Leaderboard

What up! I know I am about 16 years late but, I just wanted to point out that (like others have) @Tesseract was incorrect in saying that salt and vinegar makes hydrochloric acid. I dislike the spread of misinformation. Next time make sure something is correct before you post it to the internet. Also I made this account to post this. But I'm sure nobody will ever see this. I put so much time and effort into doing something so utterly pointless.

What makes the question even more complex is the tachyon wavefunctions must be subliminal. There is a particular rule for this though I would have to dig for it as I can't recall the name atm. If I recall correctly Beaz mentions it in one his tachyon articles. Edit I was right it's Paley Weiner theorem http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/tachyons.html

I down voted your post, not because of any of the content but simply because it was rude. Seems you a more interested in ranting than discussing.

Assuming you don't mean 'effective' mass, but actual inertial mass, which, by the equivalence principle, is identical to the mass which 'generates' the gravitational field, and to the mass which responds to an external gravitational field ( by momentum conservation ), then H Bondi, W B Bonnor an R L Forward ( one of my favorite sci-fi authors ) proposed the phenomenon of 'Runaway Motion' An excerpt from the Wiki article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass follows, and you might want to give the whole Wiki article a good read... "Although no particles are known to have negative mass, physicists (primarily Hermann Bondi in 1957,[6] William B. Bonnor in 1964 and 1989,[12][13] then Robert L. Forward[14]) have been able to describe some of the anticipated properties such particles may have. Assuming that all three concepts of mass are equivalent according to the equivalence principle, the gravitational interactions between masses of arbitrary sign can be explored, based on the Newtonian approximation of the Einstein field equations. The interaction laws are then: In yellow, the "preposterous" runaway motion of positive and negative masses described by Bondi and Bonnor. Positive mass attracts both other positive masses and negative masses. Negative mass repels both other negative masses and positive masses. For two positive masses, nothing changes and there is a gravitational pull on each other causing an attraction. Two negative masses would repel because of their negative inertial masses. For different signs however, there is a push that repels the positive mass from the negative mass, and a pull that attracts the negative mass towards the positive one at the same time. Hence Bondi pointed out that two objects of equal and opposite mass would produce a constant acceleration of the system towards the positive-mass object,[6] an effect called "runaway motion" by Bonnor who disregarded its physical existence." The article goes on to state that R L Forward showed that no conservation laws are violated by this effect, however, quite a few unphysical situations ( mentioned in the article ) result.

! Moderator Note Both have energy. This does not imply that matter is made of light. This thread is closed. Do not bring this subject up again. Feel free to ask questions in the appropriate part of the forum to fill the obvious gaps in your understanding.

@John Cuthber and other experts For this experiment, I confirmed again. My guy said that he could observe the movement of the spot without adding the vacuum tube. He didn't make a very careful comparison. So sorry. Now I prefer to believe that Einstein's idea that the speed of light is constant is believable. Thank you very much for your attention and suggestions on this topic.

You must be riding out this blizzard like me, with a lot of time on your hands. Apparently many members here are academics who insist on rigorously accurate posts and like to argue details & rhetoric rather than principles. I apologize. I should have asked if anyone could name a non-renewable resource that is in danger of depletion in the next 300 yrs. You're absolutely right about our fisheries. We already did a number on our bison, but that was intentional. It wouldn't do to have 60 million migrating, large beasts trampling our crops, not to mention feeding our rivals, every year. In regards sustainable ag, I guess I should have explicitly stated that we can't use organic, renewable N sources and continue our high yields. Lower yields would translate to lower carrying capacity, and that in turn, would lead to a die-off until population numbers matched resource availability. You gotta spell it out for some people. Between the biased editorial policy and this sort of picayunish, petty crap, I don't think I'll be back here. Thanks for the ride. It's been a slice.

this website provides some information including coronavirus's genetic sequence which is too technical for me to understand. we need experts to verify it. https://www.infowars.com/white-house-asks-scientists-to-investigate-whether-2019-ncov-was-bio-engineered/

Gaia theory is brief and it's the one everybody always falls back to when so-called scientists come forward to label anybody talking about something that can't be measured as hippy culture claptrap. You've provided something bigger than a dinosaur but you're scale of mind is smaller than the size of the atmosphere. You literally couldn't answer with anything bigger, not even to intrigue me. This is the limit of your intelligence and nearly every other scientist in the world. I'm trying to find someone who can imagine a planet as a being or as part of a being but it seems outside of the realm of logic or any kind of human theory of space and time and the universe. Is that not where modern science falls apart because it all revolves around ourselves being the kingpin of space like we are children waiting for presents for christmas. Nearly everything in modern science revolves around looking downward at things which are smaller, and yet there seems to be zero ability within the human conciousness of explaining things which are larger from the point of view of something which is larger, looking down at us. Do you see my point?

There is no burden of anything for 'I don't know' Only those claiming they do know bear that puppy! And I did answer the question. You see all light here in the fishbowl from anywhere. You see, unless time existed the same out there, and space, there are no distances to any star known! So you are in posiyion to discuss from where. Forget physical space you made that up. You don't know what space is either! I suggest you tell us how anything about time translation symetry applies to deep space. Otherwise do not bring it up again. Define 'physical' space and then prove it also exists in the fringes of the universe?