qid int64 1 74.7M | question stringlengths 12 33.8k | date stringlengths 10 10 | metadata list | response_j stringlengths 0 115k | response_k stringlengths 2 98.3k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference. | Write to the editor of the journal. Offer your explanation and ask for the best way forward.
You might be lucky and be given a chance to write an article with your clarification.
The editor might instead decide to do a correction with varying levels of acknowledgement of you.
>
> article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem
>
>
>
The problem is not obvious despite your initial impression. It may be worthwhile dissecting and contemplating the complexity of the blindspot in this area. Was it obvious to you because you come from a different perspective? Have experience from a different discipline? Interrogate why the issue was not obvious to at least 15 publication worthy authors and not to mention a larger number of editors and peer reviewers. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.
The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal. | **Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem.**
Not so surprising, my friend, as many people cite papers and books they have not read well, or read at all.
You can email the author, outlining the problem. They may or may not be receptive to your argument, they may or may not be hostile in their reply (or reply at all), and they may or may not be moved to publish an erratum. But you will have done all that you could. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.
The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal. | I have been in a similar situation, but on the other side. My own MS thesis and an article derived from it contained a major flaw. In short, the thesis was about investigating some static waves in a certain system, but the system itself is unstable in the very same model, with the instability length being comparable to the characteristic wavelength of the static waves in question. The whole investigation did not make any scientific sense at all, because the assumed system could not be physically realized in the first place.
I myself discovered the flaw a few months before submitting my thesis. I discovered the flaw pretty accidentally: I wanted to formally prove that the system is stable, but the result of my calculations showed that the opposite is true. I had never heard from my supervisor, who had given me the problem for my thesis, or from his colleagues that the system may be unstable. Everyone simply did not even think about that possibility.
And then I faced the dilemma as to what to do.
My final choice was to tell no one and to simply get my degree. I was an undergraduate student graduating from a Russian university, and getting my MS degree asap and moving abroad to get a Western PhD degree was my highest priority. If I had raised the issue about the flaw, I would have suffered a major setback in my career. I would have had to start my MS project over, and I am not even sure whether I would have been allowed to do it at all. If I had had a setback in my career, I would not have been able to win a prestigious PhD stipend in a Western country.
I should have checked at the very beginning of my MS project whether the system is stable. I should have, but I did not. Partially it is a fault of my supervisor, who directed my work in a very rigid way, giving me concrete tasks and deadlines. He never told me to check whether the system is stable. The official research plan, which I and he signed, did not contain any mention of a stability analysis. It was my own initiative to try to prove stability, because I felt that this was needed to make my investigation complete. I did not even talk to my supervisor about my idea to perform a stability analysis. After I discovered the flaw, I was sure that if I talked to my supervisor about the flaw, he would say the whole MS project had to be canceled.
After I submitted my thesis, my supervisor insisted that I write and publish an article derived from the thesis. I did not want to do it, but I had to. After all, I needed good recommendation letters from my supervisor, so I had to obey. The article was published in a reputable American journal and was cited ~20 times. Writing that article was the most unpleasant experience in my scientific career.
No one noticed the flaw, so I successfully got my MS degree in Russia, moved abroad, got a Western PhD degree, and some years later published an article explaining the flaw. I explicitly wrote in that article that my previous article and a number of other articles, which I cited, are invalid science. No one published a comment in response. In private conversations, my colleagues confirmed that my conclusion about the flaw is correct.
Why did I wait about six years to tell the scientific community about the flaw? Don't hate the player, hate the game. I simply could not afford a career setback. I needed my MS degree asap. I believe I made a wise choice. I would do exactly the same in the same circumstances. Who wouldn't?
Concerning your question, the principal thing is this: what's in it for you? Does the guy's article make any harm to you or your reputation by, e.g., contradicting your own articles? If it does not, then I want to tell this: there are so many wrong or misleading articles in science, there are so many awful things in science, and the guy's article is a drop in the ocean of all this. Why wouldn't you focus on doing your own great research instead? I guess the guy's article is insignificant anyway and is not even worth considering, just like most articles in science. I guess it is just a mathematical or computational exercise made for the purpose of producing a paper and earning a PhD degree. If my guess is correct, then you do not need to stoop to that level and search for mistakes in insignificant articles, and you do not need to harm the guy's career at its very beginning. I have articles published in Physical Review Letters, even as the first author, but I started my career with a wrong and misleading MS thesis.
Imagine you noticed a mistake in an article published in Indian Journal of Physics, whose impact factor is below 1. Would you care to correct the mistake by publishing a comment? I doubt you would. Not every mistake must be corrected. Some are just not worth spending time and effort correcting them.
My own principles are simple:
1. All physics journals that are "lower" than Physical Review journals are trash bins.
2. If an article does not interfere with my own research, then this article is none of my business.
I hope that my post will help you and others look at the issue from an angle different from the one from which many people see the issue. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference. | **Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem.**
Not so surprising, my friend, as many people cite papers and books they have not read well, or read at all.
You can email the author, outlining the problem. They may or may not be receptive to your argument, they may or may not be hostile in their reply (or reply at all), and they may or may not be moved to publish an erratum. But you will have done all that you could. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | This is what science *is*. Not everything that gets published is correct or true. Presumably, the literature of science is self correcting. Someone will eventually address and correct it. For example, Descartes' whole physiological framework is just about entirely incorrect. The process of science fixed this, over hundreds of years, and still Descartes publications were an important part of that process.
If the area of research you're referencing is important, the error you hold to be present will misguide the community and harm future research efforts, and *you're a participant in the community with sufficient credibility and standing to correct the issue*, you might consider a letter to the editor or a rapid publication to a high profile journal.
If any of those criteria do not hold, your actions should be tempered. If the publication you believe to be incorrect is on the topic of your personal research, the issue might find its way into the discussion section of one of your near-future publications. If it doesn't reach that level in your personal research portfolio, you might just let it go, and let someone more appropriate address it. | **Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem.**
Not so surprising, my friend, as many people cite papers and books they have not read well, or read at all.
You can email the author, outlining the problem. They may or may not be receptive to your argument, they may or may not be hostile in their reply (or reply at all), and they may or may not be moved to publish an erratum. But you will have done all that you could. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference. | I have been in a similar situation, but on the other side. My own MS thesis and an article derived from it contained a major flaw. In short, the thesis was about investigating some static waves in a certain system, but the system itself is unstable in the very same model, with the instability length being comparable to the characteristic wavelength of the static waves in question. The whole investigation did not make any scientific sense at all, because the assumed system could not be physically realized in the first place.
I myself discovered the flaw a few months before submitting my thesis. I discovered the flaw pretty accidentally: I wanted to formally prove that the system is stable, but the result of my calculations showed that the opposite is true. I had never heard from my supervisor, who had given me the problem for my thesis, or from his colleagues that the system may be unstable. Everyone simply did not even think about that possibility.
And then I faced the dilemma as to what to do.
My final choice was to tell no one and to simply get my degree. I was an undergraduate student graduating from a Russian university, and getting my MS degree asap and moving abroad to get a Western PhD degree was my highest priority. If I had raised the issue about the flaw, I would have suffered a major setback in my career. I would have had to start my MS project over, and I am not even sure whether I would have been allowed to do it at all. If I had had a setback in my career, I would not have been able to win a prestigious PhD stipend in a Western country.
I should have checked at the very beginning of my MS project whether the system is stable. I should have, but I did not. Partially it is a fault of my supervisor, who directed my work in a very rigid way, giving me concrete tasks and deadlines. He never told me to check whether the system is stable. The official research plan, which I and he signed, did not contain any mention of a stability analysis. It was my own initiative to try to prove stability, because I felt that this was needed to make my investigation complete. I did not even talk to my supervisor about my idea to perform a stability analysis. After I discovered the flaw, I was sure that if I talked to my supervisor about the flaw, he would say the whole MS project had to be canceled.
After I submitted my thesis, my supervisor insisted that I write and publish an article derived from the thesis. I did not want to do it, but I had to. After all, I needed good recommendation letters from my supervisor, so I had to obey. The article was published in a reputable American journal and was cited ~20 times. Writing that article was the most unpleasant experience in my scientific career.
No one noticed the flaw, so I successfully got my MS degree in Russia, moved abroad, got a Western PhD degree, and some years later published an article explaining the flaw. I explicitly wrote in that article that my previous article and a number of other articles, which I cited, are invalid science. No one published a comment in response. In private conversations, my colleagues confirmed that my conclusion about the flaw is correct.
Why did I wait about six years to tell the scientific community about the flaw? Don't hate the player, hate the game. I simply could not afford a career setback. I needed my MS degree asap. I believe I made a wise choice. I would do exactly the same in the same circumstances. Who wouldn't?
Concerning your question, the principal thing is this: what's in it for you? Does the guy's article make any harm to you or your reputation by, e.g., contradicting your own articles? If it does not, then I want to tell this: there are so many wrong or misleading articles in science, there are so many awful things in science, and the guy's article is a drop in the ocean of all this. Why wouldn't you focus on doing your own great research instead? I guess the guy's article is insignificant anyway and is not even worth considering, just like most articles in science. I guess it is just a mathematical or computational exercise made for the purpose of producing a paper and earning a PhD degree. If my guess is correct, then you do not need to stoop to that level and search for mistakes in insignificant articles, and you do not need to harm the guy's career at its very beginning. I have articles published in Physical Review Letters, even as the first author, but I started my career with a wrong and misleading MS thesis.
Imagine you noticed a mistake in an article published in Indian Journal of Physics, whose impact factor is below 1. Would you care to correct the mistake by publishing a comment? I doubt you would. Not every mistake must be corrected. Some are just not worth spending time and effort correcting them.
My own principles are simple:
1. All physics journals that are "lower" than Physical Review journals are trash bins.
2. If an article does not interfere with my own research, then this article is none of my business.
I hope that my post will help you and others look at the issue from an angle different from the one from which many people see the issue. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference. | This is what science *is*. Not everything that gets published is correct or true. Presumably, the literature of science is self correcting. Someone will eventually address and correct it. For example, Descartes' whole physiological framework is just about entirely incorrect. The process of science fixed this, over hundreds of years, and still Descartes publications were an important part of that process.
If the area of research you're referencing is important, the error you hold to be present will misguide the community and harm future research efforts, and *you're a participant in the community with sufficient credibility and standing to correct the issue*, you might consider a letter to the editor or a rapid publication to a high profile journal.
If any of those criteria do not hold, your actions should be tempered. If the publication you believe to be incorrect is on the topic of your personal research, the issue might find its way into the discussion section of one of your near-future publications. If it doesn't reach that level in your personal research portfolio, you might just let it go, and let someone more appropriate address it. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.
The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal. | Do not overthink it.
I have had similar experience and authors were reluctant at first (mostly because they have moved to another problem).
It is very dangerous to leave a flaw in the literature. Especially a critical flaw where others may build on it. This will lead to more chaos. I am aware some (well-known) people do not care about their old results being incorrect. But this is not what Academia is about. You should appreciate the peer review and rigorous findings more than anything else. You already have contacted the author, offer him a collaboration (if seems right) on correcting the whole thing in the context of your work.
You usually have spotted the error because your work is related. On that particular connection re-analyze the claim and correct it. Include in your new paper the claim, prove why it is incorrect and prove the new correct result. This actually can be seen as a new contribution to your paper/thesis.
For me, I was very satisfied with the outcome; the first author of the other paper did mentor me for a while after we met at a conference. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.
The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal. | Write to the editor of the journal. Offer your explanation and ask for the best way forward.
You might be lucky and be given a chance to write an article with your clarification.
The editor might instead decide to do a correction with varying levels of acknowledgement of you.
>
> article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem
>
>
>
The problem is not obvious despite your initial impression. It may be worthwhile dissecting and contemplating the complexity of the blindspot in this area. Was it obvious to you because you come from a different perspective? Have experience from a different discipline? Interrogate why the issue was not obvious to at least 15 publication worthy authors and not to mention a larger number of editors and peer reviewers. |
134,684 | Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.
In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.
I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article? | 2019/08/14 | [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164/"
] | Write to the editor of the journal. Offer your explanation and ask for the best way forward.
You might be lucky and be given a chance to write an article with your clarification.
The editor might instead decide to do a correction with varying levels of acknowledgement of you.
>
> article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem
>
>
>
The problem is not obvious despite your initial impression. It may be worthwhile dissecting and contemplating the complexity of the blindspot in this area. Was it obvious to you because you come from a different perspective? Have experience from a different discipline? Interrogate why the issue was not obvious to at least 15 publication worthy authors and not to mention a larger number of editors and peer reviewers. | **Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem.**
Not so surprising, my friend, as many people cite papers and books they have not read well, or read at all.
You can email the author, outlining the problem. They may or may not be receptive to your argument, they may or may not be hostile in their reply (or reply at all), and they may or may not be moved to publish an erratum. But you will have done all that you could. |
60,209 | SOQL Polymorphism (SELECT TYPEOF) was introduced in [Winter 13, API version 26](https://login.salesforce.com/help/doc/en/salesforce_winter13_release_notes.pdf) for developer organization.
Is this feature going to be enabled by default for production organizations also sometime in the future? If so - when? | 2014/12/16 | [
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/60209",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com",
"https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/users/12984/"
] | No information regarding when this be made GA. As they documented [here](http://www.salesforce.com/us/developer/docs/soql_sosl/Content/sforce_api_calls_soql_select_typeof.htm), you can reach out to them and see if they will enable in your org. | As per the [Summer 19 Release Notes](https://releasenotes.docs.salesforce.com/en-us/summer19/release-notes/rn_api_soql.htm#rn_api_soql), `TYPEOF` is finally going GA! Time to celebrate! |
10,727 | I'm looking to paint a red oak commission piece and the client asked about a "white wash" type finish instead of purely opaque white paint such that the grain shows through.
I was wondering if there are thinners that can be added to regular latex white paint to do this? | 2020/06/15 | [
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/10727",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/users/3142/"
] | You can do what you want by merely thinning white wall paint with water1. It's not a perfect way to do this2 but it works.
However the adhesion of the diluted paint may end up highly compromised, and additionally the coating is very thin, so in general it would be extremely easy to wear through or damage a finish such as this in other ways. Merely dragging the unglazed ring on the underside of a coffee mug over the surface may leave visible wear.
So a clear topcoat (waterbased poly should work well) would be highly desirable.
Another option uses the same clear finish but as part of your starting point. In effect you make a white-tinted waterbased poly. Mixing different brands could work here. But for safety, to ensure chemical compatibility, it would be best to use two products from the same range — you could for example mix the General Finishes white poly into one of their clear waterbased polyurethanes, to make a cloudy clear finish or a weak white finish depending on how you want to look at it.
---
1 Because you're working with oak, and because you'll be painting on a very watery mixture, it may be advisable to use distilled water for the thinning instead of tap water. Your tap water may contain enough dissolved iron to cause dark staining in the red oak.
2 The ideal method to thin paint for this sort of thing would involve diluting with more carrier, not just more water. But there's no simple recommendation for that sort of thing. An artists' acrylic paint range such as Golden's have numerous products to pick from, but these are not generally made to provide high wear resistance, just to use as bonding agents or 'medium'. | I have seen the use of iron fillings dissolved in vinegar to add a bleached aged look to white oak and white ash.
To make this up use distilled white vinegar, I know it's a synthesized product but it works from what I've seen. For every gallon of vinegar add 1-2 pounds, or until it would dissolve anymore. You can get iron fillings from brake shops that regrind brake drums and discs.
It will look a bit red until it dries. |
10,727 | I'm looking to paint a red oak commission piece and the client asked about a "white wash" type finish instead of purely opaque white paint such that the grain shows through.
I was wondering if there are thinners that can be added to regular latex white paint to do this? | 2020/06/15 | [
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/10727",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/users/3142/"
] | You can do what you want by merely thinning white wall paint with water1. It's not a perfect way to do this2 but it works.
However the adhesion of the diluted paint may end up highly compromised, and additionally the coating is very thin, so in general it would be extremely easy to wear through or damage a finish such as this in other ways. Merely dragging the unglazed ring on the underside of a coffee mug over the surface may leave visible wear.
So a clear topcoat (waterbased poly should work well) would be highly desirable.
Another option uses the same clear finish but as part of your starting point. In effect you make a white-tinted waterbased poly. Mixing different brands could work here. But for safety, to ensure chemical compatibility, it would be best to use two products from the same range — you could for example mix the General Finishes white poly into one of their clear waterbased polyurethanes, to make a cloudy clear finish or a weak white finish depending on how you want to look at it.
---
1 Because you're working with oak, and because you'll be painting on a very watery mixture, it may be advisable to use distilled water for the thinning instead of tap water. Your tap water may contain enough dissolved iron to cause dark staining in the red oak.
2 The ideal method to thin paint for this sort of thing would involve diluting with more carrier, not just more water. But there's no simple recommendation for that sort of thing. An artists' acrylic paint range such as Golden's have numerous products to pick from, but these are not generally made to provide high wear resistance, just to use as bonding agents or 'medium'. | There are thinners for latex paints, you could totally do it with the latex paint, but there also white tint dye base, for ex. <https://www.homedepot.com/p/Varathane-1-qt-Classic-White-Tint-Base-Water-Based-Interior-Wood-Stain-339584/305626822> - one coat will let the grain show through
It's really bout what exactly a client wants. Historically whitewash was limestone based, the simplest recipe I've seen was ~5:1 mason limestone to table salt dilited to an appropriate thickness, does the customer want this or just whitish finish with grain showing through? |
10,727 | I'm looking to paint a red oak commission piece and the client asked about a "white wash" type finish instead of purely opaque white paint such that the grain shows through.
I was wondering if there are thinners that can be added to regular latex white paint to do this? | 2020/06/15 | [
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/10727",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/users/3142/"
] | There are thinners for latex paints, you could totally do it with the latex paint, but there also white tint dye base, for ex. <https://www.homedepot.com/p/Varathane-1-qt-Classic-White-Tint-Base-Water-Based-Interior-Wood-Stain-339584/305626822> - one coat will let the grain show through
It's really bout what exactly a client wants. Historically whitewash was limestone based, the simplest recipe I've seen was ~5:1 mason limestone to table salt dilited to an appropriate thickness, does the customer want this or just whitish finish with grain showing through? | I have seen the use of iron fillings dissolved in vinegar to add a bleached aged look to white oak and white ash.
To make this up use distilled white vinegar, I know it's a synthesized product but it works from what I've seen. For every gallon of vinegar add 1-2 pounds, or until it would dissolve anymore. You can get iron fillings from brake shops that regrind brake drums and discs.
It will look a bit red until it dries. |
35,917 | In iOS 5 the lock screen can access the camera app.
Is there a way to change the default app that is launched. I would rather use instagram for its social media connections and filters. | 2012/01/08 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/35917",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/13247/"
] | Sorry, but Apple doesn't allow this, and it doesn't even look like there is a jailbreak tweak for this. | If you are runnning a jailbroken iOS5 device, [AnyLockApp](http://moreinfo.thebigboss.org/moreinfo/depiction.php?file=anylockappDp) seems to be able to change the default app.
You will have to enter your passcode in order to use the app though. |
6,033,241 | We're exploring different approaches for communicating between two different SQL Server instances. One of the desired workflows is to send a message of some sort to the "remote" side requesting, let's say, deletion of a record. When that system completes the deletion, it holds its transaction open and sends a response back to the initiator, who then deletes its corresponding record, commits its transaction, and then sends a message back to the "remote" side, telling it, finally, to commit the deletion on its side as well.
It's a poor man's approximation of two-phase commit. There's a religious debate going on in the department as to whether SQL Server Service Broker can or can't handle this type of scenario reasonably cleanly. Can anyone shed light on whether it can? Any experience in similar types of workflows? Is there a better mechanism I should be looking at to accomplish this, considering that the SQL Server instances are on separate, non-domain machines?
Edit: To clarify, we can't use distributed transactions due to the fact that network security is both tight and somewhat arbitrary. We're not allowed the configuration that would make that possible. | 2011/05/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/6033241",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/60647/"
] | Unless I'm misunderstanding the requirements, I'd say it's a perfect job for Service Broker. Service Broker frees you from the need of using distributed transactions and 2PC. What you do with Service Broker is reduce the problem to local transactions and transactional messaging between the servers.
In your particular case, one of the servers would delete its record and then (as part of the same transaction) send a message to the other server requesting deletion of the corresponding record. After enqueuing the message, the first server can commit the transaction and forget the whole thing without waiting for synchronization with the second server. Service Broker guarantees that once enqueuing of a message is committed, the message will be transactionally delivered to the destination, which can then delete its record as part of the same transaction in which it received the message, thus making sure the message processing and data changes are atomic. | Have you tried using a distibuted transaction?
It will do everything you need but each server will need to connect to each other as a linked server. |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | "Principalities" and "powers" are separated in the original language. The structure is similar to the ESV rather than the KJV. I will, therefore, treat them separately.
*Principalities*
The underlying word here can carry a range of meanings. In [Romans 13:3](http://esv.to/Rom13.3), for instance, it refers to a human magistrate. In [Ephesians 6:12](http://esv.to/Eph6.12) it is instead contrasted with "flesh and blood" and refers to an evil spiritual being. [1 Corinthians 15:24](http://esv.to/1Cor15.24-25) gives a perhaps ambiguous picture of the human/angelic nature of rulers, but they are enemies of God to be destroyed.
Moving to consider its use here in Romans 8:38, the pairing of death/life, angels/principalities, and things present/things to come suggests that principalities should be understood along with angels indicating that they are spiritual in nature. Whether Paul intends evil beings or evil and good beings here is less clear. Again, though, the pairing with angels suggests a dualism and I'm inclined to accept the NIV's rendering.
In the context of Colossians 1:16, it's a little more difficult to discern. The context of the entire letter suggests that Paul is writing about spiritual beings. It would take us too much space to discuss the Colossian heresy/philosophy, but Paul's purpose in the Christ hymn is to emphasize the exaltedness of Christ over all things and especially over angelic beings (see also 2:10, 2:15, 2:18). While some contexts suggest they are evil (2:15), others are less clear and since Paul places also good things like the church under Christ in the hymn, it makes sense to understand "rulers"/"principalities" as simply spiritual beings, neither necessarily good nor bad.
*Powers*
In Colossians, "powers" can be understood right along with principalities. They are mentioned together as they are in 1 Cor. 15:24 as well. There is nothing to distinguish them, and Paul is probably simply enumerating any spiritual being he could think of to establish the supremacy of Christ over *all things*.
It's less clear in Romans 8:38 how he uses the term. One strange thing about its use there is that he doesn't pair it with another term as he does all the other items in his list (except "anything else in creation"). Doug Moo in his commentary on Romans (NICNT) notes that elsewhere Paul uses the term for miracles, and so it's possible that he has such in mind ("performed perhaps by Satan"), but there isn't a whole lot to recommend this and the presence of angels and principalities leads us to believe he again means spiritual beings as in Colossians. | *Arche* and *dunamis* : *Arche*, I take it, is the Office and *Archon* the personage. *Arche* is that which is not only foundational, archetypal, it also has absolute precedence. Thus, that which comes after will, of necessity, be within its realm and under its influence and command.
So principalities were foundational and all that followed would be subservient.
This structure has power, for that is its purpose, to be dynamic. And this Rule revealed itself, very soon, to be of Serpentine character. And many followed, for when he he fell from heaven, a third part fell with him.
But these were triumphed over, in the weakness of God, for they did not understand; their mentality was faulty. They would never have crucified the Lord of Glory had they any conception of who God really was and what His Purposes really were.
>
> Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. [I Corinthians 1:25 KJV]
>
>
> |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | "Principalities" and "powers" are separated in the original language. The structure is similar to the ESV rather than the KJV. I will, therefore, treat them separately.
*Principalities*
The underlying word here can carry a range of meanings. In [Romans 13:3](http://esv.to/Rom13.3), for instance, it refers to a human magistrate. In [Ephesians 6:12](http://esv.to/Eph6.12) it is instead contrasted with "flesh and blood" and refers to an evil spiritual being. [1 Corinthians 15:24](http://esv.to/1Cor15.24-25) gives a perhaps ambiguous picture of the human/angelic nature of rulers, but they are enemies of God to be destroyed.
Moving to consider its use here in Romans 8:38, the pairing of death/life, angels/principalities, and things present/things to come suggests that principalities should be understood along with angels indicating that they are spiritual in nature. Whether Paul intends evil beings or evil and good beings here is less clear. Again, though, the pairing with angels suggests a dualism and I'm inclined to accept the NIV's rendering.
In the context of Colossians 1:16, it's a little more difficult to discern. The context of the entire letter suggests that Paul is writing about spiritual beings. It would take us too much space to discuss the Colossian heresy/philosophy, but Paul's purpose in the Christ hymn is to emphasize the exaltedness of Christ over all things and especially over angelic beings (see also 2:10, 2:15, 2:18). While some contexts suggest they are evil (2:15), others are less clear and since Paul places also good things like the church under Christ in the hymn, it makes sense to understand "rulers"/"principalities" as simply spiritual beings, neither necessarily good nor bad.
