All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Electrons do not really move in orbits. Perhaps the video was saying that if they did, then they would have to move faster than light? This is just one of many problems that quantum theory solves. (If they were moving in orbits, they would radiate and lose energy and fall into the nucleus, neither of which happen.) Spin is important. It is what dictates the structure of electron shells in atoms. And a main contribution to why solid materials feel ... well, solid. (Both because of the Pauli exclusion principle.)
  3. Ok, then I think it was a random video with not so reliable content if it implies velocities greater than speed of light in vacuum. Or did you draw the conclusion about velocities greater than speed of light? I think velocities and spin is included in detail in current models. Can you be more specific?
  4. Today
  5. Greenland is autonomy. Does it allow its inhabitants decide themselves?
  6. I think it was a random video on orbiting electrons that it sometimes disappear from moving too fast. But for something this small you really have to consider how fast it moves or spins.
  7. You're gonna laugh. I made a mistake earlier that we both didn't see. The good equality is : [math](H/H_0)^2=\Omega_{\Lambda,H0} / \Omega_{\Lambda,H}[/math]. of course I used [math]\Lambda_{m^-2}=3H^2\Omega_{\Lambda}/c^2[/math] problem for me I didn't succes to find the value of (H/H_0)^2 with all [math]\Omega[/math] I don't want to violate the rules of the speculation section by adding a spreadsheet as an attachment. For all the formulas, I can send you the complete attachment by personal message H0 Lambda (m^-2) 67,9 1,12009E-052 2,20048913788313E-18 Om_Lambda,H H²/H0² OmL0/OmLH col I-col J H H/Ho 0,693 column D ² 22915,263 1,31973E-009 525109278,359169 525109278,359169 0,00E+00 5,042478732E-014 15740,128 2,79716E-009 247751629,456384 247751629,456384 0,00E+00 3,463598069E-014 10859,192 5,87676E-009 117922050,892864 117922050,892864 0,00E+00 2,389553404E-014 7520,218 1,22538E-008 56553678,767524 56553678,767524 0,00E+00 1,654815802E-014 5224,758 2,53864E-008 27298096,158564 27298096,158564 0,00E+00 1,149702323E-014 3639,803 5,23091E-008 13248165,878809 13248165,878809 0,00E+00 8,009346966E-015 2541,361 1,07300E-007 6458515,732321 6458515,732321 0,00E+00 5,592237276E-015 1777,702 2,19288E-007 3160224,400804 3160224,400804 0,00E+00 3,911813941E-015 1245,393 4,46807E-007 1551003,724449 1551003,724449 0,00E+00 2,740473769E-015 873,554 9,08142E-007 763096,590916 763096,590916 0,00E+00 1,922246088E-015 613,344 1,84215E-006 376190,862336 376190,862336 0,00E+00 1,349656810E-015 430,988 3,73081E-006 185750,656144 185750,656144 0,00E+00 9,483844126E-016 303,042 7,54619E-006 91834,453764 91834,453764 0,00E+00 6,668406293E-016 213,19 1,52475E-005 45449,9761 45449,9761 0,00E+00 4,691222793E-016 150,041 3,07832E-005 22512,301681 22512,301681 0,00E+00 3,301635907E-016 105,633 6,21061E-005 11158,330689 11158,330689 0,00E+00 2,324442691E-016 74,389 1,25232E-004 5533,723321 5533,723321 0,00E+00 1,636921865E-016 52398 2,52408E-010 2745550404 2745550404 0,00E+00 1,153012298E-013 36,917 0,00050848767592 1362,864889 1362,864889 0,00E+00 8,123545750E-017 26,017 0,001023808664586 676,884289 676,884289 0,00E+00 5,725012590E-017 18,342 0,002059870207846 336,428964 336,428964 0,00E+00 4,036137177E-017 12,938 0,004139986653113 167,391844 167,391844 0,00E+00 2,846992847E-017 9,137 0,008300915344211 83,484769 83,4847690000001 0,00E+00 2,010586925E-017 6,467 0,016570190934269 41,822089 41,822089 0,00E+00 1,423056325E-017 4,596 0,032807504311844 21,123216 21,123216 0,00E+00 1,011344808E-017 3,292 0,063946029182273 10,837264 10,837264 0,00E+00 7,244010242E-018 2,395 0,120815373015285 5,736025 5,736025 0,00E+00 5,270171485E-018 1,788 0,216769514886717 3,196944 3,196944 0,00E+00 3,934474579E-018 1,392 0,357647146254459 1,937664 1,937664 0,00E+00 3,063080880E-018 1,145 0,528594039015274 1,311025 1,311025 0,00E+00 2,519560063E-018 1 0,693 1 1 0,00E+00 