MigL

I thought you were going to ask about the incident where Suarez bit Chellini ( Italian defender ). Suarez may be a good player , but he lacks ethics and sportsmanship.

All observed Gamma ray bursts are directional in nature. That is because they are caused by the influx of rotating ionized material as supernovae clollapse into Black Holes or neutron stars. The polar jets are produced perpendicular to the plane of accretion. Other classes of Gamma ray bursts are produced from mergers of neutron stars, and are similarly directional, because of orbital motion. The Gamma ray burst from the end-of-life explosion/evaporation of a microscopic Black Hole would not be directional, as there is no rotating infalling ionized material to produce polar radiation. It would most likely be an omni-directional burst, and as far as I know, none of the sort have been observed.

The problem is that Black Holes have entropy, and therefore a characteristic temperature and associated black body radiation, also known as Hawking radiation. Most Black Holes are greater than stellar size, and very cool. much less than the CMB radiation, but as they get smaller ( or start out much smaller, even microscopic ), their temperature increases dramatically, and the radiation emitted is more energetic. Eventually, when small enough, they don't have the mass to support an event horizon, and essentially de-collapse in a large explosion of highly energetic radiation. This Gamma ray burst would be the tell-tale of a microscopic Black Hole's final evaporation. If we know the size of a Black Hole, even primordial ones, we can compare to the CMB as it cooled, and we can estimate how long it would take for microscopic Black Holes to evaporate, and it turns out that primordial microscopic Black Holes would have evaporated by now. IOW, as we look out into the universe, and back in time, we should be seeing the tell-tale Gamma ray bursts that are the last gasps of these primordia; black holes that formed in the high energy densities shortly after the Big Bang. None have ever been recorded.

If someone shuld choose not to get vaccinated because they don't trust the fools who run the Government, what protection does everyone else have, when that unprotected person goes grocery shopping ? Or to work ? Or any other part of normal life ?

But aren't we assuming that length contraction is not just an illusion? In that case, when you and I say "see it in a different position" doesn't this really mean, "is in a different position"? Whether the contraction is real or not, does not really matter. For an observer in the object's rest frame, there is no contraction. For observers in any other frame there could be contraction. What makes contraction 'real' to those other observers is the fact that Relativity deals with the speed of light, which is also the speed of information. Any information you observe from a relativistic contracted object supports that contraction. That means any forces/interactions, or other effects will also manifest as if the object is contracted. IOW, for that observer, who sees relativistic contraction ( or time dilation ) the object is effectively contracted. Again, this is why frames matter. Until you wrap your head around the fact that different frames give differing observations, and all are equally valid ( no preferred frame ), you don't understand Relativity. From now on, when you mention an observational effect ( like your Muon example ), I expect you to specify which frame this effect is being observed from.

If you place your finger about a foot away from your face, and you look at it with one eye closed, you see it in a certain position relative to the background. If you then close the open eye, and open the other one, you see your finger in a different position relative to the background. Do you think your finger moved ??? Is it in two places at once ??? Is that a superposition of ststes ??? Or is it simply your viewpoint that has changed ?

I thought you said you understood relativity ... Something cannot be relative to itself. The particle has different positions ( and times ) relative to different observers. Each observer, in a different frame, sees the particle in a different position ( and at a diferent time ). That is why frames of reference are so important.

We can't turn them away from hospitals when theyeventually contract Covid, but we can certainly 'punish' them in ways that makes it inconvenient to not get vaccinated. A lot of viral diseases have been eradicated by forcible childhood immunization; you had to get vaccinated to attend elementary school. Did you forget that ? If you are willing to wear an ankle bracelet, stay in your home, and not come in contact with anyone, then by all means, don't get vaccinated. But if you intend to go to movies, restaurants, or even grocery shopping, where you might come into contact with people who have upheld their part of the social contract, then you'd better follow suit. And that goes for your family, and others, who may be exposed to you.

If that means what I think it means, then you have at last, hit the nail fair square on the head. Here, I give you a like!! Then we don't agree on this Beecee. Everyone has the right to expect help, even if they don't do their part. But they should expect a 'punishment' of some sort, if they don't. Would Dimreepr have posted that line if we were discussing welfare recipients ?? Dmreepr should know that drug users are prosecuted ( and arrested ) for illegal drug use, yet they are not turned away at hospitals for complications with illegal drug use.

The 'duration' and 'length' of an event, in relativity, is equivalent to the projection on the spatial and temporal axis, of its rest frame ( proper ) length and duration. This projection is different for different observers, depending on their position on the spatial/temporal axis. IOW, depending on the speed ( and vice versa ). The frame has no physical effect, nor does it change anything directly. It is simply the point of view of the observer, taking his circumstances into consideration. It is similar to measuring your shadow in a North facing frame, as opposed to a south facing frame. In the first you will measure your shadow to be very long because the sun is at your back, while in the second, you will be facing the sun , and will see little, or no shadow.

Just about everything you've said. And people have been telling you for two pages already, but you simply ignore them and go on. That's no way to learn anything ...