*Powers*
In Colossians, "powers" can be understood right along with principalities. They are mentioned together as they are in 1 Cor. 15:24 as well. There is nothing to distinguish them, and Paul is probably simply enumerating any spiritual being he could think of to establish the supremacy of Christ over *all things*.
It's less clear in Romans 8:38 how he uses the term. One strange thing about its use there is that he doesn't pair it with another term as he does all the other items in his list (except "anything else in creation"). Doug Moo in his commentary on Romans (NICNT) notes that elsewhere Paul uses the term for miracles, and so it's possible that he has such in mind ("performed perhaps by Satan"), but there isn't a whole lot to recommend this and the presence of angels and principalities leads us to believe he again means spiritual beings as in Colossians. | Colossians 2:15 (DRB):
>
> And despoiling the principalities and powers, he hath exposed them confidently in open shew, triumphing over them in himself.
>
>
>
Ephesians 6:12 (DRB):
>
> For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
>
>
>
Titus 3:1 (DRB):
>
> Admonish them to be subject to princes and powers, to obey at a word, to be ready to every good work.
>
>
>
Titus 2:8 (DRB):
>
> The sound word that can not be blamed: that he, who is on the contrary part, may be afraid, having no evil to say of us.
>
>
>
The question is so simple:
Who are the principalities and powers?
From the above mentioned verses I suggest that they are the rulers of this world, they are of good works but of bad conscience, hence, they are allegorically of no blood and flesh.
I suggest that Satan is the head of these rulers.
Again, they are of good works but of bad conscience. Exactly like Pharisees and Scribes.
Since they are of good works, they are appointed by God to rule our world.
After we get mature enough, we will be transported to the God/Christ Kingdom.
This is my point of view supported by verses of the Bible.
Look:
* Job 1:6-10.
* Colossians 1:16.
* Titus 3:3.
* 1 Peter 2:1. |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | "Principalities" and "powers" are separated in the original language. The structure is similar to the ESV rather than the KJV. I will, therefore, treat them separately.
*Principalities*
The underlying word here can carry a range of meanings. In [Romans 13:3](http://esv.to/Rom13.3), for instance, it refers to a human magistrate. In [Ephesians 6:12](http://esv.to/Eph6.12) it is instead contrasted with "flesh and blood" and refers to an evil spiritual being. [1 Corinthians 15:24](http://esv.to/1Cor15.24-25) gives a perhaps ambiguous picture of the human/angelic nature of rulers, but they are enemies of God to be destroyed.
Moving to consider its use here in Romans 8:38, the pairing of death/life, angels/principalities, and things present/things to come suggests that principalities should be understood along with angels indicating that they are spiritual in nature. Whether Paul intends evil beings or evil and good beings here is less clear. Again, though, the pairing with angels suggests a dualism and I'm inclined to accept the NIV's rendering.
In the context of Colossians 1:16, it's a little more difficult to discern. The context of the entire letter suggests that Paul is writing about spiritual beings. It would take us too much space to discuss the Colossian heresy/philosophy, but Paul's purpose in the Christ hymn is to emphasize the exaltedness of Christ over all things and especially over angelic beings (see also 2:10, 2:15, 2:18). While some contexts suggest they are evil (2:15), others are less clear and since Paul places also good things like the church under Christ in the hymn, it makes sense to understand "rulers"/"principalities" as simply spiritual beings, neither necessarily good nor bad.
*Powers*
In Colossians, "powers" can be understood right along with principalities. They are mentioned together as they are in 1 Cor. 15:24 as well. There is nothing to distinguish them, and Paul is probably simply enumerating any spiritual being he could think of to establish the supremacy of Christ over *all things*.
It's less clear in Romans 8:38 how he uses the term. One strange thing about its use there is that he doesn't pair it with another term as he does all the other items in his list (except "anything else in creation"). Doug Moo in his commentary on Romans (NICNT) notes that elsewhere Paul uses the term for miracles, and so it's possible that he has such in mind ("performed perhaps by Satan"), but there isn't a whole lot to recommend this and the presence of angels and principalities leads us to believe he again means spiritual beings as in Colossians. | Angels and Demons, The Cosmic Evil Powers
-----------------------------------------
The *principalities and powers* cannot be referring to human rulers or kings. It is referring to the spiritual forces of darkness, the evil powers or in simple terms *demons*. The human rulers are mentioned positively (Rom 13:3, Titus 3:1); [compare](https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=rulers%20authorities&t=ESV#s=s_primary_0_1) a similar verse:
>
> [Eph 6:11-12 NHEB] Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world's rulers of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
>
>
>
Robertson's World Pictures:
>
> The world-rulers of this darkness (τους κοσμοκρατορας του σκοτους τουτου). This phrase occurs here alone. In Joh 14:30 Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (ο αρχων του κοσμου τουτου). In 2Co 4:4 he is termed "the god of this age" (ο θεος του αιωνος τουτου). The word κοσμοκρατωρ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth.
>
>
>
On Romans 8:38 [Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL05/VOL05_08.html) comments,
>
> "**principalities. . .powers**" This refers to (1) the evil angelic or demonic forces of this age (cf. Eph. 2:2; 6:12; 1 Cor. 15:24; Col. 1:16) or (2) possibly the impersonal structures of the fallen world (religion, government, education, medicine, etc.) that allows fallen mankind to be independent of God (cf. Hendrickus Berkhoff, Principalities and Powers).
>
>
>
**Archon** (Greek: ἄρχων, romanized: árchōn, plural: ἄρχοντες, árchontes) is a Greek word that means "ruler", frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem αρχ-, meaning "to be first, to rule", derived from the same root as words such as monarch and hierarchy. ([Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon))
* The plural in Greek ἀρχαὶ (Rom 8:38) is used in the verse, the word order in KJV differs which puts *power* early in the sequence. The NIV, NLT has used *demons* for this word taking the phrase parallel to the contrasting 'life and death; present-future; heights and depths'.
* [NET Bible](https://www.stepbible.org/?q=version=ESV%7Cversion=NETfull%7Cversion=NIV%7Cversion=SBLG%7Cversion=THGNT%7Creference=Rom.8.38&options=NVGUVH&display=INTERLEAVED): "heavenly rulers", says in notes: "BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 6 takes this term as a reference to angelic or transcendent powers (as opposed to merely human rulers). To clarify this, the adjective “heavenly” has been supplied in the translation. Some interpreters see this as a reference to fallen angels or demonic powers, and this view is reflected in some recent translations (NIV, NLT)."
It is likely the reference to heavenly or cosmic evil powers includes or directly addresses the Gnostic Archons.
Archons of the Gnostics
-----------------------
>
> [**Archons**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon_(Gnosticism)) are, in Gnosticism and religions closely related to it, the builders of the physical universe. Among the Archontics, Ophites, Sethians and in the writings of Nag Hammadi library, the archons are rulers, each related to one of seven planets; they prevent souls from leaving the material realm. The political connotation of their name reflects rejection of the governmental system, as flawed without chance of true salvation. In [Manichaeism](https://web.archive.org/web/20221224065955/https://bjorkbloggen.com/2012/04/03/augustine-the-former-gnostic-and-his-many-heretical-views/), the archons are the rulers of a realm within the "Kingdom of Darkness", who together make up the Prince of Darkness. In The Reality of the Rulers, the physical appearance of Archons is described as hermaphroditic, with their faces being those of beasts.
>
>
> **Hebdomad** A characteristic feature of the Gnostic concept of the universe is the role played in almost all Gnostic systems by the seven world-creating archons, known as the Hebdomad (ἑβδομάς). These Seven are in most systems semi-hostile powers, and are reckoned as the last and lowest emanations of the Godhead; below them—and frequently considered as proceeding from them—comes the world of the actually devilish powers. There are indeed certain exceptions; Basilides taught the existence of a "great archon" called Abraxas who presided over 365 archons.
>
>
> Evidently from works such as the Apocryphon of John, the Ophite Diagrams, On the Origin of the World and Pistis Sophia, archons play an important role in Gnostic cosmology. Probably originally referring to the Greek daimons of the planets, in Gnosticism they became the demonic rulers of the material world, each associated with a different celestial sphere. As rulers over the material world, they are called ἄρχοντες (archontes, "principalities", or "rulers"). As with ancient astronomy, which thought of a sphere of fixed stars, above the spheres of the seven planets, beyond the spheres of the evil archons (Hebdomad), there were the supercelestial regions which a soul must reach by gnosis to escape the dominion of the archons. This place is thought of as the abode of Sophia (Wisdom) and Barbelo, also called Ogdoad.
>
>
>
[Eph 2:1-2 NHEB]
>
> You were made alive when you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the children of disobedience;
>
>
>
"In the NT the air is the realm of the demonic. The lower air (açr) was seen by the Greeks to be impure and therefore the domain of evil spirits. Some see this use of "air" as referring to the immaterial nature of the spiritual realm" ([Bob Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL08/VOL08B_02.html)). The “[airy spirits](https://www.gnosticwarrior.com/airy-spirits.html) (ariel spirits)” who the Gnostics said were the lords of darkness and the mischievousness of spirits of the air. The Christians had considered them to be wicked spirits on high whose habitation was mainly the air which was said to be the mansion of evil spirits, of whom Satan (Great Dragon) is the chief. |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | *Arche* and *dunamis* : *Arche*, I take it, is the Office and *Archon* the personage. *Arche* is that which is not only foundational, archetypal, it also has absolute precedence. Thus, that which comes after will, of necessity, be within its realm and under its influence and command.
So principalities were foundational and all that followed would be subservient.
This structure has power, for that is its purpose, to be dynamic. And this Rule revealed itself, very soon, to be of Serpentine character. And many followed, for when he he fell from heaven, a third part fell with him.
But these were triumphed over, in the weakness of God, for they did not understand; their mentality was faulty. They would never have crucified the Lord of Glory had they any conception of who God really was and what His Purposes really were.
>
> Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. [I Corinthians 1:25 KJV]
>
>
> | Colossians 2:15 (DRB):
>
> And despoiling the principalities and powers, he hath exposed them confidently in open shew, triumphing over them in himself.
>
>
>
Ephesians 6:12 (DRB):
>
> For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
>
>
>
Titus 3:1 (DRB):
>
> Admonish them to be subject to princes and powers, to obey at a word, to be ready to every good work.
>
>
>
Titus 2:8 (DRB):
>
> The sound word that can not be blamed: that he, who is on the contrary part, may be afraid, having no evil to say of us.
>
>
>
The question is so simple:
Who are the principalities and powers?
From the above mentioned verses I suggest that they are the rulers of this world, they are of good works but of bad conscience, hence, they are allegorically of no blood and flesh.
I suggest that Satan is the head of these rulers.
Again, they are of good works but of bad conscience. Exactly like Pharisees and Scribes.
Since they are of good works, they are appointed by God to rule our world.
After we get mature enough, we will be transported to the God/Christ Kingdom.
This is my point of view supported by verses of the Bible.
Look:
* Job 1:6-10.
* Colossians 1:16.
* Titus 3:3.
* 1 Peter 2:1. |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | *Arche* and *dunamis* : *Arche*, I take it, is the Office and *Archon* the personage. *Arche* is that which is not only foundational, archetypal, it also has absolute precedence. Thus, that which comes after will, of necessity, be within its realm and under its influence and command.
So principalities were foundational and all that followed would be subservient.
This structure has power, for that is its purpose, to be dynamic. And this Rule revealed itself, very soon, to be of Serpentine character. And many followed, for when he he fell from heaven, a third part fell with him.
But these were triumphed over, in the weakness of God, for they did not understand; their mentality was faulty. They would never have crucified the Lord of Glory had they any conception of who God really was and what His Purposes really were.
>
> Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. [I Corinthians 1:25 KJV]
>
>
> | Angels and Demons, The Cosmic Evil Powers
-----------------------------------------
The *principalities and powers* cannot be referring to human rulers or kings. It is referring to the spiritual forces of darkness, the evil powers or in simple terms *demons*. The human rulers are mentioned positively (Rom 13:3, Titus 3:1); [compare](https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=rulers%20authorities&t=ESV#s=s_primary_0_1) a similar verse:
>
> [Eph 6:11-12 NHEB] Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world's rulers of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
>
>
>
Robertson's World Pictures:
>
> The world-rulers of this darkness (τους κοσμοκρατορας του σκοτους τουτου). This phrase occurs here alone. In Joh 14:30 Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (ο αρχων του κοσμου τουτου). In 2Co 4:4 he is termed "the god of this age" (ο θεος του αιωνος τουτου). The word κοσμοκρατωρ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth.
>
>
>
On Romans 8:38 [Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL05/VOL05_08.html) comments,
>
> "**principalities. . .powers**" This refers to (1) the evil angelic or demonic forces of this age (cf. Eph. 2:2; 6:12; 1 Cor. 15:24; Col. 1:16) or (2) possibly the impersonal structures of the fallen world (religion, government, education, medicine, etc.) that allows fallen mankind to be independent of God (cf. Hendrickus Berkhoff, Principalities and Powers).
>
>
>
**Archon** (Greek: ἄρχων, romanized: árchōn, plural: ἄρχοντες, árchontes) is a Greek word that means "ruler", frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem αρχ-, meaning "to be first, to rule", derived from the same root as words such as monarch and hierarchy. ([Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon))
* The plural in Greek ἀρχαὶ (Rom 8:38) is used in the verse, the word order in KJV differs which puts *power* early in the sequence. The NIV, NLT has used *demons* for this word taking the phrase parallel to the contrasting 'life and death; present-future; heights and depths'.
* [NET Bible](https://www.stepbible.org/?q=version=ESV%7Cversion=NETfull%7Cversion=NIV%7Cversion=SBLG%7Cversion=THGNT%7Creference=Rom.8.38&options=NVGUVH&display=INTERLEAVED): "heavenly rulers", says in notes: "BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 6 takes this term as a reference to angelic or transcendent powers (as opposed to merely human rulers). To clarify this, the adjective “heavenly” has been supplied in the translation. Some interpreters see this as a reference to fallen angels or demonic powers, and this view is reflected in some recent translations (NIV, NLT)."
It is likely the reference to heavenly or cosmic evil powers includes or directly addresses the Gnostic Archons.
Archons of the Gnostics
-----------------------
>
> [**Archons**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon_(Gnosticism)) are, in Gnosticism and religions closely related to it, the builders of the physical universe. Among the Archontics, Ophites, Sethians and in the writings of Nag Hammadi library, the archons are rulers, each related to one of seven planets; they prevent souls from leaving the material realm. The political connotation of their name reflects rejection of the governmental system, as flawed without chance of true salvation. In [Manichaeism](https://web.archive.org/web/20221224065955/https://bjorkbloggen.com/2012/04/03/augustine-the-former-gnostic-and-his-many-heretical-views/), the archons are the rulers of a realm within the "Kingdom of Darkness", who together make up the Prince of Darkness. In The Reality of the Rulers, the physical appearance of Archons is described as hermaphroditic, with their faces being those of beasts.
>
>
> **Hebdomad** A characteristic feature of the Gnostic concept of the universe is the role played in almost all Gnostic systems by the seven world-creating archons, known as the Hebdomad (ἑβδομάς). These Seven are in most systems semi-hostile powers, and are reckoned as the last and lowest emanations of the Godhead; below them—and frequently considered as proceeding from them—comes the world of the actually devilish powers. There are indeed certain exceptions; Basilides taught the existence of a "great archon" called Abraxas who presided over 365 archons.
>
>
> Evidently from works such as the Apocryphon of John, the Ophite Diagrams, On the Origin of the World and Pistis Sophia, archons play an important role in Gnostic cosmology. Probably originally referring to the Greek daimons of the planets, in Gnosticism they became the demonic rulers of the material world, each associated with a different celestial sphere. As rulers over the material world, they are called ἄρχοντες (archontes, "principalities", or "rulers"). As with ancient astronomy, which thought of a sphere of fixed stars, above the spheres of the seven planets, beyond the spheres of the evil archons (Hebdomad), there were the supercelestial regions which a soul must reach by gnosis to escape the dominion of the archons. This place is thought of as the abode of Sophia (Wisdom) and Barbelo, also called Ogdoad.
>
>
>
[Eph 2:1-2 NHEB]
>
> You were made alive when you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the children of disobedience;
>
>
>
"In the NT the air is the realm of the demonic. The lower air (açr) was seen by the Greeks to be impure and therefore the domain of evil spirits. Some see this use of "air" as referring to the immaterial nature of the spiritual realm" ([Bob Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL08/VOL08B_02.html)). The “[airy spirits](https://www.gnosticwarrior.com/airy-spirits.html) (ariel spirits)” who the Gnostics said were the lords of darkness and the mischievousness of spirits of the air. The Christians had considered them to be wicked spirits on high whose habitation was mainly the air which was said to be the mansion of evil spirits, of whom Satan (Great Dragon) is the chief. |
1,829 | In some translations, I see the term "principalities and powers." To what does this refer?
This will not be exhaustive, but for example, consider the KJV's translation of Romans 8:38-39:
>
> For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
> principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
> Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
> separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 KJV)
>
>
>
Compare this with another translation, for example ESV:
>
> For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
> things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth,
> nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from
> the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39 ESV)
>
>
>
Now consider NIV1984:
>
> For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor
> demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither
> height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to
> separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
> (Romans 8:38-39 NIV1984)
>
>
>
So, it seems that "principalities and powers" in the KJV corresponds to "rulers" in the ESV and "demons" in the NIV1984. Does the term "principalities and powers" refer to *evil* spiritual beings, or just *powerful* ones?
Also, consider Colossians 1:16:
>
> For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
> in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or
> dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by
> him, and for him. (Colossians 1:16 KJV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible
> and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities
> -- all things were created through him and for him. (Colossians 1:16 ESV)
>
>
> For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
> visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
> authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians
> 1:16 NIV1984)
>
>
>
In these translations of this particular passage, the connotation of "principalities and powers" seems somewhat blurry. Can you please help me to understand? | 2012/05/28 | [
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1829",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com",
"https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/users/599/"
] | Angels and Demons, The Cosmic Evil Powers
-----------------------------------------
The *principalities and powers* cannot be referring to human rulers or kings. It is referring to the spiritual forces of darkness, the evil powers or in simple terms *demons*. The human rulers are mentioned positively (Rom 13:3, Titus 3:1); [compare](https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=rulers%20authorities&t=ESV#s=s_primary_0_1) a similar verse:
>
> [Eph 6:11-12 NHEB] Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world's rulers of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
>
>
>
Robertson's World Pictures:
>
> The world-rulers of this darkness (τους κοσμοκρατορας του σκοτους τουτου). This phrase occurs here alone. In Joh 14:30 Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (ο αρχων του κοσμου τουτου). In 2Co 4:4 he is termed "the god of this age" (ο θεος του αιωνος τουτου). The word κοσμοκρατωρ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth.
>
>
>
On Romans 8:38 [Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL05/VOL05_08.html) comments,
>
> "**principalities. . .powers**" This refers to (1) the evil angelic or demonic forces of this age (cf. Eph. 2:2; 6:12; 1 Cor. 15:24; Col. 1:16) or (2) possibly the impersonal structures of the fallen world (religion, government, education, medicine, etc.) that allows fallen mankind to be independent of God (cf. Hendrickus Berkhoff, Principalities and Powers).
>
>
>
**Archon** (Greek: ἄρχων, romanized: árchōn, plural: ἄρχοντες, árchontes) is a Greek word that means "ruler", frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem αρχ-, meaning "to be first, to rule", derived from the same root as words such as monarch and hierarchy. ([Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon))
* The plural in Greek ἀρχαὶ (Rom 8:38) is used in the verse, the word order in KJV differs which puts *power* early in the sequence. The NIV, NLT has used *demons* for this word taking the phrase parallel to the contrasting 'life and death; present-future; heights and depths'.
* [NET Bible](https://www.stepbible.org/?q=version=ESV%7Cversion=NETfull%7Cversion=NIV%7Cversion=SBLG%7Cversion=THGNT%7Creference=Rom.8.38&options=NVGUVH&display=INTERLEAVED): "heavenly rulers", says in notes: "BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 6 takes this term as a reference to angelic or transcendent powers (as opposed to merely human rulers). To clarify this, the adjective “heavenly” has been supplied in the translation. Some interpreters see this as a reference to fallen angels or demonic powers, and this view is reflected in some recent translations (NIV, NLT)."
It is likely the reference to heavenly or cosmic evil powers includes or directly addresses the Gnostic Archons.
Archons of the Gnostics
-----------------------
>
> [**Archons**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon_(Gnosticism)) are, in Gnosticism and religions closely related to it, the builders of the physical universe. Among the Archontics, Ophites, Sethians and in the writings of Nag Hammadi library, the archons are rulers, each related to one of seven planets; they prevent souls from leaving the material realm. The political connotation of their name reflects rejection of the governmental system, as flawed without chance of true salvation. In [Manichaeism](https://web.archive.org/web/20221224065955/https://bjorkbloggen.com/2012/04/03/augustine-the-former-gnostic-and-his-many-heretical-views/), the archons are the rulers of a realm within the "Kingdom of Darkness", who together make up the Prince of Darkness. In The Reality of the Rulers, the physical appearance of Archons is described as hermaphroditic, with their faces being those of beasts.
>
>
> **Hebdomad** A characteristic feature of the Gnostic concept of the universe is the role played in almost all Gnostic systems by the seven world-creating archons, known as the Hebdomad (ἑβδομάς). These Seven are in most systems semi-hostile powers, and are reckoned as the last and lowest emanations of the Godhead; below them—and frequently considered as proceeding from them—comes the world of the actually devilish powers. There are indeed certain exceptions; Basilides taught the existence of a "great archon" called Abraxas who presided over 365 archons.
>
>
> Evidently from works such as the Apocryphon of John, the Ophite Diagrams, On the Origin of the World and Pistis Sophia, archons play an important role in Gnostic cosmology. Probably originally referring to the Greek daimons of the planets, in Gnosticism they became the demonic rulers of the material world, each associated with a different celestial sphere. As rulers over the material world, they are called ἄρχοντες (archontes, "principalities", or "rulers"). As with ancient astronomy, which thought of a sphere of fixed stars, above the spheres of the seven planets, beyond the spheres of the evil archons (Hebdomad), there were the supercelestial regions which a soul must reach by gnosis to escape the dominion of the archons. This place is thought of as the abode of Sophia (Wisdom) and Barbelo, also called Ogdoad.
>
>
>
[Eph 2:1-2 NHEB]
>
> You were made alive when you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the children of disobedience;
>
>
>
"In the NT the air is the realm of the demonic. The lower air (açr) was seen by the Greeks to be impure and therefore the domain of evil spirits. Some see this use of "air" as referring to the immaterial nature of the spiritual realm" ([Bob Utley](http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/new_testament_studies/VOL08/VOL08B_02.html)). The “[airy spirits](https://www.gnosticwarrior.com/airy-spirits.html) (ariel spirits)” who the Gnostics said were the lords of darkness and the mischievousness of spirits of the air. The Christians had considered them to be wicked spirits on high whose habitation was mainly the air which was said to be the mansion of evil spirits, of whom Satan (Great Dragon) is the chief. | Colossians 2:15 (DRB):
>
> And despoiling the principalities and powers, he hath exposed them confidently in open shew, triumphing over them in himself.
>
>
>
Ephesians 6:12 (DRB):
>
> For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
>
>
>
Titus 3:1 (DRB):
>
> Admonish them to be subject to princes and powers, to obey at a word, to be ready to every good work.
>
>
>
Titus 2:8 (DRB):
>
> The sound word that can not be blamed: that he, who is on the contrary part, may be afraid, having no evil to say of us.
>
>
>
The question is so simple:
Who are the principalities and powers?
From the above mentioned verses I suggest that they are the rulers of this world, they are of good works but of bad conscience, hence, they are allegorically of no blood and flesh.
I suggest that Satan is the head of these rulers.
Again, they are of good works but of bad conscience. Exactly like Pharisees and Scribes.
Since they are of good works, they are appointed by God to rule our world.
After we get mature enough, we will be transported to the God/Christ Kingdom.
This is my point of view supported by verses of the Bible.
Look:
* Job 1:6-10.
* Colossians 1:16.
* Titus 3:3.
* 1 Peter 2:1. |
173,523 | I'm quite certain the following sentence is natural:
>
> Ikuto was taking a picture of her.
>
>
>
But which of the following would be more common in spoken English?
>
> Ikuto was recording a video of her.
>
>
> Ikuto was taking a video of her.
>
>
>
My initial thought was that "recording" was the better choice here. But then I couldn't find evidence to back this up online.
Note that this sentence would be said when describing an illustration of a character named Ikuto recording a video of his friend. Since we have context, there would not be confusion when using "taking." In other words, it's clear that Ikuto isn't doing something like taking a DVD of "her" that was on the table, or anything like that.
Please help! | 2018/07/16 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/173523",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/75655/"
] | In my experience, the most natural expression would be, "Ikuto was **taping** her." It sounds perfectly natural to say, ". . .taking a video of her," as well, although it wouldn't be my first choice in speech. If you wanted to use the word "recording," I would say, "Ikuto was recording her."
It mostly comes down to personal preference. | You could also say *shooting a video* or *making a video*.
There is nothing wrong with any of them.
