geordief

I have heard differing descriptions or definitions of a "gravitational field" and my takeaway is that it is wrong to think of it as a physical object Rather I have been assured it (like any field) is just a set of measurements in space and time . I am not sure ,given that definition it can be said to mediate a force between two massive bodies (if that was what you were saying)

Apparently** practically all cases in Ireland are now Omicron. Seems to me Delta will go the way of the earlier variants. **no source just something I read on social media.

Can a baby step be taken?Can it be shown that the smallest imaginable system can arise out of some more fundamental process? In a deterministic ,reproducible way... (Not sure what I am asking,but we agree surely that the links between an individual quark and the movement of the left ear of a giraffe are impossible to show in practice and perhaps in principle) I think the idea I think someone may have brought up.of replacing spacetime distances with other forms of correlation sounds very interesting (exciting?)

Is this a bit analogous to chaos theory where systems are deterministic in principle but not in practice? And ,as someone said above does it make more sense to view emergence as being an phenomenon of perception? (If that is the case there may never be a satisfactory answer because understanding our own nature** is subject to the law of diminishing returns.) Are all transactions in macro systems mediated according to laws of quantum mechanics but perceived according to the models we make to understand them? **are we first and foremost creatures that seek to learn?

I think I have heard that ,insofar as this now seems to be more of a disease of the upper airways than the lungs themselves that younger ("very young",was it?) people are more liable to more serious illness on that account. Perhaps that ,if true would be relevant?

Does the suspected great underreporting of cases mean that the overall ratio of hospitalizations to cases could be actually lower than what it appears from the raw statistics? If so that would indicate an intrinsically less virulent disease ? (esp as it seems to be accepted that it is less effective at attaching to the cells in the lungs themselves) Or was there similar underreporting in earlier wages as well?

" Physicists Observe Incredible 'Quantum Tornados' Formed From Ultra-Cold Atoms" https://www.sciencealert.com/ultracold-atoms-form-tiny-tornadoes-as-classic-physics-gives-way-to-quantum-behavior and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04170-2 (Sorry about the formatting) Thought it might be interesting if anyone wanted to comment on what looks quite spectacular to this untrained eye

So the Sunshield has been deployed? Thst sounds good

I had ,,hopefully a layman's idea of formal logic Can it be viewed as there being one kind of logic that begets other kinds? One logic "to rule them all" so to speak or are you perhaps going to say that all we have is models?

Oh ,I see positive could be false and negative could be true(that it?) Or would positive/negative be neither true nor false? Already out of my depth ,but (perhaps off topic) is there any relationship I wonder between fuzzy logic and quantum computing? Fuzzy logic sounds to me like software and quantum computing like hardware. Would they be well suited if so?

Thanks ,but I have an aversion to computer studies I only mentioned computing because it seems to be joined at the hip with the concept of logic. I have come across the idea that there are some questions (or problems)that could only be answered if the universe was converted into a giant computer

Can it reasonably be said that the main limit is that logic can only show a negative and never a positive? If so are there any other limits?(computing capacity for one?)

No,I knew that Markus .You told us that but I still did a search on it.That is how I learn things sometimes. Sometimes,I may even think of a concept and just look it up to see if anyone has thought of it before(nothing of consequence, maybe even just a sequence of words)

I did a search on "gravitational fluid"(I do that as almost as a routine for something I don't understand ) and there was this mini video No idea what it is supposed to be. BTW ,is there any possibility that DM could be clouds of mini black holes formed in the very early days after BB?

Does this idea of yours make any predictions or any potential predictions? Can you take it any further in any way even though as you say this potential state is not computable even in principle?

Isn't the BB at T+ 10^-43 seconds? There would have been a time before then,wouldn't there? If you are talking about T=0 seconds then I think I see your point. Would that mean no beginning as well as no "prior"? Or is T=O just something we can say nothing about since the model breaks down then?

Oh yes,I did realize that I was just putting it out there,if "it" amounted to anything at all.

If Markus was right and DM was an emergent phenomenon would it by the same token be "observer related"? Seems absurdly improbable. (unless I have absurdly misunderstood,as per usual)

How is there no space?Does any network not presuppose distances between members,and a temporal ordering? But yes the passage from the very small and discrete to the large and seemingly continuous seems apt to be described as an "emergence",although it it is not "puff like" instantaneous since quantum effects persist into very large structures

Dark side of the Black Hole

A sort of "Cher effect"?

Maybe endless amusements for dolphins? Or to cook fusilli pasta?

That's a very inefficient way to turn a handle OK ,first sunny day we get I will look for the caustic light light caustics on my milky coffee. Thom was the name of our PE teacher.Maybe he was French.

Would the light find a way round ?(I have listened to a fair few Al Khalili documentaries so I know my stuff)

Maybe if the right circumstances applied.It could be entirely reproducible (my preference) and there would be a formal connection between the preceding and the subsequent arrangement. Obviously I am imagining. Wonder what your particle pairs are. How fundamental?(I mean what happens when they are more fundamental?)