All Activity

So, here we have noticed at least two Standard Model (QFT) anomalies. First the cosmological catastrophe. And secondly an unexplained and unexpected large discrepancy between the VEV (even if being a probabilistic amount) and the observed cosmological constant. Thus, being the cornerstone in modern physics it is, it obviously can be shaken and giving strong divergences. If so, can we trust the 2012 LHC result at all? Is there a parallel theory and explanation for maybe the Higgs boson? The LHC did though confirm theories sprung from mid 1960's. -Finally, we have to trust the main parts in the Standard Model when proven right so many times. /chron44

I agree, drones are definitely obfuscating the issue! This one doesn't look like a typical drone to me, its cylindrical shape is odd for a drone but with the evidence at hand drone is more likely. I posted this because it was recent and almost certainly not a hoax and was videoed recently and what ever it was it clearly presented a possible danger to aircraft in the area and shouldn't be ignored no matter what it is. I've seen quite a few "interesting" looking videos of late but I've refrained from posting them, not being sure if its proper to the forum. If no one objects I will post some of the most interesting on here. I know that since their providence is not known they do not constitute evidence and I am not suggesting they are anything but part of an interesting puzzle. If no one objects I do have several I want to present. It is difficult to find decent footage with out crazy people in the background talking about it. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-M5hDC5x_Ys?feature=share

Looks like a drone that strayed into forbidden air space near LaGuardia. It's apparent speed looks to me like an artifact of it and the plane's relative speeds. I would expect UAP sightings to jump as more people are playing with drones, some not responsibly.

If it is factored into integral of the area -> A/(integral of r * integral of A) ->9pi/((3/1+1)^(1+1) x (3/2+1)^(2+1)pi) -> 9pi/(3/2)^2 x (3/3)^3 pi -> 9pi/(9/4 x pi) = 4; where r=3 Then you get your 4G/r for:

At what grade/level of experience do you learn the math and complex stuff needed? (I'm getting bored in school, so this seems fun and will help me with becoming a theoretical physicist)

See my previous post. And learn about trophic cascades. The chain is more like a loop, where autotrophs and heterotrophs interact in complex ways. Please read all replies, you can learn a lot.

I find it interesting that many hunter-gatherer peoples did not believe in a personal god, but saw nature as alive, in various blends of animism and pantheism. The notion of a powerful Boss deity seems to have emerged along with more hierarchical societies and, as others note here, used for controlling hoi polloi. As a person in touch with my inner HG, I find the pantheist view to be prima facie less delusional. We seem to be hard wired to view nature as alive, and then unlearn that in western culture through indoctrination. Basically, one can be a dualist, in the sense of attributing a spiritual aspect to matter, without being a supernaturalist. The current philosophical stance of panpsychism seems closer to this, where matter is hypothesized to have some intrinsic consciousness however rudimentary.

And perhaps you should too. I can sympathise with the conceit of not capitalizing 'god', but why on earth are you giving him a double initial 'g' in bei Gott? And while you're at it, please clarify the context of both 'he' and 'it'. Your anaphora is clear as mud. It's almost as if you're trying to deliberately obscure your meaning.

It’s not a matter of you being an idiot. The details here involve advanced physics. Quantum oscillations don’t involve motion as you normally think about it - it’s not like a pendulum, where you can make the amplitude a little smaller. In quantum systems the energy differences are like steps, and in the ground state there isn’t a lower step.

A rotation will slow the clock down; this has been independently measured citations 82-84 in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity You can analyze these as equivalent to gravitational redshifts with acceleration v^2/r

However, there still is change and the time crystal oscillates in a perpetual pattern. If you figure out the pattern and the relative locations (Point A to Point B of the time crystal's motion), couldn't you set up two checkpoints that harvest this change in distance, which will go infinitely? (I have no clue how this will work, I'm not even in high school) If I am being an idiot, be free to call me out.

But the food chain starts with the plants, so that makes the plants the producers. That's what I was taught in biology class, that the producers are at the start of the food chain. If you're not at the start of the food chain you're not a producers, which means all the producers are plants.

I'm not sure what is going on but UFO of UAP sightings have jumped and cell phones are catching them! This video is a news broadcast of a recent sighting from an Airliner over NYC. The video is quite clear and appears to show an extraordinary object in flight near the airliner... a safety hazard if nothing else!

