Leaderboard

So another sort of analogy then: This thread of yours seems like saying "given a banana could ride a bicycle, I claim it would compete in the tour de France" ... and then trying to say "I don't want to talk about how a banana rides a bike, just the impact on the cycle race". After someone dies, what is retaining their last thought or feeling?

We are assuming there is no time dilation in this scenario. There is no relativistic anything. The premise is that light travels at a finite speed, but not that it is invariant.

In order to reach and attempt to "de-program" a QAnon follower, it might be useful to explore the science of getting someone extracted out of a cult. This same approach may also sadly be required to reach a sizable share of ardent Trump supporters.

Nice post overall. One possible and reasonable answer to this one question from it: Once we die, we live on solely in the memories of those who survive us. Some of us leave bigger footprints in the proverbial snow than others. For some, that snow is just digital, while for others that snow is printed into history books and sung into stories for future generations, but for all of us we only live on in the lives of others who encountered us and our “thoughts and feelings” are retained solely in the neural connections of those whom we may have somehow touched.

None of those is very usual in my neighbourhood. Where I grew up, I would've been beaten to within an inch of my life just for saying "I don't care for your schadenfreude." "Don't be so epicaricacious" wouldn't have fared much better, TBH. The problem with humour that tries to be too "gentle", "inclusive", "non-discriminatory", politically correct, etc.; is that it's not very funny; nor is it very convincing, IMO. Maybe that's why humour is an art, perhaps. I do believe in its power to convince, though, if done right.

No, as observed by both observers, the clock rate would not change. If you think otherwise, you need to show this, not just assert it. That doesn't give a change in the clock rate. That gives an (apparent) change in the clock phase (time), but this can be adjusted for, as we do with actual clocks in use. You subtract out t = d/c (if the clocks are at rest with respect to each other) You are confusing the clock's time with the signal that is being received. That's only a problem if we were trying to reconstruct the time from the signal frequency. You could just broadcast a "at the tone the time will be..." signal and then reconstruct the time from the signal delay. Then there is no frequency shift of the signal to worry about.

Funny how you seem to think I offered an analogy. I didn't. I've addressed the possible impact of your concept upon religions. I understood that is what you wanted us to focus on. I have respected that wish. Funny you chose not to respond to my comments in that regard. I don't understand where you get that from. I have considered your "theory", but find insufficient reason to find it convincing. You have declared, quite strongly, that you do not want to debate the theory. Such debate would be necessary if I were to stand a chance of being convinced by it. You have closed the door to that option in this thread. So, I have - for sake of argument - considered its possible impact on religious believers. Exactly what you asked for. BigQuestioner, a dialog involves both parties paying attention to what the other says. You have ignored what I did say and imagined me to have said things I didn't. If you wish to offer an explanation for that I am ready to listen.

You cannot explain the time dilation of the muon with just delay. Time dilation and delay are not the same. So you cannot deduce time dilation by a delay. If you think you can, please show me with my example of the muon.

Pangaea is just the last of a series of super-continents that existed in the past. The land masses had collided and separated in ages prior to its formation. As far as an imbalance is concerned; The entire mass of the Earth's crust is 2.77e22 kg, which is just 1/72 the mass of the Earth. In addition, continental crust is actually less dense than oceanic crust. So while the crust is thicker under the continents, it doesn't weigh that much different per square mile than oceanic crust. Thirdly, even if there were a slight shift in the mass of the Earth, it wouldn't cause an " imbalance". The axis of rotation would just shift to pass through the new center of mass. It isn't like a washing machine drum which starts to shake the whole machine if the load is unbalanced. In this situation, the axis of rotation is fixed relative to the washing machine and can't shift in response to the center of mass change. Thus the whole washing machine moves in response. The Earth rotates freely in space and is not connected to something else like the drum is connected to the washing machine.

Are you familiar with the Miller-Urey experiment? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller–Urey_experiment and equivalent experiment of making RNA and DNA building blocks? To create adenine you just need 5 HCN and electricity e.g. thunderstorm. It took billions of years after the first single cell microorganism appeared on Earth, before they began to cooperate in a multicellular form of life. Earth like planets with existing life forms might be extremely deadly place with unknown lethal pathogens.

StrangeSuperNerddapartypooper; you closed the following forum --- “a possible new source of energy, flammable farts” Before you stuck your but into this discussion a few posters were trying to honestly discuss the energy potential of converting sewage treatment plants into self-sustaining facilities. The plants would get their power from the sewage they treat. I believe this could qualify as the first perpetual motion machine in our history. You are truly a party-pooper what say you-?

I already have a polynomial time algorithm for k-Sat in Java . I don't have a phd and can't publish it in a formal journal as a result. So what is in it for me to help you? I'm sure nobody will solve it until I am in a position to publish anyway. Your proof is wrong by the way.