swansont

Cosmology investigates the way the universe behaves and has evolved. The nature of things is metaphysics,which is a branch of philosophy. They are distinct field of inquiry.

The implication is that it’s only the US that does this, but I’m skeptical that this is the case. Not sure why; I’m not a subscriber but I’m in the US and aware of the story behind “In God We Trust” and “Under God” from the cold war, the Christian nation nonsense, Land of the Free issues (e.g. “What to the Slave is the 4th of July” by Frederick Douglass, and CRT, though not the perversion of it by MAGA), military budget, etc. US education is US-centric, but I imagine all countries emphasize their own history in education and have propaganda (we had a recent thread that touched on this happening in the UK). The whitewashing can be countered by going beyond what you learn in grade school (more education, and reading on your own)

Another pronunciation would be superb olé, which describes a really good bullfighter

All oscillations have common behaviors, which is why you can describe them with equations. It should be utterly unsurprising (the opposite of a revelation) that you see similar behavior. Which violates rule 2.13

You’ve “discovered” that oscillations act like oscillations. I’m curious - who are you quoting in your posts? These should be attributed to their source.

Making even one would be a refreshing change. So? You’ve not connected this with anything. It’s not enough for many of us. You could make a connection between alcohol consumption and suicide rate; there’s plenty of literature on that. But this is purportedly about direct democracy, and that remains unconnected.

And also explain how these facts support your thesis. e.g. the Swiss having a slightly better-than-European-average suicide rate is a fact, but you’ve made zero connection to the form of government. The fact that the difference is small suggests that any possible effect is also small, and there are many other cultural effects that you’ve not mentioned that would impact the behaviors you’ve mentioned.

No. Things that are not matter carry momentum and can exert a force

The details here are wrong, but that probably doesn’t matter much. Photons are not matter and are not components of matter. Particles don’t break down into individual quarks. Not a science person. The field of investigating the fundamental nature of reality is metaphysics. Science tells you how nature behaves. Some things can be inferred from that knowledge, but some things can’t.

That’s not what Planck scale is. We can’t come anywhere close to measure Planck time or distance, but the Planck energy is about 2 x 10^9 J, which is pretty big in the human experience view. The Planck scale is where quantum effects of gravity would come into play. I don’t see how this brings anything extra to science. A computer simulation would be based on equations, i.e. we’d already know how they would behave

I was focusing on “construct” which may indeed be beside the point you intended to make, but not (IMO) the way you made it. The density calculation of a BH is made up of the singularity and then a huge volume of nothing. It’s an average, not a description of a physically realizable object. To physically “construct” it requires a collapse at some point.

If you constructed a structure out of bricks, how would it become a BH without matter-crushing forces? The structure would always have a radius larger than the Schwarzschild radius. Alternately, such bricks can’t exist whose structural integrity remains intact as the size gets arbitrarily large

And it’s your interpretation, not that of the mainstream. That’s why this is now in its own thread. Please leave the contributions of ai out of it, per the rules.

Drones aren’t really germane to the issue of passenger planes. It’s a different aspect of the scaling problem

That’s just it, though - are these “suggestions” mainstream science? Your phrasing suggests that they aren’t If how it fits together is not new then point to it in the existing literature