swansont

! Moderator Note The international language of science is English

Fair enough

What is the marker? A line is not a physical object.

The trash bin is for topics that are also rules violation of some sort. Not for failed proposals.

You’d have to have something in the space to be able to observe behavior in order to tell.

PE is not only for gravity. Any conservative force will work, i.e. there is no dissipative force, such as friction. Electrostatic forces and springs are two prominent examples

The conversion of PE to KE (or vice-versa) depends on the internal force that’s present. An object under constant acceleration will convert at a different rate than acceleration from an inverse-square relation. You should be able to solve for KE or PE as a function of time, for whatever circumstance you have

It’s the slope of the function, y = f(x)

Safety note: these green lasers can “bleed” a lot of IR if there is no IR filter and can be an eye danger since your eyes don’t have a blink reflex for the IR, and there’s a lot of IR power relative to the green light. https://www.technologyreview.com/2010/08/12/121205/the-danger-of-green-laser-pointers/

This is moot, since fusion does not deal with significant amounts of bulk material. It also depends on the material and wavelength. Some materials are quite transparent at certain laser wavelengths. Fiber optics depends on this But you don’t want the EM radiation to penetrate, you want it to exert pressure. “NIF does this by amplifying and focusing 192 laser beams onto a tiny hollow metal cylinder at the centre of which is a peppercorn-sized capsule containing the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium. X-rays generated from the walls of the cylinder blast off the outer surface of the capsule, forcing the rest of it inwards thanks to momentum conservation and causing the deuterium and tritium nuclei within it to fuse – in the process releasing alpha particles (helium nuclei), neutrons and lots of energy.”

It may be difficult to tie a single event to climate change, much like you can’t tell for sure that seatbelts saved a life in certain accidents. But it becomes clearer when you look at the statistics of all the events.

It’s the gravitational potential - the height change is the major contributor, not the change in g - and atomic clocks don’t rely on radioactive decay.

Yup. Yeah, right. Making stuff up? Accuse others of what you’re doing? That’s the Trump playbook.

Growth rate has been slowing for decades https://www.statista.com/chart/28744/world-population-growth-timeline-and-forecast/

That tells you where the scattering event occurred. It doesn’t tell you the neutrino path, because you don’t know where the neutrino originated. You might estimate the angle, but how do you know the momentum of the neutrino? When I was a postdoc, we did an experiment where we knew where the originated, because they came from beta decay in a magneto-optic trap, so the source was localized to a small volume. We couldn’t detect them, though, but could deduce their momentum by detecting the beta, the daughter nucleus, and any orbital electrons that were ionized in the decay process, for decays where all the particles were co- or counter-propagating.

I’m sorry, have you met science? Science questions the world, makes models, and compares them to evidence. If you don’t have evidence, you aren’t doing science. And these are the requirements for speculations. So let’s have the evidence to support your claims, or this gets shut down.

! Moderator Note Responses to inquiries need to be mainstream science, rather than pet theories, which can only be discussed in their own thread in speculations

What’s the evidence that this is the case?

! Moderator Note A. It’s their thread, and B. It’s brought up in the OP

Why have a fight with a language model that has only a casual relationship with the truth? (And I should take my own advice)

The conditions are not the same, so you won’t get that result. Are you being deliberately obtuse? We weren’t discussing the crew. No, that’s not what the article says. On the other hand, when it’s on the side when our planet completely blocks out the sun, the thermometers plummet to minus 250 degrees Fahrenheit (-157 degrees Celsius). -157 is not in the dark side in sunshine

There’s nothing inherent in the equations that says the zero-mass particle must be a photon. i.e. it applies to all zero-mass particles.

The Webb isn’t in LEO You have no reference for “they don't want them to get cold”

And your reference for this is...? What's the point of discussing things if you're just going to make stuff up?

That's not accessible now, though. That's a lander that's not returning. I've seen a study where DNA was stored at temperatures below -20ºC and was stable for 24 months. The units that have only recently been available to the ISS don't get that cold. Once the temperature issue gets solved for LEO, the next issue is radiation.