However, if you're looking for what is the most common from among those four, Google Books Ngram Viewer suggests that *making a video* [has the most use](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=recording%20a%20video%2C%20taking%20a%20video%2C%20shooting%20a%20video%2C%20making%20a%20video&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Crecording%20a%20video%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Ctaking%20a%20video%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cshooting%20a%20video%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmaking%20a%20video%3B%2Cc0) in print.
As for spoken English as opposed to written, I don't know. All would be equally understood. |
2,475 | Inspired by [another question](https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/2472/what-factors-should-i-consider-when-choosing-a-dna-testing-service), I got interested in companies that provide DNA tests for genealogy matters.
The problem is that the samples would be collected and submitted from Brazil, looking for ancestors from Italy, Czech and Poland.
And after having my DNA sequenced, where should I submit it or where could I find DNA from other people for possible matches? | 2012/12/04 | [
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/2475",
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com",
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/users/126/"
] | [Family Tree DNA](http://www.familytreedna.com) is based in the U.S., but has customers worldwide -- they can and do ship DNA kits anywhere. They also have resellers in Europe and the Middle East, which helps bring in the international samples.
Other U.S.-based companies only ship within the U.S. or have limited international reach. For example, Ancestry.com's new [AncestryDNA](http://dna.ancestry.com) test is U.S.-only at the moment, and [23andMe](http://www.23andMe.com) ships to a [limited list of countries](https://customercare.23andme.com/entries/21262316-do-you-take-international-orders).
There are genetic genealogy companies outside the U.S., but the biggest ones are U.S.-based.
The [International Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG)](http://www.isogg.org) has a [list of genetic genealogy companies](http://www.isogg.org/wiki/List_of_DNA_testing_companies) at their website.
All companies have their own databases, where you are compared to other customers of the company. However, depending on what type of test you are doing, there are also external databases where you can upload your results for further comparison. Some companies also allow uploading results from another company.
Disclaimer: I'm currently a consultant for FamilyTreeDNA, though I started as a customer first in 2005. | As discussed above Family Tree DNA are your best option. They have by far the most international database. They also have lots of geographical projects where results can be compared with other people with ancestry from the same country or region. There is a list in the ISOGG Wiki:
<http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Geographical_DNA_projects> |
854,331 | In the last few days, every night when I turn off my PC, there is an update installed (1). In the windows updater, it says that it's an "update for windows 7 for x64-systems" (translated word for word from german). Does anyone know if this is normal? | 2014/12/18 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/854331",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/324543/"
] | This could be because of your "Windows Update" settings. If it is configured to run frequently (daily), then the available updates downloaded in the temp location and will get installed when you shutting down your machine.
Configure the "Windows Update" settings as per your convenient time window and ensure your other processes not delayed because of frequent updates.
Go to Control Panel > Windows Update > Change Settings > now, change your selection from the drop down box.
 | * Start Run Type "services.msc"
* In the window that opens (Services), look for the following entry in the the right pane:
**"Windows Update"**
* Double click on this entry.
see the below image
* In the windows that opens first "Stop" the service.
* Set Startup type as "Disabled".
* Click on Ok to validate. |
854,331 | In the last few days, every night when I turn off my PC, there is an update installed (1). In the windows updater, it says that it's an "update for windows 7 for x64-systems" (translated word for word from german). Does anyone know if this is normal? | 2014/12/18 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/854331",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/324543/"
] | This could be because of your "Windows Update" settings. If it is configured to run frequently (daily), then the available updates downloaded in the temp location and will get installed when you shutting down your machine.
Configure the "Windows Update" settings as per your convenient time window and ensure your other processes not delayed because of frequent updates.
Go to Control Panel > Windows Update > Change Settings > now, change your selection from the drop down box.
 | I have had the same thing; like you i didn't think it was 'normal' and that maybe the update installation was failing for some reason, then repeating itself the next time i shut down. You can monitor the updates through Start/All Programs/Windows Update, then select 'view history'. When i ddi this i could see there were a whole lot of updates (all successful) then, next day, a whole lot of different updates, also all successful. Seems a bit weird to me, but not too worried ....yet |
226,973 | >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How do I install Adobe Flash player?](https://askubuntu.com/questions/11/how-do-i-install-adobe-flash-player)
>
>
>
yum for Linux
target for other Linux
rpm for other Linux
apt for Ubuntu 10/04+
i don't have a clue what is going on | 2012/12/09 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/226973",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/113526/"
] | You shouldn't download anything. Just use the search function in the Software Center to search for Adobe Flash, it will do everything for you. | Ubuntu uses the Apt system, so get that one. |
3,169,850 | I came across [Ushahidi](http://www.ushahidi.com/ "Ushahidi") today and that got me thinking about various community service software projects. What other community service software projects are there, whether they be web-based (as Ushahidi is) or not?
Note, I'm not talking about open source by itself, per se—although I presume most community service software will be opensource, I'm really aiming for more "help the disadvantaged of the world" type projects.
Anyone?
List
====
* [Ushahidi](http://www.ushahidi.com/ "Ushahidi") (PHP, MySQL)
* [One Laptop Per Child (software side of things)](http://laptop.org/ "One Laptop Per Child") (Python and more)
* [Sahana](http://www.sahanafoundation.org/ "Sahaha") (PHP, MySQL) | 2010/07/03 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3169850",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/251162/"
] | The FSF gives an Award for Projects of Social Benefit. Not all of the projects are necessarily software projects, but some are. They've awarded Wikipedia, Sahana, Groklaw, Creative Commons, and Internet Archive.
Probably [Sahana](http://sahanafoundation.org/) is the closest so far to what you're looking for. It's a system to coordinate disaster relief. It was originally developed for the 2004 Sri Lanka tsunami. | Community service projects offer people an opportunity to give something back to their communities. Through community service, groups and individuals can take part in projects.
Apache Software Foundation (1991) is also a community service project.
Also,
JBoss(Java) is a community software.
And both these are open source software projects. |
16,498 | One of our dogs apparently had a teething problem while we were out working in the garden, and decided to work it out on the wooden door's mullion. The mullion has been rather decreased in the process. I have no problem sanding it back down to shape, then sanding the entire door down and refinishing it; I'd planned to anyway. The problem is that I need to fill these gaps and restore the contours first, and it needs to be more durable than your standard Elmers or Minwax wood filler, which I feel will just flake off.
Painting is probably not an option as we're renting (I'd just use bondo if it was an option) and the landlord was proud of the (horrible) refinishing job she'd done on the door recently.
I've attached two photos to show the damage. They don't show it well -- what you should know is that there's probably at least 1/8" of wood removed in some areas, especially the bottom right of the first image.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dTgKT.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/h7TnU.jpg) | 2012/08/20 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/16498",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/3450/"
] | Unfortunately, I'll be surprised if you can effect a very successful repair. Restoring the outer corners like those is tricky at best. And having it stained only makes it worse, since the wood grain will be easily visible.
Most likely any attempt to repair will make it worse looking not better. I'd opt for something low-impact, such as a scratch-cover product like Olde English, which essentially re-stains the now-exposed wood fibers. It at least conceals the bright colors of the underlying wood and makes the damage a little less noticeable.
But ultimately I'd confess to your landlord and let her decide how best to proceed. It's her door, and her call. | The wood fillers are pretty durable if you have a real crack or gap that can hold them in. By themselves on the surface they are less reliable.
Alternative would be to remove the entire face that is damaged to an even consistent depth and then glue on a thin strip of the same type of wood. you can then trim it flush with the surrounding edges, stain and finish the whole door. This does take some skill and patience with a plane, chisel, sureform or similar.
An alternative is to use wood filler, but drill or otherwise cut out some additional surface for the wood filler to grab. Then sand the filler down to a hair below the desired surface level and laminate [wood veneer tape](http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1v/R-100585395/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&keyword=wood%20veneer&storeId=10051) on top of the surface.
This will really only solve the flat face problems, but that might be the bulk of your issue. Tooth marks in the grooves probably would be ok with filler and careful blending with stain or stain pens. |
16,498 | One of our dogs apparently had a teething problem while we were out working in the garden, and decided to work it out on the wooden door's mullion. The mullion has been rather decreased in the process. I have no problem sanding it back down to shape, then sanding the entire door down and refinishing it; I'd planned to anyway. The problem is that I need to fill these gaps and restore the contours first, and it needs to be more durable than your standard Elmers or Minwax wood filler, which I feel will just flake off.
Painting is probably not an option as we're renting (I'd just use bondo if it was an option) and the landlord was proud of the (horrible) refinishing job she'd done on the door recently.
I've attached two photos to show the damage. They don't show it well -- what you should know is that there's probably at least 1/8" of wood removed in some areas, especially the bottom right of the first image.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dTgKT.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/h7TnU.jpg) | 2012/08/20 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/16498",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/3450/"
] | Unfortunately, I'll be surprised if you can effect a very successful repair. Restoring the outer corners like those is tricky at best. And having it stained only makes it worse, since the wood grain will be easily visible.
Most likely any attempt to repair will make it worse looking not better. I'd opt for something low-impact, such as a scratch-cover product like Olde English, which essentially re-stains the now-exposed wood fibers. It at least conceals the bright colors of the underlying wood and makes the damage a little less noticeable.
But ultimately I'd confess to your landlord and let her decide how best to proceed. It's her door, and her call. | If you could obtain a sample of the wood that is used. An elaborate solution would be to get a saw and a chisel and remove the top section of wood from the window (ie, the area that was chewed), this can be done by sawing to the desired depth and removing material with a wood chisel.
Then glue in the section of wood that you have cut to size, sand and stain.
I would not recommend this solution however. i feel it is too much effort (and risk) for so little reward! |
205,305 | I have about 80ft of exterior stairs with two landings to which I want to add three zones of low-voltage lights. I would like a 3-way switch controlling each zone at the top and the bottom of the zone.
I believe I could use one transformer and run low-voltage wire to all my switches however, I am having a hard time finding appropriate exterior switches and the equivalent of 3-wire wet-location low voltage wire.
My 120V brain says to just use UF-B 120V wiring and wet location switches/boxes that then feed three separate GFCI outlets into which I plug three separate transformers. The expensive part of the project are the lights so paying more for UF-B 14/3 or 12/3, for instance, appears nominal.
I'm using 12guage and a 20amp GFCI breaker wire in the example in case I need to use the outlet for electrical tools in the future. Other than having to buy three transformers instead of one, what are the benefits of a all low-voltage system over what I am proposing?
This is the only DC wall switch I can find: Leviton 12021-2I (SPST)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5bX2z.jpg) | 2020/10/11 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/205305",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/104656/"
] | I'd use relays for this
-----------------------
The simplest way to get out of this jam without throwing a bunch of lighting transformers at it would be to use single-pole/single-throw switches to switch on and off SPDT *relays* that control the lighting loads, as SPDT relay contacts can be wired in the same fashion as 3-way switches. For the switches, you can use Leviton 56021s with Bell 5123 (single) and 5127 (double) weatherproof covers; you have a couple options for relays, though. If you have space around where you're installing the switches, you can thread Functional Devices RIBU1C-N4 relays into hubs on the switch boxes; an alternative approach would be to use AP&C PAM-4 relays mounted inside the boxes, but this requires a fair bit of box real estate at each switch location. Both of these relays are rated for switching significant resistive load at 28VDC (7A for the PAM-4, 10A for the RIBU1C-N4), so 3A of LED lighting shouldn't be a significant challenge. | Since it **is** low voltage, you could do things that are not OK with mains voltage, such as running 2 2-wire cables you can easily source (wire-tied together) where you can't easily source 3-wire cable. You could also use 3-wire UF-B as overqualified low-voltage cable. It might confuse the next person to see it, but it would be perfectly safe/adequate.
Wet-location switch boxes that are set up to operate a "normal" switch protected inside the box exist, and AC/DC rated switches also exist, though they are harder to find than AC-Only switches. *I have not throughly investigated sources for wet-location low-voltage DC-only 3-ways at this point. Boating suppliers might be a good place to look, for instance.*
If going with the 120V approach, I'll always suggest conduit as superior to UF cable. |
116,571 | I need to take any given valid XML schema (XSD) and denormalize it to a simple form containing no refs, no includes, etc. All simple type definitions should be inline, such that when looking at any given element, all declarations are visible without performing another lookup.
I've found some tools that have this built-in, but I need to do it "on the fly." Platform of choice is Java, but I'd be willing to port the code from another language if necessary. I just really don't want to reinvent the wheel here. Searching for OSS libraries from Apache/etc have yielded nothing. The closest I've found is XSOM which supports traversing a schema as an object model, but you still have to handle every possible form that a schema could take to represent a given structure.
The output doesn't have to be actual XML, as it will actually be used in a object model in its final form. | 2008/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/116571",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/13664/"
] | You might find XSD4J helpful:
<http://dynvocation.selfip.net/xsd4j/> | Another useful API for XML Schema is [XSOM](https://xsom.java.net/).
XSOM is used by [XJC](http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/tools/share/xjc.html), JAXB schema compiler under the hub so is probably guaranteed to be kept alive. |
116,571 | I need to take any given valid XML schema (XSD) and denormalize it to a simple form containing no refs, no includes, etc. All simple type definitions should be inline, such that when looking at any given element, all declarations are visible without performing another lookup.
I've found some tools that have this built-in, but I need to do it "on the fly." Platform of choice is Java, but I'd be willing to port the code from another language if necessary. I just really don't want to reinvent the wheel here. Searching for OSS libraries from Apache/etc have yielded nothing. The closest I've found is XSOM which supports traversing a schema as an object model, but you still have to handle every possible form that a schema could take to represent a given structure.
The output doesn't have to be actual XML, as it will actually be used in a object model in its final form. | 2008/09/22 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/116571",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/13664/"
] | The EMF XSD model may be helpful:
<http://www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt/?project=xsd> | Another useful API for XML Schema is [XSOM](https://xsom.java.net/).
XSOM is used by [XJC](http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/tools/share/xjc.html), JAXB schema compiler under the hub so is probably guaranteed to be kept alive. |
67,506 | I have a feature that only allow users to use it when they've already reached a level of experience in the app (similar to stackexchange, stackoverflow).
Should I:
* hide it until they reach the level or
* show it at the first place but disable (button/text) or
* show it in full state but when they click on it, throw a message saying the requirement ?
And of course the reasoning behind the decision. Thanks | 2014/11/11 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/67506",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/46980/"
] | I would say that:
>
> show it at the first place but disable (disabled button/text)
>
>
>
Is the right approach as it gives users an idea about how their "expertise" rewards them as well as an idea about what they need to to do in order to achieve progress towards a desired set of goals. the **review** feature in UX.SE offers a good example of progressive disclosure:
Do bear in mind that this is not a blanket rule as you do need to balance the need to show some of your reward elements with that of keeping your users intrigued and engaged. | What's the rationale behind the decision of hiding this features? What will determine the right level of expertise reached by the user?
I would suggest not to hide any features. Some users may be in a position to use that feature straight away, so why should you want to impact negatively their experience?
If things need to be hidden, I would consider looking into an advance option that perhaps will allow users to tap into enhanced functionality - but I am nit sure this is what you need.
Antonio |
67,506 | I have a feature that only allow users to use it when they've already reached a level of experience in the app (similar to stackexchange, stackoverflow).
Should I:
* hide it until they reach the level or
* show it at the first place but disable (button/text) or
* show it in full state but when they click on it, throw a message saying the requirement ?
And of course the reasoning behind the decision. Thanks | 2014/11/11 | [
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/67506",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com",
"https://ux.stackexchange.com/users/46980/"
] | I would say that:
>
> show it at the first place but disable (disabled button/text)
>
>
>
Is the right approach as it gives users an idea about how their "expertise" rewards them as well as an idea about what they need to to do in order to achieve progress towards a desired set of goals. the **review** feature in UX.SE offers a good example of progressive disclosure:
Do bear in mind that this is not a blanket rule as you do need to balance the need to show some of your reward elements with that of keeping your users intrigued and engaged. | In the absence of any additional info that may impact how this question is answered, I recommend that you hide it and not show it until it is truly available to the user for the following reasons:
* Displaying disabled controls imply that, at some point during the interaction in the page, it will eventually be available. Based on the assumption that it's not the case, I'd say you could be setting false expectations by leaving it out there.
* Showing the controls in its full state also implies a certain amount of expectations that those functions are available when it really isn't. That's like telling someone that they cannot go into a room where the door has been left open (a locked door sends a clearer message). |
288,842 | >
> The last thing your strands need IS/ARE chemical preservatives, sulfates, or perfumes stripping them of any moisture that’s still left.
>
>
>
In the above sentence, is it grammatically correct to use "is" or "are"? | 2021/06/12 | [
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/288842",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com",
"https://ell.stackexchange.com/users/136823/"
] | I am a native American English speaker. The word should be *is*, and the rest of the sentence is correct. There is nothing wrong with it.
You use *is* because the subject is *thing*. You use *them* because it refers to the plural word *strands*. There is no ambiguity in this sentence. | It is a badly written sentence. “Them” floats off in the air unattached to anything.
According to the strict rules of English grammar, the subject precedes the verb in indicative sentences. As the comments correctly point out, the subject is “thing,” which is singular, and so requires “is” rather than “are.”
Nevertheless, you will frequently see or hear “are” in this kind of verbose sentence. The primary reason, I believe, is that the correct plural “strands need” immediately preceding the main verb gets the mind thinking in a plural mode. The way to avoid many errors in agreement between main subject and main verb is to avoid unnecessary verbosity.
Here is a possible rewrite that is less verbose and therefore less likely to lead to error.
>
> Preservatives and perfumes strip the moisture from your strands, which is not what you want at all.
>
>
> |
31,143 | Is it possible to change the Bluetooth UUID (the 128-bit value) on my iPod (Currently running iOS 5.0)? or is this a factory locked value? | 2011/11/13 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/31143",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/11322/"
] | No it is not possible. No known private API or jailbreak methods to do so AFAIK. | The UDID is locked, but it is possible to spoof a UUID, as for an Bluetooth UUID, I'd think so but I'm not sure there's anything readily available i.e. in Cydia to do so, only a general phone UUID spoofer. |
20,671,136 | Basically it is a CORS problem, after adding
Header add Access-Control-Allow-Origin "\*"
Header add Access-Control-Allow-Headers "Origin, X-Requested-With, Content-Type, Accept"
Header add Access-Control-Allow-Methods "POST, GET, PUT, OPTIONS"
into server config file, I can "GET" data, it works for Chrome but not for lower version IE.
Then I used JSONP to handle the problem of GET, it works for IE8 and IE9.
Now, my question is how to get cross-origin resource sharing (CORS) post or put method not working in IE8 and IE9? Really have no idea, IE8 and IE9 has a bigger coverage.
Keep getting the error: "Access is denied"
Thanks, | 2013/12/19 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/20671136",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1459575/"
] | CORS is not supported natively by IE9 or lower. You need to use a CORS polyfill, such as [easyXdm](http://easyxdm.net/wp/).
You can find the list of supported browsers [here](http://caniuse.com/cors). | IE 8 and 9 support CORS partially via their XDomainRequest object, which is not used on any other browser. AngularJS doesn't XDomainRequest, so CORS won't work on IE 8/9 with AngularJS (or jQuery for that matter) unless you use some kind of polyfill.
If you only need to do GET and POST (not PUT, DELETE, etc.) and you don't need to send any custom headers, include this library to get CORS working on IE 8 and 9:
<https://github.com/intuit/xhr-xdr-adapter> |
79,266 | I've been playing a song wrong for a while now, and it's only when I took the time to slow down the music that I learned why. The alignment of the notes on the sheet music is different to how it the music sounds. However, when put through MuseScore, it plays the sheet music how the music sounds, indicating that it's not a mistake that the sheet music is written this way. I'm wondering if there are any symbols I don't know the meaning of, or if I'm missing some piece of basic music theory knowledge.
Looking at the sheet music, why is it written the way it is?
I'm including two photos. The first is the actual sheet music, the second is how that sheet music sounds.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EKLW1.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/l59RO.jpg)
If you want to hear the song, the part I'm having trouble with occurs at 2:20. On musescore this is called mabinogi saga login theme. | 2019/01/26 | [
"https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/79266",
"https://music.stackexchange.com",
"https://music.stackexchange.com/users/57131/"
] | I would say: **the author of the [score on musescore.com](https://musescore.com/prinnrose/scores/150600) intended the notes for playback by a human, and did not care to hack around in Musescore to get its playback exactly "right"**. ("Right" as in, to sound like they would play it themselves, or like in the original recording they did the transcription from.) The score in Musescore is a bit different from the one in the "OST" Youtube video, and the program's playback is probably not even what was intended. I can't hear much of an arpeggio on Youtube.
This is what it sounds like on Youtube (relevant part at around 2:20):
This is the playback in Musescore 2.3.2
Would any human player interpret the notes anywhere near like that? If the Youtube link to the original sound track is what was transcribed, then Musescored playback is plain wrong. Even the transcription is inaccurate, because I don't think there are any arpeggios. Maybe a different original soundtrack version was used for the transcription.
Replacing the grace notes with acciaccaturas changes the Musescore robot's programming, try it and you'll see. You could also add arpeggio lines, which are wavy lines in the "Arpeggios & Glissandos" palette.
See [Different types of grace notes](https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/5936/different-types-of-grace-notes)
Apparently, getting Musescore's playback to sound exactly "right" (i.e. in some particular way) needs some hacking around with hidden markings and plugins, to play back things like ritardando
<https://musescore.org/en/handbook/tempo#ritardando-accelerando>
For comparison, here's how Sibelius 6 interprets the same score, opened from MusicXML format (and after resetting layout and spacing). This is very close to how I would play it myself, except that the "rit." marking should be some kind of slowing-down (ritardando or ritenuto), but it doesn't seem to do anything. | These are **arpeggios**, (one example many ornaments)
Imagine you are playing the harp accompanying a singer. Where would you place your chord? Before the beat, accurately with the beat, or delayed?
All will be o.k. It’s just a question of interpretation and performance, or agreements between soloists, conductor and orchestra.
**List and Examples of Music Ornaments**
<http://musicofyesterday.com/historical-music-theory/list-and-examples-of-music-ornaments/> |
415,818 | I purchased the multimeter pictured below for a high voltage power supply I'm working on. It's rated for 100V DC and 10A, but I hope to measure several thousand volts. Is it possible to use a HV voltage probe like I would use with a regular multimeter on this component, or no?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EJ7hq.png) | 2019/01/08 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/415818",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/150968/"
] | No. Those cheap meters use a voltage divider adding up to around 280-290K and go directly into an 8-bit MCU (STM8 series).
Typical high voltage probes assume a reasonably accurate 10M\$\Omega\$ input impedance for the multimeter- something like 999M in series with 1.11M (internal divider values), so it would read grossly low on this kind of an input. | Only if the input impedances are the same to form a voltage divider. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | The target audience of the writers of the gospels was to people who did not know about or did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah and Risen Lord. They included the virgin birth story because it was an important part of the narrative. Paul's target audiences, on the other hand, were already Christians and so, presumably, were already aware of the narrative of Christ. There are many other life events Paul did not mention as well. | I much prefer Nathaniel's answer to mine (the accepted answer), as it is considerably more thorough and answers more questions. I still believe the Paul's mission to the gentiles is a piece of the puzzle, but only a small part. I do not have the time to flesh this out, but I will leave it for completeness.
Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles. The virgin birth was something that had been prophesied by Isaiah and of great importance to a Jewish Christian. The gentile had no concern for, or history regarding this theology. It would have been totally out of context to tell the churches that Paul wrote to that Christ was born of a virgin. They would have said, "Why are you telling me this? What does this have to do with anything!"
For the Jew it was considerably more important since through their histories they could have understood that sin comes through the father, and that all are conceived in sin (Psalm 51).
So Paul does not mention this because it was not at all important for his readers to hear. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | The target audience of the writers of the gospels was to people who did not know about or did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah and Risen Lord. They included the virgin birth story because it was an important part of the narrative. Paul's target audiences, on the other hand, were already Christians and so, presumably, were already aware of the narrative of Christ. There are many other life events Paul did not mention as well. | The question comes down to whether Paul, Mark and John failed to mention the virgin birth because:
1. They never heard of it or
2. They did not think it was necessary to include in their writings.
Each of these are different cases, so I will take them one by one.
Paul
====
Galatians, as John McKenzie mentioned, is as good a place for Paul to have mentioned the virgin birth as any. He explained his purpose for writing early in the letter:
>
> I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.—Galatians 1:6-8 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Galatians+1/))
>
>
>
We know from the Talmud that [Jesus' parentage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud#Mother_and_father) was a common line of criticism of Christian gospels. So one might very well assume that since Paul didn't defend Mary's virginity, he didn't believe it or didn't think it an important part of the gospel. However, Paul's letters predated any of the works we call "the Gospels". In Galatians, it might be better to translate εὐαγγέλιον literally as "good news". Specifically, Paul is talking about the good news of the "grace of Christ" and spends nearly the entire letter fleshing out the reason Jewish Christians are no longer held to the Mosaic law.
