Leaderboard

OK, I'll re-phrase. In every other normal, or sane, country in the world, if you are carrying a weapon, you intend to do harm to others ( or yourself ). In the US, where you are Constitutionally enabled to carry military assault weapons into grocery stores, banks, or even churches, I guess that rule doesn't apply. And you defend that right, making a police officer's choice either getting harmed ( or shot at ) while 'talking', or shooting first, asking questions later, and possibly going to jail for having made the wrong choice. Policing in the US is becoming untenable; I'm surprised you can find people who want to do the job. ( and possibly a reason why you get people like D Chauvin ) Carry-on, I'm going back to vacationing ...

There seems to be a presumtion in the last few posts that the solar system formed from the product of a single supernova explosion. This is not the case. Multiple supernovae would have contributed to the molecular cloud whose collapse led to the formation of the solar system. What is thought to be practical is to identify sister stars to the sun, from their spectroscopic signature. These would have formed as neigbours in the same cloud (compare with the Pleiades) then drifted apart. I don't recall whether such siblings have yet been idenitifed, but a literature search should turn up the answer. Here are a couple of papers on the subject: The evolution of the Sun's birth cluster and the search for the solar siblings with Gaia The authors "use self-consistent numerical simulations of the evolution and disruption of the Sun's birth cluster in the Milky Way potential to investigate the present-day phase-space distribution of the Sun's siblings." Searching for solar siblings among the HARPS data The authors note "At present, there are four plausible candidatesreported in the literature: HIP21158, HIP87382, HIP47399, and HIP92831. In this study weconduct a search for solar siblings amongthe HARPS high-resolution FGK dwarfs sample, which includes precise chemical abundances and kinematics for 1111 stars. Usinga new approach based on chemical abundance trends with condensation temperature, kinematics, and ages we found one (additional)potential solar sibling candidate: HIP97507."

I thought that was the intent of all threads, on all forums, for all time.

It is also important to note that all extant species have experienced exactly the same time of evolution. Obviously with large variations in life span. I.e. the length of evolutionary time is not related to expected lifespan.

There is a reasonable correlation between the mass of an organism and its lifespan. (cf. mouse, dog, man, elephant). So, unless you anticipate us evolving into 300ton monsters don't expect a 2.5 my lifespan. Part of the explanation for extended lifespans lies in the inreasing complexity of the most complex organism: An e.coli bacterium doesn't need any time to develop a whole suite of interacting organs. Yes, we are continuing to evolve. We shall either evolve into and entirely new species, or multiple species, or our line will become extinct. Species don't last for much more than a million years. Convergent evolution is common. Thus flying was independently developed by pterosaurs, birds and bats. Swimming with a "fish shape" was developed by mutiple kinds of fishes, ichtyosaurs and cetaceans.

Um, you mean like the police?

Everything we know about the external world (including our assumption that it exists) is created by our mind. So we can't say anything about the external world other than what our mind tells us. I suppose that is indistinguishable from the mind creating the external world. (If you want to really get into this I depth, there is a thread on the Cosmoquest forum that has been going for about 100 years. And not really getting anywhere.)

You can't extrapolate evolution into the future, other than the process will find a way around almost any roadblock.

And like the gods, these copy universes can't be detected, observed, or measured, so there's no way to test the idea, which means any proponents are just waving their hands. If you really want to do some science in this regard, you should figure out how these exact copies could affect the universe, and then test for that. Prediction is one of science's best tools, but you can't base it on woo and poor reasoning.

There are many examples of animals which evolved independently, from different branches of evolutionary tree, which are very similar, at least from POV how they look and behave. Example: birds, pterosaurs, bats. Re-making true dinosaur (or extraterrestrial animals, including intelligent one) is plausible.. because you can go through the all possible combinations of DNA in a loop, run simulation of animal inside the computer (or rather network of supercomputers), and sooner or later (rather later) you will find the right combination of DNA which will match (but you will have problem of knowing it really does match perfectly.. that is another problem). So, better find damaged DNA of dinosaur, in amber or so, then run simulation in a loop, to find missing parts which will fit and work and simulated animal will be able to live inside of your simulation (to verify it is promising DNA sequence for later tests and uses)..