2,200489138E-018 0,919 0,82054463798352 0,844561 0,844561 0,00E+00 2,022249518E-018 0,879 0,896923668301319 0,772641 0,772641 0,00E+00 1,934229952E-018 0,857 0,943564495288305 0,734449 0,734449 0,00E+00 1,885819191E-018 0,845 0,97055425230209 0,714025 0,714025 0,00E+00 1,859413322E-018 0,839 0,984485474932556 0,703921 0,703921 0,00E+00 1,846210387E-018 0,836 0,991563837824226 0,698896 0,698896 0,00E+00 1,839608919E-018 0,834 0,996325241964702 0,695556 0,695556 0,00E+00 1,835207941E-018 0,833 0,998718815257195 0,693889 0,693889 0,00E+00 1,833007452E-018 0,833 0,998718815257195 0,693889 0,693889 0,00E+00 1,833007452E-018 0,833 0,998718815257195 0,693889 0,693889 0,00E+00 1,833007452E-018 0,833 0,998718815257195 0,693889 0,693889 0,00E+00 1,833007452E-018 0,832 1,00112102440828 0,692224 0,692224 0,00E+00 1,830806963E-018 0,832 1,00112102440828 0,692224 0,692224 0,00E+00 1,830806963E-018 0,832 1,00112102440828 0,692224 0,692224 0,00E+00 1,830806963E-018
  8. No. Why does size matter? yes. They do? Do you have a reference for that or is it part of a new idea we can investigate? Electrons are not made of quarks in current models as far as I know. Electrons are fundamental particles. Photons are not made of quarks. Do you have a reference for that or is it part of a new idea we can investigate?
  9. No. Things with mass cannot travel at or above the speed of light. Photons and electrons are not made of quarks.
  10. And What kind of "force" has kg*s as unit? Compare definition of Newton: [math] kg*m*s^{-2} [/math] If object is motionless then there is no force acting on it so q=0 and therefore t = q/m = 0. Do you mean that time stands still for objects at rest?
  11. We agree that the smaller the particles the faster it moves? We got photon traveling at the speed of light. And electrons that orbit the atom sometimes even above light speed, speculation. And we further theorized the constitution of electrons, photons, and neutrons making out of quarks. What do you think is the moving speed of these quarks? If quarks do move on the border line of light speed, what does it say about the smallest fundamental particles? Is it a form of energy?
  12. t has second m has kilogram q has second * kilogram If quantity of counteraction of forses to motion doesn't exist then how Swansont defined different quantities of it for different masses?
  13. That does not match earlier statements. What units does t, q and m have? Earlier posts: and So what is q?
  14. They have got a cheap way they built a gun to launch satellites in the 60s . It’s a common and it s the cheapest way for us to get non living things into space
  15. As you have a mixed state of contributors though the principle contributor is Lambda your better off using the full formula. Formula one that you have would only apply to a Lambda only contributor. If you were to compare to say the CMB time at z=1100 you would get inaccurate answers as the CMB is part of the matter dominant Era shortly after the radiation Era. Lambda dominant Era started roughly at universe age 7 Gyr depending on dataset used Here is the H/H_0 as a function of redshift. [latex]H=H_0\sqrt{\Omega_{r,0}(1+z)^4+\Omega_{m,o}(1+z)^3+\Omega_{k,0}(1+z)^2+\Omega_{\Lambda_0}}[/latex] [latex]\Omega_{k,o}=1-\Omega_{r,o}-\Omega_{m,o}-\Omega_{\Lambda,o}[/latex] which describes the curvature term. Though for a critical dense universe simply set to curvature density to zero. Ie ignore it in the above equation. Now you can apply any dataset. (Lol you can even toy model expansion rates of different component universes such as a matter only universe ) simply set unneeded terms to zero Notice the [latex]\Omega_\Lambda[/latex] doesn't change...the total energy of Lambda however does.
  16. I've been trying to put the math together for this, its out of my league. What i need to answer is: if each charged plate strips/adds electrons to the air molecules they touch, will this configuration of insulators and charged plates produce positive thrust along the main Y axis? -DT PS, "Tah-Dah!"
