Bufofrog

Good deal!

Chatbots aren't good at math.

It is against the rules to hijack a thread to promote your own pet theory.

Shouldn't this be something that you need to think up on your own? Does it seem fair for us to think up an experiment that impresses the judges and gets you a good grade?

There are ways to simulate gravity in space but there is nothing like antigravity.

Yes, evidence points to gravity being 4D and it's produced effects are 4D. 3 spatial and 1 temporal dimension.

Clearly not. If you are interested in science this is a great place to ask questions to further your understanding. Making things up based on limited knowledge is a waste of your time.

No kidding?

No, I do know that he indicated he was quite old though...

This guy is clearly "pulling our leg".

It's possible that the whole point of life is to facilitate the invention of potato chips. I don't think it is but it could be.

What's a utility model?

No, you don't seem to understand reference frames. Each frame would see the other one as length contracted.

How exactly is 0.81 a whole number?

It I understand you correctly, you are saying that large flares and CMEs are responsible for earth quakes and volcanos on earth. If that is what your idea is then it should be rather easy to see if it is viable by simply seeing if in general cataclysms vary with the solar cycle. In other words there should be a cyclical increase in earth quakes and volcanos every 11 years. I don't see this correlation, do you?

That is not how the the theory works. For instance in one experiment the amount of lensing was calculated for a star behind the sun and the observations matched the calculation. The amount of curvature cannot be arbitrarily changed in GR. 'What ifs' are not very useful. Do you have evidence that modeling gravity as a force gives a better answer than space time curvature?

In Newtonian gravity it is modeled as a force. This model works reasonably well. When gravity is modeled as a force, you get the incorrect answer for lensing, when you model gravity as a curvature of space time you get the correct answer for lensing.

In general relativity gravity is defined as a space time curvature, so your question is nonsensical. There are many examples of space time curvature such as gravitational lensing, but there is nothing else that curves space time besides gravity AFAIK. Edit: X-posted once again....

If you have a theory that is supported by evidence the thread won't get closed. However, with the false equivalencies you just gave in the OP, I am not optimistic about your theory being logical. edit: X-posted with Phi for All.

This entire post is nothing but pseudoscience.

I don't know of any material that can directly turn the KE of fission products into electricity. The heat produced by fission or radioactive decay can directly turned into electricity. This is a method used to power many unmanned space craft. Look up 'thermopile' for more information on this.

No, space would be terrible. You would have a freeze dried body part.

The first thing I would like to know is what is a soul? Can a human body be alive without a soul? Are there lots of souls waiting for bodies? When does a soul enter a body? Can a soul enter more than one body over the lifetime of a soul? Where do souls hang out when they are not in bodies? Do souls associate with nonhuman bodies?

That's not true for me, if I imagine a circle it never has a specific size.

Word. Word. Word, word word, word. Word you very much, Word