Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by swansont

  1. A scientist is someone who does science. You can make a distinction between professional and amateur, but those are modifiers/distinctions within the category — both are scientists. A scientist who becomes unemployed doesn't suddenly forget how to science. You can also make a distinction about the level of training. But someone without a degree who is doing science is a scientist. These days it's unusual, but go back a while, and training wasn't quite as formal. There have been largely self-taught scientists, and others who were informally taught, for at least part of their background. Einstein had defended his thesis, IIRC, when he was employed as a patent clerk and wrote his papers in 1905; he did this while looking for a professorship (much like actors and actresses wait tables between gigs if they haven't made the big time). He was a scientist.
  2. ! Moderator Note Persistent sockpuppet, banned. Thread locked
  3. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/10/venus-might-not-have-much-phosphine-dampening-hopes-for-life/ “Promising sign of life on Venus might not exist after all” Repeatability can be a cruel mistress...
  4. That's confusing. "Could a similar philosophical stance arise in Christianity?" refers to future events. Whether something happened in the past is a question of history, and your post suggests that it did not. Do you mean to investigate an alternative history?
  5. Part of this depends on the state of the copper. If it's polished and the surface is flat, it is very reflective. But a rough, oxidized surface can have an emissivity that's quite large, meaning it acts more like a blackbody. It also depends on the properties at different wavelengths https://www.flukeprocessinstruments.com/en-us/service-and-support/knowledge-center/infrared-technology/emissivity-metals Assuming it's shiny copper, if you paint it, it should be a matte finish, since a glossy one would reflect more light. That will probably heat up faster than just the copper. Maybe you do an experiment and see how it heats up before and after painting?
  6. [T]he fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. — Carl Sagan Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right. — Robert Park ! Moderator Note Showing that you are right requires experimental confirmation. It also requires that one be able to try and falsify your idea. And I have provided an experimental result that falsifies your idea (it is completely unsurprising that you dismissed this without justification and have not pursued it further. Instead, you repeat your assertions). Plus descriptions of other experiments that confirm Faraday's law. Others have pointed out that motors and generators run in accordance with Faraday's law, and would not work if things were as you claimed. So what I mean here is that quoting Schopenhauer and invoking the fallacious "if you are resisting I must be right" stance implies you have no evidence to present. You were given the opportunity, and you chose not to. There's no point in wasting more of anyone's time. Don't bring this topic up again.
  7. https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Zinc-HealthProfessional/ "A wide variety of foods contain zinc (Table 2) [2]. Oysters contain more zinc per serving than any other food, but red meat and poultry provide the majority of zinc in the American diet. Other good food sources include beans, nuts, certain types of seafood (such as crab and lobster), whole grains, fortified breakfast cereals, and dairy products [2,11]. Phytates—which are present in whole-grain breads, cereals, legumes, and other foods—bind zinc and inhibit its absorption [2,12,13]. Thus, the bioavailability of zinc from grains and plant foods is lower than that from animal foods, although many grain- and plant-based foods are still good sources of zinc [2]."
  8. Yes, especially if you don't have people inside. But they still need to end up near neutral buoyancy if you want more than one trip, so there is still a limit. You can fill them with e.g. oil of some sort, or some other fluid that's less dense than water.
  9. I recall when I was a teaching assistant there was a lab on Faraday's law. You had a coil with some number of turns, and you flipped it and looked at the induced current in a circuit. Students used it to deduce the earth's magnetic field. And it worked reasonably well. One fun part of this was that students on one corner of the room got a different answer because there was an NMR lab one floor up, and when that magnet was on, it was strong enough to affect the field in that corner of the room. So they got a number noticeably larger than students at the other side of the room.
  10. Random reddit comments do not constitute a scientific theory, no matter how they are woven. A theory has a mathematical model, makes testable predictions, and has evidence to support it.
  11. Probably not. How much sway does the church hold over the science community as opposed to even 100 years ago? The biggest vector is probably the church via government. We can see this in e.g. stem-cell research limitations in the US, but by and large, I don't think there's a lot of influence, and I get the impression it's even less in Europe. And countries where Christianity isn't a dominant religion wouldn't be affected very much. China, Japan, etc. wouldn't be slowed by this.
  12. The shock wave in water would be an interesting phenomenon. A problem with streamlining a submarine hull is that it's not the best shape for a pressure hull. Keeping out pressures above atmosphere are a priority for submarines, whereas planes never have to deal with a static difference greater than 1 atm, usually it's even less, and when it's an issue it's about keeping air in rather than being crushed. An autonomous or remotely-piloted vehicle would be required.
  13. ! Moderator Note Are there testable predictions here? A way to falsify the idea? I don’t see an actual model
  14. A rotating magnet. What’s the difference if you rotate the coil or you rotate the magnet? The change in flux is the same.
  15. No, it’s not. It shows you don’t understand electromagnetism Experiment is the only way you can falsify a theory Here’s the experiment I did http://blogs.scienceforums.net/swansont/archives/9120 Spinning magnet dropped through a coil.
  16. Could you be more specific? I don't see a use of the reciprocal for speed. I see a reciprocal for gamma mentioned, which they call alpha. Is that what you're referring to? The only mention of "reciprocal" is in this context.
  17. Good question. Why don't you do this experiment, instead of mucking about with qualitative descriptions? (I've done a similar one - spun a magnet inside of a coil, and got oscillatory behavior. So your objection has to be more specific in detailing what's wrong with Faraday's law) Why is the current a maximum when the wire loop is in the vertical position in your first example, but there is no current induced in that configuration here?
  18. It already has, so it probably will in the future. A significant number of people live past 100 already.
  19. ! Moderator Note So there’s no basis for a conjecture here. Just a WAG, which is not what we do.
  20. Is there any reason to think these are connected?
  21. Please don’t lump me in with politicians
  22. ! Moderator Note As Mike has been escorted across the river Styx, this is closed
  • 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.