Leaderboard

Perhaps because we are living through a post-apocalyptic movie, the forum seems to be attracting a larger that usual number of people with their own wacky ideas about how the world works. So I put this together, partly based on my own observations but also a few pinched from the Crackpot Index (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html).

Maybe you should answer questions, instead of referring back to people reading your article. Assume they have, and if they still have questions answer them, or direct them, with a lot of help and all the necessary steps, to the right answer.

Whether billions of locusts can be caught, or, we can stay on topic ? Locusts will go where the food is; once it's gone, they'll die off, or migrate. Use of chemical agents to incapacitate them, also puts the remaining food at risk. The only suitable method, is trapping them, using netting, I would think. ( then possibly roasting them to dry out, and mixing with a suitable carb, like rice ,or other grain, flour ) Not sure how efficient the process would be; the netting would need to be suspended above the vegetation the locusts are attacking, and then, drawn up, and tight, to capture them. But you still need to incapacitate them somehow, or you'll need to put the netting in the roasting ovens also. So then, the netting would need to be heat resistant, and you could only do batches, instead of a continuous process.

I had though you might like to reason the condition out for yourself. It depends both on the rato of [A] to and Vn to V1

I have worked on other matrices but there are more significant results with matrices to 10 by 10. But see above there is also with 5 by 5. "so-called, "thus-called" these grammatical problems are secondary.

I see. So the answer now is it depends on the values. So take the rate R = k[A] and compare rate when you add V2 < V3 < V4 volumes of B to 3 samples of V1 volume of A. Then the total volumes are now V1 < (V1 + V2) < (V1 + V3) < (V1 + V4) Which clearly dilutes [A] since you have added no more Ab ( that is V2, V3 and V4 contain no A) So the initial concentrations for A to put into the rate equation are [math]\left[ A \right] > \left[ A \right]\frac{{{V_1}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_2}} \right)}} > \left[ A \right]\frac{{{V_1}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_3}} \right)}} > \left[ A \right]\frac{{{V_1}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_4}} \right)}}[/math] For B the situation works the other way round since each adds a large quantity of B to the total So the initial quantities of B to put into the rate equation are [math]\left[ B \right] > \left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_2}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_2}} \right)}} > \left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_3}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_3}} \right)}} > \left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_4}}}{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_4}} \right)}}[/math] So the rate varies depending and I will leave you to think about where it goes up or down. But below is a spreadsheet tracking variations in [A], and the volumes of A and B. [math]rate = k\left[ A \right]\left[ B \right];k\left[ A \right]\left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_1}{V_2}}}{{{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_2}} \right)}^2}}};k\left[ A \right]\left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_1}{V_3}}}{{{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_3}} \right)}^2}}};k\left[ A \right]\left[ B \right]\frac{{{V_1}{V_4}}}{{{{\left( {{V_1} + {V_4}} \right)}^2}}}[/math]

I hope no governments consider your reverse-terraforming proposal. If possible, it's even more short-sighted than most governments are these days. Even if we give up on maintaining Earth's ecosystem, space colonization isn't going to be solely about changing humans to adapt to other systems. That's not what humans do. We can change systems to better suit life as we know it. Your argument seems like a false dilemma fallacy. We have more than the two choices you've laid out, to decrease pollution or recolonize. We're currently using a third option, which is to keep industrial contamination at levels that balance economic and health concerns. Many folks aren't happy with the proportions (for various reasons), but to reduce our solutions to two seems unnecessarily confining. Also, with outer space policy what it is, I think we have a MUCH better chance of revitalizing our environment than we do getting the world to agree on what to do with the rest of the wealth of the solar system. I'm excited about the prospects of colonizing other planets, but it's something we definitely need to understand and regulate unless we want all those villainous sci-fi plot lines to play out. If we aren't smart, compassionate, and united in our efforts, the first big group to leave the planet could own the rest of us in a fairly short time.

And now that their legal CYA statement is in place, Darwin will sort the rest out

They were on the menu of a restaurant I used to go to regularly. Sautéed in a sticky soy sauce. Delicious.