..what is minimum velocity of dust from a supernova explosion? (i.e. which won't get back to it due to gravity and being sucked by the newly forming black hole)... ..what is maximum velocity of dust from a supernova explosion? (can it exceed escape velocity of the entire galaxy? analyze per galaxy size and mass).. In the case of Crab Nebula velocity measurements x time, can give the moment in which supernova exploded. According to Wikipedia it might be 1054 year A.D. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1054 Enjoy Betelgeuse until you have it! The same extrapolation can be done with any other supernova, or supernova-to-be. i.e. when (and in what quantity) remnants of Betelgeuse will reach Earth in the future (and any other close to the Solar System supernova-explosion-to-be) The same extrapolation can be done with the Solar System. I think the best is to write a computer simulation which calculates, estimates, predicts where and when it happened (or predicts where any other historical supernova was in the past billions of years ago). Where is remaining black hole after supernova explosion, which created the all heavier elements which you have here on the Earth, and in the Solar System?

AFAIK your intuition is right. Main sequence stars are in their steady hydrogen burning state. And doesn't the main sequence form a more or less 1-parameter curve? And the single parameter is mass. What you call 'wild variation in the types of stars' is due to stars that are not simply fusing hydrogen in their core: not yet, or not anymore. The 'funny patches' of stars in the HR-diagram arise because of the short time that stars live in some in-between phase. As an example the life-path of an sun-like star in the HR-diagram: I don't think so. I am not sure if the lives of stars (like the sun!) that are second-generation stars (i.e. mixed with debris from first-generation stars) also live the biggest part of their lives on the main sequence. The spectra of second-generation stars are of course different from first-generation ones, because their higher metallicity, but if these elements have a big impact on the life path of a star I don't know. I am not aware of e.g. a catalyst function of heavier elements in second-generation stars compared to the first generation.

15 minutes into this I'd thought I'd share it here in with my friends: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s78hvV3QLUE

Yes https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/humans-still-evolving-3-recent-adaptations Maybe. BBC news- Human species may split in two They already did, dinosaurs are just animals.

1. Evolution doesn't work in straight line graphs 2. Yes. If we don't go extinct we will become a new species. If the second species is plural - that seems unlikely as genetic isolation of 2 populations seems improbable. 3. Something extinct cannot evolve again - extinction is final. Something similar - seems unlikely but who knows.

Evolution doesn't have an agenda, it's a discription of a process; you may as well ask "If I got £20 using my bank card from an ATM today, will I get £100 tomorrow?".

Please don't just gainsay everything I say, but at least you're consistent, I've never said that nor even vaguely implied it. I said/implied, what I think is basis of justice, "innocent until proven guilty", so unless your proposing to populate the police with a version of Judge Dredd, their JOB is to present the suspect to the court's, with an actual judge. sigh 🙄, I continue to suggest: 1. you don't know they're violent criminal's before you talk to them. 2. they try that approach before they shoot or other wise try to kill them. 3. they discharge they're duties in a fair non biased way. 4. all of the above can be taught without additional funds, or a resident Shifu.

I'm on vacation but I had to respond... If they have a bat, knife, gun, any other weapon that can be used against you ( vehicles are sometimes also used ), or if they try to take the police officer's weapon away from him, they have made their choice, they intend to hurt someone. That is the definition of violent offender. You go ahead and talk to them first, Dim; me, I will put my safety, and that of those I care about, first. If you don't intend to do violence you should not have a weapon !

I am very interested in clarification, it's just that I have seen no evidence of it from you. You have moved the goalposts, but you deny this. You misapply poll results to support assertions that seem to lack any sound basis. Your posts continue to have more than a whiff of aggression. All of this you seem to be unaware of; as I noted previously this makes it difficult for readers to take your arguments seriously. You do them a disservice by your approach. Why not go back to square one and restate your argument with accompanying support, then we can debat whether there is anything of substance there.