Leaderboard

One of the many things Tesla was wrong about.

I hope I carefully avoided saying there was but I am waiting until we can help Michel develop his thoughts, which are often highly rational, if not formally expressed. We should all help each other improve the expression of our thoughts. Joigus picked me up on something a few posts back, for which I was (am) grateful.

Interestingly, this too is mistaken. Decades of evidence shows rather consistently that the riots get more out of control and the property damage gets worse the more police are present. From 50 years ago: https://belonging.berkeley.edu/system/tdf/kerner_commission_full_report.pdf?file=1&force=1 From 5 years ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/05/01/when-police-ratchet-up-the-force-riots-get-worse-not-better/ And from 5 months ago: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/06/01/why-so-many-police-are-handling-the-protests-wrong

Or it implies the non-existence of quanta when you consider that time is continuous and there is no lower bound. (In other words, your statement is an example of the fallacy of begging the question.)

So we are back to what I said a page or two ago. If we are going to be able to define time we will have to do so in terms of the properties it possesses and the effects it bestows on other inhabitants of the manifold or receives from them.

There's no paradox. You're talking about a finite spacetime that seems to be flat. Or basically an object with a proper length of over ten billion light years. You're calling that "the universe", which is fine as long as you avoid attaching meaning to that label, like that everything else you specify must be within that. Not everything in the (flat, toy) universe gets length contracted. Only the stuff that is moving relative to you does. The pilot isn't moving relative to the ship. If the ship is part of the universe, the universe won't be contracted to 1m, only the stuff moving relative to it. If the ship's not part of the universe, the universe can be like a 1m-thick wall traveling past the ship at near c. If you want to talk about the ship being at rest inside the flat universe, and then accelerating "instantly" to near c, then simultaneity is important if the universe is not static. It sounds like the ship is implicitly Born rigid, and clocks on parts of it would become out of sync with each other (by billions of years??). I think you would see the far edge of the approaching 'wall' appearing to age over twenty billion years in the nano seconds it takes to pass you, due to the relativity of simultaneity and relativistic Doppler shift. Actually, that idea's more complicated than I thought. Say the ship starts in the middle of a toy universe, and instantly accelerates to near c. Ignoring simultaneity, you might conclude that the universe contracts to a wall in the middle of the ship, with the ship sticking out both ends. But that's impossible because the back of the ship never travels backward. No part of the ship ever enters the "back" half of the universe. But with relativity of simultaneity, the different parts of the (Born rigid) ship travel through the front half of universe at different times... eek is that right? I think a pilot in the middle of the ship could consistently conclude, "I'm in the middle of the "universe" which is 1m wide and is smaller than my ship would be at rest (which it currently is not, it doesn't share a single inertial frame), but the back of my ship has already passed through the front edge of the universe has not yet reached the same speed as me and the universe is not yet contracted for them."??? That's confusing, I doubt I got it right. However, relativity of simultaneity does resolve this part of the paradox if you do it right. It sounds like you're referring to the spacetime as 'the universe' and others are referring to all the moving stuff in it as the universe? If all the stuff was moving, the pilot would measure it as length-contracted.

That's probably because you're an architect. I suppose that when you're thinking about buildings, you must be careful that they don't flip in any sense. That would be a liability for a building. The longer a building lasts unchanged, the better. We're all constrained by the theoretical framework of our guild. Physical systems* do flip. An Ising magnet for example, is a physical system that must make a choice (take a decision). Spontaneous symmetry breaking is the paradigmatic example. Some time in the remote past, the Higgs multiplet took what I've called "a decision", thus breaking a symmetry, filling the world with massive gauge bosons and fermions by pointing towards an abstract direction in the configuration space. Edit: So I suppose my point is: Could the direction of time that we perceive be the result of some kind of accidental orientation-taking that we now know to be at the basis of much symmetry breaking in Nature? Could conscience be some version of this kind of symmetry breaking? When you are exposed to the concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking, it just blows your mind. Edit 2: Natural-born physical systems, not programmed, like a building.

I am to you too, and to all of you. @Ghideon caught me a couple of days ago on an important example about tiling the plane with regular polygons I had omitted. Thank you for being sensitive to that. +1 I would agree, had you said: Time is sooo fundamental that it underlies almost everything we do, say, understand, or think.

