Jump to content

EWyatt

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-1 Poor

About EWyatt

  • Rank
    Meson

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    physics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Aaaargh! What does that even mean! As much as we say that we know little about BHs, some sure spout a lot. Perhaps if some tried less to sound sooo intellectual, we could have a conversation. First off, we know little about what's past the event horizon, so why talk about the density within? For all we know, the "inside" of the event horizon could hide a super neutron (or quark) star just heavy enough with actual matter to suck in light and other EMs. Some say the singularity inside has "infinite density." WTH! "Infinite" density would mean the entire universe would have to be a black hole singularity. And if each black hole has "infinite" density, or close to it, how can any other black hole be bigger (heavier) than the other if they were "equally infinitely dense?" Can one infinity be bigger than its sister infinity? "Have a density less than that of water?" Yeah, I've read that before too but how can that be proven? Does the area just inside a BH constitute matter or just a "space" where outside matter like rogue spaceships or bodies of scientists whiz by on their way to the "infinite" singularity? If it's just a "space" how can it weigh like water; if it's matter (it's probably not) then "weigh like water," really? And if it's not space or matter, then..... OK, thanks for the venting opportunity. Bottom line: Speculation about the inside of BHs should be just that -- speculation. But it shouldn't be: pseudo-scientist 1, black holes have extreme density thus preventing even light from escaping, and pseudo-scientist 2, large BHs have a density like that of water.
  2. Not "all of this to happen again" but our self awareness (self conscious being, our life!) could happen again. It only seems logical: if our self-conscious life happened once due to pure physics, why not again in another time, another universe perhaps, given the right prescription of physics again.
  3. I agree with most of your comments, but "afterlife" isn't really what I wrote about. My point was that if we are here now, why not again. If physics can get us here this time, why not again?
  4. Afterlife? The thing is, we're here now, and if it can happen once, it can happen again. That, I believe, is the key to "afterlife" no matter if our "next" life happens a millisecond or 100 trillion years after this one. I don't believe we can dispute the "if it happened once it can happen again" concept.
  5. Thanks, StringJunky -- good info. There's hope that our portion of the lateral lines will be producing, and paying! Besides, it makes sense to use the entire line.
  6. A general question about the oil/gas fracking process: Is the lateral line of a well usually fracked (and providing production) along almost the entire length of the lateral line or just the far end? Example: we have 9 lateral lines, each a half mile long, originating from a neighbor's acreage and extending to another neighbor's land. We're in the middle. Can we assume that oil/gas production is coming from under our land also, or are we just granting access? Note: we're in the Eagle Ford formation in Karnes County, Texas.
  7. Must be true, yet that doesn't jive with the fact that it takes the site at least a few milliseconds to analyze the incoming password and provide a reject comment. How can all that happen thousands or millions of times per second. Or perhaps I don't understand how it all works....
  8. I'm not exactly sure what your question is, but here are my thoughts. I think that the current scientific standard on the universe, big bang timing, the first 380,000 years, etc., is as good as it gets, due to the overwhelming agreement of the scientific world. Scientists always try to disprove their counterparts, but we are left with the result of that, and we have consensus. Second, the word "infinite" should be outlawed, especially when related to tangible concepts. When related to "size" or matter, it's ridiculous. How can anything be infinitely small or large or dense?! Illogical. When someone says that a black hole's singularity is infinitely dense, that's crazy! If anything were infinitely dense, then the entire universe and beyond would be a black hole singularity or more! And the universe cannot be infinitely large because of "space" beyond its expanded boundaries. Propeller heads will rationalize otherwise, but that's all it is. Time is another matter though. Who knows, but I feel that time is a measurement between two or more events, which need energy or matter. Since energy or matter cannot be infinite, can time be? I don't know. This doesn't answer your question but let's me get out some lingering thoughts.
  9. We're told to use strong passwords, yada, yada... It must be true, since hackers successfully get past the password walls all the time. My question is how! Sites ask for our passwords to get in, we supply them, and the site spends "some" time evaluating them for accuracy. If inaccurate, the site asks again, or gives us a few more tries, which takes even more time. Seems to me that using brute force to get a correct password would take days (or more) of trying to get in, considering the time sites evaluate those incoming passwords. Even using automated software to guess moderately strong passwords must take a LOT of time due to the site's time to evaluate them. What am I missing? Do hackers indeed spend days (or more) just trying to get into a site? Don't they have a life?
  10. Sorry for simply being "typical," which explains the reason I asked. I only wanted others' opinions. But being atypical, you supplied an answer that makes sense: that those African apes took a different evolutionary direction from all the other apes in the world. And that surely doesn't make their homeland a sweet spot. Oh no. EW (they) A good, solid answer, Thanks. The next question could be: why didn't other apes evolve as he Africans did. Environment, chance, slight genetic differences... etc? But I'm afraid to ask, here.
  11. My first posting in this forum, so.... The consensus is that humans (sapiens) slowly made their way out of Africa around 100K years ago (or so) and eventually populated the Earth. Considering that mammals survived the KT extinction around 66 MYA and were present worldwide, why wouldn't they evolve likewise throughout the planet, as they did in Africa apparently. Or perhaps they did (though I haven't read about it) considering the many different "races" in the world today. Why would Africa be the only sweet spot? Or could it be that there WERE other Homo "evolutions" worldwide, but natural selection edited the others out somehow and left Africa as the only birthplace of Homo Sapiens. This may be an over-simplistic question, but it's all I've got for now. Help! EW
  12. Uh, so our universe could be "infinite" in size, but there would be room for other universes anyway?? Does that pass the logic or physics test?
  13. Airbrush, I think your post was less about the Fermi Paradox than about your (leftist) politics. Get a life. However, Gutfeld should have spoken about something he actually had reasonable information on rather than just dorky blather. EW
  14. Thanks, StringJunky, for the reply. I'll keep it plugged in (mostly) all the time. The laptop has an SSD so that should be a plus for heat production, I think... Regards. EW
  15. I purchased a new Dell Inspiron 13, 5000 series, laptop jewel. The battery may be tough to replace eventually, so..... Will I improve (or hurt) the battery by keeping the laptop plugged in ALL the time from the start, or are charge/discharge cycles necessary? Thanks. EW
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.