I have eaten grasshoppers when visiting Oaxaca; indeed, garlic, lime and salt make up the standard accompaniment. I would hold back on the butter, it is already heavy food. Another tradition is to serve them on fried eggs. If you are too squeamish, pass them through the digestive system of the chickens first.

For those interested in "coincidences" of values of physical constants and their history, there is a well-written (don't let the typesetting fool you) paper by Victor J. Stenger: https://web.archive.org/web/20120716192004/http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Cosmo/FineTune.pdf Jean-Yves, I have read your article, and the amount of work that you put into it is obviously impressive. So far as I can see it presents only the consequences of your concept of ultimate numbers up until the number 99, is that not essentially correct? Can you make any predictions, or have you even made observations already, concerning the consequences up to as high as 224 (so that you have square \(15\times 15\) matrices available)? I find confusing sounding quotes such as (...) the definition of so-called prime numbers did not allow the numbers zero (0) and one (1) to be included in this set of primes. Thus, the set of whole numbers was scattered in four entities: prime numbers, non-prime numbers, but also ambiguous numbers zero and one at exotic arithmetic characteristics. You are aware that there is a precise definition of primes, according to which every integer less than 2 is a non-prime, including 0 and 1? So why explain the opposite in your article? And why so-called prime numbers? I do not know how it works in French, but you should realize that this sounds insulting. You should remove such phrases from your paper if you want to be taken seriously.

Maybe use explosive subsonic charges attached to drones to deliver them, either as a missile or by gravity from above. A laser-guide could be used to work out the edge of the swarm and then the explosion can calculated to occur when the missile has penetrated the swarm sufficiently for maximal efficacy.

I am unclear about details, but I feel garlic butter should be involved.

And to prove my point that you guys are overestimating his greed, and underestimating his stupidity... https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/skbaer/coronavirus-trump-light-disinfectants President Trump has now suggested experts find a way to inject light or disinfectants into the human body to combat Covid-19. ( I myself have been doing that for years, by raising my blood alcohol level; but not before driving )

Energy is not conserved on cosmological scales (because energy conservation only applies to a single frame of reference). Also, if the universe is infinite (and we have no way of knowing if it is or not) then there is no limit to the mass-energy. Actually it will approach c asymptotically. Which means it will never quite reach c; even after infinite time. That was thought to be the case. But the discovery of dark energy suggest it is more likely to keep expanding forever, and expand at an increasing rate. What is "the infinite time loop"? And how can there be one if nothing is infinite? No there isn't. And I assume your god is eternal, with infinite knowledge and power. Therefore it cannot exist according to you. Preaching is against the rules of the forum. So, in summary a series of incorrect and/or ignorant statements, followed by some incoherent noises, followed by a appeal to a mythical being. Not sure what you have posted this on a science forum. ! Moderator Note I am feeling generous, so I have moved this to Speculations, rather than Trash, in case you want to try and defend this drivel.

I do not think they care. It is painfully obvious that xenophobia and nationalism was part of the agenda all along (in fact, aside from dismantling protective agencies, it is one of the few obviously consistent policies) to make America great white again.

Outside of any effect due to the message being off the mark, how do you tie his exuberance for hydroxychloroquine to specific damage? If a M.D. prescribes it and it doesn't work, is that on Trump? If there is a shortage for better uses, is that potentially damage caused by Trump? He's essentially advocating it as a potential tool for physicians toolbags. That on it's own is not a bad thing. Here are a couple of Canadian efforts studying it's potential for use against Covid 19. https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/hydroxychloroquine-trial-underway-at-university-of-alberta-1.4891216 https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/mcgill-university-researchers-looking-for-patients-to-test-hydroxychloroquine-as-treatment-for-covid-19-1.4886510 Do you think they're doing this because it's been advocated by Trump, LOL? If it turns out to be useless for Covid 19 is Trump responsible for that effort not being focused elsewhere? Or is this just for any Americans duped into wasting significant resources on this? (or ingesting fish tank cleaner...) The trend should be toward taking your President with a bucket of salt, and not exaggerating the importance of his medical advice. Or is all that just unfathomable to those that dislike him?

No I'm saying that the government have two options , one is that they pull together and decrease pollution , the other is as I stated in the thread.

Please, sorry to repeat again and again: read the entire article carefully.