MigL

The requirement for both, a classical theory of gravity, and a quantum field theory of gravity is that it is self-coupling. For a classical theory, like GR, stress-energy produces curvature in space-time, either static or travelling ( as in GWs ). This curvature of space-time is also a stress-energy and so, contributes to further curvature. IE gravity gravitates. In a quantum field theory, which is the only place you would expect to find gravitons, self-coupling means gravitons interact with gravitons. IE gravity gravitates. What exactly is the problem ?

An example of another type of logic which doesn't apply to the concept of God ? ( there are many )

I respect you too much not to give you the opportunity to explain, Zap... You have la belled Raider's misgivings an enormous strawman, and accusations of logical 'fallacies' get tossed about rather freely in the politics forum. Never does anyone explain what the error in logic is, that leads to the misguided fallacy. It is often simply used as a way to dismiss an opposing argument without analyzing the argument itself. I would like an explanation for labelling his argument a 'strawman', when it can be backed up by obvious examples. You do remember the 30000 people evacuated from the New Orleans flooding to the Superdome, and the ensuing chaos, after hurricane Katrina ? How did that work out ? And why do you think the situation would not be repeated at the border ? PS: I am an immigrant and have always been pro immigration. What is happening at you southern border could and should have been handled differently. ( but, hey, its YOUR country )

I probably wasn't very clear, JC. When light is climbing out of a gravitational potential well, it is also red-shifted. And to an external observer, who doesn't mind his frames, it also appears to be 'losing' energy ( as the OP implies is happening with light due to universal expansion ). But when frames are properly considered, there is no loss of energy. Globally, the concept of energy conservation is not valid. Markus Henke had explained it a while back ( but I'll be damned if I can find it ).

Yeah, but there are a lot of regrets associated with eating spicy foods. Usually the next morning when you go to the bathroom. ( too much information ? )

didn't take you for a guy that uses hair salons, Phi.

I don't know enough about superconductors. Maybe Swansont can answer your questions, or another member who is more knowledgeable about the subject. I just know not to jump to conclusions based on a limited amount of information.

Have changes in suicide rates been accentuated by the last 20-30 years of changes in Poland's society ? Were people of the former USSR sphere of influence expecting more from those changes ? As CharonY pointed out, pessimistic attitudes about life often go hand-in-hand with other negative or self-destructive attitudes/habits, such as heavy drinking. People tend to use drinking or other chemical means to forget about their problems, but usually end up wallowing in self pity, and make the situation worse. Nobody's life is perfect, but obsessing about life's problems leads to a downward spiral. Best to consider all the good things that bring you happiness and your life fulfillment. Maybe you need to make good on your promise to come back to Canada, and leave Poland's problems behind, my friend.

you are assuming too much regarding superconduction/entanglement ( possibly ). The entanglement of a Cooper pair simply means that the quantum state of each individual electron cannot be described independently, and this situation persists even after the pair are separated. IE entanglement continues even after superconductivity ceases, or until an interaction with one of the individual electrons forces a wave function collapse.

I just assumed a 'single' electron pair, and would think its speed would not be limited by any resistance to travel ( as in a vacuum ). But you're right, for superconductivity to be set up in the first place ( Meissner effect and expulsion of the magnetic field ) would necessarily involve more than a single Cooper pair. I don't know much about superconduction myself.

The graviton is a 'consequence' of the quantization of the gravitational field, as quantum field theory has, by necessity, a 'carrier' particle ( quantum ). Gravitational waves, on the other hand, are a consequence of GR; a strictly classical theory, involving no quantization, and no gravitons. IE, without a quantum field theory of gravity, there is no graviton. ( but since QG is postulated, the graviton is also postulated )

A superconductor is defined by the trivial resistance to electron travel. What is the maximum velocity of electrons in a vacuum ?

Bending space-time is simple enough; any amount of mass-energy will do it. A closed timelike curve is a different matter altogether. It is a path through space-time which involves apparent faster than light travel. It is usually accomplished by using a 'wormhole' to traverse great distances in little or no time, such that a relativistic trip lasting years, would happen in little or no time, resulting in time travel into the past equivalent to those years ( example by K Thorne ). Wormholes are not that simple, however !