We don't know exactly how the good news was originally communicated to the Galatians (and other early Christian communities), but the written gospels show clear evidence they began as oral traditions. This isn't surprising given the importance of the [oral Torah](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/1272/why-do-most-christians-not-follow-the-talmud/7140#7140) at the time. As a rabbi, Jesus was expected to teach on the law and his disciples were expected to remember both the teachings and the context of individual lessons. As with the [two major schools of Jewish tradition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_and_Shammai), followers of Jesus would have taught their own disciples the teachings of their rabbi. Of particular importance to the question, the circumstances Jesus' birth would not have been part of the oral tradition since Jesus didn't take that opportunity to teach (understandably).
So one possibility is that Paul didn't include the virgin birth information because it wasn't part of Jesus' oral tradition. But that doesn't mean the virgin birth wasn't taught in other contexts. Luke 1:1-4 mentions specifically "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Luke+1/)) as sources. It's entirely possible Paul didn't know about the virgin birth because he was more concerned with the oral tradition than with eyewitness accounts of Jesus' early life.
Mark
====
Regarded by most scholars as the earliest gospel account, Mark seems to follow a similar approach to Jesus as his contemporary Plutarch did in his [*Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Lives). In particular, Mark's gospel attempts to paint a portrait of Jesus through his actions. Like many of Plutarch's *Lives*, the first gospel drops us *in medias res* with a description of John's baptism of Jesus. His mother and brothers are [mentioned briefly](https://www.esv.org/Mark+3/), but mostly serve as a motivation for a teaching about community.
The core message of this gospel can be found in [Mark 8](https://www.esv.org/Mark+8/) when Peter identifies Jesus as the messiah. Then Jesus subverts expectations by predicting his suffering and death rather than a triumphant victory over the Romans. The author then tells of how this prediction came true. Importantly, **Jesus also predicted his own resurrection, which is not described in the gospel**. It's possible this section of manuscript [was lost](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1280/does-the-lost-leaf-theory-for-marks-abrupt-ending-fail-if-written-on-a-scroll), but it could also be [the author's intent](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/16951/68). If so, it's not really surprising the virgin birth narrative was skipped too.
John
====
Like Mark, John skips the nativity. Matthew and Luke added nativity stories to the start of their accounts, but otherwise accept the Marcan chronology. As (most likely) the final gospel, John's author would (probably) have been aware of the those narratives. But he uses his own chronology and borrows almost nothing from the synoptic tradition. Instead, he begins with a philosophical essay equating of Jesus to the concept of Logos reminiscent of [Philo of Alexandria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo).
Like Paul, John had an opportune moment to mention the virgin birth in the [Bread of Life discourse](https://www.esv.org/John+6/):
>
> So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”—John 6:41-42 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+6/))
>
>
>
Like in Galatians, this is a fine opportunity for the author to point out Joseph was not the *biological* father. (The author parenthetically points out later in the chapter that Jesus was talking about Judas.) Also like Galatians, the virgin birth is not critical to the purpose of the text:
>
> The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. **But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.**—John 1:9-13 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+1/))
>
>
>
Notice that this passage asserts that not just Jesus but *all who believe in his name* haee the right to be born of God. While the virgin birth is unique in history, John asserts that spiritual rebirth is available to all who recognize Jesus' true nature. So discussing the details of the nativity would have been a distraction from the main thesis.
Conclusion
==========
This is certainly an argument from silence that hardly seems justified. The virgin birth doctrine [must have been ridiculed early](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/6163/914) and would have been a distraction for Paul and John. Mark's biography probably left out Jesus' parentage for stylistic reasons. Matthew and especially Luke add details of Jesus' birth to Mark because they were interested in preserving those traditions.
As an aside, it's easier to see that the argument from silence is tenuous when you read modern documents with a critical eye. For instance there's an [article in the LA Times](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-riot-poll-20170426-story.html) this morning today about the possiblity of race riots. It's a complicated issue with many contributing factors. While the article does highlight some new factors, it assumes people know or can easily discover details that were relevant 25 years ago. There's no doubt the acquittal of Rodney King's attackers was a pivotal event, but it's not mentioned in the article at all. It's just part of the background knowledge the reporter assumes everyone will have. I suspect Paul, Mark and John felt the same way about the virgin birth. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | The target audience of the writers of the gospels was to people who did not know about or did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah and Risen Lord. They included the virgin birth story because it was an important part of the narrative. Paul's target audiences, on the other hand, were already Christians and so, presumably, were already aware of the narrative of Christ. There are many other life events Paul did not mention as well. | Paul does mention the virgin birth. He knew the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 that a virgin will conceive and bear a son and call Him Immanuel; that is, God-with-us. So where does Paul mention the virgin conceiving and bearing to term and calling Him God-with-us?
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, …”
Galatians 4:4
God sent forth His Son. Paul uses the same term ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō translated “sent forth” two verses later to describe God sending forth the Holy Spirit ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō . This wasn’t a man’s spirit, just like it wasn’t a man’s seed. God was the active origin; He sent forth His Son.
God made Him of a woman, from her flesh. Not of a man and woman, but of a woman.
Further, Son of God was a term Paul used for Christ at Romans 1:4, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Galatians 2:20, and Ephesians 4:13. Obviously Paul knew Christ was not a son of Joseph. Christ was Son of God.
So, if you know God sent forth His Spirit, you also know God sent forth His Son who was made of a woman and who is called Immanuel. Paul wrote about the virgin conceiving and bearing. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | Advocates for the virgin birth make the following arguments for why Paul didn't mention it:
1. It wasn't controversial and therefore not worth mentioning
2. It didn't need to be mentioned in order to accomplish the goals of the epistles
3. It was a matter of some privacy
4. He didn't know about it
Points 1 & 2 overlap to some extent and thus are sometimes difficult to distinguish. Point 4 is held by some advocates of the virgin birth, but most reject it, as we'll see.
Not controversial
=================
First, many suggest that the virgin birth was widely known in Christian circles, through the oral tradition. For example, James Orr:
>
> It is to be remembered that Paul is not in the habit of alluding to, or recalling, the incidents in Christ's life—incidents which must have been perfectly familiar to him from the common preaching. (114)
>
>
>
J. Gresham Machen suggests that the virgin birth may well have been a topic of Paul's in-person teaching, in light of the uncharacteristic summary he gives in 1 Corinthians 15. John Frame writes:
>
> The virgin birth was not part of Jesus’ preaching or that of the early church. It was not a controversial matter such as might have been addressed in the epistles (Christology in general was not a particularly controversial matter among the Christians, and even if it had been, the virgin birth most likely was not seen as a means of supporting Christological dogma).
>
>
>
This parenthetical remark by Frame may seem surprising to us, but there is little evidence of controversies like those associated with [Docetism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism) and [Arianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism) in the time that Paul was writing. Major debates between Christians over Christ's nature came later. As Machen writes:
>
> Paul does not argue in the Epistles about his conception of the person of Christ. About other things there was debate, but, at least during the period of the earlier Epistles, there was no debate whatever about this; apparently Paul assumes that his own stupendous view of Jesus as a supernatural Person, come voluntarily into the world for our redemption, now risen from the grave and living in glory, was the view of everyone in the Church.
>
>
>
Not pertinent
=============
Besides being non-controversial, and probably in part because of that, many argue that Paul simply did not find the virgin birth worth mentioning in order to accomplish his purposes. Louis Matthews Sweet calls Paul a "practical theologian" who never had the chance to write systematically on the "historic and spiritual Christ" (236). Machen cites two important doctrines that Paul mentions only once as evidence for his different focus:
>
> If things so very important to the Apostle as the institution of the Lord's Supper and the appearances of the risen Christ appear in the whole extent of the Epistles only once each—because of what from the human point of view was the mere chance of the emergence of certain errors—how can we draw from the non-appearance of other things the inference that Paul knew nothing about them? It does not follow at all, therefore, that because Paul says nothing about the virgin birth in his Epistles he knew nothing about it.
>
>
>
Paul's focus is clearly on the dead and risen Christ, and not a historical recounting, says Richard Joseph Cooke:
>
> We should not expect him to mention the virgin birth unless the logical implications or relation of the particular thought he is unfolding necessarily led him for illustration or proof to historical details of Christ's early life. [...] His preaching had for its theme the moral or spiritual significance of the Christ, and not the events of his earth-life. (119–20)
>
>
>
James Orr pushes the argument from silence further:
>
> It might as well be argued that Paul did not believe in the *existence* of Mary, since he never once mentions her. (114; emphasis in original)
>
>
>
Privacy
=======
On the question of discretion, John Frame writes:
>
> We must also assume that the early church maintained a certain reserve about public discussion of these matters out of respect for the privacy of Jesus’ family, especially Mary.
>
>
>
Orr calls the virgin birth "essentially private" in nature, and Richard John Knowling points us to discussions on why this may have been important:
>
> "If there was never a doubt," says Dr. Weiss, "among the people that Jesus was the actual son of the man in whose house He grew up, if the reproach of illegitimate birth is not employed by the enemies of Jesus till a much later date, and *is obviously based upon our Gospel narratives*, this is an evident proof that the honour of the house was not exposed by affording a pretext for each unbeliever to designate Jesus as one born in sin and shame." And in this consideration he finds an ample reason for the comparatively late dissemination of the facts concerning the Virgin birth. (70–71)
>
>
>
Did Paul actually believe it?
=============================
All the authors cited thus far make the case that Paul did indeed know and believe in the virgin birth, but that's not quite the entire story. Some advocates of the virgin birth offer the possibility that Paul didn't know, such as George Barker Stevens:
>
> It is improbable that Paul was acquainted with the traditions respecting the supernatural conception and miraculous birth of Jesus; but even in that case there is nothing in his language which is inconsistent with them. (212)
>
>
>
On the other hand, Machen, among others, defends Paul's "failure" to mention the virgin birth in Galatians 4 and Romans 1, and writes:
>
> Paul clearly regarded Jesus Christ as no mere product of what had gone before Him, but as an entirely new beginning in humanity, the second Adam, the Founder of a new race. Could such a Person have been derived by ordinary generation from the men who had existed before Him upon the earth; could He, in the ordinary sense, have had a human father? [...] To think of the Christ of the Pauline Epistles as the son of Joseph and Mary involves an incongruity from which the mind naturally shrinks. The virgin birth is not explicitly mentioned in the Epistles, but it does seem to be implied in the profoundest way in the entire view which Paul holds of the Lord Jesus Christ.
>
>
>
---
**References:**
* Richard Joseph Cooke, ["Did Paul Know of the Virgin Birth"](https://books.google.com/books?id=MFxDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114)
* John Frame, ["Virgin Birth of Jesus"](http://frame-poythress.org/virgin-birth-of-jesus/)
* Richard John Knowling, *[Our Lord's Virgin Birth](https://books.google.com/books?id=chwPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA70)*
* J. Gresham Machen, *[The Virgin Birth of Christ](https://www.monergism.com/virgin-birth-christ-ebook)*, chapter 11
* James Orr, [*The Virgin Birth of Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=D8dFAAAAIAAJ)
* George Barker Stevens, [*The Pauline Theology*](https://books.google.com/books?id=VagsAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA212)
* Louis Matthews Sweet, [*The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=P8cOAAAAIAAJ) | I much prefer Nathaniel's answer to mine (the accepted answer), as it is considerably more thorough and answers more questions. I still believe the Paul's mission to the gentiles is a piece of the puzzle, but only a small part. I do not have the time to flesh this out, but I will leave it for completeness.
Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles. The virgin birth was something that had been prophesied by Isaiah and of great importance to a Jewish Christian. The gentile had no concern for, or history regarding this theology. It would have been totally out of context to tell the churches that Paul wrote to that Christ was born of a virgin. They would have said, "Why are you telling me this? What does this have to do with anything!"
For the Jew it was considerably more important since through their histories they could have understood that sin comes through the father, and that all are conceived in sin (Psalm 51).
So Paul does not mention this because it was not at all important for his readers to hear. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | I much prefer Nathaniel's answer to mine (the accepted answer), as it is considerably more thorough and answers more questions. I still believe the Paul's mission to the gentiles is a piece of the puzzle, but only a small part. I do not have the time to flesh this out, but I will leave it for completeness.
Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles. The virgin birth was something that had been prophesied by Isaiah and of great importance to a Jewish Christian. The gentile had no concern for, or history regarding this theology. It would have been totally out of context to tell the churches that Paul wrote to that Christ was born of a virgin. They would have said, "Why are you telling me this? What does this have to do with anything!"
For the Jew it was considerably more important since through their histories they could have understood that sin comes through the father, and that all are conceived in sin (Psalm 51).
So Paul does not mention this because it was not at all important for his readers to hear. | The question comes down to whether Paul, Mark and John failed to mention the virgin birth because:
1. They never heard of it or
2. They did not think it was necessary to include in their writings.
Each of these are different cases, so I will take them one by one.
Paul
====
Galatians, as John McKenzie mentioned, is as good a place for Paul to have mentioned the virgin birth as any. He explained his purpose for writing early in the letter:
>
> I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.—Galatians 1:6-8 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Galatians+1/))
>
>
>
We know from the Talmud that [Jesus' parentage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud#Mother_and_father) was a common line of criticism of Christian gospels. So one might very well assume that since Paul didn't defend Mary's virginity, he didn't believe it or didn't think it an important part of the gospel. However, Paul's letters predated any of the works we call "the Gospels". In Galatians, it might be better to translate εὐαγγέλιον literally as "good news". Specifically, Paul is talking about the good news of the "grace of Christ" and spends nearly the entire letter fleshing out the reason Jewish Christians are no longer held to the Mosaic law.
We don't know exactly how the good news was originally communicated to the Galatians (and other early Christian communities), but the written gospels show clear evidence they began as oral traditions. This isn't surprising given the importance of the [oral Torah](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/1272/why-do-most-christians-not-follow-the-talmud/7140#7140) at the time. As a rabbi, Jesus was expected to teach on the law and his disciples were expected to remember both the teachings and the context of individual lessons. As with the [two major schools of Jewish tradition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_and_Shammai), followers of Jesus would have taught their own disciples the teachings of their rabbi. Of particular importance to the question, the circumstances Jesus' birth would not have been part of the oral tradition since Jesus didn't take that opportunity to teach (understandably).
So one possibility is that Paul didn't include the virgin birth information because it wasn't part of Jesus' oral tradition. But that doesn't mean the virgin birth wasn't taught in other contexts. Luke 1:1-4 mentions specifically "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Luke+1/)) as sources. It's entirely possible Paul didn't know about the virgin birth because he was more concerned with the oral tradition than with eyewitness accounts of Jesus' early life.
Mark
====
Regarded by most scholars as the earliest gospel account, Mark seems to follow a similar approach to Jesus as his contemporary Plutarch did in his [*Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Lives). In particular, Mark's gospel attempts to paint a portrait of Jesus through his actions. Like many of Plutarch's *Lives*, the first gospel drops us *in medias res* with a description of John's baptism of Jesus. His mother and brothers are [mentioned briefly](https://www.esv.org/Mark+3/), but mostly serve as a motivation for a teaching about community.
The core message of this gospel can be found in [Mark 8](https://www.esv.org/Mark+8/) when Peter identifies Jesus as the messiah. Then Jesus subverts expectations by predicting his suffering and death rather than a triumphant victory over the Romans. The author then tells of how this prediction came true. Importantly, **Jesus also predicted his own resurrection, which is not described in the gospel**. It's possible this section of manuscript [was lost](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1280/does-the-lost-leaf-theory-for-marks-abrupt-ending-fail-if-written-on-a-scroll), but it could also be [the author's intent](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/16951/68). If so, it's not really surprising the virgin birth narrative was skipped too.
John
====
Like Mark, John skips the nativity. Matthew and Luke added nativity stories to the start of their accounts, but otherwise accept the Marcan chronology. As (most likely) the final gospel, John's author would (probably) have been aware of the those narratives. But he uses his own chronology and borrows almost nothing from the synoptic tradition. Instead, he begins with a philosophical essay equating of Jesus to the concept of Logos reminiscent of [Philo of Alexandria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo).
Like Paul, John had an opportune moment to mention the virgin birth in the [Bread of Life discourse](https://www.esv.org/John+6/):
>
> So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”—John 6:41-42 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+6/))
>
>
>
Like in Galatians, this is a fine opportunity for the author to point out Joseph was not the *biological* father. (The author parenthetically points out later in the chapter that Jesus was talking about Judas.) Also like Galatians, the virgin birth is not critical to the purpose of the text:
>
> The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. **But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.**—John 1:9-13 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+1/))
>
>
>
Notice that this passage asserts that not just Jesus but *all who believe in his name* haee the right to be born of God. While the virgin birth is unique in history, John asserts that spiritual rebirth is available to all who recognize Jesus' true nature. So discussing the details of the nativity would have been a distraction from the main thesis.
Conclusion
==========
This is certainly an argument from silence that hardly seems justified. The virgin birth doctrine [must have been ridiculed early](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/6163/914) and would have been a distraction for Paul and John. Mark's biography probably left out Jesus' parentage for stylistic reasons. Matthew and especially Luke add details of Jesus' birth to Mark because they were interested in preserving those traditions.
As an aside, it's easier to see that the argument from silence is tenuous when you read modern documents with a critical eye. For instance there's an [article in the LA Times](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-riot-poll-20170426-story.html) this morning today about the possiblity of race riots. It's a complicated issue with many contributing factors. While the article does highlight some new factors, it assumes people know or can easily discover details that were relevant 25 years ago. There's no doubt the acquittal of Rodney King's attackers was a pivotal event, but it's not mentioned in the article at all. It's just part of the background knowledge the reporter assumes everyone will have. I suspect Paul, Mark and John felt the same way about the virgin birth. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | I much prefer Nathaniel's answer to mine (the accepted answer), as it is considerably more thorough and answers more questions. I still believe the Paul's mission to the gentiles is a piece of the puzzle, but only a small part. I do not have the time to flesh this out, but I will leave it for completeness.
Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles. The virgin birth was something that had been prophesied by Isaiah and of great importance to a Jewish Christian. The gentile had no concern for, or history regarding this theology. It would have been totally out of context to tell the churches that Paul wrote to that Christ was born of a virgin. They would have said, "Why are you telling me this? What does this have to do with anything!"
For the Jew it was considerably more important since through their histories they could have understood that sin comes through the father, and that all are conceived in sin (Psalm 51).
So Paul does not mention this because it was not at all important for his readers to hear. | Paul does mention the virgin birth. He knew the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 that a virgin will conceive and bear a son and call Him Immanuel; that is, God-with-us. So where does Paul mention the virgin conceiving and bearing to term and calling Him God-with-us?
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, …”
Galatians 4:4
God sent forth His Son. Paul uses the same term ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō translated “sent forth” two verses later to describe God sending forth the Holy Spirit ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō . This wasn’t a man’s spirit, just like it wasn’t a man’s seed. God was the active origin; He sent forth His Son.
God made Him of a woman, from her flesh. Not of a man and woman, but of a woman.
Further, Son of God was a term Paul used for Christ at Romans 1:4, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Galatians 2:20, and Ephesians 4:13. Obviously Paul knew Christ was not a son of Joseph. Christ was Son of God.
So, if you know God sent forth His Spirit, you also know God sent forth His Son who was made of a woman and who is called Immanuel. Paul wrote about the virgin conceiving and bearing. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | Advocates for the virgin birth make the following arguments for why Paul didn't mention it:
1. It wasn't controversial and therefore not worth mentioning
2. It didn't need to be mentioned in order to accomplish the goals of the epistles
3. It was a matter of some privacy
4. He didn't know about it
Points 1 & 2 overlap to some extent and thus are sometimes difficult to distinguish. Point 4 is held by some advocates of the virgin birth, but most reject it, as we'll see.
Not controversial
=================
First, many suggest that the virgin birth was widely known in Christian circles, through the oral tradition. For example, James Orr:
>
> It is to be remembered that Paul is not in the habit of alluding to, or recalling, the incidents in Christ's life—incidents which must have been perfectly familiar to him from the common preaching. (114)
>
>
>
J. Gresham Machen suggests that the virgin birth may well have been a topic of Paul's in-person teaching, in light of the uncharacteristic summary he gives in 1 Corinthians 15. John Frame writes:
>
> The virgin birth was not part of Jesus’ preaching or that of the early church. It was not a controversial matter such as might have been addressed in the epistles (Christology in general was not a particularly controversial matter among the Christians, and even if it had been, the virgin birth most likely was not seen as a means of supporting Christological dogma).
>
>
>
This parenthetical remark by Frame may seem surprising to us, but there is little evidence of controversies like those associated with [Docetism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism) and [Arianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism) in the time that Paul was writing. Major debates between Christians over Christ's nature came later. As Machen writes:
>
> Paul does not argue in the Epistles about his conception of the person of Christ. About other things there was debate, but, at least during the period of the earlier Epistles, there was no debate whatever about this; apparently Paul assumes that his own stupendous view of Jesus as a supernatural Person, come voluntarily into the world for our redemption, now risen from the grave and living in glory, was the view of everyone in the Church.
>
>
>
Not pertinent
=============
Besides being non-controversial, and probably in part because of that, many argue that Paul simply did not find the virgin birth worth mentioning in order to accomplish his purposes. Louis Matthews Sweet calls Paul a "practical theologian" who never had the chance to write systematically on the "historic and spiritual Christ" (236). Machen cites two important doctrines that Paul mentions only once as evidence for his different focus:
>
> If things so very important to the Apostle as the institution of the Lord's Supper and the appearances of the risen Christ appear in the whole extent of the Epistles only once each—because of what from the human point of view was the mere chance of the emergence of certain errors—how can we draw from the non-appearance of other things the inference that Paul knew nothing about them? It does not follow at all, therefore, that because Paul says nothing about the virgin birth in his Epistles he knew nothing about it.
>
>
>
Paul's focus is clearly on the dead and risen Christ, and not a historical recounting, says Richard Joseph Cooke:
>
> We should not expect him to mention the virgin birth unless the logical implications or relation of the particular thought he is unfolding necessarily led him for illustration or proof to historical details of Christ's early life. [...] His preaching had for its theme the moral or spiritual significance of the Christ, and not the events of his earth-life. (119–20)
>
>
>
James Orr pushes the argument from silence further:
>
> It might as well be argued that Paul did not believe in the *existence* of Mary, since he never once mentions her. (114; emphasis in original)
>
>
>
Privacy
=======
On the question of discretion, John Frame writes:
>
> We must also assume that the early church maintained a certain reserve about public discussion of these matters out of respect for the privacy of Jesus’ family, especially Mary.
>
>
>
Orr calls the virgin birth "essentially private" in nature, and Richard John Knowling points us to discussions on why this may have been important:
>
> "If there was never a doubt," says Dr. Weiss, "among the people that Jesus was the actual son of the man in whose house He grew up, if the reproach of illegitimate birth is not employed by the enemies of Jesus till a much later date, and *is obviously based upon our Gospel narratives*, this is an evident proof that the honour of the house was not exposed by affording a pretext for each unbeliever to designate Jesus as one born in sin and shame." And in this consideration he finds an ample reason for the comparatively late dissemination of the facts concerning the Virgin birth. (70–71)
>
>
>
Did Paul actually believe it?
=============================
All the authors cited thus far make the case that Paul did indeed know and believe in the virgin birth, but that's not quite the entire story. Some advocates of the virgin birth offer the possibility that Paul didn't know, such as George Barker Stevens:
>
> It is improbable that Paul was acquainted with the traditions respecting the supernatural conception and miraculous birth of Jesus; but even in that case there is nothing in his language which is inconsistent with them. (212)
>
>
>
On the other hand, Machen, among others, defends Paul's "failure" to mention the virgin birth in Galatians 4 and Romans 1, and writes:
>
> Paul clearly regarded Jesus Christ as no mere product of what had gone before Him, but as an entirely new beginning in humanity, the second Adam, the Founder of a new race. Could such a Person have been derived by ordinary generation from the men who had existed before Him upon the earth; could He, in the ordinary sense, have had a human father? [...] To think of the Christ of the Pauline Epistles as the son of Joseph and Mary involves an incongruity from which the mind naturally shrinks. The virgin birth is not explicitly mentioned in the Epistles, but it does seem to be implied in the profoundest way in the entire view which Paul holds of the Lord Jesus Christ.
>
>
>
---
**References:**
* Richard Joseph Cooke, ["Did Paul Know of the Virgin Birth"](https://books.google.com/books?id=MFxDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114)
* John Frame, ["Virgin Birth of Jesus"](http://frame-poythress.org/virgin-birth-of-jesus/)
* Richard John Knowling, *[Our Lord's Virgin Birth](https://books.google.com/books?id=chwPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA70)*
* J. Gresham Machen, *[The Virgin Birth of Christ](https://www.monergism.com/virgin-birth-christ-ebook)*, chapter 11
* James Orr, [*The Virgin Birth of Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=D8dFAAAAIAAJ)
* George Barker Stevens, [*The Pauline Theology*](https://books.google.com/books?id=VagsAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA212)
* Louis Matthews Sweet, [*The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=P8cOAAAAIAAJ) | The question comes down to whether Paul, Mark and John failed to mention the virgin birth because:
1. They never heard of it or
2. They did not think it was necessary to include in their writings.
Each of these are different cases, so I will take them one by one.
