MigL

Rumor is the WP was all set to endorse Harris, but J Bezos quashed it because he's afraid of retribution should Trump win. Last I heard quite a few editors/reporters have resigned, and they've lost 200K subscribers. Maybe all these people who are afraid of Trump should help make sure he's not elected, instead of kissing his ass.

Whereas the Planck scale cut-off for the 'traditional' vacuum energy calculation is based on solid physical/mathematical reasoning, This proposed SU(3) scale cut-off is based solely on the U(1) symmetry being broken at low temperature, while SU(3) retains stability. No calculations are presented to back up the claim that SU(3) minimum scale occurs at proton scale ( even though quantum fluctuations below that scale make huge contributions to vacuum energy ), and then the dubious jump is made to claim the number of proton volumes in the observable universe is equivalent to the mis-match between observed and calculated vacuum energy. You are trying to construct a theory without providing the foundation, and while your goals may be admirable, skipping details only ensures that it comes crashing down. Since you liked the last video, I'll post another on the viability of the Planck scale cut-off ...

You can use dashed, or dotted, lines also ... There are many ways to illustrate the path taken by test particles in free-fall, through space-time, such that the path length is minimized. ( in the context of GR )

No, you're not old. I've seen all those things come and go also. Yet I had a dinner date with an attractive, intelligent, personable 38 year old woman on the weekend. We were silly, laughed and enjoyed each other's company; you would not believe how young this 65 year old man felt.

People who pay attention to the details, and think a little, didn't show up to vote, and a lot of them didn't think highly of the alternative either. People have to realize, especially young people and women, if you don't vote you get the Government old white men deserve. Get your ass out to vote, or it'll happen again. ( preaching to the choir, I know )

Either you don't understand the Holographic Principle, or you are misusing it.

The method described in the video uses the vacuum energy from quantum fluctuations, where we consider the maximum energy available in the smallest unit of measurable time ( according to the HUP ), in the smallest unit of measurable space. The OP decides to 'throw out' all quantum fluctuations below the volume of a proton ( equal to the SU(3) atom ). We know that there are quantum fluctuations below that scale, and that they contribute to the vacuum energy. Yet your pet theory says they don't, and we should believe it ? That was the issue with your 'early' posts; you tend to believe your 'logic' as opposed to actual observations. You can find other videos similar to the one I posted, at this site https://www.youtube.com/@PhysicsExplainedVideos/videos Most are very interesting and educational.

While the standard method for deriving the vacuum energy density involves harmonic oscillators and the Planck scale cut-off, the method utilized in the 2nd half of this video gives related critical reasoning for using the Planck scale cut-off. Using a cut-off of the SU()3) atom scale, approximately the size of a proton, would seem to ignore energy contributions from smaller scales, without a reasonable related explanation such as in the video. The fact that the SU\(3) atom scale happens to give numbers which seem to fit our needs is, then, finding relations where none exist, AKA numerology. ( Note that the method used in the video calculates the maximum Planck energy allowed in Planck time as per the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and, while simple to understand, may not be nuanced enough to consider factors which may reduce this maximum. )

Paerticle radioactivity, such as Alpha and Beta radiation, cannot be modulated on Electromagnetic radiation.

If you actually think that is the simplest, most likely explanation, and not just being unable to sleep because your subconscious is regurgitating your conscious thinking, maybe it would be wise to consult a mental health professional.

It was a loooong time ago, but I seem to remember the teacher comparing to even and odd numbers, and how two odds make an even, while two evens also make an even.

No arguments with any of the responses the OP got. But Come on !?! Don Rickles was hilarious !

I have never found the 'coin' type batteries, such as CR2032, to leak, and I have some computer motherboards that are >20 years old ( I keep them for 'sentimental' reasons 😃 ). Similarly, my key fob remote operated with a CR2032 for over 10 years, and didn't leak. What I have had 'leakage' issues with is the tube style AA, or AAA, type batteries in my Digital multi-meters. I have now started removing the batteries from my 'good' meters, and only keep them in the cheap Aneng meter ( which is cheap enough to be disposable ), but if I need a meter for mains, or higher, I need to replace batteries in the Fluke.

So, just to clarify ... ( this thread has moved fast ) Is the author's assertion that, if we do the harmonic oscillator calculation for vacuum energy, but, instead of using Planck scale cut-off, we instead use 'SU(3) atom' scale cut-off we would arrive at the actual vacuum energy, and not the inflated ( by 123 orders of magnitude ) value given by the Planck scale cut-off ? I do still question the validity of this SU(3) atom scale.