Indeed, that is true for any direction due to the fact that the border of the observable universe is receding at c in any direction. No matter how fast the ship travels, it won't catch it. Actually, the situation for the ship won't be special. The border still will recede at c for it, despite of its speed. The mental experiment is an impossible one This solves the paradox, but at the cost of making the recession of the border of the universe at c a necessity, rather than something that could be different An universe in contraction, static or in a expansion slower than the current one, would still be sensitive to the paradox, hence, not possible. This explanation makes the recession of the border of the universe at c a requirement if the relativity to be true, something that could not be otherwise

If we are envisaging a culture capable of constructing a craft delivering interstellar travel and self-repair over a period of centuries, it is not a stretch to consider an artificial womb for the initial physical development of the embryos and robotic/AI 'parents' for the subsequent mental and emotional development of the children.

! Moderator Note I hardly think that asking you to present your ideas in writing (a technology that has been around for thousands of years) is "nonsensical". Trying to present technical information via a video is pretty nonsensical. It is a terrible medium for the task. ! Moderator Note OK. But I can't see that anyone is losing anything. Do not start another thread on this subject.

Do you have any good textbooks on speciffic biological topics that you personally found intresting/rich in scientific content and well written? As because of the current worlwide events we are stuck at home, it seems like it's a good time to learn something new. I can personally recomend some textbooks on: - The Fifth Kingdom by Bryce Kendrick - Well written, fascinating textbook on mycolgy, most of it is avaible online on http://www.mycolog.com/fifthtoc.html - Brock Biology of Microorganisms(my favorite textbook on microbiology) - Bacteriology of Humans: An Ecological Perspective(about human microbiome) - Physical Biology of the Cell - R. Phillips et all(fascinatic textbook about the topic on the very verge of biology and biophisics) - Epigenetics - Amstrong Lyle - Molecular and Cell Biology of Cancer: When Cells Break the Rules and Hijack Their Own Planet (textbook on cancer) Bonus: Eating the Sun: Small Musings on a Vast Universe (not a textbook, but a collection of poems about how extraordinary are all the of the mechanisms in which the universe and life works, something we often forget when we study. It's good to make a break sometime to wonder about it all)

Best current explanations have been defended to within an inch of their lives (that why we call them theories, and also why yours is NOT). I don't understand how you can say, "it's everyone else who is refusing to investigate the information". It's your burden if you wish to go against our best mainstream explanations, but you should stop being lazy and support your ideas similarly if you want to be anti-mainstream. As Bufofrog said, you've got it exactly backwards. The burden of proof is yours. But please don't use videos to make your point. Nobody wants to waste that much time when reading is quicker, easier to respond to, and more informative.

! Moderator Note Provide the mathematics and the evidence supporting it in your very next post, otherwise this thread will be closed.

Simplest way to make NRA go out of business is not to "dissolve" them, but instead to take away their tax exempt non-profit status. Same outcome, fewer rage conversations with 2nd amendment worshipers

I believe I already have. By simply insulating the cold plate, which is where the engine's refrigeration winds up, to prevent ambient heat infiltration, the same way an ice box is insulated, the "sink" or cold plate getting colder, demonstrably causes the engine to run better and faster. Why not just carve it out on some stone tablets? Sorry, but I don't need this, there ia a multitude of forums I could be posting to that don't have such nonsensical restrictions. Close the thread if you want boo hoo. Your loss.

Do you care to point out where my analysis is incorrect? If you are unable to understand the analysis then it does not mean it is incorrect, it only implies that you lack the aptitude to understand it.

Most people don't commit crimes. The criminals who do it, have bad genes. These genes could be eliminated by executing the criminals before they can reproduce. In that way, we could arrive at a law-abiding society. Isn't that a sensible idea?

thanks for your question, getting but that's too off topic for the religion category. I would refer you to classical physics to give real information, as my ideas are largely symbolic, as religions tend to be, and cannot be held to any accuracy in detail. Unless, of course, you want to know what my particular religion has to say on such matters, then I would be glad to say something. I just started it yesterday, so am working out the kinks. Praise sagA

I'm not sure where you learned how to cite a source, but if you have specific pages you want to cite in that 431 page Kerner commision report then do so, otherwise you are just engaging in the classic unethical tactic of dumping paperwork on someone with limited resources. The second article is behind a paywall. You have misrepresented the content of the third article. It claims that disproportionate police force is one of the things that can make a peaceful protest not so peaceful, and therefore it does not address the problem of dealing with a riot that is already out control prior to any disproportionate police intervention. Unfortunately the goals of maximizing the protection of property and maximizing the potential to rehabilitate criminals are at odds with one another. In order to make a logical and coherent policy, we need to decide what the acceptable minimum levels are for those goals. Both absolutely cannot be maximized.