Paul
====
Galatians, as John McKenzie mentioned, is as good a place for Paul to have mentioned the virgin birth as any. He explained his purpose for writing early in the letter:
>
> I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.—Galatians 1:6-8 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Galatians+1/))
>
>
>
We know from the Talmud that [Jesus' parentage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud#Mother_and_father) was a common line of criticism of Christian gospels. So one might very well assume that since Paul didn't defend Mary's virginity, he didn't believe it or didn't think it an important part of the gospel. However, Paul's letters predated any of the works we call "the Gospels". In Galatians, it might be better to translate εὐαγγέλιον literally as "good news". Specifically, Paul is talking about the good news of the "grace of Christ" and spends nearly the entire letter fleshing out the reason Jewish Christians are no longer held to the Mosaic law.
We don't know exactly how the good news was originally communicated to the Galatians (and other early Christian communities), but the written gospels show clear evidence they began as oral traditions. This isn't surprising given the importance of the [oral Torah](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/1272/why-do-most-christians-not-follow-the-talmud/7140#7140) at the time. As a rabbi, Jesus was expected to teach on the law and his disciples were expected to remember both the teachings and the context of individual lessons. As with the [two major schools of Jewish tradition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillel_and_Shammai), followers of Jesus would have taught their own disciples the teachings of their rabbi. Of particular importance to the question, the circumstances Jesus' birth would not have been part of the oral tradition since Jesus didn't take that opportunity to teach (understandably).
So one possibility is that Paul didn't include the virgin birth information because it wasn't part of Jesus' oral tradition. But that doesn't mean the virgin birth wasn't taught in other contexts. Luke 1:1-4 mentions specifically "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/Luke+1/)) as sources. It's entirely possible Paul didn't know about the virgin birth because he was more concerned with the oral tradition than with eyewitness accounts of Jesus' early life.
Mark
====
Regarded by most scholars as the earliest gospel account, Mark seems to follow a similar approach to Jesus as his contemporary Plutarch did in his [*Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_Lives). In particular, Mark's gospel attempts to paint a portrait of Jesus through his actions. Like many of Plutarch's *Lives*, the first gospel drops us *in medias res* with a description of John's baptism of Jesus. His mother and brothers are [mentioned briefly](https://www.esv.org/Mark+3/), but mostly serve as a motivation for a teaching about community.
The core message of this gospel can be found in [Mark 8](https://www.esv.org/Mark+8/) when Peter identifies Jesus as the messiah. Then Jesus subverts expectations by predicting his suffering and death rather than a triumphant victory over the Romans. The author then tells of how this prediction came true. Importantly, **Jesus also predicted his own resurrection, which is not described in the gospel**. It's possible this section of manuscript [was lost](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1280/does-the-lost-leaf-theory-for-marks-abrupt-ending-fail-if-written-on-a-scroll), but it could also be [the author's intent](https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/a/16951/68). If so, it's not really surprising the virgin birth narrative was skipped too.
John
====
Like Mark, John skips the nativity. Matthew and Luke added nativity stories to the start of their accounts, but otherwise accept the Marcan chronology. As (most likely) the final gospel, John's author would (probably) have been aware of the those narratives. But he uses his own chronology and borrows almost nothing from the synoptic tradition. Instead, he begins with a philosophical essay equating of Jesus to the concept of Logos reminiscent of [Philo of Alexandria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo).
Like Paul, John had an opportune moment to mention the virgin birth in the [Bread of Life discourse](https://www.esv.org/John+6/):
>
> So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”—John 6:41-42 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+6/))
>
>
>
Like in Galatians, this is a fine opportunity for the author to point out Joseph was not the *biological* father. (The author parenthetically points out later in the chapter that Jesus was talking about Judas.) Also like Galatians, the virgin birth is not critical to the purpose of the text:
>
> The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. **But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.**—John 1:9-13 ([ESV](https://www.esv.org/John+1/))
>
>
>
Notice that this passage asserts that not just Jesus but *all who believe in his name* haee the right to be born of God. While the virgin birth is unique in history, John asserts that spiritual rebirth is available to all who recognize Jesus' true nature. So discussing the details of the nativity would have been a distraction from the main thesis.
Conclusion
==========
This is certainly an argument from silence that hardly seems justified. The virgin birth doctrine [must have been ridiculed early](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/6163/914) and would have been a distraction for Paul and John. Mark's biography probably left out Jesus' parentage for stylistic reasons. Matthew and especially Luke add details of Jesus' birth to Mark because they were interested in preserving those traditions.
As an aside, it's easier to see that the argument from silence is tenuous when you read modern documents with a critical eye. For instance there's an [article in the LA Times](http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-riot-poll-20170426-story.html) this morning today about the possiblity of race riots. It's a complicated issue with many contributing factors. While the article does highlight some new factors, it assumes people know or can easily discover details that were relevant 25 years ago. There's no doubt the acquittal of Rodney King's attackers was a pivotal event, but it's not mentioned in the article at all. It's just part of the background knowledge the reporter assumes everyone will have. I suspect Paul, Mark and John felt the same way about the virgin birth. |
56,509 | Matthew and Luke each open with [an account of Jesus' miraculous virginal conception and birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Jesus). The [virgin birth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus) is widely seen as an essential belief in Christianity, being found for example in the [Apostles' Creed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles%27_Creed).
Numerous passages in Paul's letters explicate what has been called [wisdom Christology](https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/wisdom_christology_an_interview_with_dan_ebert), which includes belief in a pre-existent and divine or semi-divine Christ, and he [directly references Jesus' birth once](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal+4:4). But he never mentions the virgin birth, leading some to claim that he knew of no virgin birth tradition. See for example [pages 108–109](https://books.google.com/books?id=P-dLAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA108#v=onepage&q&f=false) of Jesuit priest [John McKenzie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_L._McKenzie)'s book *[The New Testament Without Illusion](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1606082728)*:
>
> If Matthew, chapter 1, and Luke, chapter 1, were missing from the New Testament, there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth. ... Paul, the earliest of the New Testament writers, does not mention the virgin birth, in spite of an excellent opportunity to mention it in Galatians 4:4.
>
>
> The argument from silence is generally regard as invalid when one deals with documents, unless it can be shown conclusively that the writer could not have omitted the item in question had he known it. This cannot be shown for the virgin birth. But the omission does raise speculations, as I said. The event is unusual enough for one to wonder why an author who knew of it would not mention it; and it seems that those who maintain that Mark, John and Paul knew of the virgin birth owe their readers some explanation why these authors thought it was not important enough to deserve mention.
>
>
> On the other hand, those (like me) who solve the problem of the silence of all New Testament writers except Matthew and Luke by ay asserting that all the writers except these two never heard of the virgin birth also owe their readers some explanation of the supposed ignorance. This explanation I shall attempt.
>
>
>
How do those who hold that Jesus' mother literally gave birth to him without having had intercourse explain why Paul failed to mention it? What is an **overview** of their arguments? | 2017/04/25 | [
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/56509",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com",
"https://christianity.stackexchange.com/users/9289/"
] | Advocates for the virgin birth make the following arguments for why Paul didn't mention it:
1. It wasn't controversial and therefore not worth mentioning
2. It didn't need to be mentioned in order to accomplish the goals of the epistles
3. It was a matter of some privacy
4. He didn't know about it
Points 1 & 2 overlap to some extent and thus are sometimes difficult to distinguish. Point 4 is held by some advocates of the virgin birth, but most reject it, as we'll see.
Not controversial
=================
First, many suggest that the virgin birth was widely known in Christian circles, through the oral tradition. For example, James Orr:
>
> It is to be remembered that Paul is not in the habit of alluding to, or recalling, the incidents in Christ's life—incidents which must have been perfectly familiar to him from the common preaching. (114)
>
>
>
J. Gresham Machen suggests that the virgin birth may well have been a topic of Paul's in-person teaching, in light of the uncharacteristic summary he gives in 1 Corinthians 15. John Frame writes:
>
> The virgin birth was not part of Jesus’ preaching or that of the early church. It was not a controversial matter such as might have been addressed in the epistles (Christology in general was not a particularly controversial matter among the Christians, and even if it had been, the virgin birth most likely was not seen as a means of supporting Christological dogma).
>
>
>
This parenthetical remark by Frame may seem surprising to us, but there is little evidence of controversies like those associated with [Docetism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism) and [Arianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism) in the time that Paul was writing. Major debates between Christians over Christ's nature came later. As Machen writes:
>
> Paul does not argue in the Epistles about his conception of the person of Christ. About other things there was debate, but, at least during the period of the earlier Epistles, there was no debate whatever about this; apparently Paul assumes that his own stupendous view of Jesus as a supernatural Person, come voluntarily into the world for our redemption, now risen from the grave and living in glory, was the view of everyone in the Church.
>
>
>
Not pertinent
=============
Besides being non-controversial, and probably in part because of that, many argue that Paul simply did not find the virgin birth worth mentioning in order to accomplish his purposes. Louis Matthews Sweet calls Paul a "practical theologian" who never had the chance to write systematically on the "historic and spiritual Christ" (236). Machen cites two important doctrines that Paul mentions only once as evidence for his different focus:
>
> If things so very important to the Apostle as the institution of the Lord's Supper and the appearances of the risen Christ appear in the whole extent of the Epistles only once each—because of what from the human point of view was the mere chance of the emergence of certain errors—how can we draw from the non-appearance of other things the inference that Paul knew nothing about them? It does not follow at all, therefore, that because Paul says nothing about the virgin birth in his Epistles he knew nothing about it.
>
>
>
Paul's focus is clearly on the dead and risen Christ, and not a historical recounting, says Richard Joseph Cooke:
>
> We should not expect him to mention the virgin birth unless the logical implications or relation of the particular thought he is unfolding necessarily led him for illustration or proof to historical details of Christ's early life. [...] His preaching had for its theme the moral or spiritual significance of the Christ, and not the events of his earth-life. (119–20)
>
>
>
James Orr pushes the argument from silence further:
>
> It might as well be argued that Paul did not believe in the *existence* of Mary, since he never once mentions her. (114; emphasis in original)
>
>
>
Privacy
=======
On the question of discretion, John Frame writes:
>
> We must also assume that the early church maintained a certain reserve about public discussion of these matters out of respect for the privacy of Jesus’ family, especially Mary.
>
>
>
Orr calls the virgin birth "essentially private" in nature, and Richard John Knowling points us to discussions on why this may have been important:
>
> "If there was never a doubt," says Dr. Weiss, "among the people that Jesus was the actual son of the man in whose house He grew up, if the reproach of illegitimate birth is not employed by the enemies of Jesus till a much later date, and *is obviously based upon our Gospel narratives*, this is an evident proof that the honour of the house was not exposed by affording a pretext for each unbeliever to designate Jesus as one born in sin and shame." And in this consideration he finds an ample reason for the comparatively late dissemination of the facts concerning the Virgin birth. (70–71)
>
>
>
Did Paul actually believe it?
=============================
All the authors cited thus far make the case that Paul did indeed know and believe in the virgin birth, but that's not quite the entire story. Some advocates of the virgin birth offer the possibility that Paul didn't know, such as George Barker Stevens:
>
> It is improbable that Paul was acquainted with the traditions respecting the supernatural conception and miraculous birth of Jesus; but even in that case there is nothing in his language which is inconsistent with them. (212)
>
>
>
On the other hand, Machen, among others, defends Paul's "failure" to mention the virgin birth in Galatians 4 and Romans 1, and writes:
>
> Paul clearly regarded Jesus Christ as no mere product of what had gone before Him, but as an entirely new beginning in humanity, the second Adam, the Founder of a new race. Could such a Person have been derived by ordinary generation from the men who had existed before Him upon the earth; could He, in the ordinary sense, have had a human father? [...] To think of the Christ of the Pauline Epistles as the son of Joseph and Mary involves an incongruity from which the mind naturally shrinks. The virgin birth is not explicitly mentioned in the Epistles, but it does seem to be implied in the profoundest way in the entire view which Paul holds of the Lord Jesus Christ.
>
>
>
---
**References:**
* Richard Joseph Cooke, ["Did Paul Know of the Virgin Birth"](https://books.google.com/books?id=MFxDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114)
* John Frame, ["Virgin Birth of Jesus"](http://frame-poythress.org/virgin-birth-of-jesus/)
* Richard John Knowling, *[Our Lord's Virgin Birth](https://books.google.com/books?id=chwPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA70)*
* J. Gresham Machen, *[The Virgin Birth of Christ](https://www.monergism.com/virgin-birth-christ-ebook)*, chapter 11
* James Orr, [*The Virgin Birth of Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=D8dFAAAAIAAJ)
* George Barker Stevens, [*The Pauline Theology*](https://books.google.com/books?id=VagsAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA212)
* Louis Matthews Sweet, [*The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ*](https://books.google.com/books?id=P8cOAAAAIAAJ) | Paul does mention the virgin birth. He knew the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 that a virgin will conceive and bear a son and call Him Immanuel; that is, God-with-us. So where does Paul mention the virgin conceiving and bearing to term and calling Him God-with-us?
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, …”
Galatians 4:4
God sent forth His Son. Paul uses the same term ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō translated “sent forth” two verses later to describe God sending forth the Holy Spirit ἐξαποστέλλω exapostellō . This wasn’t a man’s spirit, just like it wasn’t a man’s seed. God was the active origin; He sent forth His Son.
God made Him of a woman, from her flesh. Not of a man and woman, but of a woman.
Further, Son of God was a term Paul used for Christ at Romans 1:4, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Galatians 2:20, and Ephesians 4:13. Obviously Paul knew Christ was not a son of Joseph. Christ was Son of God.
So, if you know God sent forth His Spirit, you also know God sent forth His Son who was made of a woman and who is called Immanuel. Paul wrote about the virgin conceiving and bearing. |
44,043 | The part of the Einstein equations of general relativity referred to vacuum energy, introduce a repulsive term in gravity. This means that as the space become bigger and bigger, vacuum part become more and more important, leading to an undefined accelerated growth of the universe. Why vacuum energy does not violate the principles of thermodynamic? This is a sort of perpetual motion, isn't it? | 2012/11/12 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/44043",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/8434/"
] | You should read the question here [energy conservation in general relativity](https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/2597/energy-conservation-in-general-relativity) to get a feel of the complexity of the problem.
You ask:
>
> Why vacuum energy does not violate the principles of thermodynamic?
>
>
>
Thermodynamics is an emergent theory from classical statistical mechanics and that is based on quantum statistical mechanics. General relativity does not enter in the derivation of the thermodynamic laws.
It is conservation of energy that can be questioned and the answer is in the link provided.
I quote from the concluding paragraph:
>
> What you can't have is a tensor quantity that is globally defined that one can easily associate with 'energy density' of the gravitational field, or define one of these energies for a general spacetime. The reason for this is that one needs a time with which to associate a conserved quantity conjugate to time. But if there is no unique way of specifying time, and especially no way to specify time in such a way that it generates some sort of symmetry, then there is no way to move forward with this procedure.
>
>
>
To violate a law one has to be able to define it, and it seems that this is not possible in general in General Relativity. | Energy conservation in GR only holds approximately in spacetime regions that are very small, compared to curvature radii. But in general, since parallel transport is dependent on the trajectory in spacetime, an observer cannot uniquely define the energy of another distant observer.
The so-called Universal Time in the FLRW cosmology is a convention. We choose to define a set of synchronized observers, so that the metric can be separated in two factors, one of them with only spatial coordinates. But that doesn't mean that the universal time can be used as an analogous concept to a newtonian $t$ that would allow to define conservation laws. You could slice spacetime in another way, defining a different set of synchronized observers.
Anyway, physics is all about mathematical models, and you are free to think in terms of the one called Newtonian Cosmology in astrophysics books. It has mainly didactical purposes, but it leads to some correct results (and it is what many people secretly have in mind when they talk about cosmology). In that framework, you may define a total energy and see if it is conserved. The problem is that Newtonian Cosmology doesn't have dark energy. How would you model the summand of the dark potential energy?
The conserved quantity in GR, in problems that do NOT deal with the cosmological-scale dark energy (for instance when studying neutron stars and black holes) is the energy momentum tensor of normal matter. I think that perhaps an equivalent statement to your question may be: Is there any way to include the dark energy as part of the energy-momentum tensor, so that its conservation law still holds? There is nowadays a very active theoretical research on how to model dark energy, so your question is eventually a very interesting one, and is still open. |
44,043 | The part of the Einstein equations of general relativity referred to vacuum energy, introduce a repulsive term in gravity. This means that as the space become bigger and bigger, vacuum part become more and more important, leading to an undefined accelerated growth of the universe. Why vacuum energy does not violate the principles of thermodynamic? This is a sort of perpetual motion, isn't it? | 2012/11/12 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/44043",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/8434/"
] | You should read the question here [energy conservation in general relativity](https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/2597/energy-conservation-in-general-relativity) to get a feel of the complexity of the problem.
You ask:
>
> Why vacuum energy does not violate the principles of thermodynamic?
>
>
>
Thermodynamics is an emergent theory from classical statistical mechanics and that is based on quantum statistical mechanics. General relativity does not enter in the derivation of the thermodynamic laws.
It is conservation of energy that can be questioned and the answer is in the link provided.
I quote from the concluding paragraph:
>
> What you can't have is a tensor quantity that is globally defined that one can easily associate with 'energy density' of the gravitational field, or define one of these energies for a general spacetime. The reason for this is that one needs a time with which to associate a conserved quantity conjugate to time. But if there is no unique way of specifying time, and especially no way to specify time in such a way that it generates some sort of symmetry, then there is no way to move forward with this procedure.
>
>
>
To violate a law one has to be able to define it, and it seems that this is not possible in general in General Relativity. | Theoretically, you could use the accelerated expansion of the universe to create a perpetual motion machine. It would not be practical due to engineering issues, but in theory it is possible. Imagine you had two large masses that are separated by a large distance and you had a monomolecular filament rope between the objects that could be lengthened at a negligible energy cost. With that setup the accelerated expansion would cause a tension on that rope and you could let that force be exerted over a distance to extract work from the accelerated expansion.
First of all, the universe is expanding at 74 km/sec/Mpc (Mpc is a mega parsec which is 3.26 million light years). So let's take two heavy objects and place them far from any galaxy cluster or other influence and space them just one parsec apart (3.26 light years). Then they will effectively be moving apart at 7.4 cm/sec. Now imagine that your monomolecular filament rope between the objects puts a force on the objects that will decelerate the objects. Then during the time that they are decelerating you can extract work from the objects. That work per second comes from the force the rope is exerting being applied over the 7.4 cm/sec that the objects are moving apart. However, once the force causes their relative velocity to drop to 0, you won't be able to get any more energy from the objects since they are no longer moving apart. There will still be a constant force on your rope but you need to have a force applied over a distance to get work.
Now this is all from just the "Big Bang" expansion of space. Once the rope's force has gotten their relative velocity to zero, the two objects are like a gravitational bound system and it will stop "expanding". However, in addition to the "standard" expansion of space, we now know that there is dark energy which is causing an accelerating expansion of the universe. This means that the two objects are not just "moving" apart at constant 7.4 cm/sec but that this velocity is actually increasing with time. So if you setup your rope such that the force it is exerting on the objects results in an deceleration that is slightly smaller than this cosmic acceleration, you can extract work continuously and indefinitely. Unfortunately, I have not been able to convert the dark energy measurements into units of acceleration in this particular case of objects at one parsec. I suspect it is a small number but current estimates are that it is definitely positive. Note that if your rope exerts more force that causes a deceleration larger than the cosmic acceleration then the objects will eventually stop moving apart and the work you can extract will drop to zero again.
Note that from just the normal expansion of the universe you can only extract a finite total amount of energy, but that with the accelerated expansion you can extract a small but positive amount of energy per second forever. However, your rope needs to get longer and longer with time (at the rate of 7.4 cm/sec, in this example), so, as they say TANSTAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch). The rope needs to get longer because you have to have your very small force applied to continuously moving objects to get work done. Since it will take continuous energy to make a continuously lengthening rope, and you cannot win this battle by starting with objects that are further apart since then the rope is lengthening at an even faster rate than the 7.4 cm/sec of this example. You can increase the energy per second you extract by making the objects more massive, but then the force on the rope increases so you need to make a thicker rope.
The bottom line is that I think this free energy project is impractical, even though it is theoretically possible. The problem that needs to be solved is the energy cost of the continuously lengthening rope. |
44,043 | The part of the Einstein equations of general relativity referred to vacuum energy, introduce a repulsive term in gravity. This means that as the space become bigger and bigger, vacuum part become more and more important, leading to an undefined accelerated growth of the universe. Why vacuum energy does not violate the principles of thermodynamic? This is a sort of perpetual motion, isn't it? | 2012/11/12 | [
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/44043",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com",
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/users/8434/"
] | Energy conservation in GR only holds approximately in spacetime regions that are very small, compared to curvature radii. But in general, since parallel transport is dependent on the trajectory in spacetime, an observer cannot uniquely define the energy of another distant observer.
The so-called Universal Time in the FLRW cosmology is a convention. We choose to define a set of synchronized observers, so that the metric can be separated in two factors, one of them with only spatial coordinates. But that doesn't mean that the universal time can be used as an analogous concept to a newtonian $t$ that would allow to define conservation laws. You could slice spacetime in another way, defining a different set of synchronized observers.
Anyway, physics is all about mathematical models, and you are free to think in terms of the one called Newtonian Cosmology in astrophysics books. It has mainly didactical purposes, but it leads to some correct results (and it is what many people secretly have in mind when they talk about cosmology). In that framework, you may define a total energy and see if it is conserved. The problem is that Newtonian Cosmology doesn't have dark energy. How would you model the summand of the dark potential energy?
The conserved quantity in GR, in problems that do NOT deal with the cosmological-scale dark energy (for instance when studying neutron stars and black holes) is the energy momentum tensor of normal matter. I think that perhaps an equivalent statement to your question may be: Is there any way to include the dark energy as part of the energy-momentum tensor, so that its conservation law still holds? There is nowadays a very active theoretical research on how to model dark energy, so your question is eventually a very interesting one, and is still open. | Theoretically, you could use the accelerated expansion of the universe to create a perpetual motion machine. It would not be practical due to engineering issues, but in theory it is possible. Imagine you had two large masses that are separated by a large distance and you had a monomolecular filament rope between the objects that could be lengthened at a negligible energy cost. With that setup the accelerated expansion would cause a tension on that rope and you could let that force be exerted over a distance to extract work from the accelerated expansion.
First of all, the universe is expanding at 74 km/sec/Mpc (Mpc is a mega parsec which is 3.26 million light years). So let's take two heavy objects and place them far from any galaxy cluster or other influence and space them just one parsec apart (3.26 light years). Then they will effectively be moving apart at 7.4 cm/sec. Now imagine that your monomolecular filament rope between the objects puts a force on the objects that will decelerate the objects. Then during the time that they are decelerating you can extract work from the objects. That work per second comes from the force the rope is exerting being applied over the 7.4 cm/sec that the objects are moving apart. However, once the force causes their relative velocity to drop to 0, you won't be able to get any more energy from the objects since they are no longer moving apart. There will still be a constant force on your rope but you need to have a force applied over a distance to get work.
Now this is all from just the "Big Bang" expansion of space. Once the rope's force has gotten their relative velocity to zero, the two objects are like a gravitational bound system and it will stop "expanding". However, in addition to the "standard" expansion of space, we now know that there is dark energy which is causing an accelerating expansion of the universe. This means that the two objects are not just "moving" apart at constant 7.4 cm/sec but that this velocity is actually increasing with time. So if you setup your rope such that the force it is exerting on the objects results in an deceleration that is slightly smaller than this cosmic acceleration, you can extract work continuously and indefinitely. Unfortunately, I have not been able to convert the dark energy measurements into units of acceleration in this particular case of objects at one parsec. I suspect it is a small number but current estimates are that it is definitely positive. Note that if your rope exerts more force that causes a deceleration larger than the cosmic acceleration then the objects will eventually stop moving apart and the work you can extract will drop to zero again.
Note that from just the normal expansion of the universe you can only extract a finite total amount of energy, but that with the accelerated expansion you can extract a small but positive amount of energy per second forever. However, your rope needs to get longer and longer with time (at the rate of 7.4 cm/sec, in this example), so, as they say TANSTAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch). The rope needs to get longer because you have to have your very small force applied to continuously moving objects to get work done. Since it will take continuous energy to make a continuously lengthening rope, and you cannot win this battle by starting with objects that are further apart since then the rope is lengthening at an even faster rate than the 7.4 cm/sec of this example. You can increase the energy per second you extract by making the objects more massive, but then the force on the rope increases so you need to make a thicker rope.
The bottom line is that I think this free energy project is impractical, even though it is theoretically possible. The problem that needs to be solved is the energy cost of the continuously lengthening rope. |
1,750,668 | I have a J2EE webapp which is used to upload a file which is then processed by a database procedure. Because we do not want the webapp to have to wait until the database procedure completes, it is executed in a different thread.
