All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Greatest Possible Beings and Posets

    I was under the impression that was almost unique to the Abrahamic religions.
  3. Ultra violet catastrophe and Plank's theory

    Because it worked. At the time it was seen, by Planck, as a mathematical "trick" to get rid of the infinities. But the quantisation was later confirmed by Einstein's work on the photoelectric effect. Where would that infinite energy come from? Torch batteries wouldn't last long if the were the case! If it doesn't "manifest" how can you say it is there? You seem to be invoking magic as an alternative explanation Theoretically? Please show the maths and evidence that supports this claim. Otherwise it is not "theoretical," it is just nonsense.
  4. Rotation - is it absolute?

    In GR there is no concept of inertial FoR, but it has curved space-time and you would either be rotating relative to your local geodesic or moving on a closed geodesic. In ether case it should be absolute. P.S. There's actually a wiki article on Absolute rotation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_rotation
  5. Today
  6. Scientific Method in climate science

    hint the clues are in the words 'change' and 'null' That sounded like a snarky comment. In any case it was not particularly informative was it?. I was rather hoping that someone could provide some info about what model I am supposed to use. String Junky, Yes I want to put numbers to something - but what? The example given as a guide was Einsteins theory of relativity. It is described by a single equation, provides it falsification criteria, has been tested thousands of ways and has never been falsified. I realise that i cannot even get of the starting blocks with this one. Which model do we consider?
  7. Rotation - is it absolute?

    Thanks. Much more succinctly stated than what I was posting. That carried to extreme suggests the possibility of no absolute rotation, at least to me. This is true locally but is it true in a more global geometry of GR spacetime? (is it true absolutely?)
  8. Rotation - is it absolute?

    To rephrase the question: can one portion of spacetime rotate with respect to another? Frame dragging to me seems to suggest the answer is yes, but I'm not familiar enough to be sure.
  9. Why do some humans have extra ribs?

    I was born in 1962, long before we were using cell phones and I have not only 1 extra set of ribs (cervical), found during a recent Xray, but I also have a set of small 'nub' ribs as well, 4 in all. I also have RH Neg blood. My mother, who also had RH Neg blood, also had 1 extra set of ribs (cervical).
  10. I don't think so. The equality sign in a "proper" equation has specific meaning. It eg shouldn't matter if you switch right and left (= is commutative ). This property is violated by both the chemical reaction and the computer language assignment.
  11. Rotation - is it absolute?

    Clearly true in Newtonian physics or SR/Minkowski Space but is that absolutely true in GR? Perhaps I am taking this too far, but how do we know for sure our little portion of the Universe (the observable universe), everything we measure rotation against, is "Absolutely" non rotating? "This frame is rotating with respect to the fixed stars and counter-rotating with respect to the black hole." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging
  12. Ultra violet catastrophe and Plank's theory

    I tend to believe that the Universe is infinite, but what I believe doesn't matter. We can observe only a chunk of the entirety of the universe with large but finite amount of mass and energy. As for 0 K, yes, it can't be reached in principle, but we can get within some hundred billionths of a degree to it using lasers. You can look at it in other way. For example, we have an object and it radiates "infinite" amount of energy via black body radiation. We heat it up by X Kelvin. The amount of energy radiation is still an infinity. Therefore, where did the energy we just added to the system go?
  13. Sorry, if I make mistake, but according to modern physics 0 K cannot be reached principally, and blackbody will always radiate something. Do you believe that universe is infinite? If yes, than it should contain an infinite amount of energy anyways?
  14. Scientific Method in climate science

    Is putting numbers to something not quantitative?
  15. better late than never? Why does the OH leave in the 4th step? why does this need to happen? thanks in advance
  16. Ultra violet catastrophe and Plank's theory