Sunlight has a temperature around 5000 degK. Bright, sunshiny days make me happy. ( especially this time of year )

Where is the energy 'loss' when light is climbing out of a gravitational potential well ? As Swansont says, energy is frame dependent; you cannot make a measurement from a different frame and expect energy conservation to hold. No point in the universe is expanding or experiencing accelerated expansion ( strictly Hubble ) in its OWN frame. The expansion is only apparent from other frames. ( and globally, we and GR cannot say anything about energy conservation )

I may be re-evaluating my 'fit' on this forum ( politics in particular ), but I still read occasionally, and can't stand lack of comprehension ( on both sides ). The confusion arises because Conjurer hasn't bothered to look up the difference between virtual particles and 'random particle pairs'. Virtual particles exist on 'borrowed' energy, in accordance with the Uncertainty Principle. As such, they are not like real particle pairs and when their time is up, they annihilate without resultant photons. Real particle/anti-particle pairs require the emission of photons in accordance with momentum and energy conservation laws on annihilation. When an event horizon removes one of the virtual particles from consideration, the other ( of the pair ) must by necessity, become real. The 'borrowed' energy that created the virtual particles, must still be repaid back to the vacuum, by the mechanism which 'stole' the virtual particle, the Black Hole itself. If you do the energy 'accounting', the BH ends up losing exactly one virtual particle equivalent of mass-energy, and the universe outside the event horizon gains one real particle. That is Hawking Radiation. Notice that there is no link to the Holographic Principle, other than the fact that the entropy of the BH is encoded on the surface of the event horizon, and this entropy is linked to temperature of the BH, and the resultant Hawking Radiation.

You may close this thread down, Swansont. People are more interested in discussing my PERCEIVED political leanings rather than the subject of the OP. Or the fact that I appear dispassionate about murder ( when did I state that ! ) rather than the direction that J Keshoggi and the Crown Prince want to take Saudi society towards. Some even throw D Trump into every reply, implying an association, and then have the gall to post about false equivalence. Some people want to go through life 'seeing' only one viewpoint, the one that fits their sensibilities, and ignore/refuse to discuss any other. And then attach a convenient label to those holding those viewpoints, so they can be dismissed 'en masse' with a generalization. Sometimes the 'tolerance' for alternate views in the politics section amazes me. ( yes, its sarcasm ! )

Took the liberty of quoting the whole article from the NYTimes… ( read it if you are interested ) Jamal Khashoggi and the Competing Visions of Islam The growing tensions between Turkey and Saudi Arabia after the murder of the Saudi journalist in Istanbul remind us of an older conflict between monarchical and republican Islam. By Faisal Devji (Mr. Devji teaches history at the University of Oxford) Jamal Khashoggi’s murder by Saudi agents in Istanbul doesn’t just cast a harsh light on the authoritarian and reckless behavior of Prince Mohamad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia; it also highlights the rivalry between Turkey and Saudi Arabia, which represent competing forms of Islam. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy that allows Islam to define all social relations as long as it makes no political claims. Turkey, led by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party, is a republic whose government was brought to power by the votes of many conservative Muslims. Despite being an influential Saudi voice, Mr. Khashoggi had over the years embraced these competing visions of governance and the place of Islam in politics. He had been a loyal adviser to Saudi rulers, but he also, like Mr. Erdogan and his party, is widely believed to have subscribed to the Islamist ideal of power democratically achieved — an ideal represented by the Muslim Brotherhood. Edited by mod; see link below to read the whole article.

So you ( but mostly others ) think I should make an argument from emotion, rather than cold, hard facts ? Seems rather inappropriate for a SCIENCE forum.

You have a serious understanding problem, Rangerx.

I didn't get that meaning from re-reading my post. I said " I'm having trouble being too upset about the situation". Not that I wasn't upset at all, or even happy about it.

A simple google search of J Keshoggi and the Muslim Brotherhood will give you several articles about Keshoggi's leanings. He believed ( as does T Erdogan of Turkey ) that the ( Muslim ) Brotherhood is an expression of Muslim democracy. although things haven't gone too well where the Brotherhood has taken power. Sorry, INow, I like controversial topics. How upset are you when ISIL members with 'questionable viewpoints' get blown up ?

Journalist J Kashoggi was was allegedly ( well, pretty certainly ) killed in the Saudi embassy in Istambul, Turkey. This brazen act was carried out without much thought to deniability on the part of the Saudis, even evidence of the involvement of the Saudi Crown Prince might be forthcoming. What isn't being discussed is the fact that J Kashoggi was a 'hack' journalist, only interested in promoting the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood, and an extremely vocal critic of the Crown Prince, and his reforms. The Crown Prince, on the other hand, has introduced more progressive reforms to Saudi society in the last year than in the previous 100yrs. I realize the ends don't justify the means, but I'm having trouble being too upset about the situation. Your thoughts ?

I would be more worried if the Republicans get crushed in the midterms. This current President has enabled all the bat-shit crazies to act like total idiots, as demonstrated by today's events ( the mailings to the Obamas, Clintons, CNN, etc ). I can just imagine how they'll react if their 'hero' gets a slap-down in the midterms.

At my age, running is very hard on arthritic knees.