Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/12/20 in all areas

  1. I'm gonna go on a slight rant that may pertains to the subject matter more or less. I'm sorry but this pisses me of. Where do you come off on pissing over the hard work of others who take the time out of their day to assist you with your "ground breaking" ideas. If it is so ground breaking then you should want to have it taken apart so that it can become more viable. If your idea is so "special" then prove it, if you think that ya got something amazing then bring it to the table. If you wanna sit on it then sit on it. 9 times out of 10 the idea is either some strange mix of religious non
    5 points
  2. No, we have all seen your posts and know that your level of mathematical understanding is 'middle' school level. You don't know any calculus, or even grasp limits; I don't think you can begin to do any QM ( where the fun is ), never mind the 'way it's used in our modern day and age' ( ? time of use makes a difference ? ). And you don't seem to understand the meaning of 'numerology'. ( did you even read the link; where does it mention 'respected' applications and domain ? ) How many times must you be told to ask questions regarding things you don't understand, if you want to be ta
    2 points
  3. I'm shocked! How would anyone write such a thing. You forgot the apostrophe on cat's (or cats' if there's more than one cat) It's an apostrophe catastrophe. :-)
    2 points
  4. @curiousone So, you think you can bypass the the decades of study that it takes to achieve notability in scientific circles? Science is like any other endeavour... practice, practice, practice. It's my guess that the trmes amateurs have had their ideas 'pinched' on a forum by pro scientistists is vanishingly small. All scientists know that once an idea is 'out there' anyone can use it and they expect/hope it will be used.
    2 points
  5. Most of us don't do this for 'fame and fortune'. Others have their own reasons; I do it because I enjoy discussion with like-minded people. ( I don't even belong to any social media, and a couple of times it has 'scared' me when googling some science topic, that a link to MigL@Science Forums.net come up in the search. )
    2 points
  6. I guess I disagree with how you used predecessor; to me that suggests one basically became the other with a large overlap of membership and purpose. The articles seem to agree that the alt-right founders were not prominent atheists, and the ones aligned with the alt-right are in the minority of the atheist movement. They’re atheists who just happen to be bigots, with that having little to do with their atheism. I don’t find it all that surprising that one ideology that has a spectrum of ideas would have an overlap of adherents with another ideology that is largely orthogonal in its views.
    1 point
  7. I just did some calculations with this information and I must truly say thanks.. Calculus truly makes ""more"" sense now, and I'm hoping other science members whom had years of agonizing confusion read this thread. 0 and 1 uses the concept of "distance" In computer science.. i = 0 while i < length (' ') i = i + 1 It usually applies a distance in a string of characters, numbers or letters, the very 1st character is 0.. However, I see a relationship here to length or distances in general..
    1 point
  8. Another example of society adopting willfully sloppy definitions for issues they become passionate about. Get 100 people to define "leftist" or "atheist" or "socialist" and we see how badly aligned they all are.
    1 point
  9. There aren’t plenty of radioactive isotopes, and nothing formed that’s heavier than iron until after a star goes supernova. So basically no fission on the main sequence.
    1 point
  10. I do not understand, but I like how you did the graphics. It flows with the text very well.
    1 point
  11. No one knows. This will only emerge as those who have been vaccinated, either in the trials or in vaccination programs, begin to succumb to covid in the future. I have yet to see a genuine expert, in any country, offer a speculation - only various hopes. If I have properly understood some of the reports I've seen then this is definitely a possibility and is actively hoped for. At the risk of giving offence I wouldn't call it controversial, just silly.
    1 point
  12. First you need to know that 0 and 1 are fractions themselves ! [math]0 = \frac{0}{1}\quad and\quad 1 = \frac{1}{1}[/math] Although we don't usually write them like that. Mathematics recognises a series of 'number systems' that are nested like Russian dolls. The outer one is the most complicated and the number systems get simpler inside just as the outer doll is the biggest and the dolls get smaller inside. For number systems the more complicated (outer) system contains or includes all the simpler systems within it. The simplest system is called the natural numb
    1 point
  13. The quoted part of the text you provided seems correct to me. In particle physics, there is a concept of a parton. A parton is the thing that does the core interaction when a proton is shot at something else in a particle collider ("core interaction" is the part of the process with the highest energy, the one that you draw Feynman diagrams for to describe it). Experimental physicists have a very pragmatic approach to these partons: They define a probability to get a certain parton (a quark or a gluon) with a given momentum from the proton. These probabilities can be taken into account when si
    1 point
  14. (My emphasis) Real thinkers don't crawl; they glide. They also share knowledge. They are good listeners and readers of other people's ideas, as well as communicators of their own. (My emphasis) Oh boy, the box again. Real thinkers know the way back home, to the safety of the trusty box, and always keep handy the key to it, because it's where everything makes sense. And no matter how far away from the box they might venture, they never lose sight of the box's entrances, and have a good mental picture of its rooms and corridors. When they're back home, they meet people wh
    1 point
  15. This was earlier, possibly before a thorough understanding of the dangers was developed
    1 point
  16. This is a very bad start. Photons don't need to be propelled. The rest of the sentence does not make any sense. Second sentence is badly, badly wrong. This belongs in Speculations. It is a speculation, and a awful one at that. It doesn't stand together. Let alone against physical reality.
    1 point
  17. First of all I will say that COVID-19 should not be lumped together with other known seasonal diseases. The reason is that for the latter the susceptibility is massively lower than for a novel disease. Ultimately, COVID-19 might eventually become seasonal, depending how immunity against it pans out in the population. The next question would then to look at known diseases and inspect their pattern of seasonality before we go any deeper in specifics. A lot of diseases not only have different patterns, but also different causes, for examples the properties of the causative agent (e.g. mutati
    1 point
  18. The church did. It improved compliance among the flock. That's why the church kept doing it.
    1 point
  19. Another Dali factoid: He doodled on the cheques so they would never be cashed: https://theuijunkie.com/salvador-dali-cheque-restaurants/
    1 point
  20. I think this poll confuses two concepts: philosophy as a discipline or process (a way of thinking about problems, definitions and questions) and a philosophy (a worldview or set of beliefs; e.g. I am (apparently) a naive realist). Both of these can be good or bad. The former (the "process") is highly valuable when done well. So I guess there is some sort of objective-ish measure of how good it is. For the latter meaning, I suspect good or bad become much more subjective.
    1 point
  21. All energy reaches equilibrium All energy including heat reverses order to equal to zero (equilibrium). In engineering the process of air conditioning for creating cold air is to expel hot air. Eventually the hot air in the environment merges with the cold air to reach equilibrium. The law of conservation states that hot air motions towards the cold to reach equilibrium. Therefore the hot air with positive temperature reduces in the negative direction and the cold air with negative temperature increases towards the positive temperature to equal zero (equilibrium). That is why in my r
    -1 points
  22. I can totally relate, "trust me." If you don't know of any "from your science to knowledge endeavours" then its pointless telling you. Well then, when ever you want to share your "perfect" world where everyone is equal, loving healthy, "all get paid equally for their jobs, "where women are not objects of sex but rather thinkers like everyone else" and everywhere you go others have not one single judgement on you---------> please let "the rest of us foolish people" know the location...lol...
    -2 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.