratic behavior.
>>
>> "I don’t think it’s realistic and we’ve got to solve those problems
>> here on Earth," he said. "Dealing with climate change on Earth is a
>> doddle compared to making Mars habitable. So I don’t think we should
>> hold that out as a long-term aim at all."
>>
>> "I think there might be a few crazy pioneers living on Mars, just like
>> there are people living at the South Pole, although it’s far less
>> hospitable than the South Pole," he said. "But the idea of mass
>> migration to avoid the Earth’s problems, which he and a few other
>> space enthusiasts adopt, that, I think, is a dangerous illusion."
>>
>> Hazy Future
>> Rees instead proposed that any human exploration of space should be
>> funded privately and not with public money, like the close
>> collaboration between NASA and Musk's SpaceX, because governments "got
>> to be very safety conscious and that makes it very expensive," he said.
>>
>> Instead, Rees proposed remote-controlled robots do the bulk of
>> exploration — and heavy lifting of building structures out in space —
>> while "only people who really have a high appetite for risk should be
>> going into space, and they should be privately funded, not by the rest
>> of us."
>>
>> NASA is already exploring commercial partners, including SpaceX, for
>> getting to Mars, which will undoubtably cost countless gobs of money.
>>
>> These are practical points Rees has raised, because our bodies are
>> just not equipped to withstand longterm space travel due to the low
>> gravity and cosmic radiation, among other harmful factors.
>>
>> And in a bigger sense, maybe he's right that we should fix up the
>> problems we've caused here on Earth before forging out to mess up
>> another planet.
>>
>> More on Mars and Elon Musk: Elon Musk: My Main Goal is to Get Humanity
>> to Mars Before I Die
>>
>
> Given that Mars radius is about 0.6 times that of the Earth and it have
> about the same average density, it's mass is 0.6^3 that of the Earth, or
> 0.216 Earth mass. So, the surface gravity is 0.6 Earth's gravity and
> it's escape velocity 0.36 that of the Earth.
> The result ? Even with a magnetic field as strong as that of the Earth,
> Mars would still have lost it's atmosphere, only at a slightly slower
> pace. With a strong magnetic field, at best, Mars would barely have 10%
> more atmosphere left than it currently have.
> Living on Mars is worst than living at the summit of Mount Everest, IF
> Mount Everest was relocated near one of the poles.

One of my daughters took her near teen age daughter to
Biosphere last week.
Interesting experiment.
---Seems to me like it is very important to understand why it FAILED!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2
https://biosphere2.org/
https://biology.kenyon.edu/slonc/bio3/2000projects/carroll_d_walker_e/whatwentwrong.html#:~:text=As%20an%20attempt%20to%20create,extinction%20were%20the%20most%20notable.

"a425couple" wrote in message news:OB%ON.501477$vFZa.4933@fx13.iad...

One of my daughters took her near teen age daughter to
Biosphere last week.
Interesting experiment.
---Seems to me like it is very important to understand why it FAILED!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2
https://biosphere2.org/
https://biology.kenyon.edu/slonc/bio3/2000projects/carroll_d_walker_e/whatwentwrong.html#:~:text=As%20an%20attempt%20to%20create,extinction%20were%20the%20most%20notable.

-------------------------------------
The social aspects can be studied from utopian communities, most of which
failed.
https://www.history.com/news/5-19th-century-utopian-communities-in-the-united-states

In college I studied science and took my required liberal arts electives in
theatre, and thus had to fit into two groups that hardly could have been
more different, quiet introverts and vocal extroverts. "Stars on Mars"
featured the latter and showed how they loudly express their displeasure
with each other and then quickly get over it, which is practice for an
acting career. Although few had technical ability the cliques that quickly
formed at least tried to cooperate. Scientists are more likely to conceal
their resentment but not forget.

