Quote from: Willie the Duck;961878Any time someone has to resort to an argument along the lines of 'no you're the one being immature,' it's pretty clear how the discussion has gone. And that the person making said statement is likely the only person who thinks it is the opposing side who has shown a lack of maturity.

Y'see, I *know* what I am talking about. Its my job to know this. What you are demonstrating on this thread is that you haven't studied science academically.

QuoteI won't even dignify the attempts at defining which science is the most important science.  They all are important in answering the...etc

I don't care whether you want to take issue with the whole body of science on the matter - but that, again, is what it is you are doing at this point. Again, if you don't know these things or these quotes, then it begs the question as to what you have studied in science. Physics is the fundamental science that underpins chemistry, biology and all the rest. The quotes from Rutherford (AKA the "Grandfather of Chemistry") merely puts into a statement that fact. Without physics, you have no explanation of any biological processes like photosynthesis, respiration, digestion, osmosis, microbiology, neurology, palaeontology or anything else. They are all rooted in Physical calculation, and academically all calculations are done in SI measurements. That is not a point of pomposity. It is a fact.  

And just because you are demonstrably acting indignantly, it doesn't change any of that. They are facts.

QuoteBut please, if you would prefer, ignore said advice and tell us more about how we're the ones acting like an indignant Year 11 class. I'm sure you'll convince others that such is the case.

If the cap fits, wear it. If you had studied any science degree, you would know about the requirements for S.I. measurement in science academia from your own experience - and you wouldn't be continuing to argue indignantly against these points.

And if we are going to go right back to my original statement - which you took issue with - here it is again:

QuoteA second is metric. It's an S.I. unit, and it specifically represents the amount of time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 10 9 ) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom. It's a universal measurement.

Scientists do not use minutes or hours or years in their calculations, only exponentials of seconds.

Are you still challenging this point?

Weren't we supposed to be talking about how different GMs choose to measure dates in Traveller?

Quote from: Dumarest;961956Weren't we supposed to be talking about how different GMs choose to measure dates in Traveller?

We were. The point was raised about 'metric time' using exponentials of seconds. I pointed out that seconds were the standardised S.I. time measurement used in science. This was challenged, and here we now are.