  17. I'll indulge that. Here's the fallacy I spoke of. Fact. The pipeline went to the supreme court and lost. The feds buying it on your dime doesn't change a thing. The injunction stands. Moreover It has sweet FA to do with Saudi oil. In fact quite the opposite. Selling unrefined low grade oil to China at a loss is not some magic bullet to solve the economy and prevent us from buying Saudi oil. It's absurd to sell oil to China so we don't have to buy Saudi oil. There's a reason there's no pipelines in BC, they're called mountains, canyons, avalanches, rock slides, fish, farm and wildlife habitats, water supplies, first nations issues and all that annoying liberal nonsense, right? Then of course there's the complete incapability to deal with major oils spills at sea so screw BC, so long as whiners can piss and moan about pennies at the pump or in this case, dog whistle terrorists, right? Lets just nip this in the bud now. Tar Sand is on Harper. He made the deal with devil on that one, yet you lay it at my feet? How about Khadr? Harper is the most culpable party in that one too, in fact he violated the constitutional rights of a juvenile offender while in office FFS, yet you chose to lay that at Trudeau's fee? Sure, Trudeau could have fought both, but he would have lost, both times and it would have cost you and me twice as much (or more) in the case of Khadr and already cost us and arm and a leg for a dead horse in the case of TransMountain. How about SNC Lavalin...oops Harper sold that to the Saudi's. right? How bout dem der tanks, eh? You (Ontario I mean) take it. Put your money where your mouth is. You got the pipes, you got the refineries. You guys need the work. You need the oil, right? Truth is you don't want it, so you'd rather buy Saudi and ship the dirty oil to China through us at our expense and destruction. Nope. TransMountain ain't happening. It will never get off the ground for pure legal reasons, no less if they try it will fail to any number of perils by nature. It's just that simple. And yet again the experts and pundits will be wrong. Dead wrong.
  18. ok thank you is there a mistake? [math]\Omega_{\Lambda ,0}=\frac{\Lambda c^2}{3H_0^2}[/math] [math]\Omega_{\Lambda ,H}=\frac{\Lambda c^2}{3H^2}[/math] [math]H/H_0=\Omega_{\Lambda ,0}/\Omega_{\Lambda ,H}[/math], right? so :
  19. t = q/m t is time of observer q is quantity of counteraction of forces to motion of motionlees object m is mass of motionless object
  20. The radiation density was incorporated into the Seq value if I recall correctly Cuthbert was the main programmer same with the [latex]1-\Omega_0 [/latex] D particle is the particle horizon. Here is the formula derivatives they used to produce the calculations. We used the methodologies presented by Line weaver and Davies hence the usage of Stretch which is the inverse of the scale factor. So the formulas were modified accordingly. Incorporating radiation density and matter density into Seq was essential to produce the correct calculations which we compared to Planck and WMAP datasets following the graphs of Lineweaver and Davies paper. Each program adjustment we has gotten several PH Ds to help confirm via several forums.
  21. I can see Canadians aren’t innately immune from militarized social division, either Perhaps the merger of our countries isn’t so foreign
  22. THAT's what you don't like about J Trudeau, Rangerx ? The pipelines which would avoid buying from the Middle East ? Not the fact that he tries to influence the justice system to benefit those who donate to the Liberal party ? Not the fact that he shuts down inquiries into his abuses of power ? Not the fact that he promised Proportional Representation until he won a majority ? Not the bungled Air Force jet acquisition ( which we are part of the program due to a previous Liberal government ) but, to save face he is stalling until after his mandate, at which point, the same jet will be bought ? Not the fact that he champions women's rights, yet he groped a woman 18 yrs ago, and claims his recollection is different from hers ? Need I go on ? I'm no fan of A Sheer, the NDP are now trailing the Greens in public support, and J Trudeau may well get re-elected. But the 'knuckle dragger' S Harper had way more sense, international clout and intelligence than our current 'drama teacher' ( and father's coat-tail riding ) Prime Minister. PS Its about time we discussed some Canadian politics. I'm getting tired of talking Trump.
  23. Hey if anyone actually reads this 8 years later lol, would you get a perfectly efficient set of reactions by doing this or is there any waste in the process? Just trying to figure out if itd even be worth the cost of the materials
  24. Well, their constitution does give them the authority the royal family needs to change anything.
  25. As geordief points out, the time is relative. If you toss a ball in the air, and comes down again, you can solve for the up-down motion using simple kinematics. An observer in relative inertial-frame motion to you can also solve the problem with the same stable of equations (i.e. the same physics) but the solution will be a parabola. Further, you would not be able to say who is moving. If you’re on a train, or on the ground, you toss the ball straight up in your frame in order to catch it. In the other frame, the path is a parabola. All you can say is that there is relative motion. That’s what the postulate means.
  1. Load more activity