My ancestors were early settlers in the Virginia and Massachusetts colonies
which were poor examples of cooperation or self-reliance.
https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/colonial-settlement-1600-1763/virginia-colony-1611-1624/

Perhaps an isolated colony requires the strict discipline of the military or
a monastery, which may not attract independent minded explorer/adventurers,
plus a leader with the qualities of Shackleton or Amundsen. The history of
exploration shows that the leaders had trouble recruiting enough members who
were both capable and cooperative.
https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/charbonneau_toussaint/
"he nearly capsized a pirogue filled with the expedition’s instruments,
prompting Lewis to record in the Journals on May 14, 1805, that Charbonneau
“cannot swim and is perhaps the most timid waterman in the world.”

I think the people most qualified to succeed on Mars are satisfied with
Earth society, those who'd volunteer to leave Earth wouldn't do well
together under any conditions.

In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
> "a425couple" wrote in message news:OB%ON.501477$vFZa.4933@fx13.iad...
>
> One of my daughters took her near teen age daughter to
> Biosphere last week.
> Interesting experiment.
> ---Seems to me like it is very important to understand why it FAILED!
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2
> https://biosphere2.org/
> https://biology.kenyon.edu/slonc/bio3/2000projects/carroll_d_walker_e/whatwentwrong.html#:~:text=As%20an%20attempt%20to%20create,extinction%20were%20the%20most%20notable.
>
> -------------------------------------
> The social aspects can be studied from utopian communities, most of which
> failed.
> https://www.history.com/news/5-19th-century-utopian-communities-in-the-united-states
>
> In college I studied science and took my required liberal arts electives in
> theatre, and thus had to fit into two groups that hardly could have been
> more different, quiet introverts and vocal extroverts. "Stars on Mars"
> featured the latter and showed how they loudly express their displeasure
> with each other and then quickly get over it, which is practice for an
> acting career. Although few had technical ability the cliques that quickly
> formed at least tried to cooperate. Scientists are more likely to conceal
> their resentment but not forget.
>
> My ancestors were early settlers in the Virginia and Massachusetts colonies
> which were poor examples of cooperation or self-reliance.
> https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/colonial-settlement-1600-1763/virginia-colony-1611-1624/
>
> Perhaps an isolated colony requires the strict discipline of the military or
> a monastery, which may not attract independent minded explorer/adventurers,
> plus a leader with the qualities of Shackleton or Amundsen. The history of
> exploration shows that the leaders had trouble recruiting enough members who
> were both capable and cooperative.
> https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/charbonneau_toussaint/
> "he nearly capsized a pirogue filled with the expedition???s instruments,
> prompting Lewis to record in the Journals on May 14, 1805, that Charbonneau
> ???cannot swim and is perhaps the most timid waterman in the world.???
>
> I think the people most qualified to succeed on Mars are satisfied with
> Earth society, those who'd volunteer to leave Earth wouldn't do well
> together under any conditions.

In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.
There is a huge corpus of material on it.
Early material -- mostly related to looking at the Cold War and
nuclear deterrant -- tried to argue that a rational agent would eventually
end up co-operating for things like Assured Mutual Destruction.
But in my work I looked at "all possible strategies" for deciding
whether to co-operate and when to look after no 1 and it seemed the
rational ones (i.e. "scored" the best in million of simulations)
were the liars. I.e. they make all the right noises and cooperate
a few times to give the impression to other agents they are rational.
But when the chips are down they start betraying everyone and dont look back.
The "lock in" effect they used to call it.
In a lab setting with people hooked up to mutual electric shockers and buttons
and fed stories about how much the other guy was being paid
or that the other guys shocker was a dummy or various other stories
(you know how psychologists like to dick around with experimental subjects :)
it was found that subjects easily got into the mode of giving each other
shocks for no reason and not backing off.
At the time (1980s) is was a mystery how a rational agent could get into
this state and not get out.
But my sims showed it was perfectly rational if you take into account
all possible strategies the other guy might be using to decide if they
will hit that button.

LUCKILY. No-one in any nuclear weapon command read any of this stuff so
we were safe until a few weeks ago. :)

--
"Scientific" is a word that impressed lots of folk.
That is the only reason it is used.
-- Will (there is no climate change) Janoschka, Fri, 22 Jun 2012

"R Kym Horsell" wrote in message
news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...

