Leaderboard

Just finished “The Poison Squad” by Deborah Blum - very good Now reading “The Spy and the Traitor: The Greatest Espionage Story of the Cold War” by Ben Macintyre - thus far also very good

Is brainwashing the same as propaganda? To me it implies more than simply not telling people the truth.

Which series is this? I enjoyed the clever realms he created in his Richard & Kahlan novels. Loved the wizard's rules.

I am going to poke the bear one more time on this, i hope all who were interested enough to comment on this thread will comment on this short science video. Video is IMHO the next wave of education and the ease of making such videos requires that the scientific community get on top of it as quickly as possible. “The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking Dimissing, ridiculing, or even ignoring this situation will allow what is known as pseudoscience to continue to gain control of the narrative and now that anyone with a pulse and a keyboard can make a video we need to start giving our support to those who make real videos as opposed to those who make pretend reality videos and pass them off as real. many people are at the forefront of this new medium and a few are doing their best to keep the medium as honest as possible. Thunderf00t, potholer54, and AronRa are at the forefront of this debunking but AronRa's message is being diluted by his Atheist activism IMHO. Here is the kind of Videos that are beginning to crop up, this is a classroom assignment if i read it correctly.

This was a condition you described earlier in the thread. For fermions it’s the Pauli exclusion principle I can send them a signal if they are a distance greater than ct from me

Or possibly you misunderstand. Because obviously SR is not nonsense and has been experimentally and observationally validated many times.

It doesn’t matter. The spatial coordinate (0,0) is occupied at t=0 You can’t have another object occupying that bit of spacetime It’s important to understand and enforce the rules of relativity and clock synchronization to be able to communicate about this And the “back and forth” coordinates are not “empty” in the sense that you were at 0,0,0 and that cannot change

FlyerDave - I disagree. The (getting old) "solar and wind can't work at large scale" claims are collapsing in the face of real world evidence to the contrary. Not suited to everywhere of course but most of the world's population lives in places where it can. Most new electricity generation being deployed in the world is now solar and wind. Long running electricity generators are investing in them in preference to coal or gas or nuclear for sound economic reasons, and because they do work - and to some extent to avoid potential liability for emissions in the future. Including in France. They are not stand alone technologies - not sure any technologies are - and backup based on various kinds of storage as well as network interconnections and demand management will increasingly be a feature of grid networks that have growing amounts of them. Being based around energy storage, EV's can be a useful complementary technology that moderates demand variability within such a grid and better aligns it with variable energy availability. It is not uncommon for current EV owners to charge them using their own rooftop solar. Obviously this has limitations - yet I can foresee having an electricity supply contract that accommodates EV charging elsewhere within a nation's electricity grid, effectively allowing me to use my home PV contributions (with some surcharge) wherever I am. Car parking with EV charging I expect. It is likely to be a source of reserve storage for PV fitted homes - and vice versa. And home and EV storage may well be an emergency reserve for grid management to draw upon, under suitable contractual arrangements. What a climate responsible low to below zero emissions grid will look like is still uncertain but for a number of sound reasons wind and solar look likely to be prominent. Some nuclear is likely to be a feature but closer examination shows it is not the simple or effective or low cost emissions solution it is so often presumed to be.

I think you mean energy, not power. By themselves, perhaps not. But that’s an objection to a straw man. No, kW is power. It’s a rate of energy use. “4kw of electricity per day” makes no sense. UK households use a bit less than 13 kWh per day (kilowatt-hours. Power*time gives energy) US is about 32 http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/average-household-electricity-consumption

[7] Modern Physics; Second edition; Randy Harris; Chapter 2; Special Relativity; 2008 In the derivation of LT in [7], three special cases are used to determine the constants A, B, C, D. The result of this derivation gives the following: B = −Av, C = −Av/c2, D = A, A = γ. If you replace these values in LEx': x' = Ax + Bt LEt': t' = Cx +Dt you get LTx': x' = (x – vt)γ LTt': t' = (t – vx/c2)γ It is these two equations that are LT. But during the derivation, the combination LEt', SC1 is not used. Therefore, we make a verification of a solution (as one should always do). We calculate LTt' in SC1: LTt': t' = (t – vx/c2)γ SC1: x' = 0, x = vt → t' = (t-v(vt)/c2)γ → t' = t(1-v2/c2)γ → t'= t/γ My comment: In the derivation of LT in [7] is used LEx ', LEt', SC1, SC2, SC3 and as a result you get time dilation t' = tγ. But the verification of the derivation, LTt' with SC1 gives us t'= t/γ. This shows that the derivation of LT in [7] is not self-consistent! This is one of the reasons I said that SR is nonsense. I regret that everyone is upset by my conclusion but I have a lot more aspects of SR that I have analyzed in detail and everyone shows the same thing.