(April 22, 2021 at 10:58 am)FlatAssembler Wrote:LOL. The paper you cited actually says you are wrong. Reading fail for you.The Grand Nudger Wrote:A strict lockdown implemented -at any time- will slow the rate of spreadThe evidence tells us otherwise...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7268966/ Wrote:Here [in Europe] Lockdown is positive, suggesting that countries that implemented the lockdown have, on average, more New Cases than in countries that did not. This is possibly due to the fact that in the countries that implemented lockdown, the spread of COVID-19 was already advanced compared with other European countries.And that is a study that is generally supportive of lockdowns. The counter-evidence just cannot be honestly ignored.
(April 22, 2021 at 10:58 am)FlatAssembler Wrote:Because such studies were completed before you were even born. Nothing in your abstract is new.The Grand Nudger Wrote:and as far as your "work in the social sciences". Stop it.I see no reason why. And I also see no reason to think you are familiar with my work. OK, here is the abstract of my newest paper which I am planning to publish:
https://flatassembler.github.io/Fonolosk...ezika.docx Wrote:What will the language we speak now look like in the future? To a large extent, that question is impossible to answer. The vocabulary of our language will gain, but also forget (How many young people today know what a floppy disk is, yet alone what a fiacre is?), words related to technology, the development of which is impossible to predict. The vocabulary of our language will also receive words from languages that will be used in international communication, which is dependent on politics, and it is also impossible to predict long-term (If you told somebody in Roman Empire that, one day, a Germanic language will be a global language, and that most of the languages all over the world will have loan-words from it, they will look at you oddly.). Morphology and syntax follow some scientific laws (analytic languages evolve into agglutinative ones, agglutinative ones evolve into fusional languages, and fusional languages evolve into analytic ones.), but those laws are difficult to model computationally and probably full of exceptions (Armenian language, for example, is an agglutinative language that evolved from the fusional Indo-European proto-language, but there is no reason to think there was a time when it was an analytic language.). Morphology and syntax are also probably somewhat influenced by politics (It seems as though languages with many adult learners, such as English or Late Latin, tend to have simpler morphology but more complicated syntax. Similarly, some syntactic structures that recently appeared in the Croatian language are probably an influence of the English language.). Nevertheless, is it possible to predict how the phonology of a language will develop? Here, I have researched exactly that, I have tried to make a computer model of the phonological evolution of languages. Although I was not particularly successful at that, I believe my work can come helpful to others, at least not to repeat the mistakes I have made, because, as far as I know, nobody has done anything like that. I have also researched whether computer models can be used in etymology, and, related to that, what effect do different parts of the grammar have on the entropy of human languages. I came to the conclusion that, in the Croatian language, phonology takes away 1.62 bits per symbol of entropy of consonant pairs, that syntax takes away 0.21 bits per symbol, and that morphology takes away 1.57 bits per symbol. Only 5.99 bits per symbol of entropy of pairs of consonants is semantics.So, why should I stop with that?