In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:

In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.
There is a huge corpus of material on it.
Early material -- mostly related to looking at the Cold War and
nuclear deterrant -- tried to argue that a rational agent would eventually
end up co-operating for things like Assured Mutual Destruction.
But in my work I looked at "all possible strategies" for deciding
whether to co-operate and when to look after no 1 and it seemed the
rational ones (i.e. "scored" the best in million of simulations)
were the liars. I.e. they make all the right noises and cooperate
a few times to give the impression to other agents they are rational.
But when the chips are down they start betraying everyone and dont look
back.
The "lock in" effect they used to call it.
In a lab setting with people hooked up to mutual electric shockers and
buttons
and fed stories about how much the other guy was being paid
or that the other guys shocker was a dummy or various other stories
(you know how psychologists like to dick around with experimental subjects
:)
it was found that subjects easily got into the mode of giving each other
shocks for no reason and not backing off.
At the time (1980s) is was a mystery how a rational agent could get into
this state and not get out.
But my sims showed it was perfectly rational if you take into account
all possible strategies the other guy might be using to decide if they
will hit that button.

LUCKILY. No-one in any nuclear weapon command read any of this stuff so
we were safe until a few weeks ago. :)

--
"Scientific" is a word that impressed lots of folk.
That is the only reason it is used.
-- Will (there is no climate change) Janoschka, Fri, 22 Jun 2012
----------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
In military decision making Hidden Markov theory may be more applicable. You
have incomplete and possibly wrong information and the enemy is actively
trying to confuse you (Maskirovka).
https://www.baeldung.com/cs/hidden-markov-model

The studies themselves might be examples of the maxim that those who can,
do, those who can't, teach. My job was converting electronic designs dreamed
up by Ph.D. theoreticians into functional hardware.

I psychiatrist I knew (socially, not professionally) had been in a student
experiment to replicate Kent State. She found that as a Guardsman she would
have felt extremely threatened and might have opened fire.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2022-10-03/soviet-submarines-nuclear-torpedoes-cuban-missile-crisis

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:uulsfh$im22$1@dont-email.me...
"R Kym Horsell" wrote in message
news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...

In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:

In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.
There is a huge corpus of material on it.
Early material -- mostly related to looking at the Cold War and
nuclear deterrant -- tried to argue that a rational agent would eventually
end up co-operating for things like Assured Mutual Destruction.
But in my work I looked at "all possible strategies" for deciding
whether to co-operate and when to look after no 1 and it seemed the
rational ones (i.e. "scored" the best in million of simulations)
were the liars. I.e. they make all the right noises and cooperate
a few times to give the impression to other agents they are rational.
But when the chips are down they start betraying everyone and dont look
back.
The "lock in" effect they used to call it.
--------------------------
https://www.pbs.org/show/julius-caesar-the-making-of-a-dictator/

Jim Wilkins wrote on 4/4/24 9:41 pm:
> "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:uulsfh$im22$1@dont-email.me...
> "R Kym Horsell" wrote in message
> news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
>
> In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.

Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you used the
word/abbreviation 'math'.

When you use the full word, do you say 'mathematic' or 'mathematics'??

Because, here in Australia, we tend to use the full word 'mathematics'
.... which then gets abbreviated to 'maths'. (note the 's' at the end of
both the full word AND the abbreviation.)

Saying 'math' just seems awkward ... but I guess it's what you're brought
up with.

(Hmm! Weird! When I hit 'Send' my mail program runs a Spell-checker ....
which wanted to correct 'mathematic' to 'mathematics' but then wanted to
correct 'maths' to 'math' ..... So I'm confused!! ;-( )

> There is a huge corpus of material on it. Early material -- mostly
> related to looking at the Cold War and nuclear deterrant -- tried to
> argue that a rational agent would eventually end up co-operating for
> things like Assured Mutual Destruction.