The process running in the separate thread needs to obtain and close its own connection. The webapps usually look up the datasource jndi name using a ServiceLocator which in turn looks it up from the application context (the lookup key for the jndi name is defined as a class constant) but for the separate thread looking up the jndi name with the ServiceLocator fails. To get around this problem we have used the jndi name as the class constant instead, so that the thread can look up the datasource directly.
This means that the jndi name for the datasource is now fixed for the application, and we can no longer deploy the same application in the same container but with different datasources simply by modifying the web.xml.
What are industry best practices around this? Should the jndi name be configurable or is it OK to fix it for the application? Has anyone implemented a configurable datasource jndi name solution that is usable both in the webapp and by other threads in the container? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1750668",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/25464/"
] | Yeah - I feel your pain.
I do think it is a very good idea to try and make the jndi configurable via the web.xml. The way I've handled this is cached the datasource reference. iow, on startup of the webapp the datasource referenced is sourced while it is available to the thread and then passed to or made available to any other object which requires it. | You could pass the JNDI name or the DataSource in as constructor or method argument of the thread class. |
1,750,668 | I have a J2EE webapp which is used to upload a file which is then processed by a database procedure. Because we do not want the webapp to have to wait until the database procedure completes, it is executed in a different thread.
The process running in the separate thread needs to obtain and close its own connection. The webapps usually look up the datasource jndi name using a ServiceLocator which in turn looks it up from the application context (the lookup key for the jndi name is defined as a class constant) but for the separate thread looking up the jndi name with the ServiceLocator fails. To get around this problem we have used the jndi name as the class constant instead, so that the thread can look up the datasource directly.
This means that the jndi name for the datasource is now fixed for the application, and we can no longer deploy the same application in the same container but with different datasources simply by modifying the web.xml.
What are industry best practices around this? Should the jndi name be configurable or is it OK to fix it for the application? Has anyone implemented a configurable datasource jndi name solution that is usable both in the webapp and by other threads in the container? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1750668",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/25464/"
] | For best practices, [The role of JNDI in J2EE](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jndi/) (co-authored by Kirk Pepperdine) is one of the best article I've found. It explains clearly the "vision" of Sun regarding development, packaging, deployment and how JNDI fits in there.
The short version is that Sun and application servers providers provide a way to define and name a *global* resource (java:DefaultDS) and to bind the *local* resource ref name (jdbc/mydatasource) to the named resource.
This solves the portability issue of an application (made of J2EE components). But the local resource ref name is component-specific so it doesn't solve your issue (which is deploying the same component several times, but with different local resource ref name).
In other words, Sun's vision doesn't address your particular use case (although I think it's a valid use case). With Sun model, you should solve this at build/packaging time (i.e. create and assemble two versions of the component, each using a specific local resource ref name).
The programmatic approach you describe (performing a lookup of the value from a key stored in JDNI/properties/whatever) is a workaround. | You could pass the JNDI name or the DataSource in as constructor or method argument of the thread class. |
188,967 | I just miss the ability to go to first position of the shell with just 1 keyboard stroke, which I use it often at my office on CentOS ?
I know I can go by Option + left key or Option + Right key to jump word to word but that doesnt help much . | 2015/05/27 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/188967",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/64918/"
] | To solve data corruption, have users log out. Also, empower users to know if their backups are current and make it their responsibility to self-service restore activities.
To minimize restart times, have users restart the macs and sleep them when the login screen arrives (assuming you don't have auto-log in enabled). This makes much more sense to me since new classes should have everything prepped and the last class should clean up their mess.
All your workarounds seem like IT taking the cleanup burden from the users and also shouldering the data protection lead. When IT is seen as a second fail safe to be relied upon when the routine maintenance and operating throw an exception, your life will be much better. In turn, the staff and student's lives will be much better since you can then support the real problems and not be self-selecting and volunteering for all the janitorial work.
Also, having reboots be a monthly task is working well in most environments I'm aware of. If your software selection and testing is yielding leaky and crash-tastic performance, documenting that would be an excellent investment in the future so that the curriculum reflects the costs of maintenance since you are well aware of how real they can be when you don't have stable OS that can wipe things clean once a user logs out.
When IT can be responsible for system stability and users responsible for user maintenance (log out and log in) and you can track reboots as a signal that users are not trained or that a quality defect has slipped past the testing group, life gets far more fun for IT.
Lastly, look at your MDM provider - with 150 macs under management, you'll reap significant benefits if you learn how to use that tool proactively. If you don't have one, start a bushel trial immediately and reach out to one or more vendors to learn how you can leverage tools to assist. Even if you end up rolling out scripts to tweak hooks, you'll want a solid framework for monitoring and change management rather than laying hands on every cart and interrupting staff constantly for inevitable changes and updates. | this is kind of unrelated out-of-the-box thinking, but I'm wondering if it might indirectly solve the problem.
if you enable verbose boot mode, it will show system startup and shutdown information. well it will mostly be useless information for most people.
but it may just be enough of a visual clue ( *hey look there's text on the screen* ) for users to understand that the system is still running.
you can **temporarily** enable this by holding Command+V during power on, you can then do a system shutdown watching the pretty words fly by.
well there are multiple ways to permanently enable it, i used OnyX.
and since this is done in firmware, you see text until the system is fully off. |
98,684 | I am a carpenter. I like chamfered dado trunking but would like to custom make some for my home using timber instead of the typical plastic product in shops.
Is there any safety differences in using timber as trunking. Considering many electricians run 2.5 under floorboards, behind walls and along joists, i am seeking a little clarity as there appears no definitive answer online elsewhere.
(Work will be carried out by a certified electrician, my question here is to better understand any difference as i wish to make said trunking. ) | 2016/09/04 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/98684",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/-1/"
] | I am guessing this is partially driven by an aesthetic concern?
Plastic trunking isn't used for safety, it is used for cable management and routing. Where there is a safety concern (ie buried cables in non-safe zones) then earthed metal trunking is required.
There is nothing wrong with using other types of trunking & you can already acquired wood/wood-effect trunking.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fcG4a.jpg)
Just be aware, if such "trunking" is outside of the safe zone it is not so inconspicuous that others may not consider there any cables. Has the end effect resulted in essentially a buried cable consideration simply because of the nature of how you concealed the cables.
**Cables in a wall or partition**
1. A cable concealed in a wall or partition must be at least 50mm from the surface [If the wall or partition is made from or partially made from metal then the cable will require RCD protection or be installed as 2), 3) or 4) below]
2. have earthed armouring or an earthed metal sheath (eg SWA, a BS 8436 cable or MICC cable)
3. be enclosed in earthed steel conduit or trunking
4. be provided with mechanical protection (3mm steel is deemed sufficient to meet this requirement)
**The safe zones for cables concealed in walls are**
1. a horizontal zone within 150mm of the top of a wall
2. a vertical zone within 150mm of the angle formed by two walls - e.g. internal and external corners.
3. the horizontal and vertical zone adjacent to an electrical accessory (switch, socket, cable outlet etc)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mygi2.jpg) | It's not clear what you are really asking (what is "trunking", "2.5"?), but power cable is routinely run in wood-framed houses by being fastened directly against the wooden supports. Safety has already been built into the current the cable is allowed to handle and the circuit breaker ratings to prevent it getting anywhere near hot enough to cause a problem being right up against wood. |
204,106 | Often when trying to fix someone else's computer - especially consumer machines - the operating system will need to be reinstalled, but the owner will have lost or never created the installation or recovery media.
How can the system be legally restored to the original functionality? | 2010/10/27 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/204106",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/53764/"
] | I keep Dell install disc for XP with sp3 handy, it will install on any OEM PC without using a key, it will not activate however, when it fails to activate you will be able to change the key, punch in the key on the COA sticker that is on the PC, it should activate now. This is not an easy way, you still have to find all the drivers, and customers will complain all their OEM pre-installed software is missing.
It is the responsibility of the owner to keep up with discs and keys, not yours.
On many PCs like Dell, HP, Acer, there is a recovery partition on the hard drive that can reload the OS clean. Go to the manufacturers website for instructions.
Link for legal downloads of Windows 7 ISO images of install discs: <http://www.mydigitallife.info/2010/04/28/download-windows-7-iso-official-32-bit-and-64-bit-direct-download-links/> (I suggest you get copies of these for future use, you will still need a legal key to activate the software.)
For Windows Vista, here is a [link](http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/software-os/w/microsoft_os/3317.2-3-microsoft-windows-vista-official-iso-download-links-digital-river.aspx) to a Dell community web page that describes the process to download and recreate Windows Vista (with SP1) bootable DVDs.
---
If you have activation problems with legitimate keys, here are the toll free Microsoft activation hotline numbers for the USA:
* **Windows XP:** 1(888)571-2048
* **Windows Vista:** 1(866)740-1256
* **Windows 7:** 1(888)725-1047 | you can try contacting the manufacturer, sometimes they ask for a small fee to send a set of recovery dvds, some even do it for free.
I guess it depends how old the computer in question is |
10,344 | I am very new to this so please be patient with me. I had a DNA test via Ancestry which didn't tell me very much and so I uploaded the data to GEDmatch. My top 3 matches are:
* A:11 chr matches, 372.6 cM, longest 62.6 cM
* B:13 chr matches, 381.6, cM, longest 49.6 cM
* C:10 chr matches, 348.9 cM, longest 48.7 cM
Now, I know who these people are. A and C are brother and sister and are my 2nd cousins. B is my father's full cousin, so my 1st cousin once removed. So far so good. We are closely related so would expect good matches.
My 4th best match according to GEDmatch is:
* D:2 chr matches, 51.2 cM, longest 38.8 cM - I don't know who this person is.
So now we come to my question(s):
* Do closer relatives match on more chromosomes or is this irrelevant?
* Do the actual chromosomes that you match on make any difference in interpretation?
* Does the longest matching cM mean anything above 7 cM? e.g. in the example above A and C are both related to me in the same way but the longest cM is quite different.
None of the sources I have read address these questions. | 2016/02/13 | [
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/10344",
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com",
"https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/users/4706/"
] | The closer your match generationally you will generally have more shared centimorgans (cMs).
There is a published shared cM relationship range chart on the [ISOGG website that gives a good general 'guideline' for interpretation](http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Autosomal_DNA_statistics)..
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tJ6gj.jpg)
...but it is just a guideline as the further one gets out in relationship you may retrieve additional shared cMs from more than one shared ancestor or path to a common ancestor.
Though the general rule is you inherit about 50% of each parents DNA it is not exact ([reference previous question Generational Loss in DNA testing](https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/6668/generational-loss-of-data-with-dna-testing/6675#6675)) and will vary by sibling on what DNA segments are passed onto each child and it can vary.. I seem to recall easily up to a ~10% difference in shared cMs between two siblings in my very amateur research so far for some of my 1st cousins. This would account for the difference in your tests as well.
Where the chromosomes matching comes into play is that it can provide clues on what common ancestor you share.. which at close distances this does not matter so much but for more distant ancestors it for me is a clue of a potential common shared ancestor. Such as as I illustrated in the "[Family Trait in a Shared Segment](https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/9628/autosomal-dna-chromsome-browser-is-there-such-a-thing-as-a-family-trait-of-s?rq=1)" question.. though I haven't found an exact reference as to what this is scientifically called.. I have learned that people who share a common ancestor ***sometimes*** retain a particular common trait unique to a particular chromosome. While far from bulletproof, I look for shared segments sometimes in a particular range in a chromosome to identify someone from that line. The biggest caveat with this method is I have to first establish a high confidence shared segment from multiple lines of a common known and documented ancestor from people who have tested.. but this helps me identify others from that line. I have done this with my primary research line who share a common couple born in 1815/1817.. and the 7 known and documented descendants (age 95 to 20) I have tested from 5 different lines of their children all have shared segments in a particular region of Chromosome 1. Beyond that shared segment they share no other segments over a length of whatever ftDNA's filter is (I think it is 5cms?).
On your third question, about longest matching cM.. yes each service uses a slightly different method for measuring what a match is as well as what a shared cM's minimum length is to be countered/aggregated on a match. Some services also do not count the X chromosomes in their calculation. Basically the important thing to know is that longer continuous cM segment is that the match is likely closer in nature because the segment is unbroken and been less diluted through the generations. | Just to build on @CRSouser, "Though the general rule is you inherit about 50% of each parents DNA it is not exact", it's possible that two differently-sexed siblings will share no DNA at all, albeit statistically unlikely. Ignoring X/Y, siblings share about 25% *on average*, but within one family there are few enough samples that the figures could vary more wildly.
In addition to generational loss (usually single-pair mutations), some individual chromosomes may be partly from one parent and partly from the other due to chromosomal crossover:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosomal_crossover>
I expect that the level of interest in genealogy DNA will contribute to a better understanding of chromosomal crossover in the human genome. |
149,483 | How do I setup wireless connection in my Ubuntu 11.04?
How to configure the connection? How to get the details like SSID and all that... | 2012/06/11 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/149483",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/69947/"
] | If you are using network manager, right click the "Network Manager" icon, hit "Connection Information". It will show you all those details.
And if I remember correctly, the SSID is the network name (so if the wifi network's name is "IAmTheEvil", then the SSID is "IAmTheEvil").
However, if you are trying to configure your wireless networking, Network Manager is basically "click and connect", just left-click the Network Manager icon, and then choose the wifi network to connect to. If you don't know the SSID of your wifi, you're kind of out of luck there. | >
> Over recent years it has become increasingly common for computers to
> be connected to local area networks and the Internet via wireless
> Wi-Fi connections. This has spread from the home and public spaces
> such as libraries and Cafes into the enterprise, especially with the
> advent of increased wireless security and faster standards such as
> 802.11n.
>
>
> Support for wireless networking in Ubuntu has come a long way since
> the days of manually editing network configuration files. In fact,
> configuring access to Wi-Fi networks using Ubuntu is now easier than
> it has ever been thanks to something called the Network Manager.
>
>
>
If you're looking for a tutorial that guides you through the process, then [take a look at this](http://www.divms.uiowa.edu/help/wireless/ubuntu1104.html).
Source: <http://techotopia.com/index.php/Configuring_Ubuntu_11.04_Wireless_Networking> |
269,137 | I've written about a 40-50 line block in Python for a very specific task: scrubbing Japanese addresses based on certain criteria. Most of my SO questions are short but this one would be notably longer.
I have specific criteria for the addresses, such as replacing "丁目" with a dash unless it appears at the end of the address, then make it blank (there are about 15-20 conditions). My script works but I know it could be improved so I wanted to ask SO users but I thought my code might be too long.
* Is 40-50 lines of code too long? If not,
* Can I ask a question for something that has very specific environmental parameters? (Mostly reading addresses in Japanese).
Thank you. | 2014/08/19 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/269137",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/1378651/"
] | Questions should contain **all** the code needed to reproduce the problem. Fiddle links, while useful as a back up and to show the code in context, can be useless if the link goes dark or the fiddle site is down - which happens far too often.
If you're posting lots of code then you should be looking at reducing it down to the barest minimum. People don't want to have to wade through pages of code to find your problem - that's your job.
However, you state:
>
> My script works but I know it could be improved so I wanted to ask SO users but I thought my code might be too long.
>
>
>
In that case you should ask your question on [CodeReview](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) | Yes, you are allowed. 40-50 lines of code is not a big deal in Stack Overflow. However it would be more helpful if you provide a working [Python Fiddle](http://pythonfiddle.com/) with your code in it and then point out/add the exact code block(your struggle part) in your question.
In case if you want to improve your code, I would suggest you to take your question to [Code Review Community](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | I think it's generally popular sites, not just porn sites. However there might be some reasons why pornsites tend to attract more malware.
Mostly malware originates from dodgy advertisement platforms. Because the morality of porn is often debated and not accepted in every culture, a lot of larger advertisement websites, such as Google Ads, do not allow their advertisements to be published on a porn site. This means that porn websites need to turn to somewhat dodgier advertisement provider to get money (porn sites make money from ads). One thing that happens is spreading adware and even right-out malware through these advertisements.
There is an interesting article "[Porn Sites Aren't (Always) Dens of Malware](http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/malware/310499-porn-sites-aren-t-always-dens-of-malware)" on pcmag's security watch. There's also [Dynamoo's blog](http://blog.dynamoo.com/2013/04/top-porn-sites-lead-to-malware.html) who did analysis on this. Xhamster has had issues with this before:
>
> The problem is that even reliable advertisers sometimes can be hacked.
> For example, in the past we had such issues with one of the top five
> porn paysites in the world," xHamster told the BBC. "Now our reliable
> partners are checking new advertisers very strictly, so it's almost
> impossible to put a new site with malware on xHamster.
>
>
>
The conclusion of the article is that it's not inherent to porn websites alone, but generally popular websites.
>
> It's easy to dismiss this as a problem reserved for a reviled, fringe
> industry but that is simply not the case. According to Bob Hansmann,
> security research marketing manager at Websense, any site which draws
> traffic is a potential target for malvertising.
>
>
> "Past research by the Websense Security Labs has actually illustrated
> that popular beats porn when it comes to malicious content," Hansmann
> told SecurityWatch. He explained that even blocking access to
> so-called risky content like porn and gambling would do little to
> protect against malvertising attacks.
>
>
> "Such threats are now more common on ‘business’ and ‘technology’
> sites," he said. "Malware is everywhere."
>
>
> It's worth noting that the ranking service Alexa lists xHamster as the
> 46th most popular website on the Internet, and Pornhub the 63rd. Of
> course, malvertisers will tailor their ads to appeal to what they
> perceive their victim's preferences to be but they would do this for
> any site.
>
>
> Just a few months ago, Google detected malicious ads on the New York
> Times and HuffPo. The issue was malicious content being delivered
> through the NetSeer advertising platform. For a while, the popular
> Google Chrome browser blocked access to these sites. Hansmann pointed
> to similar attacks affecting Spotify and the London Stock Exchange.
>
>
> | It depends upon the site; popularity does not guarantee that it is safe or secure. Various factors that can contribute to insecurity are (AND BE AWARE THAT THIS IS ONLY THE PARTIAL ANSWER):
Does it scrape or link to numerous other sites?
>
> There are numerous free sites that collect links and display images to
> porn on multiple other sites, but do not host any of it themselves.
> One common theme about them is that they all redirect you to
> advertisements, other porn collection sites, and continually hit you
> with XXX dating site popups and video phone sex sites. In effect,
> sending you down a rabbit hole looking for what you wanted, bypassing
> browser protections, and offering multiple ways of collecting personal
> information.
>
>
>
What resource types of porn does it host - GIFs, downloadable videos, pictures, flash videos?
>
> Any type of content can have something malicious embedded into it. The
> more it utilizes the system, the more potentially damaging it can be.
>
>
>
Who created the content, when was it created, and how many times has it been redistributed before it was uploaded to where it was found?
>
> Many of the common porn sites still link to porn from decades ago,
> hosted on sites that are not even remotely owned by the people who
> originally created it. And it is sad to say, but a lot of porn is not
> created or hosted by the nicest of people. There is also the fact that
> there has always been a very strong connection between the sex trades
> and criminal organizations. With cyber crime in the top 5 of
> international crime, there is always a good chance that any site could
> be a drive by computer compromise waiting to happen.
>
>
>
Is it an upload site where multiple people can upload whatever they want?
>
> There are sites that allow any person to upload any type of graphic
> material they want. Most of them that I have personally seen are
> pretty archaic or amateurish in terms of their web technologies or
> their execution. So it also implies that the back end protection might
> also be old, outdated. or ineptly implemented.
>
>
> Exceptions like the many Pinterest clones that allow you to upload a
> link, and the site will scrape that content, probably have good
> protection; but it probably also wouldn't provide protection from
> unique malware with custom signatures that target zero day exploits.
> There are constantly new forms of viruses, trojans, and worms being
> produced that no anti-virus company is aware of. They only know when
> someone who has detected a compromise submits a sample for analysis.
>
>
>
Who hosts it - tumblr, reddit, GoDaddy, Amazon EC2, private servers, etc?
>
> Porn on the web can be hosted on any number of blog services, web
> hosting companies, cloud platforms, or private servers. Which makes
> for a huge number of variables between what is displayed, and the
> protections in place to protect both the content and the people who
> surf that site. A lot of porn sites are even hosted on compromised
> home computers and university/business servers.
>
>
>
What OS, web server, and versions host the porn - Linux (Many), Windows Server (2000, 2003, 2008 R1 or R2, 2012), Apache, Nginx, IIS?
>
> The older the operating system that hosts the web server, the more
> outdated the technology and the more exploits and security flaws that
> are known about it. The same applies to the various web servers. Every
> hacker worth their salt knows how to fingerprint a server's OS to
> determine version, scan its ports to find out which ones are open and
> what services are listening, as well as make an initial determination
> of what exploits and payloads are likely to allow them to compromise
> it.
>
>
>
Where is the host located, is it cached in various geographic regions for faster distribution, and who caches it?
>
> The general location of the physical host can give you a strong hint
> about how compromising a porn site is likely to be. Servers located in
> Russia, China, or Eastern Europe would be very suspicious. A smart way to get around
> this is to have a proxy that redistributes the content from the
> primary server. This both makes the distribution of the content faster
> for various geographic locations since it is cached locally, but can also
> obfuscate the actual origin of the content itself and inspire a false
> sense of security.
>
>
>
What type and version of programming went into the website - Java, Ruby, Python, HTML, JavaScript, CSS, VisualBasic, etc?
>
> The web pages themselves are composed of numerous possible elements,
> all with various versions, possible compromises, sloppy programming,
> links to databases, possible security keys, etc. Part of profiling a
> web site for compromise is to take apart and analyze the application
> itself. Just right clicking and hitting "View page source" will tell
> you a lot. Defacing and compromising a website is one of the most
> common ways for hackers to compromise identities for profit,
> compromise computers to create drones for a botnet, encrypt a hard
> drive for extortion, or just for the fun of crashing someone's
> computer.
>
>
> |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | I think it's generally popular sites, not just porn sites. However there might be some reasons why pornsites tend to attract more malware.
Mostly malware originates from dodgy advertisement platforms. Because the morality of porn is often debated and not accepted in every culture, a lot of larger advertisement websites, such as Google Ads, do not allow their advertisements to be published on a porn site. This means that porn websites need to turn to somewhat dodgier advertisement provider to get money (porn sites make money from ads). One thing that happens is spreading adware and even right-out malware through these advertisements.
There is an interesting article "[Porn Sites Aren't (Always) Dens of Malware](http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/malware/310499-porn-sites-aren-t-always-dens-of-malware)" on pcmag's security watch. There's also [Dynamoo's blog](http://blog.dynamoo.com/2013/04/top-porn-sites-lead-to-malware.html) who did analysis on this. Xhamster has had issues with this before:
>
> The problem is that even reliable advertisers sometimes can be hacked.
> For example, in the past we had such issues with one of the top five
> porn paysites in the world," xHamster told the BBC. "Now our reliable
> partners are checking new advertisers very strictly, so it's almost
> impossible to put a new site with malware on xHamster.
>
>
>
The conclusion of the article is that it's not inherent to porn websites alone, but generally popular websites.
>
> It's easy to dismiss this as a problem reserved for a reviled, fringe
> industry but that is simply not the case. According to Bob Hansmann,
> security research marketing manager at Websense, any site which draws
> traffic is a potential target for malvertising.
>
>
> "Past research by the Websense Security Labs has actually illustrated
> that popular beats porn when it comes to malicious content," Hansmann
> told SecurityWatch. He explained that even blocking access to
> so-called risky content like porn and gambling would do little to
> protect against malvertising attacks.
>
>
> "Such threats are now more common on ‘business’ and ‘technology’
> sites," he said. "Malware is everywhere."
>
>
> It's worth noting that the ranking service Alexa lists xHamster as the
> 46th most popular website on the Internet, and Pornhub the 63rd. Of
> course, malvertisers will tailor their ads to appeal to what they
> perceive their victim's preferences to be but they would do this for
> any site.
>
>
> Just a few months ago, Google detected malicious ads on the New York
> Times and HuffPo. The issue was malicious content being delivered
> through the NetSeer advertising platform. For a while, the popular
> Google Chrome browser blocked access to these sites. Hansmann pointed
> to similar attacks affecting Spotify and the London Stock Exchange.
>
>
> | It's a myth that porn sites are more risky to use than other websites when it comes to malware. [This report published by Symantec in 2011](http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/other_resources/b-istr_main_report_2011_21239364.en-us.pdf) (PDF, see page 33) identified that you can get malware from pretty much any kind of website, even those which can be work-related for many professions. In fact, porn sites ranked lower than many other categories of websites.
Many infections originated from reputable websites which got compromised by hackers to spread malware. But according to this report, the most common source of malware are personal blogs.
I speculate that the reason for this is that many bloggers use popular content management systems like Wordpress but then do not take due diligence in updating it regularly. I assume that many black-hat hackers run automated bots which scan the web for outdated installations with known security vulnerabilities and automatically place malware payloads on them. |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | I think it's generally popular sites, not just porn sites. However there might be some reasons why pornsites tend to attract more malware.
Mostly malware originates from dodgy advertisement platforms. Because the morality of porn is often debated and not accepted in every culture, a lot of larger advertisement websites, such as Google Ads, do not allow their advertisements to be published on a porn site. This means that porn websites need to turn to somewhat dodgier advertisement provider to get money (porn sites make money from ads). One thing that happens is spreading adware and even right-out malware through these advertisements.