In the case of the twin paradox, the redshift and blueshift are due to the relative velocity between the source and receiver. In the case of gravitational redshift and blueshift, equivalent to accelerational redshift and blueshift, there is no relative velocity between the source and receiver. The redshift and blueshift is due to the acceleration itself, and depends on the displacement between source and receiver. If one examines the metric of an accelerated frame of reference, sources that are at rest and above the receiver (note that the acceleration is directed upward) will be blueshifted, while sources that are at rest and below the receiver will be redshifted. It is worth noting that the source that is at rest below the receiver has a greater acceleration than the receiver, and that the source that is at rest above the receiver has a lesser acceleration than the receiver. However, this does not determine the redshift or blueshift, and it might not apply to gravitation.

Okay, in simple terms explained VEV is not like G, the gravitational constant, applicable almost in every astro physical formula. VEV has different amounts in different theories' framework. Or as Mordred says - being a probabilistic value. A necessary note is that the observed value of the VEV being around 246 GeV is specific to the Standard Model framework and the experimental results obtained at the LHC. So according to (using) the Standard Model and QFT..?? we still have the discrepancy not totally explained. /chron44

We love our carbs! Maybe a better way to get the nuances of food chains is through trophic cascades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophic_cascade Also, in understanding how large heterotrophs also "produce," look at fecal detritus pathways. Whales have been studied, regarding their importance in this kind of pathway.... https://marinesanctuary.org/blog/whale-poop-and-climate-change/

! Moderator Note This topic is in a mainstream section. Can you offer some support for this statement? It seems trivially false.

We all know the twin paradox with the travelling twin returning younger than the stay at home twin. The acceleration in order to return is considered important for the outcome. Now, let's add a new acceleration, let's consider the travelling twin revolving around an axis, in order to feel as on Earth surface (same g force). If we have 1 clock on the Earth twin location (#1) and 2 on the ship, one on the axis of rotation (#2) and the other (#3) where the traveling twin is staying, which clock is recording the least time between departure and arrival and why? In order to see if only the (added) acceleration is important, let's add another, bigger, "wheel" on the starship, with a different rotation speed, but with the same centripetal/centrifugal acceleration, g. The 4th clock, on the rim of the bigger wheel, would record the same time as the clock #3, on the rim of the smaller wheel? If not, why not?

I think you can figure it out yourself. Hint: compare with tidal effects, which exist on Earth but not on an accelerating spacecraft.

I understand and will try to avoid snake and spider analogies. For my previous point in terms of optics I was merely alluding to how an 8-eyed tarantula with 6 more eyes or 3 more pairs of eyes than a snake doesn’t directly have an extra 3 times more consciousness than a snake.

Indeed, nor should they. But as Nietzsche suggests, not everyone is equal and it takes a great man/person to point out the difference.

I believe this is the real deal, but only for those with some foundations in AC circuit theory. I will see how things relate to what I am investigating. @Carrock. I am trying to reduce AC circuit to DC circuit "instantaneously". I don't want coaxial cables which complicates things. Say I have a simple ac generator that generates fairly good sinusoidal voltage source at 50 Hz (If possible at all?). I connect a long resistive wire to the terminals in a huge circular loop. When the wire is at thermal equilibrium with the environment, we know that all power will be dissipated as IR radiation loss, purely resistive loss - assume ideally. So we could always apply ohm's law of I=V/R where R is the resistance of the wire, V the instantaneous voltage. It seems that there will be the usual charge conservation along the wire as if the current is a dc current. The current should be a constant at that moment of consideration. My setup would eliminate capacitance, inductance etc. Instantaneously, we only have the magnetic fields around the wire which we assume "steady". How is such an analysis.

In another thread, where twin paradox was discussed, Markus Hanke said: I asked: The first answer, from Mordred, was: True, but he didn't understand my question. The second answer, from Markus, was: Again, not what I asked, so I'll try again here. The traveling twin, after the turnaround, accelerates toward Earth/Sun and he immediately see the light from the Sun blueshifting. As long as he accelerates, the light is blueshifted again and again, due to the increase in speed towards the source of the light (the Sun). So, as long as his accelerometer indicates an acceleration towards the Sun, the light of the Sun is blueshifted again and again. On the Earth surface, say on the South pole, in summer, we also have the accelerometer indicating an acceleration towards the Sun, but the blueshift is not increasing, like in the traveling twin case. So the equivalence principle seems not quite relevant in explaining the blueshift that the travelling twin experiences. If I'm wrong, please explain me how/why I'm wrong.

Which discussion? It's relevant to the discussion of some things - like the prevalence of bigotry in human cultures. It's relevant to the psychology of mass manipulation and self-esteem. "Science", whoever she is, might not give a shit, and it shouldn't matter to physicists and chemists, but no scientist in the fields of medicine, psychology or anthropology can ignore it.

We cross posted Migl but I included a primary missing detail in terms of VEV being a probability value much like a weighted sum in statistics.