Strange

Senior Members
  • Content count

    13505
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    151

Strange last won the day on August 20

Strange had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2368 Glorious Leader

1 Follower

About Strange

  • Rank
    SuperNerd

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    珈琲店
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics
  • Occupation
    Engineer/Writer

Recent Profile Visitors

31591 profile views
  1. The scale and the number of subdivisions are not necessarily related.
  2. Not sure what the question is. But the first number show will just be whatever is convenient for that scale (i.e. usably large and rounded to a sensible number). The units for each division would be 0.5m / 25 or 20mm.
  3. What mystery? Apart from the fact that this is wrong, What is so clever abut saying that you can represent a number as the um of other numbers? Next you will be telling us that 5 = 3+2. (Actually, based on the above, you would probably tell us that 5=3+4.) We already knew that. It is not exactly a revelation. If you had come up with a new way of finding out exactly how much more, then it might have been impressive. Don't worry. No one wants to copy this drivel. Seems pretty accurate. Based on your other recent posts, I would suggest you refrain from posting when stoned.
  4. I don't think that was the point (I may be wrong). I think Prometheus was just pointing out that, despite John's impossible requirement, there are plenty of people who identify as Christian. I would not be surprised if, in the same way that everyone has their own dialect of English, each of them have their personal view of Christianity.
  5. Like so many of the pints made, I struggle to see the relevance. It is not as if non-religious people live in perfect harmony.
  6. Just noticed that the price of bitcoins has shot up in the last few months. So even something that doesn't exist can have a high value.
  7. I don't think this is your age or lack of intelligence. I think that hole just posted a lot of incoherent nonsense. (And the stuff about "error correcting codes in QM" is just numerology. Or some other pseudo-science.)
  8. On a practical note related to this question, if you wanted to prevent radicalisation of young people (or reverse their indoctrination) or persuade people to be more tolerant of gay people then attacking their religion is likely to be counter-productive. It is more likely to strengthen their views - and possibly those of others around them who didn't have strong feelings on the issue before but who may now feel themselves under attack. A more effective route is probably to educate them about the other messages in their religion and why they are better ideals to live by, etc.
  9. Standard beta decay can go both ways (beta+ and beta-) and produce similar radiation (high energy electrons or anti-electrons). I'm not sure that either is less bad than the other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay#Description But I am curious, why do you ask this?
  10. I think it depends on the topology. For example, the surface of a torus is flat but of finite size. From the little I know, multiverse models work with both finite and infinite universes.
  11. Stop cherry picking? As you seem to be struggling with this simple concept, I will just point out that it also says "don't kill people". In other words, you can't blame the words in the book. It is the attitudes of the people you need to address. (Unfortunately, that sounds a bit like the "guns don't kill people, people do" line.)
  12. And that mathematical definition works pretty well for real stuff as well. For example, in an infinite universe no matter how far you go, you can always take one more step.
  13. So ignore them then. What's the big deal. You are cherry picking because you are only quoting the bits that support your opinions. If one were to quote sections that present both sides, that wouldn't be cherry picking, would it. Sheesh.
  14. I just read through to the end of this. "Despite the mismatch, Dvali praises the ingenious way in which the team threw out the Big Bang model." Yeuch. They haven't thrown out the Big Bang model. The Big Bang model describes how the universe evolves from an early hot dense state. They haven't challenged that at all. I would take everything Itoero posts with a large pinch of salt.... (And I wouldn't trust everything I say, either. I am often wrong!)
  15. I don't think there are any theories based on black holes exploding. That doesn't say anything about black holes exploding nor, as far as I can see about black holes at the centre of galaxies. From the mass of the star that collapsed to form the black hole. (And, in that highly speculative, purely theoretical paper, they would be 4D stars.) Mass is ejected from the accretion disk around black holes, not from the black hole itself. None of this seems to have any connection with the topic of the thread. It seems to be pure speculation by Itoero.