There is an interesting article "[Porn Sites Aren't (Always) Dens of Malware](http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/malware/310499-porn-sites-aren-t-always-dens-of-malware)" on pcmag's security watch. There's also [Dynamoo's blog](http://blog.dynamoo.com/2013/04/top-porn-sites-lead-to-malware.html) who did analysis on this. Xhamster has had issues with this before:
>
> The problem is that even reliable advertisers sometimes can be hacked.
> For example, in the past we had such issues with one of the top five
> porn paysites in the world," xHamster told the BBC. "Now our reliable
> partners are checking new advertisers very strictly, so it's almost
> impossible to put a new site with malware on xHamster.
>
>
>
The conclusion of the article is that it's not inherent to porn websites alone, but generally popular websites.
>
> It's easy to dismiss this as a problem reserved for a reviled, fringe
> industry but that is simply not the case. According to Bob Hansmann,
> security research marketing manager at Websense, any site which draws
> traffic is a potential target for malvertising.
>
>
> "Past research by the Websense Security Labs has actually illustrated
> that popular beats porn when it comes to malicious content," Hansmann
> told SecurityWatch. He explained that even blocking access to
> so-called risky content like porn and gambling would do little to
> protect against malvertising attacks.
>
>
> "Such threats are now more common on ‘business’ and ‘technology’
> sites," he said. "Malware is everywhere."
>
>
> It's worth noting that the ranking service Alexa lists xHamster as the
> 46th most popular website on the Internet, and Pornhub the 63rd. Of
> course, malvertisers will tailor their ads to appeal to what they
> perceive their victim's preferences to be but they would do this for
> any site.
>
>
> Just a few months ago, Google detected malicious ads on the New York
> Times and HuffPo. The issue was malicious content being delivered
> through the NetSeer advertising platform. For a while, the popular
> Google Chrome browser blocked access to these sites. Hansmann pointed
> to similar attacks affecting Spotify and the London Stock Exchange.
>
>
> | I remember a malware-code sneaked into exoclick-ad-network some month ago. Within an hour on most of the popular pornsites you got a "malware warning" from Chrome.
But apart from those special incident you are actually safer, as they would lose a lot of google traffic, if they don't fix that.
I would actually take more attention to less popular or illegal (eg download) sites. Those usually have nasty popups where you can get malware within a click - which sucks.
But just as you won't pay attention on unknown onlineshop I suggest to check all sites before clicking anything.
So basically your friend is right - But he could do better ;) |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | It's a myth that porn sites are more risky to use than other websites when it comes to malware. [This report published by Symantec in 2011](http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/other_resources/b-istr_main_report_2011_21239364.en-us.pdf) (PDF, see page 33) identified that you can get malware from pretty much any kind of website, even those which can be work-related for many professions. In fact, porn sites ranked lower than many other categories of websites.
Many infections originated from reputable websites which got compromised by hackers to spread malware. But according to this report, the most common source of malware are personal blogs.
I speculate that the reason for this is that many bloggers use popular content management systems like Wordpress but then do not take due diligence in updating it regularly. I assume that many black-hat hackers run automated bots which scan the web for outdated installations with known security vulnerabilities and automatically place malware payloads on them. | It depends upon the site; popularity does not guarantee that it is safe or secure. Various factors that can contribute to insecurity are (AND BE AWARE THAT THIS IS ONLY THE PARTIAL ANSWER):
Does it scrape or link to numerous other sites?
>
> There are numerous free sites that collect links and display images to
> porn on multiple other sites, but do not host any of it themselves.
> One common theme about them is that they all redirect you to
> advertisements, other porn collection sites, and continually hit you
> with XXX dating site popups and video phone sex sites. In effect,
> sending you down a rabbit hole looking for what you wanted, bypassing
> browser protections, and offering multiple ways of collecting personal
> information.
>
>
>
What resource types of porn does it host - GIFs, downloadable videos, pictures, flash videos?
>
> Any type of content can have something malicious embedded into it. The
> more it utilizes the system, the more potentially damaging it can be.
>
>
>
Who created the content, when was it created, and how many times has it been redistributed before it was uploaded to where it was found?
>
> Many of the common porn sites still link to porn from decades ago,
> hosted on sites that are not even remotely owned by the people who
> originally created it. And it is sad to say, but a lot of porn is not
> created or hosted by the nicest of people. There is also the fact that
> there has always been a very strong connection between the sex trades
> and criminal organizations. With cyber crime in the top 5 of
> international crime, there is always a good chance that any site could
> be a drive by computer compromise waiting to happen.
>
>
>
Is it an upload site where multiple people can upload whatever they want?
>
> There are sites that allow any person to upload any type of graphic
> material they want. Most of them that I have personally seen are
> pretty archaic or amateurish in terms of their web technologies or
> their execution. So it also implies that the back end protection might
> also be old, outdated. or ineptly implemented.
>
>
> Exceptions like the many Pinterest clones that allow you to upload a
> link, and the site will scrape that content, probably have good
> protection; but it probably also wouldn't provide protection from
> unique malware with custom signatures that target zero day exploits.
> There are constantly new forms of viruses, trojans, and worms being
> produced that no anti-virus company is aware of. They only know when
> someone who has detected a compromise submits a sample for analysis.
>
>
>
Who hosts it - tumblr, reddit, GoDaddy, Amazon EC2, private servers, etc?
>
> Porn on the web can be hosted on any number of blog services, web
> hosting companies, cloud platforms, or private servers. Which makes
> for a huge number of variables between what is displayed, and the
> protections in place to protect both the content and the people who
> surf that site. A lot of porn sites are even hosted on compromised
> home computers and university/business servers.
>
>
>
What OS, web server, and versions host the porn - Linux (Many), Windows Server (2000, 2003, 2008 R1 or R2, 2012), Apache, Nginx, IIS?
>
> The older the operating system that hosts the web server, the more
> outdated the technology and the more exploits and security flaws that
> are known about it. The same applies to the various web servers. Every
> hacker worth their salt knows how to fingerprint a server's OS to
> determine version, scan its ports to find out which ones are open and
> what services are listening, as well as make an initial determination
> of what exploits and payloads are likely to allow them to compromise
> it.
>
>
>
Where is the host located, is it cached in various geographic regions for faster distribution, and who caches it?
>
> The general location of the physical host can give you a strong hint
> about how compromising a porn site is likely to be. Servers located in
> Russia, China, or Eastern Europe would be very suspicious. A smart way to get around
> this is to have a proxy that redistributes the content from the
> primary server. This both makes the distribution of the content faster
> for various geographic locations since it is cached locally, but can also
> obfuscate the actual origin of the content itself and inspire a false
> sense of security.
>
>
>
What type and version of programming went into the website - Java, Ruby, Python, HTML, JavaScript, CSS, VisualBasic, etc?
>
> The web pages themselves are composed of numerous possible elements,
> all with various versions, possible compromises, sloppy programming,
> links to databases, possible security keys, etc. Part of profiling a
> web site for compromise is to take apart and analyze the application
> itself. Just right clicking and hitting "View page source" will tell
> you a lot. Defacing and compromising a website is one of the most
> common ways for hackers to compromise identities for profit,
> compromise computers to create drones for a botnet, encrypt a hard
> drive for extortion, or just for the fun of crashing someone's
> computer.
>
>
> |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | It depends upon the site; popularity does not guarantee that it is safe or secure. Various factors that can contribute to insecurity are (AND BE AWARE THAT THIS IS ONLY THE PARTIAL ANSWER):
Does it scrape or link to numerous other sites?
>
> There are numerous free sites that collect links and display images to
> porn on multiple other sites, but do not host any of it themselves.
> One common theme about them is that they all redirect you to
> advertisements, other porn collection sites, and continually hit you
> with XXX dating site popups and video phone sex sites. In effect,
> sending you down a rabbit hole looking for what you wanted, bypassing
> browser protections, and offering multiple ways of collecting personal
> information.
>
>
>
What resource types of porn does it host - GIFs, downloadable videos, pictures, flash videos?
>
> Any type of content can have something malicious embedded into it. The
> more it utilizes the system, the more potentially damaging it can be.
>
>
>
Who created the content, when was it created, and how many times has it been redistributed before it was uploaded to where it was found?
>
> Many of the common porn sites still link to porn from decades ago,
> hosted on sites that are not even remotely owned by the people who
> originally created it. And it is sad to say, but a lot of porn is not
> created or hosted by the nicest of people. There is also the fact that
> there has always been a very strong connection between the sex trades
> and criminal organizations. With cyber crime in the top 5 of
> international crime, there is always a good chance that any site could
> be a drive by computer compromise waiting to happen.
>
>
>
Is it an upload site where multiple people can upload whatever they want?
>
> There are sites that allow any person to upload any type of graphic
> material they want. Most of them that I have personally seen are
> pretty archaic or amateurish in terms of their web technologies or
> their execution. So it also implies that the back end protection might
> also be old, outdated. or ineptly implemented.
>
>
> Exceptions like the many Pinterest clones that allow you to upload a
> link, and the site will scrape that content, probably have good
> protection; but it probably also wouldn't provide protection from
> unique malware with custom signatures that target zero day exploits.
> There are constantly new forms of viruses, trojans, and worms being
> produced that no anti-virus company is aware of. They only know when
> someone who has detected a compromise submits a sample for analysis.
>
>
>
Who hosts it - tumblr, reddit, GoDaddy, Amazon EC2, private servers, etc?
>
> Porn on the web can be hosted on any number of blog services, web
> hosting companies, cloud platforms, or private servers. Which makes
> for a huge number of variables between what is displayed, and the
> protections in place to protect both the content and the people who
> surf that site. A lot of porn sites are even hosted on compromised
> home computers and university/business servers.
>
>
>
What OS, web server, and versions host the porn - Linux (Many), Windows Server (2000, 2003, 2008 R1 or R2, 2012), Apache, Nginx, IIS?
>
> The older the operating system that hosts the web server, the more
> outdated the technology and the more exploits and security flaws that
> are known about it. The same applies to the various web servers. Every
> hacker worth their salt knows how to fingerprint a server's OS to
> determine version, scan its ports to find out which ones are open and
> what services are listening, as well as make an initial determination
> of what exploits and payloads are likely to allow them to compromise
> it.
>
>
>
Where is the host located, is it cached in various geographic regions for faster distribution, and who caches it?
>
> The general location of the physical host can give you a strong hint
> about how compromising a porn site is likely to be. Servers located in
> Russia, China, or Eastern Europe would be very suspicious. A smart way to get around
> this is to have a proxy that redistributes the content from the
> primary server. This both makes the distribution of the content faster
> for various geographic locations since it is cached locally, but can also
> obfuscate the actual origin of the content itself and inspire a false
> sense of security.
>
>
>
What type and version of programming went into the website - Java, Ruby, Python, HTML, JavaScript, CSS, VisualBasic, etc?
>
> The web pages themselves are composed of numerous possible elements,
> all with various versions, possible compromises, sloppy programming,
> links to databases, possible security keys, etc. Part of profiling a
> web site for compromise is to take apart and analyze the application
> itself. Just right clicking and hitting "View page source" will tell
> you a lot. Defacing and compromising a website is one of the most
> common ways for hackers to compromise identities for profit,
> compromise computers to create drones for a botnet, encrypt a hard
> drive for extortion, or just for the fun of crashing someone's
> computer.
>
>
> | I remember a malware-code sneaked into exoclick-ad-network some month ago. Within an hour on most of the popular pornsites you got a "malware warning" from Chrome.
But apart from those special incident you are actually safer, as they would lose a lot of google traffic, if they don't fix that.
I would actually take more attention to less popular or illegal (eg download) sites. Those usually have nasty popups where you can get malware within a click - which sucks.
But just as you won't pay attention on unknown onlineshop I suggest to check all sites before clicking anything.
So basically your friend is right - But he could do better ;) |
61,969 | I'm trying to help my friend understand this because he believes that since a site is very popular, that it's less likely to infect its viewers because of its security! Is a popular site less likely to infect its viewers?
Please answer this question as detailed as possible so I can direct him to this site. | 2014/06/27 | [
"https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/61969",
"https://security.stackexchange.com",
"https://security.stackexchange.com/users/50022/"
] | It's a myth that porn sites are more risky to use than other websites when it comes to malware. [This report published by Symantec in 2011](http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/other_resources/b-istr_main_report_2011_21239364.en-us.pdf) (PDF, see page 33) identified that you can get malware from pretty much any kind of website, even those which can be work-related for many professions. In fact, porn sites ranked lower than many other categories of websites.
Many infections originated from reputable websites which got compromised by hackers to spread malware. But according to this report, the most common source of malware are personal blogs.
I speculate that the reason for this is that many bloggers use popular content management systems like Wordpress but then do not take due diligence in updating it regularly. I assume that many black-hat hackers run automated bots which scan the web for outdated installations with known security vulnerabilities and automatically place malware payloads on them. | I remember a malware-code sneaked into exoclick-ad-network some month ago. Within an hour on most of the popular pornsites you got a "malware warning" from Chrome.
But apart from those special incident you are actually safer, as they would lose a lot of google traffic, if they don't fix that.
I would actually take more attention to less popular or illegal (eg download) sites. Those usually have nasty popups where you can get malware within a click - which sucks.
But just as you won't pay attention on unknown onlineshop I suggest to check all sites before clicking anything.
So basically your friend is right - But he could do better ;) |
31,962,569 | I am working on MQTT and using python paho-mqtt <https://pypi.python.org/pypi/paho-mqtt>
I am unable to understand how can I publish msg to a specific client or list of clients?
I'll appreciate your help. | 2015/08/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/31962569",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1073780/"
] | This isn't directly possible with strict MQTT, although some brokers may offer that functionality, or you can construct your application so that the topic design works to do what you need. | Although I do agree that in some cases it would be useful to send a message to a particular client (or list of clients) that's simply not how the publish/subscribe messaging paradigm works. [Read more on the publish-subscribe pattern on Wikipedia.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publish%E2%80%93subscribe_pattern) If all your system needs to do is send messages to unique clients, then I would perhaps suggest thinking of a different architecture for the system you are designing. That being said, you can leverage off pub/sub to achieve what you want using a clever topic design architecture.
For example, let's assume all clients are part of a group (list), you could think of the following topic design:
Unique per client: *P2P/< client-name >*
List/Group subscription: *LIST/< list-name >*
For example, *P2P/user12345* and *LIST/QA* where only user12345 subscribes to *P2P/user12345* but all users of the QA group subscribe to *LIST/QA*.
It would be the client's responsibility to ensure that it is subscribed to its own topic(s) (or if your broker allows it, you could also add the topics administratively to non-clean clients).
With this design, a publisher would be able to send a message to a specific user or all members of a defined group (list). |
2,849,703 | I am developing a website in PHP that accepts PayPal payments. It uses the IPN from PayPal and has a custom payment template etc etc. It all works great through the Sandbox server but when it comes to showing my client, I don't want to have to tell them to login to/create a Sandbox account, create a buyer account and make a payment - he hasn't got time for that and probably won't be able to do it.
Therefore, my question is - is there any simple way that I can show my client the PayPal integration in "test mode" without him using the sandbox? I realise that I can set the transaction value to 0.01 and just test on the live PayPal server but that isn't an ideal solution.
Cheers!
Edit: Just to better explain what I mean, this is what my client sees when he first goes to checkout;
[alt text http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2545/67913734.png](http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2545/67913734.png)
As you can see, he has to login to his Sandbox account before then purchasing the item using the buyer email that he sets up. It's just confusing and totally non user-friendly. | 2010/05/17 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/2849703",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/263534/"
] | Unfortunately there isn't a way around this problem via paypal. Their sandbox will always require you to be logged in to actually demo.
Here are the solutions I have taken especially with remote clients.
* Use Skype or similar service so I can share my screen as I demo how it works. This solution seems to work fairly well, and eliminates the need for them to take the extra steps required.
* When working on something I want to quick demo for a client and get their take, I have started using <http://www.jingproject.com/> It allows me to make a quick video of the process. It uploads it to their server and provides a url I can send the client to watch what I did.
Wish I could provide a more elegant solution. | What I'd do is integrate with the actual PayPal live site and use real money. The great thing is you can refund the transaction (including the fees) so nobody pays anything. I believe the refund timeframe is 30 days, but there's no reason to wait too long and risk it. The added advantage is that you get to prove to your client that the PayPal integration *really* works.
If there's a concern with littering the seller account with test transactions and refunds then go ahead and set up a separate seller account. It's quick to set up as long as you don't expect your test account to be receiving thousands of dollars. |
85,953 | I've Googled it. Trust me. It seems every site that talks about a wealth management platform already assumes one knows what this is.
Is a wealth management platform a set of ideals, a software system, a book, a robot...? Does it keep an account of your money, or does it recommend how you should invest it? Or both?
A specific one like Black Diamond - what differentiates this platform over any other?
Who uses a platform - an investment firm, a person looking to invest,...?
I am curious and clueless. Thanks. | 2017/10/10 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/85953",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/63499/"
] | It's a tech buzzword.
OK I'm being a bit glib. A Wealth Management Platform is a software system designed to help people track their investment portfolios and research new investments. Sometimes, trusts and small investment firms will use these platforms as well but they will often have more specialized separate systems for portfolio tracking and research.
There is a large variety of platforms out there all trying to be the best platform for you... or someone else. Some will have websites and be open to all with money and some will be applications and only target some types of investors. Some will have robo-advising (Wealthfront), a human adviser (Merrill) or have none at all. Some will have nice graphical tools to track your portfolio or great research tools or both (I try not to recommend products on this site). Some can be designed to nudge you into their ideology (Vanguard).
All, though, have a technology team behind them to make investing easier for you (or their investment advisers) or to sell you their products. You get the picture. | Most businesses have some sort of software to manage their client data. Most of these various software and/or services are industry specific. [Black Diamond](http://blackdiamond.advent.com/) seems to be a client management tool targeting investment advisers.
*From the black diamond site*
>
> Reach an unparalleled level of productivity and transform your client conversations.
>
>
>
You don't need one of these unless you're a professional investment adviser with so many clients you can't track them yourself or need more robust reporting or statement generation tools.
For your purposes most regular brokers, Fidelity, Schwab, Vanguard, TD, etc, have more than enough tools for the retail level investor. They have news feeds, security analysis papers, historical data, stock screeners, etc. You, a regular retail investor doesn't need to buy special software, your broker will generally provide these things as part of the service. |
7,708,342 | I'm currently working on ipad IOS Safari. Thinking of adding some plugins to the application. but found some article saying that IOS Safari doesn't support plugins. Any expert know how true is the statement? Thanks | 2011/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/7708342",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/979602/"
] | Safari, like all iOS apps, does not support plug-ins or any other form of customization. Your only option is to create an app with a UIWebView. Quite a few browser apps can be found in the App Store.
iOS 9 update: Safari still does not support plug-ins; however, it is now possible to build an app that [blocks specific content](https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_9.html) via a JSON file. Content blocking rules only affect the Safari app and the new SFSafariViewController (UIWebView and WKWebView instances are unaffected). | It DOES support plug-ins, you have to be Jailbroken to add any though. Install iFile from cydia then in iFile go to /System/Library/Internet Plug-Ins
The QuickTime Plugin is in there already, which proves that plugins are supported
And you can customize apps if your jailbroken |
7,708,342 | I'm currently working on ipad IOS Safari. Thinking of adding some plugins to the application. but found some article saying that IOS Safari doesn't support plugins. Any expert know how true is the statement? Thanks | 2011/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/7708342",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/979602/"
] | Safari, like all iOS apps, does not support plug-ins or any other form of customization. Your only option is to create an app with a UIWebView. Quite a few browser apps can be found in the App Store.
iOS 9 update: Safari still does not support plug-ins; however, it is now possible to build an app that [blocks specific content](https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_9.html) via a JSON file. Content blocking rules only affect the Safari app and the new SFSafariViewController (UIWebView and WKWebView instances are unaffected). | The fact that you need to jailbreak it to use them actually proves that Apple is not supporting the use of plugins. |
7,708,342 | I'm currently working on ipad IOS Safari. Thinking of adding some plugins to the application. but found some article saying that IOS Safari doesn't support plugins. Any expert know how true is the statement? Thanks | 2011/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/7708342",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/979602/"
] | Safari, like all iOS apps, does not support plug-ins or any other form of customization. Your only option is to create an app with a UIWebView. Quite a few browser apps can be found in the App Store.
iOS 9 update: Safari still does not support plug-ins; however, it is now possible to build an app that [blocks specific content](https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_9.html) via a JSON file. Content blocking rules only affect the Safari app and the new SFSafariViewController (UIWebView and WKWebView instances are unaffected). | As of iOS 9, browser plugins are supported (as content blockers). |
100,306 | In this [paper](http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes10060467), the authors cloned a GPD promoter for use in driving a GFP gene from Lentinula edodes using a set of provided primers. The primers were derived from the following accession [GQ457137.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/GQ457137.1) containing the GPD gene for this organism.
In fact, there are [three](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore?term=(gpd)%20AND%20lentinula%20edodes%5BOrganism%5D) accessions in GenBank containing gpd promoter sequences for Lentinula edodes, each of varied size and homology to the aforementioned sequence used in the paper.
I am working on defining a transformation protocol for Psilocybe cubensis (of which there are no published transformations) and I would like to design some primers as done in the paper above in order to clone the GPD promoter for this organism from its DNA; however, just as with L. edodes, there are multiple accessions of GPD in psilocybe cubensis: [KM273235.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KM273235.1) and [KT067727.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KT067727.1)
In my case; however, there is no literature referencing either of these accessions and so I don't know which of these accession I could or should use to design my primers.
I have the following questions:
1. Why does the same promoter within the same organism have such varied sequences?
2. If the promoter sequence varies even within the same organism, the how can anyone extract the promoter with certainty since the organism may carry a different sequence for the promoter?
3. Generally, I'm trying to find the GPD promoter for P. cubensis (or any strong promoter) and clone it for use in my plasmid for transformation. I'm stuck as to how to go about finding a suitable candidate.
Thank you. | 2021/04/15 | [
"https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/100306",
"https://biology.stackexchange.com",
"https://biology.stackexchange.com/users/65098/"
] | >
> Why does the same promoter within the same organism have such varied sequences?
>
>
>
While there may be other reasons, the fact that the same species has several genes encoding GPD proteins is an indication that this enzymatic activity is important for different mechanisms, times or conditions. For example, I mentioned in a comment to [one of your previous questions](https://biology.stackexchange.com/a/100267/39750) that the three GPD-encoding genes in budding yeast (*TDH1*, *TDH2* and *TDH3*) are expressed during different growth phases. Therefore, although the proteins encoded by these genes might share both sequence homology and function, their promoter regions most likely will not. We even *expect* their promoters to be different, to allow for such differential expression. Put differently: if the three *TDH* promoters were all highly similar, we would expect them to also be active at the same times, effectively rendering the three genes redundant.
There is therefore no reason for assuming that promoters driving the expression of two different genes will share any homology, just because the encoded proteins happen to share function.
>
> If the promoter sequence varies even within the same organism, the how can anyone extract the promoter with certainty since the organism may carry a different sequence for the promoter?
>
>
>
The only way of knowing exactly what region upstream of a gene that regulates it's expression (i.e., what functional elements that *defines* its promoter) is to characterize the promoter region. This is way beyond the scope of your work. What we tend to do in budding yeast when we clone an *uncharacterized* promoter, is to simply take 1000 bp upstream of a gene's start codon, and assume that this includes all elements necessary for proper regulation of the gene in question (e.g. possible transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs), transcriptional start site (TSS), etc). 1000 bp is a relatively safe length in budding yeast, since the distance between genes rarely exceeds this, and we tend to assume that promoter regions don't overlap neighboring genes' coding regions. But this might be different in your species. Also, if you know the location your gene's TSS, this would be a safer reference point than the start codon.
>
> Generally, I'm trying to find the GPD promoter for P. cubensis (or any strong promoter) and clone it for use in my plasmid for transformation. I'm stuck as to how to go about finding a suitable candidate.
>
>
>
My guess is that the authors that cloned the GPD promoter from *Lentinula edodes* either already knew that this specific gene is highly expressed and therefore selected its promoter; alternatively they might have cloned all GPD promoter variants, and then simply published the one that they saw worked best.
If you don't have any information about the expression of the GPD-encoding genes from your species, any decision as to which promoter to choose will inevitably be more or less guesswork. It seems to me that the evolutionary distance between *Lentinula edodes* and *Psilocybe cubensis* is way too large to make any direct inferences. Nevertheless, with the lack of better options here is what I suggest:
1. Try to identify which of *Psilocybe cubensis*'s GPD proteins is *most similar* (in terms of sequence homology) to the protein the authors chose for their *Lentinula edodes* GPD promoter. This *might* indicate that these are direct orthologs, and with a bit of luck may also share similar relative expression patterns and/or levels. You could also do a similar matching with the [Tdh3 protein](https://www.yeastgenome.org/locus/S000003424) from budding yeast, since *TDH3* is indeed [a very strong promoter](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20625983/) (article behind paywall, but easy to find elsewhere). If you still don't know which of the promoters to choose, proceed with both candidates and see which one works best (although that means doubled cost and effort).