    Nope. That's why I specified 0 K. There's no black body radiation at this temperature. And we know exactly what amount of energy we put into making an object radiate. Therefore when see infinitely high amount of energy coming off, but we've just put in 1000J, then where did the rest of the energy come from? That is not to say that the notion of infinite energy is not absurd in its own right.
  17. Not sure it could serve as a mathematical prove. Infinity plus something still gives you infinity. Let say a blackbody radiates infinite amount of energy at ambient temperature. Then you use 1000 Joules of electric energy to heat it up to 1000 K. At 1000 K it will still radiate an infinite amount of energy, but this time we are sure it obtained a certain portion of energy which manifests itself in such visible phenomena as melting, boiling and evaporation. In one word something that affects atomic bonds and crystal structure. But still there can be a huge portion of energy which doesn't manifest itself under regular conditions. It simply doesn't affect the state of atomic bonds.
  18. Arming Teachers

    Aww c'mon, a kid's gotta have some fun.
  19. Greatest Possible Beings and Posets

    I don't actually agree with that assumption. It's part of arguing a fortiori. An argument has more force if you make assumptions that make it harder to make your point, but support the point against which you're arguing. In this case, specifically, denying this assumption in the argument would be tantamount to circular reasoning. It would be arguing that there is no fact of the matter that there is a Greatest Possible Being because there is no fact of the matter that there is no Greatest Possible Being. While logically valid, it's not persuasive, and is in fact an informal fallacy.
  20. Ultra violet catastrophe and Plank's theory

    Simply put, it violates energy conservation. Take an object close to 0 K, now provide it energy to heat it up to 1000K. You know exact amount of energy that went in, and if your calculations show you that it should radiate infinite amount of energy, end don't meet.
  21. Greatest Possible Beings and Posets

    I like how Harris lays it out. A good overview on pages 6-10 here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3501430/#s2title
  22. Arming Teachers

    With only one exception, exactly as Arete said.
  23. Greatest Possible Beings and Posets

    Hm.. I don't agree with this statement.. You're trying to use mathematics, to classify human-made concepts like "morality".. What is this "morality"? What is this "greater moral" or "less moral".. ? If you will kill bug, are you more moral than if you will kill fish? If you will kill fish, are you more moral than if you will kill cow? How to judge it.. ? What if that fish, or bug, was new specie which (if you wouldn't kill it) evolve to completely new branch of organisms, which would after millions of years become intelligent, create civilization, and start flying to cosmos.. basically replacing humans after e.g. nuclear war.. ? How to convert it (human-made concepts like "morality") to math number (integer? real? irrational?), so you will be able to use comparison operator on them.. ? One of my beloved examples: mass extinction of dinosaurs. From point of view of dinosaurs, it was the end of their life.. the worst est day in their entire history.. From point of view of mammals (at least the one which survived), the greatest thing that could happen. Now, some humanist-religious person would say "thanks God, that dinosaurs died! He/she did it for us to be able to appear on the Earth!".. and it'll be example of anthropocentrism, misconception which is the core of the all major religions of this world, that Earth was made for humans, and source of many modern problems, with e.g. global warming, destruction and devastation of natural environment, etc. etc. The same might say successor of fish, or bug, after millions years from now.. "thanks God, that humans died! He/she did it for us to be able to appear on the Earth!"..
  24. Arming Teachers

    In order for this to happen - the 4 year old needs to find the keys to my shop, unlock the door and let themselves in. They need to know the 6 digit safe combination, open the safe and take out the 12ga pump with a 28 inch barrel (either of the rifles would be more difficult as I store them with their bolts out). They now need to carry the 1.2m long gun back down to the house and get to the top shelf of the master bedroom closet. They need to know the 4 digit combination to that safe too. They need to take out a box of shells and successfully load one or more shells past the loading flap into the magazine, remove the safety, rack the shotgun...and now tragedy is imminent... Personally I'm more concerned about the hot water taps, getting the keys to a car and getting it out of park, forks in electrical outlets, boiling water on the stove, the head height bench corners, riding bikes down the stairs, rattlesnakes, etc etc etc.
  25. Scientific Method in climate science

    ! Moderator Note Giving a hint is not being "snarky". It's what we do with homework help here, we help rather than give answers. You're either being far too sensitive, or you aren't being honest about your goal in discussing climate science. Dial back the troll, bro.
  26. Inverse of a matrix

    Read the date of the post you are replying to.
  27. Arming Teachers

    That's what the last guy said- right up until he found out that she had watched him put the keys away. OK it's a hypothetical "last guy", but let's see how you rule it out...
  1. Load more activity