Wasn't that 'Mutually Assured Destruction' ... M.A.D.??

--
Daniel

"Daniel65" wrote in message news:uum5f6$kuek$1@dont-email.me...

Jim Wilkins wrote on 4/4/24 9:41 pm:
> "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:uulsfh$im22$1@dont-email.me...
> "R Kym Horsell" wrote in message
> news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
>
> In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.

Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you used the
word/abbreviation 'math'.

When you use the full word, do you say 'mathematic' or 'mathematics'??

Because, here in Australia, we tend to use the full word 'mathematics'
.... which then gets abbreviated to 'maths'. (note the 's' at the end of
both the full word AND the abbreviation.)

Saying 'math' just seems awkward ... but I guess it's what you're brought
up with.

-------------------------------- (my news reader doesn't insert > before
quoted text)

In my frequent correspondence with Brits I use the Yank version to self
identify where it's well understood, both where it isn't, like hood/bonnet
or a Snow Plow in the USA is a Gritter in the UK, in suggesting used blade
wear edges as a cheap/free source of high carbon steel plate. I don't know
as many Anzac terms, or if the ones I do know are insulting. British
programs are common on Public TV here, the only Australian series I watched
was Supernova.

The full word here is Mathematics. I might write Maths if the reader
understands, or degrees C instead of F, the issue is suggesting suppliers
whose website doesn't clearly say if they sell in Britain, so I make the US
connection obvious. Shipping between the US, Canada and the UK can be
problematic.

Sometimes I throw in a Latin, French, German, Greek or Russian (Maskirovka)
word to see if anyone will complain.

In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Daniel65" wrote in message news:uum5f6$kuek$1@dont-email.me...
>
> Jim Wilkins wrote on 4/4/24 9:41 pm:
>> "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:uulsfh$im22$1@dont-email.me...
>> "R Kym Horsell" wrote in message
>> news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
>>
>> In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.
>
> Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you used the
> word/abbreviation 'math'.
....

LOL. You have mis-attributed what I wrote to Jim.
Dont worry. We've all done that. :)
I lived in the US for 10y but used "math" all my life anyway.
People have a problem with my accent because of my army brat upbringing.
I dont think we stayed in most places more than 2y and a lot of them
only 12m.
Americans think I am South African or Dutch, Germans think I am Danish,
Norwegians tell me to "please! just speak English", and
Australians think I am English.

The universe is very complicated. :)

R Kym Horsell wrote on 5/4/24 9:18 am:
> In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Daniel65" wrote in message news:uum5f6$kuek$1@dont-email.me...
>> Jim Wilkins wrote on 4/4/24 9:41 pm:
>>> "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
>>> news:uulsfh$im22$1@dont-email.me... "R Kym Horsell" wrote in
>>> message news:uul050$2ahf$2@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
>>> In alt.astronomy Jim Wilkins <muratlanne@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In the dim past I did a masters is the math of cooperation.
>>
>> Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you
>> used the word/abbreviation 'math'.
> ...
>
> LOL. You have mis-attributed what I wrote to Jim. Dont worry. We've
> all done that. :)

Bugger!! You're right! Bloody Jim and his program the doesn't indent the
stuff he's replying to correctly!! ;-P

> I lived in the US for 10y but used "math" all my life anyway. People
> have a problem with my accent because of my army brat upbringing. I
> dont think we stayed in most places more than 2y and a lot of them
> only 12m. Americans think I am South African or Dutch, Germans think
> I am Danish, Norwegians tell me to "please! just speak English", and
> Australians think I am English.

WOW!! That sounds almost as mixed-up as my Genetic make-up .... which
seems to change EVERY time my sister gets it tested!!

> The universe is very complicated. :)

Yeap! Will Wonders never cease??
--
Daniel

On 4/4/24 8:12 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
> Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you used the
> word/abbreviation 'math'.
>
> When you use the full word, do you say 'mathematic' or 'mathematics'??
>
> Because, here in Australia, we tend to use the full word 'mathematics'
> ... which then gets abbreviated to 'maths'. (note the 's' at the end of
> both the full word AND the abbreviation.)
>
> Saying 'math' just seems awkward ... but I guess it's what you're brought
> up with.

