Genady

I think it is possible. I don't think it is quite possible. No, I do not.

Well, I don't believe that 'scholars' in the past or other similar possibilities. If anything, in the past many things were considered possible, which now we think are impossible, such as perpetuum mobile for example. Advancements of knowledge show, on one hand, what is impossible, and make, on the other hand, reality of what is possible. Regarding AI, I think I've already answered above: "Life beyond our planet"? What is the question?

My definition is quite standard. Science fiction Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster: No, this is not what I am confident in. I am confident that the technology, which is called AI now, will not become as intelligent as humans. If some other technology will become so intelligent, or this current technology will dominate human race without becoming intelligent, I don't have opinion on that. What you say is possible. My point is that there are so many different things which are all equally possible that any one of them has extremely low probability of actually happening. That is why I call it science fiction - one of millions of possible scenarios.

What does make you sure it happened? Do you have references?

Yes, they are similar, IMHO.

Here is a guru's answer (Thorne, Kip. Black Holes & Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy (pp. 400-401):

I am stuck on the very first line of your diagram, on the bottom. It says, INFORMATION GENERATION. I know information as being a quantitative measure of something, not an entity by itself. It is like saying, WIDTH GENERATION. Width of what? Information of what?

I know, I know. That's why I could never be a teacher.

Yes, solutions depend on local conditions. In our case, the entire windward shore, where the sargassum come to, is unpopulated. The whole population, all 22 thousand, live on the leeward side, where sargassum yet to be seen, and in the mountains.

Of course not, I don't need to, I don't want to, I can't. Let them keep marching. Even if they don't go anywhere.

Yes, Lorentz Jr. has already said it here: And I have already replied to it here:

In Bonaire, there is no need for a fertilizer or an insulator. Just yesterday I heard from people who advocate doing nothing as a solution. They claim that, on one hand, all the work involved in collecting sargassum and cleaning the beaches damages the shoreline and costs money. On the other hand, based on experience in remote lagoons, the trapped sargassum deteriorates quite fast with our sun and wind, and the sargassum dust is just blown back to the sea.

I guess I can. I don't work - let's see - about half of my life by now.

It's all fun.

Parties and wars.

I gave up on answering that question as well, but for a different reason. I see this problem not as a problem of how the universe works or of logic, but a limitation of our, i.e., human, way of understanding things. This is what the biological evolution gave us for living in the world around us, our modus operandi. It did not evolve to explain the universe.

This Universal Supra-Computer is run according to some laws, perhaps. What runs those laws? Another Ultra-Universal-Supra-Dupra-Computer, perhaps. And that Computer? And then there are turtles all the way down.

Yes, agree. Another +1 to @wtf. The sad part is that here are 100 posts, and 0 progress.

The OP does not say anything about his ideas. It rather objects to his purported 'dogmas' of science.

In one word, inertia. Bodies continue moving at a constant speed and in the constant direction unless something disturbs that movement. For example, if you throw something up while moving inside a car, the thing will go up and down into your hand despite the car's moving forward.

See these two posts in another thread: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/128993-hijack-from-jumping-out-of-the-black-hole-what-about-the-event-horizon-from-nowhere-to-everywhere/?do=findComment&comment=1233020 https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/128993-hijack-from-jumping-out-of-the-black-hole-what-about-the-event-horizon-from-nowhere-to-everywhere/?do=findComment&comment=1233026

I think that the proper relation is skepticism. This is an important general skill and it includes but is not limited to the areas of media, misinformation and crackpottery.

The attempts to make a geometric theory of electromagnetism started pretty soon after GR was formulated. See Kaluza–Klein theory - Wikipedia The current attempts are rather to make GR like other fields. You know, “If the mountain will not come to Mohammed, Mohammed must go to the mountain.” The forces, in Newtonian sense, are absent in both ways.

It seems to me that there are many areas where the expected effects of the project rely on believes about human psychology. This is an extremely weak point, I think. It didn't work out well in previous attempts. For an historical example, there was an assumption that equal gender rights will eliminate prostitution. Needless to say, it didn't happen. There also was an assumption that if working people are the owners of production means and products, they will not steal, cheat, etc., but will rather be involved in increasing the effectiveness of their work. The large-scale result was quite opposite. There was an assumption that people will be driven by a common good if they know that they are equal part of that common. Didn't work. Etc. OTOH, negative aspects of human psychology were used historically very effectively. Fear, hate, belonging, etc. This is a problematic approach: how this proposition can be tested? There is no objective test? This is not scientific. PS. Trial-end-error is kind of test, too. But in this case the error might be very painful.

It's worth noting that Newtonian forces were 'eliminated' by Hamiltonian and Lagrangian formulations of mechanics.