Again, you are ignoring frames of reference. For an 'external' observer, the relativistically moving Muon has its time dilated, allowing it to reach the surface of the Earth. For an observer travelling along with the Muon, the distance to the surface of the Earth is contracted, allowing the Muon to reach the surface. The two FoR give differing observations of distances and durations, as measured from those particular frames. That is what people have been telling you in all of your threads. You do not understand the 'block' universe model, where an observer in a particular FoR sees a foliation, or slice, of the 4d hypercube, yet you keep bringing it up. Nor do you understand Relativity as you don't seem to grasp the importance of FoRs. Maybe you should start from the beginning and ask what happens in specific circumstances, instead of telling us what you think happens.

Energy of a system can never get to negative infinity ( whatever that means ); it can't even get to zero because of Quantum mechanical effects. Your 'logic' is mathematically flawed. What exactly is it based on ? Not good enough, Joigus; Ragingmoron hears Jesus' voice in his head ...

No such thing as perfect spheres. The amount of water on the Earth can't store much heat; after several billion years, most of the Earth's interior is still molten. Again, Studiot's first question is still the most pertinent ... Where is the evidence ?

In Canada, I can be fined for not wearing a seatbelt while operating a motor vehicle. It is a public safety issue, as seatbelts save lives. Why should I not be fined if I refuse to get vaccinated ????

You can be charged and convicted of negligence or involuntary manslaughter even if you do it unwillingly. If you chose to ignore quarantine rules, vaccinations, or even mask mandates, are you not being negligent ? This is a common theme I find myself coming back to ... Why do your rights ( not to be vaccinated ) supersede my rights ( to not get sick from you ) ?

People are incarcerated all the time for being a danger to the rest of society. They lose their right to freedom. It may be an unpopular opinion, but rights are not inherent, you are not born with them; they are granted by the society you live in. ( just ask a woman in Saudi Arabia, or a Uyghur in China ) At the beginning of the pandemic, If I were contageous, I could have killed more people in a nursing home than with a fuly loaded Glock 17, because with a virus, you don't run out of ammunition. So what is the difference.

I see you chose to ignore his first question ... Care to try again ? Or is this simply a WAG ?

Not exactly based on a novel ( script ? ), but C Nolan's movie, Interstellar, would seem to fit admirably. Based on ideas by K Thorne when he was consulting on the movie, Contact, and later adapted into a screenplay by C Nolan's brother Jonathan. It is 'accompanied' by a book by K Thorne, The Science of Interstellar. Koti's suggestion, R L Foreward's Dragon's Egg, provides excellent insight into effects around strongly gravitating objects ( neutron star ) and is a great read that I also highly recommend, but it doesn't provide for passages to elsewhere, or elsewhen.

No, it's more like ... A - There are only red , green and blue LEDs for each pixel of my TV. B - But I perceive yellow, magenta and cyan, so there must be more. A - No, those are variations/combinations of the three basics. B - But that is how I perceive them. Why must you be so mean, and not consider my feelings over your reality? And I didn't even call you any names. I was going to tell Dimreepr to 'go f**k himself' but he said he already does that with a turkey baster 😄 😄 . ( It's a difference of opinion people, lighten up ! )

Thank you for your well thought out response, CharonY. On the other hand, actual scientists seem to only consider two sexes ... Scientists Genetically Edit Mice To Have Female Only Litters With 100 Percent Efficiency (msn.com) All of the qualities I mentioned were also environment related. Blinders much ?

Read your linked article; thanks for posting. I don't think I'll ever understand the papers that have led to these conclusions, but they seem to rely on 'mathematical tricks', somewhat similar to renormalization, to make sense of the non-sensical. But if these tricks, such as entanglement entropy and quantum extremal surfaces inside event horizons, point us in the right direction and towards a quantum field theory of gravity ( like Hawking did with his 'semi-quantum' evaporative radiation ) so much the better.

The quark model was proposed by Gell-Mann and Zweig in 1964, as part of a classsification system known as the 'eight-fold way'. The criteria for sorting quark 'flavors' was estabilished long before any experimental evidence for quarks. IOW, the 'purpose' of the quark model demands that they have the flavors dictated by SU(3) symmetry, just as reproduction model of the human species dictates the sorting into male/female sexes. Neither is sufficient on its own, and any other sorting is superfluous. What is the purpose/reason for extra sex classifications ? ( and thanks for making a lier out of me; I said the previous would be my only post on the matter )

I think we can all agree that for the purpose of reproduction of the species ( human, that is ), only two sexes are needed. One is not enough, and three ( or more ) are superfluous. That doesn't mean that there are not people who don't fully fit into the male, or female, grouping; but for the criteria of reproduction, there is no third ( or 4th, or 5th ) category to place them in. One has to ask, then, what is the purpose ( or agenda, if you will ) for having more than the male and female sex classifications. Please explain. Thank God he's not Mexican, or you'd imply he was lazy. Or Oriental and a bad driver. Or Italian and a mobster. Can you see what is wrong with that line of thinking, Stringy ? I had hoped this thread had died, because I really don't like having people I consider friends call each other 'dicks', or make thinly veiled implications of transphobia, homophobia or racism, so this will be my only post on this thread. But I would like an answer ( I will still read ) as to WHY a third sex is needed, and what is the PURPOSE of the differentiation. Is more 'separation' really desirable to more 'inclusion' ? Is this just another social engineering exercise ? Is it to make some people, who feel 'different', feel better about themselves ? What am I not seeing ?

I would assume by 'ocean of energy' that gave rise to 'matter' after the inflationary period, he means the radiation dominated era that gave rise to the matter dominated era.