Interesting.

I recall only recently (maybe 5+ years ago) noting the use of the word
"maths", usually in scientific literature, in place of "math". Didn't
think of it as a US versus rest of English speaking world difference.

Just changing word spelling that happens for certain words from time to
time.

SMH

Stephen Harding wrote on 5/4/24 11:21 pm:
> On 4/4/24 8:12 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
>> Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you
>> used the word/abbreviation 'math'.
>>
>> When you use the full word, do you say 'mathematic' or
>> 'mathematics'??
>>
>> Because, here in Australia, we tend to use the full word
>> 'mathematics' ... which then gets abbreviated to 'maths'. (note the
>> 's' at the end of both the full word AND the abbreviation.)
>>
>> Saying 'math' just seems awkward ... but I guess it's what you're
>> brought up with.
>
> Interesting.
>
> I recall only recently (maybe 5+ years ago) noting the use of the
> word "maths", usually in scientific literature, in place of "math".
> Didn't think of it as a US versus rest of English speaking world
> difference.

I can, sort of, accept the 'math' version .... but it just seems soooooo
awkward (as I've mentioned above.)!!

> Just changing word spelling that happens for certain words from time
> to time.

Yes, 'they' say English is a living language!! ;-)
--
Daniel

In alt.astronomy Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
> Stephen Harding wrote on 5/4/24 11:21 pm:
>> On 4/4/24 8:12 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
>>> Jim, I'm going to 'assume' you are a U.S. of A.'ian because you
>>> used the word/abbreviation 'math'.
>>> When you use the full word, do you say 'mathematic' or
>>> 'mathematics'??
>>> Because, here in Australia, we tend to use the full word
>>> 'mathematics' ... which then gets abbreviated to 'maths'. (note the
>>> 's' at the end of both the full word AND the abbreviation.)
>>> Saying 'math' just seems awkward ... but I guess it's what you're
>>> brought up with.
>> Interesting.
>> I recall only recently (maybe 5+ years ago) noting the use of the
>> word "maths", usually in scientific literature, in place of "math".
>> Didn't think of it as a US versus rest of English speaking world
>> difference.
> I can, sort of, accept the 'math' version .... but it just seems soooooo
> awkward (as I've mentioned above.)!!
>> Just changing word spelling that happens for certain words from time
>> to time.
> Yes, 'they' say English is a living language!! ;-)

It's taken 60-70 years but I now dont vomit anytime someone says "dans"
instead of "darns".
So there is allays hope! :)

--
By some estimates humans have burned around 600 Gt of carbon in
the past 150y. All life on earth contains an estimated 550 Gt of carbon.
IOW humans have burned the equivalent of all trees, fish animals
and bacteria and thrown it into the air and water.

Le 2024-04-06 à 07:10, R Kym Horsell a écrit :

> It's taken 60-70 years but I now dont vomit anytime someone says "dans"
> instead of "darns".
> So there is allays hope! :)
>
Just don't confuse that with «dans» from French that means in/within.

"Kualinar" wrote in message news:uuserp$2aau6$1@dont-email.me...

Le 2024-04-06 à 07:10, R Kym Horsell a écrit :

> It's taken 60-70 years but I now dont vomit anytime someone says "dans"
> instead of "darns".
> So there is allays hope! :)
>
Just don't confuse that with «dans» from French that means in/within.

----------------------
I'm trying to imagine Francais in a Digger accent (Paul Hogan?) Maybe it
would be like Ypres becoming Weepers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digger_slang
"As well as gaining slang versions of many French words from the areas in
which the soldiers fought, such as "naipoo" for "no way" (taken from the
French "il n'y a plus"), "tray bon" (from "très bon", and from which other
Digger slang words such as "bonsterina" and "bontosher" were in turn
derived), "plonk" (from "vin blanc") for cheap wine, and "cushy" for
"easy";"