2. Once you have identified your candidate GPD gene, you define an appropriate region upstream of your gene’s coding region as the promoter region. This can be arbitrarily picking 1000 bp, or the entire intergenic region, as @Cholpisit suggests.
3. Design your primers for cloning this region into your target vector, upstream of GFP. | I'm not well-verse in fungal transcriptional system but I did some digging in bacteria before, so not entirely sure this perspective will help.
The promoter region of any gene should be upstream of the transcriptional unit and usually remains in the intergenic region, not being part of the CDS of interest and the adjacent gene. If we're digging a promoter of an essential gene, probably constitutively express with decent strength, ones might be able to chop the whole intergenic region and the part of the adjacent genes (in case they contribute to the transcriptional control). A well-annotated genome would be required for this approach.
Considering the different promoter/gene annotations available in the database. It might be hard to pinpoint if they're the same strain/substrain or not and that may affect the genetic variation to a certain level.
* The doubting 3 GPD promoters of *Lentinula edodes* you mentioned are from unpublished sources from 2 teams. Do we know if they're exactly the same strain? As for those two sequences from the same team, they share sequence similarity to a certain level, GQ457137 is part of GQ457138 according to the alignment.
* As for the *P. cubensis* GPD promoter, you can try chopping the intergenic sequence upstream of the coding sequence as **gaspanic** mentioned above. The GPD accessions KM273235 and KT067727 might be referring to different strains as well. Depending on the strain you're working on, you may prefer the sequence submitted as that strain. However, you'll have to look for more information since those deposited sequences refer to partial CDS, not the promoter itself like in the case of *Lentinula edodes*. |
48,706 | How does SIP work and what is its use in VOIP?
Do I have to have it or can I use a direct plug-in to the computer to use VOIP? | 2009/09/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/48706",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/11546/"
] | Right, SIP is an application protocol that runs on top of TCP.
There are many different ways to transfer voice over TCP/IP, however SIP is probably the most used and understood in the industry with the maximum compatibility.
If you just want to make calls from your computer, many come with the phone dialer application (not sure if it is included any more in Vista/7), but you should be able to find one online. This uses a standard modem and had nothing to do wit SIP, it is purely POTS (Plane old telephone system). | As Wil said, SIP is an application layer protocol. SIP is used as signaling protocol in VoIP, ie to manage sessions(voice, video or file transfer) between participants. The actual media is transported using different protocols based on the need, voice packets are transferred as RTP once the SIP signalling is successfully done. |
48,706 | How does SIP work and what is its use in VOIP?
Do I have to have it or can I use a direct plug-in to the computer to use VOIP? | 2009/09/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/48706",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/11546/"
] | Right, SIP is an application protocol that runs on top of TCP.
There are many different ways to transfer voice over TCP/IP, however SIP is probably the most used and understood in the industry with the maximum compatibility.
If you just want to make calls from your computer, many come with the phone dialer application (not sure if it is included any more in Vista/7), but you should be able to find one online. This uses a standard modem and had nothing to do wit SIP, it is purely POTS (Plane old telephone system). | Try <http://gizmo5.com> which is a VOIP client that suports SIP-based internet calling. You would be able to make calls through your PC with a headset. |
48,706 | How does SIP work and what is its use in VOIP?
Do I have to have it or can I use a direct plug-in to the computer to use VOIP? | 2009/09/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/48706",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/11546/"
] | Right, SIP is an application protocol that runs on top of TCP.
There are many different ways to transfer voice over TCP/IP, however SIP is probably the most used and understood in the industry with the maximum compatibility.
If you just want to make calls from your computer, many come with the phone dialer application (not sure if it is included any more in Vista/7), but you should be able to find one online. This uses a standard modem and had nothing to do wit SIP, it is purely POTS (Plane old telephone system). | A SIP trunk is a direct connection between your organization and an Internet telephony service provider. SIP trunk enables you to extend VoIP telephony beyond your organization’s firewall without the need for an IP-PSTN gateway. This simpler configuration is easier and less expensive to design, operate, maintain, and upgrade. Here is a suggested [blog]: <http://www.dovecommunications.com/modern-voip-features-explained-sip-trunking/> where you can read in more details about SIP trunking. |
48,706 | How does SIP work and what is its use in VOIP?
Do I have to have it or can I use a direct plug-in to the computer to use VOIP? | 2009/09/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/48706",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/11546/"
] | As Wil said, SIP is an application layer protocol. SIP is used as signaling protocol in VoIP, ie to manage sessions(voice, video or file transfer) between participants. The actual media is transported using different protocols based on the need, voice packets are transferred as RTP once the SIP signalling is successfully done. | Try <http://gizmo5.com> which is a VOIP client that suports SIP-based internet calling. You would be able to make calls through your PC with a headset. |
48,706 | How does SIP work and what is its use in VOIP?
Do I have to have it or can I use a direct plug-in to the computer to use VOIP? | 2009/09/29 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/48706",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/11546/"
] | A SIP trunk is a direct connection between your organization and an Internet telephony service provider. SIP trunk enables you to extend VoIP telephony beyond your organization’s firewall without the need for an IP-PSTN gateway. This simpler configuration is easier and less expensive to design, operate, maintain, and upgrade. Here is a suggested [blog]: <http://www.dovecommunications.com/modern-voip-features-explained-sip-trunking/> where you can read in more details about SIP trunking. | Try <http://gizmo5.com> which is a VOIP client that suports SIP-based internet calling. You would be able to make calls through your PC with a headset. |
12,812,858 | I am developing a website for an organization. They asked me to limit copying website contents to 300 words. i've googled, but i couldn't found any sollutions.. if there any scripts(javaScript or PHP) to do this? | 2012/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/12812858",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1690297/"
] | I got the simple solution for this problem. I have just upgraded my java version. Presently I am using <http://jdk7.java.net/download.html> **7u10** version for my application and it is working fine on windows server 2008 also.
Although this release is not official release yet.. but I think I can leave with it.. until the official release of this version..
Enjoy.. cheers. | Had same access violation as stated above. What worked for me was to setup "Desktop Experience" under Server Manager in Windows 2008 R2. Hope that helps... |
12,812,858 | I am developing a website for an organization. They asked me to limit copying website contents to 300 words. i've googled, but i couldn't found any sollutions.. if there any scripts(javaScript or PHP) to do this? | 2012/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/12812858",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1690297/"
] | I got the simple solution for this problem. I have just upgraded my java version. Presently I am using <http://jdk7.java.net/download.html> **7u10** version for my application and it is working fine on windows server 2008 also.
Although this release is not official release yet.. but I think I can leave with it.. until the official release of this version..
Enjoy.. cheers. | There is a JIRA issue that seems to match this problem - see <http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-23456> |
12,812,858 | I am developing a website for an organization. They asked me to limit copying website contents to 300 words. i've googled, but i couldn't found any sollutions.. if there any scripts(javaScript or PHP) to do this? | 2012/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/12812858",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1690297/"
] | Had same access violation as stated above. What worked for me was to setup "Desktop Experience" under Server Manager in Windows 2008 R2. Hope that helps... | There is a JIRA issue that seems to match this problem - see <http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-23456> |
13,349,785 | I'm working on a simple app where I have 100 records of customer with address. The requirement is to have a field for radius and address. The two fields will become the parameters to search customers.
For example:
Radius = 500 miles and Address = New York
Results should be customers 500 miles near New York. | 2012/11/12 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/13349785",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/211733/"
] | You need 2 "applications":
1. A minimal bootstrap application that checks for updates and runs the main application;
2. The main application.
The user always launches the bootstrap application, never the main application (in fact the user doesn't know about the bootstrap application). This is by far the most common pattern I've seen.
If you want to do auto-updates at runtime, you'll need to use OSGI as javabeats mentioned. But only take this path if you **really** need this. I've never used OSGI, but I can imagine that it's non-trivial.
### Edit
I don't have a concrete example, but I can imagine that
1. the bootstrap downloads some jar and configuration files
2. One of the configuration files contains the files required in the classpath (this could be done automatically by your app, if it picks all the jar files that are inside a given folder).
3. With the previous list, create a new classloader (see example [here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/252893/how-do-you-change-the-classpath-within-java)) to add the jar files to the classpath.
4. Run the main class of the application in the new classloader.
Sorry, I can't give you a more detailed answer without writing the code myself, but I charge for that :). | If JNLP is ruled out, I'd think only a solution using [OSGI](http://felix.apache.org/) would achieve that. Otherwise, even at the very simplest design possible, you'll need another program to manage and download the versions of your current program. |
198,659 | So here's what happened
I was happily using my Macbook as usual, and I closed the lid like I always do when I put it away.
When I came back and wanted to use it again two hours later, I open it up and type in my password. Strangely I'm greeted with the infamous spinning beach ball of death, and after a minute or two of the computer not responding I close the lid again.
I then hear the boot sound, and thinking the computer simply crashed and rebooted I open the lid, only to see the flashing question mark folder.
Doing some research I find that it means the computer can't find the boot drive, so I reboot into Internet recovery mode, and try to select the boot drive... Nothing's there. I then go to Disk Utility to try and see if I can repair the drive. All I find is the base system, to which I don't have write permissions, and as such am not allowed to repair or format.
What do I do? I don't want to lose all the precious work I have on it, and I don't have a time machine for backups.
It's a late 2011 13 inch Macbook pro with 8 gb ram and a 2 tb hard drive
New Information:
----------------
The computer boots fine from the hard drive if I connect it via USB, so I suspect it might have something to do with the cable, but I'm not sure. | 2015/08/03 | [
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/198659",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com",
"https://apple.stackexchange.com/users/138871/"
] | It may be as simple as the cable has become loose. If that is the case, it is a fairly easy fix. Sorry to see you don’t have a backup. If the drive has gone bad, that would have been your recourse.
For future reference, a simple external drive connected via USB will work fine as a **Time Machine** backup disk. Even if you are not as regular in connecting it as you should, you would at least have a backup in case of catastrophic failure. There are other online backup solutions too that are subscription based.
If you are comfortable with taking the MacBook apart, you can check the cables first. | I'd try booting off of another hard drive with OS X on it and then using Disk Utility to try to repair the drive and/or its Disk Permissions. Maybe one of your friends has something you can barrow to use to boot your Mac off of (even an old OS X Lion USB stick). |
1,976,982 | Ok I ve been asked to generate a schema for a database that contains 20+ tables
I ve used SQLServer Management studio to extract out the database schema but cannot export it into word
If I copy it as a diagram the tables are too small
Does anyone know how to extract the schema from a sql server database so that it is presentable to a project manager | 2009/12/29 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1976982",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/122528/"
] | If you have Visio you can use the reverse engineer functionality to generate a schema diagram of your database which you can then format to make look presentable. If required this will then paste nicely into word.
More information [here](https://support.office.com/en-gb/article/Reverse-engineer-an-existing-database-into-a-database-model-fb034862-acfc-45bc-88b2-f33d1e1f8614) | Another way is to simply take a screen shot of the database diagrams... |
1,976,982 | Ok I ve been asked to generate a schema for a database that contains 20+ tables
I ve used SQLServer Management studio to extract out the database schema but cannot export it into word
If I copy it as a diagram the tables are too small
Does anyone know how to extract the schema from a sql server database so that it is presentable to a project manager | 2009/12/29 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1976982",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/122528/"
] | If you have Visio you can use the reverse engineer functionality to generate a schema diagram of your database which you can then format to make look presentable. If required this will then paste nicely into word.
More information [here](https://support.office.com/en-gb/article/Reverse-engineer-an-existing-database-into-a-database-model-fb034862-acfc-45bc-88b2-f33d1e1f8614) | You can create more than one database diagram, each containing part of the schema. Make those small enough to see. |
1,976,982 | Ok I ve been asked to generate a schema for a database that contains 20+ tables
I ve used SQLServer Management studio to extract out the database schema but cannot export it into word
If I copy it as a diagram the tables are too small
Does anyone know how to extract the schema from a sql server database so that it is presentable to a project manager | 2009/12/29 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1976982",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/122528/"
] | You can create more than one database diagram, each containing part of the schema. Make those small enough to see. | Another way is to simply take a screen shot of the database diagrams... |
1,399 | When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:
There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)
I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them). | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1399",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/478/"
] | What you here call 'patterns' are more commonly called chess tactics. See the [Wikipedia article for Chess Tactics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_tactic) for a list with some visualization.
These are the simple patterns. There are more complicated patterns that arise rather less commonly, but these complicated patterns tend to simply be a composite of the 'basic tactics'.
A fine example of a more complicated pattern is the windmill: [Wikipedia article for Windmill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windmill_%28chess%29) | These are standard tactics. One is called a pin, where a relatively weak piece is tied up in front of stronger piece. It can't move without exposing the stronger piece. Another is called the skewer, where the stronger piece is in front, and can't move away without exposing the weaker piece. The third is called a fork, attacking two pieces in two different directions.
These are basic applications of a simple strategem: you win games by threatening two things at one time, and the opponent can defend only one of them. Basic players will have two pieces attacked at the same time. At the advanced level, it might be two smaller threats, maybe the advance of two different pawns can be supported into enemy territory by the same piece. |
1,399 | When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:
There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)
I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them). | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1399",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/478/"
] | What you here call 'patterns' are more commonly called chess tactics. See the [Wikipedia article for Chess Tactics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_tactic) for a list with some visualization.
These are the simple patterns. There are more complicated patterns that arise rather less commonly, but these complicated patterns tend to simply be a composite of the 'basic tactics'.
A fine example of a more complicated pattern is the windmill: [Wikipedia article for Windmill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windmill_%28chess%29) | As pointed out, the "patterns" you were looking at are largely covered more abstractly in the domain of tactics... My favorite guide when I was new to chess on that was Yasser Seirwan's book [Winning Chess Tactics](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0735606056). Once you get the basic ideas, the only way to improve on those is practice. I find the tactics sites like [chess.emrald.net](http://chess.emrald.net) to be the best resource for rapidly improving your game.
But there are also genuine "patterns" to learn, which are also important. The difference can be thought of as patterns tend to be less an abstract idea, but a specific implementation of several of these tactical ideas in a configuration of the pieces you will often see. Most common are the mating patterns... which I'd reference you to my favorite chess book [The Art of Attack in Chess](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1857444000), one I think should be on any serious chess players book shelf. [Here](http://blog.chess.com/batgirl/mating-patterns-i) is an online example of mating patterns, if you are interested. |
1,399 | When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:
There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)
I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them). | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1399",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/478/"
] | What you here call 'patterns' are more commonly called chess tactics. See the [Wikipedia article for Chess Tactics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_tactic) for a list with some visualization.
These are the simple patterns. There are more complicated patterns that arise rather less commonly, but these complicated patterns tend to simply be a composite of the 'basic tactics'.
A fine example of a more complicated pattern is the windmill: [Wikipedia article for Windmill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windmill_%28chess%29) | As others have mentioned, what you have shown are common tactics (the pin and the fork) which are used to win material, generally based on a double attack, only one component of which you can answer. There are other tactics as well, including the discovered attack, x-ray attack (skewer), deflection and overloading. Often tactics are conjoined in a combination. It would be advisable to familiarize yourself with these from either an electronic or printed source, of which there are many available. In addition to these tactical patterns, you should also familiarize yourself with the common checkmating patterns so you can recognize them when they arise. These would include the Scholar's Mate, Fool's mate, Legal's mate, Philidor's Legacy (smothered mate), Morphy's Mate, Dovetail Mate, Epaulette Mate, and quite a few others, all of which can be found in the same sources as the tactics. Then regular play helps you to see any of these when they are imminent so you can react in time. |
1,399 | When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:
There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)
I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them). | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1399",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/478/"
] | These are standard tactics. One is called a pin, where a relatively weak piece is tied up in front of stronger piece. It can't move without exposing the stronger piece. Another is called the skewer, where the stronger piece is in front, and can't move away without exposing the weaker piece. The third is called a fork, attacking two pieces in two different directions.
These are basic applications of a simple strategem: you win games by threatening two things at one time, and the opponent can defend only one of them. Basic players will have two pieces attacked at the same time. At the advanced level, it might be two smaller threats, maybe the advance of two different pawns can be supported into enemy territory by the same piece. | As others have mentioned, what you have shown are common tactics (the pin and the fork) which are used to win material, generally based on a double attack, only one component of which you can answer. There are other tactics as well, including the discovered attack, x-ray attack (skewer), deflection and overloading. Often tactics are conjoined in a combination. It would be advisable to familiarize yourself with these from either an electronic or printed source, of which there are many available. In addition to these tactical patterns, you should also familiarize yourself with the common checkmating patterns so you can recognize them when they arise. These would include the Scholar's Mate, Fool's mate, Legal's mate, Philidor's Legacy (smothered mate), Morphy's Mate, Dovetail Mate, Epaulette Mate, and quite a few others, all of which can be found in the same sources as the tactics. Then regular play helps you to see any of these when they are imminent so you can react in time. |
1,399 | When I started learning, I had lots of games where I lost lots of material through not being familiar with these sneaky attacks. I am talking about these:
There are many more (two minor pieces being attacked by a single pawn, discovered checks that result in attacking important pieces, etc)
I think it will be of great help to study them again and have them freshly in my mind (they often go unperceived, both when *spotting* them, and *stopping* them). | 2012/10/04 | [
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1399",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com",
"https://chess.stackexchange.com/users/478/"
] | As pointed out, the "patterns" you were looking at are largely covered more abstractly in the domain of tactics... My favorite guide when I was new to chess on that was Yasser Seirwan's book [Winning Chess Tactics](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0735606056). Once you get the basic ideas, the only way to improve on those is practice. I find the tactics sites like [chess.emrald.net](http://chess.emrald.net) to be the best resource for rapidly improving your game.
But there are also genuine "patterns" to learn, which are also important. The difference can be thought of as patterns tend to be less an abstract idea, but a specific implementation of several of these tactical ideas in a configuration of the pieces you will often see. Most common are the mating patterns... which I'd reference you to my favorite chess book [The Art of Attack in Chess](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1857444000), one I think should be on any serious chess players book shelf. [Here](http://blog.chess.com/batgirl/mating-patterns-i) is an online example of mating patterns, if you are interested. | As others have mentioned, what you have shown are common tactics (the pin and the fork) which are used to win material, generally based on a double attack, only one component of which you can answer. There are other tactics as well, including the discovered attack, x-ray attack (skewer), deflection and overloading. Often tactics are conjoined in a combination. It would be advisable to familiarize yourself with these from either an electronic or printed source, of which there are many available. In addition to these tactical patterns, you should also familiarize yourself with the common checkmating patterns so you can recognize them when they arise. These would include the Scholar's Mate, Fool's mate, Legal's mate, Philidor's Legacy (smothered mate), Morphy's Mate, Dovetail Mate, Epaulette Mate, and quite a few others, all of which can be found in the same sources as the tactics. Then regular play helps you to see any of these when they are imminent so you can react in time. |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | At present, it does not appear that there is a way to reset any stats.
The forums seems to indicate that the only way to do it is to be caught hacking and then get your stats reset by DICE. However, there is no guarantee that they wouldn't just ban you instead.
BF3 is different to BF:BC2, where you could have different profiles on the same account. | Well, you could try using a "stat padding exploit".
They did wipe/reset stats of those who did use those kind of exploit in the past.
But I wouldn't recommend doing that!! |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | At present, it does not appear that there is a way to reset any stats.
The forums seems to indicate that the only way to do it is to be caught hacking and then get your stats reset by DICE. However, there is no guarantee that they wouldn't just ban you instead.
BF3 is different to BF:BC2, where you could have different profiles on the same account. | Not sure on other consoles, but this is kind of possible with xbox 360 if you don't mind using a different account(hint: free if you are using the family plan).
1. With the profile you activated Battlefield with(or bought an online pass) download the online pass to an xbox harddrive.
2. Create a new profile on that harddrive.
You should now be able to use that online pass with your new account. It's also completely possible to later copy your online pass to a thumbdrive along with that profile and play in two locations at once with one online pass. (one with your old gamertag and the other with your new gamertag) |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | At present, it does not appear that there is a way to reset any stats.
The forums seems to indicate that the only way to do it is to be caught hacking and then get your stats reset by DICE. However, there is no guarantee that they wouldn't just ban you instead.
BF3 is different to BF:BC2, where you could have different profiles on the same account. | Now, with [Battlefield 3 Premium](http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/1/premium), your can reset you Score/Minute, Kills/Deaths, and Wins/Losses stats. |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | At present, it does not appear that there is a way to reset any stats.
The forums seems to indicate that the only way to do it is to be caught hacking and then get your stats reset by DICE. However, there is no guarantee that they wouldn't just ban you instead.
BF3 is different to BF:BC2, where you could have different profiles on the same account. | There actually is a way.
1. Go to the ps3 home screen
2. Go to the Game submenu
3. Go to Game Data Utility
(If you have a memory card in you might have to go to Memory Card Utility)
4. Scroll down to battlefield 3
5. Press triangle
6. Select delete
7. Select yes
8. Go back to the ps3 home screen
9. Go to game submenu
10. Go to Game Saved Utility
11. Scroll down to battlefield 3
12. Press triangle
13. Select delete
14. Select yes
15. Start battlefield game and have fun!! :)
WARNING: If you do this, it deleted all the battlefield 3 stats and saves. It deletes your Career, Multiplayer, Co-Op, Unlocks, Dog Tags, and I think your expansion packs. |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | At present, it does not appear that there is a way to reset any stats.
The forums seems to indicate that the only way to do it is to be caught hacking and then get your stats reset by DICE. However, there is no guarantee that they wouldn't just ban you instead.
BF3 is different to BF:BC2, where you could have different profiles on the same account. | One solution:
1. Make a new account on your PS3 Home screen.
2. Log into the PlayStation Network with a different PSN account.
3. Launch BF3 and start over.
EA recently discontinued 'Online Pass' and removed the requirement from older games (including BF3). Therefore you will NOT be required to buy a new copy. |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | Now, with [Battlefield 3 Premium](http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/1/premium), your can reset you Score/Minute, Kills/Deaths, and Wins/Losses stats. | Well, you could try using a "stat padding exploit".
They did wipe/reset stats of those who did use those kind of exploit in the past.
But I wouldn't recommend doing that!! |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | Now, with [Battlefield 3 Premium](http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/1/premium), your can reset you Score/Minute, Kills/Deaths, and Wins/Losses stats. | Not sure on other consoles, but this is kind of possible with xbox 360 if you don't mind using a different account(hint: free if you are using the family plan).
1. With the profile you activated Battlefield with(or bought an online pass) download the online pass to an xbox harddrive.
2. Create a new profile on that harddrive.
You should now be able to use that online pass with your new account. It's also completely possible to later copy your online pass to a thumbdrive along with that profile and play in two locations at once with one online pass. (one with your old gamertag and the other with your new gamertag) |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | Now, with [Battlefield 3 Premium](http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/1/premium), your can reset you Score/Minute, Kills/Deaths, and Wins/Losses stats. | There actually is a way.
1. Go to the ps3 home screen
2. Go to the Game submenu
3. Go to Game Data Utility
(If you have a memory card in you might have to go to Memory Card Utility)
4. Scroll down to battlefield 3
5. Press triangle
6. Select delete
7. Select yes
8. Go back to the ps3 home screen
9. Go to game submenu
10. Go to Game Saved Utility
11. Scroll down to battlefield 3
12. Press triangle
13. Select delete
14. Select yes
15. Start battlefield game and have fun!! :)
WARNING: If you do this, it deleted all the battlefield 3 stats and saves. It deletes your Career, Multiplayer, Co-Op, Unlocks, Dog Tags, and I think your expansion packs. |
57,125 | And I mean all stats. Including unlocks, dogtags etc. And I want to do this without re-buying the game. | 2012/03/20 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/57125",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/4263/"
] | Now, with [Battlefield 3 Premium](http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/1/premium), your can reset you Score/Minute, Kills/Deaths, and Wins/Losses stats. | One solution:
1. Make a new account on your PS3 Home screen.
2. Log into the PlayStation Network with a different PSN account.
3. Launch BF3 and start over.
EA recently discontinued 'Online Pass' and removed the requirement from older games (including BF3). Therefore you will NOT be required to buy a new copy. |
4,169 | I am in need of a desktop PC made only of Free and Open hardware components.
If I could be sure that such a thing is possible, I'd even be willing to build it myself; however, I can find no guides on Google on how to determine if this motherboard is open, or if that adapter released its firmware source.
I'm particularly interested in hardware that does not impede my ability to install my own firmware. Open hardware schematics are not necessarily a requirement.
How would you go about accomplishing this task? | 2016/07/13 | [
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/4169",
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com",
"https://opensource.stackexchange.com/users/5577/"
] | I suggest taking a look at [EOMA68 computer cards](https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop). They're expected to receive [RYF](http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/respects-your-freedom) certification, and you can order a desktop housing kit to go with yours. | I've just discovered the [FSF Guide on Free Hardware](http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw). It appears to provide just enough information to make some informed decisions on hardware. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.