MigL

Isn't formic acid ( HCOOH ) naturally produced by ants ? But why kill the poor creatures ? Ants follow trails of pheromones which are left by previous ants; that's why they follow winding trails across your floor. Wipe the floor with a mild bleach solution and they lose their way, so they don't come back to the same place.

In 1930 P A M Dirac proposed the 'Dirac Sea', as the relativistically consistent Dirac equation required an equal ( infinite ) number of negative energy states as there are positive, and keep electrons from descending into ever lower energy states without limit. This 'sea' was full of negative energy electrons, and if one was missing it could be considered a positive 'electron', or positron, which was later observed by C Anderson. The Dirac sea interpretation has been replaced by a QFT for the electron, but is that what you had in mind ?

I like to sip good vodka. I don't put drugs in my eyes anymore, but I am on a light blood pressure drug. If any woman is willing to 'engage' with this single old man I am usually agreeable. I'm one of the laziest people I know. Just what are you implying ... 😄 😄

Something @Dhillon1724X should keep in mind ... These fundamental particles ( gauge bosons and fermions, virtual or otherwise ) are the Lego blocks we use to build our models. These models act in accordance to what we observe and measure in reality, in specific areas of application, and invariably all fail outside that area of applicability. ( because reality is not composed of Lego blocks, so we will never observe a 'free' quark and may never observe a graviton ) What observations/experiments do you have that would lead you to think hi-energy photons would 'collapse' to gravitons ? Is this just a mathematical exercise ( as verified by an AI ) unrelated to the physics ? If so, it might be worth exploring ( without the AI ) for your own personal benefit, but it will never be a 'good' theory which models some aspect of reality.

IF gravitons exist, they have an energy density and momentum, both of which gravitate, or bend/curve space-time. These quantum particles are the requirement of quantum field theories, such as QED and QCD. Unless we have a quantum field theory of gravity, we don't have gravitons.

This is absolutely right, however ... When the energy density exceeds the Planck energy within a Planck volume You have gravitational collapse, and an event horizon is formed. I don't know what effect the collision of two hi-energy photons, to produce the required greater than Planck energy density, would produce, but I would assume the momentum simply adds to the energy density to produce the gravitational collapse. Accepted Physics has a mechanism for this. What mechanism do you propose for the creation of a hypothetical particle, the Graviton, which may not actually exist ?

OOPS ! Sorry reading comprehension issues. I had thought you posted we could see galaxies farther back in time than the (origin of ) CMBR, and you had written both in millions of years ( you hadn't ). But observing further back, whether using neutrino emissions or gravitational wave detection, will not be possible for a while, and most certainly will nor observe galaxies.

If you ask an ill-posed question to an AI, it will give a reasonable sounding answer, and lead you down a rabbit hole with erroneous backing evidence. The advice given by Joigus is sound ( as always ). Try not to be so thin-skinned in science; a big part of critical thinking is criticising. I, myself, find the question "what if light is the source of everything" ill posed, as lead-up to explain a particle which may not exist if the gravitational field cannot be quantized. That's not to say that this a useless exercise, as it will teach you limits of your ( and the AI's ) knowledge such that you can expand it.

Ahh, nice. I find ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern history interesting also. And he didn't want to follow in dad's footsteps, which to be honest I find very boring also, after working with chemicals for 38 years. ( although it has provided me with a good living )

That doesn't make sense. The CMBR represents the limit to which we can see into the past, as it is when atoms were able to combine and make the universe transparent from its previous plasma state. If that is at 380 million years after the BB event, there is no way to see further to 280 million years after BB. The observable universe is usually given as a radius or diameter, beyond which there is no causal connection to us on earth, so we can never know any information about it. Due to various rates of expansion throughout its history , the universe has had various horizons, where distant galaxies, now visible, will red-shift and become invisible at times in the future due to accelerating expansion. If we assume that prior to inflation the universe was in causal contact, to guarantee homogeneity and isotropy, such that its size was approximately equal to the speed of light times its age, then inflation, as per A Guth, would have started at 10-37 sec after the BB event and inflated the universe such that, at present, the entire universe has a size of at least 1.5x1034 light years, which is 3x1023 times the radius of the observable universe. These assumptions, and A Guth's theory, place a lower limit on the size of the entire universe, for the finite but unbounded case, although it could also be infinite.

Are you kidding? Nobody works in Italy. I must have missed it, and Congrats to him and you. What program did he graduate from ?