Did some reading about the Meissner Effect, and will agree that U(1) symmetry is broken at low temperature, leaving SU(3) symmetry to keep things stable, although I do have a further question ( below ). I am still not convinced about the fundamental size of the SU(3) building blocks being about the size of a proton, and would need some backing evidence. I am not agreeable at all to the comparison between fundamental SU(3) units and the orders of magnitude discrepancy vacuum 'catastrophe'. And others have similar concerns. If the fundamental SU(3) size remains constant ( so proton size prevents their decay ) then energy density drops as the universe expands. We are dealing with the observable universe here, are we not ? I am left wondering where the transition to SU(3) only stability took place. It would need to be fairly recent ( in cosmological scales ) as temperature and size would have kept U(1) symmetric and vacuum energy discrepancy even much larger. The Meissner Effect seems to me, a local symmetry break, not a global one. What evidence is there that U(1) symmetry is broken globally, to the extent of the observable universe ?

I really don't think K Harris can win this election, as there is no way some Americans can be convinced there is a better way, and not all Democrats are evil incarnate. However, if D Trump keeps spouting stupidities, and demonstrating his incompetence, pettiness and ill will towards those that don't agree with him, he may just alienate enough reasonably sensible Republicans that hands K Harris the win. I've got my fingers crossed ( and two 24s of Peroni beer, two trays of pizza, 8 lbs of hot Buffalo style chicken wings riding on it ) that half of America is not as stupid as D Trump.

A tariff IS a tax. When you buy something, nec209, who pays the tax ? Is your understanding of economics comparable to D Trump's ?

I would not use any sprays or liquids, but a little dab of Lithium grease on slide rails, gears, or other moving components ( NOT on/near the laser/diode ) probably won't hurt. The mechanism comes pre-greased where it is needed, and will probably last 20 years; just how long were you planning to keep your PS/2 Slim anyway ? ( I have Atari STs and Amiga 500s from the middle 80s where the floppy mechanisms still work )

I'm not sure I'm understandung this correctly. Albert is claiming that U91) symmetry is broken at temperatures of the present universe, as evidenced by the Meissner Effect. It is my understanding that the Meissner Effect is the (nearly ) total expulsion of magnetic fields from a superconductor, leaving only thr 'electrical effect; a sort of symmetry break of electromagnetism into electrical and magnetic components. But, if I recall Noether's Theorem, the symmetry would be electric charge and current conservation, such that the symmetry is broken when charge is not conserved. But I may be wrong, as I don't have a significant grasp of group theory. Regardless, the contention is that the only remaining symmetry is SU(3), and this implies a 'minimum volume' which is approximately the size of a proton. Never mind that the proton is a composite particle, which itself has much smaller features. But here is the real stretch. The number of estimated 'proton volumes' in the (observable, which is constantly changing in size ) universe happens to be closely related in magnitude to the discrepancy between the 'estimated from theory' vacuum energy and the 'derived from observation' value. And on this vague relation Albert has proceeded to base a theory on. This seems, to me, a non-sensical relation, as it smacks of numerology. Is there any evidence that this 'minimum SU(3) volume' is related to the proton volume, and further related to the vacuum energy discrepancy ?

Just to add to Markus' always excellent answers ... Energy is determined by the configuration of a system ( think potential energy ), so different configurations will have differing energies, even though the systems are comprised of the same individual parts. These differing energies have different contributions to the stress-energy tensor. IOW, two systems, comprised of the same individual objects, but arranged differently so as to have different energies, will have different gravity.

Ok, so this is the telepathic magic trick ? Bob a nd Alice are separated by a distance. Bob tells Alice he is going to measure a direction, and transmit the information to Alice 'telepathically'. He measures a spin up, and 'telepathically' communicates this information to Alice. Alice measures the spin of her entangled particle as down, and having received the 'telepathic' message from Bob, she knows that his spin is up. Alice then posts that Bob's spin is up, as she has received the 'telepathic' message. Is that what we are mow calling telepathy ? It might even fool Penn and Teller. ( yes, my niece was on that show, and she fooled them )

What do you mean ? The crashes are much bigger ?

Random number generators are not random; they do eventually repeat. The example you describe uses that mathematical knowledge to predict which 'random' number will come up next. If that is pseudo-telepathy, then this belongs in pseudo-science.

In the old days we used to click on 'disconnect USB device' to allow the HD to park the heads, before disconnecting. I don't think I've done that in the last 20 years. Is your drive not working ? Doesn't seem like you bumped it too hard. If it makes weird noises when you plug it in, you may have crashed it. If it sounds normal, but doesn't show up, try going into disk management to re-enable/re-partition/re-format. Or you can, try opening it and checking any internal connections that may have come loose.

You are more than welcome, but you'll have to put up with me talking your ear off about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for the 4 years.