Not a good idea. What keeps the globe from rolling and your papers getting scattered all over ? You came close to a disastrous paper mess. Sarcasm; not too good so I thought I'd explain.

I would argue the true 'paperless office' doesn't exist ( and probably never will ). We just have digital copies in addition to paper; digital is easier/faster to work with, but we archive with paper. And before buying online we used to buy by phone; the business model wasn't as attractive because of the manpower required to man the phone lines. This discussion would be much more interesting if we included sci-fi 'predictions' of the near future. I myself, am waiting for a terminator to show up to kill me, as in 25 years I lead the resistance against the merged offspring of ChatGPT and Gemini, called GeminiPT which invented time travel.

We don't discuss 'beliefs' here. This is a science forum. Accepted theory, facts, and observations are what we discuss. Not unsupported daydreams.

And some people believe that God created the universe ... and they, like you, have no evidence to support their beliefs either. Come back when you want to discuss facts and evidence ... NOT beliefs.

One of my favorite movies. He's not rehabilitated at all; he's still committing illegal and criminal acts, only now he's got Presidential immunity.

Are you saying the American justice system doesn't provide for rehabilitation ? If not, then what is the point of it ? If you want to keep them from making a living, and separate from society, after serving their rehabilitating sentence, then you might as well kill them, or ship them off to a country in Central America, or Africa, never to be heard from again ( seems a popular idea with the American Government ).

Position and time are relative quantities; they change with speed and depth in a gravity well; Inertial mass does not. Re you proposing discarding relativity ? As Swansont and Studiot have pointed out, spinning objects conserve angular momentum as radial position changes. Are you proposing discarding such conservation laws ?

Every day I read the news about what your jackass President has now done, whether it be tariffs, kidnapping people and deporting them, ending aid to Ukraine, bombing Iran, trying to annex other countries territory, forcing through one 'Big Beautiful' bill, ending birthright citizenship, etc., and it makes me angry for the rest of the day. Not just at D Trump, but all his Secretaries/advisors, Republican backers, and all the voters who still support him. I realize I'm becoming an angry hater, just like all his supporters; and I don't want to be like them.

Keep in mind that Gravitons ( and other quantum particles ) arise from quantizing field theories, as in QED and QCD. So far, Gravity has firmly resisted all attempts to quantize anything that could be interpreted as its field ( such as LQG quantizing space-time geometry ). If gravity cannot be quantized, there is no requirement for Gravitons, in the model or in 'reality'. If it 'breaks under pressure', this idea is not wasted time, as it improves your research skills and your critical thinking.

Both ... Which makes GR a very accurate model for applications of this type.

Wouldn't it be sweet if it turns out that P Hegseth or T Gabbard had leaked the intelligence files through one of their many Signals chats on private phones. The US is being run by morons, and people with no balls are allowing them to.

Decreasing the radius of the Earth while keeping the mass unchanged will increase density and gravitational acceleration; this is termed gravitational collapse. When the radius reaches R=2GM/c2 we will have reached the Schwarzschild radius, where the gravitational acceleration is equivalent to the speed of light, and an Event Horizon is formed, resulting in a Black Hole. This gravitational collapse cannot happen for a mass the size of the Earth; it only happens to stars about an order of magnitude more massive than our Sun, when these stars have exhausted their nuclear fuel, and radiation pressure cannot support against gravitational collapse. But just for interest's sake, you would have to compress the Earth to a radius of about 9 mm ( give or take, as it would be spinning incredibly fast, so not true Schwarzschild ) to form a Black Hole from the Earth's mass.

This is a variation of H Everett's Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, where each decision/observation/interaction 'creates' a new universe that time evolves differently from the previous. Understand that this is an interpretation of the theory; a way to 'make sense' of the counter-intuitive aspects of QM. This has also been proposed for time travel paradox, where the decision to kill your grandfather splits off a new universe in which you were never born. The only difference that you are proposing is that infinite numbers of universes are pre-existing, there is no splitting due to decision/observation/interaction, and travel between universes and time is accomplished, rather, by wormholes. K Thorne also has very specific rules about wormholes and how Closed Time-like Loops are allowed to be used for time travel, within the framework of GR.

Anyone who 'thinks' they understand Quantum Mechanics will agree with you. Quantum Mechanics tells us the 'world' consists only of time evolving wave functions of probability amplitudes, in a superposition of states; IOW, no local reality. It is only when these wave functions interact, or we make an observation, that they collapse to single states and we perceive that as 'reality'. You don't think QM is a simulation, do you ?