studiot

I owe you both an apology for my poorly drafted wording that I agree is totally confusing. Here is a better version. A simpler example than extrapolating back in time is to consider Charles Law. The volume of an ideal gas is directly proportional to its absolute temperature. V = aT where a is the constant of proportionality that depends upon the units employed for V and T. Therefore putting T = 0 into this equation yields V = 0 Therefore the volume of an ideal gas is zero at absolute zero. Now this is a suprising and disturbing result which shows the danger of extrapolating. Note also that I said an ideal gas. Real world gases do not obey this law at some low enough temperature, although for some gases, such as the ones Charles studied, it is pretty good at normal temperatures. Cosmology and cosmological equations are in the same state Physics was in the 18th century, or even less developed. I hope this helps.

No, I'm sorry I missed out the quote from the bottom of your posts. http://thescienceforum.org

B is much better. With A There is a twist on the screws and if they are of conventional thread this will offer a constant unscrewing force tending to work the screws a bit loose. Also with A the shear transfer is by friction from the clamping force between the plates any relaxation of which will tend to loosen the timber and cause sag at the loaded end. Edit I would also add a small triangular gusset underneath the bottom metal support. @iNow I see you are advertising these people and I had a look but couldn't get past the cookie blog. Are they still active ?

No we didn't notice the boom. We only learned about it from the News. Then I wondered if it was due the the volcanic eruption in Iceland. The last one (2010) could apparently beheard in the UK.

You keep repeating this like a mantra, but have not answered anyone's questions about the detail. The devil is in the detail and also in the fact that you are using conventionally defined terms quite differently from convention. One more thing. To have a beginning or end time (or any axis) must work on Poincare measure (ie the graduations of the scale get smaller and smaller as you approcah those points so you never actually reach them. This is similar to why we can't reach absolute zero of 'temperature', which is when incidentally an ideal gas has zero volume ie occupies zero space so exists as space time without space for as long as the gas is at absolute zero.

What on Earth do you mean in relation to this thread ?

You are the one making the claims, so you are the one who needs to provide proof. t0 and x0 are just points on a line. Mathematically I can extend the lines indefinitely in both directions and there is no mathematical reason that they must coincide. So my question remains.

I don't see an answer to my question to you.

No, the tide comes in and out under a sabkha crust. (Although the tide is the Red Sea is very small, especially by my standards in Somerset) The point is that the seawater is fully even super saturated with salts and minerals so the sabkha material cannot dissolve and forms a strong solid crust on the surface. In normal conditions this crust is so strong that the locals drive races up and down on it as it is very flat and even. But flash floods are formed from rainwater, which is fresh. This extra water runs floods down the wadi and empties into the sea where it dilutes the seawater enough to dissolve some salt out of the sabkha, collapsing its structure. And no I was not caught out, I was the one sent down to extract some colleagues who had inadvisedly driven out onto it, just before a flash flood.

But does it ? Certainly not according to the rules. The next event prescribed in the rules is that the ball must strike the table top in B's court plus a list of things it must not do. Before this happens, B is not allowed to strike, touch or influence the ball in any way so cannot be said to 'have the ball'. It is just not his ball yet. The correct sequence is that A strikes the ball, the ball strikes the table top and then B strikes the ball. In the period between A striking the ball and the ball striking the table top neither player has the ball. And if the ball does not strike the table top ie misses or spins back over the net then A looses the point. So the correct sequence is 1) The ball strikes the table top on B's side and B then 'has the ball' and retains the ball until he strikes it. 2) From B striking the ball to the ball striking the table top on A's side neither player 'has the ball'. 3) If The ball then strikes the table top on A's side, A 'then has the ball', until he strikes it. and so on. The middle event, (2) may well take bar far the longest time in a rally.

Yes it could happen and indeed there are many examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater_lake But this also does not address the issue of the deluge I mentioned before. Remember that the Bible was written by people used to dry semi desert and desert conditions. It has been suggested both here and in the article I linked to that any flood was local to the people concerned. From personal knowledge of the region I know that in the summer rainy season the area is subject to local flash floods to this day. But these are of very short duration. Have you heard of sabkha ? I had an interesting experience with this apparantly dry land by the Red Sea in 1976? In the last two decades we have gained a new understanding of the 'ocean conveyor'. This is the fact that the ocean current systems all link up to one giant circulatory system that moves water around the globe. Air currents and winds are driven by this and tend to follow the distribution. So is our whole climatic system. Not that far to the east of the middle east lies the indian sub and southy east asian sub continents. These are subject to an annula monsoon deluge. Another hypothesis is that one year perhaps a glitch in the ocean currents moved the monsoon west causing some sort of flood. The possibility is worrying as changes to the ocean conveyor could dramatically change our climate.

This is not what I meant. Let us call the players A and B. Suppose A strikes the ball. So at that point A clearly 'has the ball' and B does not. Now consider an infinitesimal instant after A has struck the ball. A is not allowed to strike the ball again or in any way further influence its trajectory. So does A still 'have the ball ?

Yes that is the difficulty. I think there is a period when neither player 'has the ball'

Please define

Unless you have/had a hidden agenda, the stated (by yourself) topic of this thread is about the Science or scientific basis of Noah's Flood as represented in the Bible and to a lesser degree as referred to in other ancient writings. What on Earth does circumcision have to do with this ?

Yes and no. Yes this is the principle of the magnetic impellor in a central heating pump. No you can't get something for nothing. You would need sufficient current to be flowing in the cabling for the magnetic coupling.

It is off topic.

Are you sure that is what you were actually told ? Was your source actually saying that the speed of light is invariant ? I said that the speed of light was measured at 300,000,000 m/s. But you could change the units so that it is exactly 1. You would of course not be measuring distance in metres and time in seconds. Please note there is an important difference between absolute, constant, and invariant. Do you know what this is ?

Are these installations because there is no available generator and how do they compare with a wind turbine ?

I am not sure, reading through this, whether Mitko means that there is a separate magnetic field due to the wire whether there is a current or not OR that he means that the when there is a current in the wire the this generates amagentic field which is one of the two fields he says interacts It seems to me there are two obvious questions that the OP needs to answer to clarify this What force is there if there is a wire but no current + the external field ? What force is there is there is a current but no wire + an external field ?

Well a long time ago the largest, (most massive) body that started drawing smaller material towards itself to form the proto-earth had a much smaller gravitational field. As first the pieces coalesced there must have been a period of rapid increase in gravity. This is the most likely mechanism for the emergence of a planet sized object, scooping into itself smaller chunks of matter local to itself and thus growing at the expense of other matter in its immediate vicinity. Further material would accumulate from (smaller) passing meteorites, comets etc. Eventually the locality would be swepts largely clean and a sort of equilibrium would be established where the planet's gravity did not change much over time. Changes would now occur due to the decreasingly frequent capture of passing meteoric material and the loss of mass due to nuclear decay of the planet's own material. This is the stage we are in today. One difficulty with the Tsunami theory is that (at least) the Bible claims a prolonged deluge that preceeded the flood. A Tsunami does not offer an explanation for this - prolonged rain can happen after a Tsunami, rather than before. Note this does not rule it out, just highlight something that needs further explanation.

Tippe Tops are made as toys, there is plenty on google about them, here is a youtube video. But remember it is not generally eccepted that this happened. Given that we do not fully understand the Earths core dynamo, it has been suggested that flipping just the core causes the magnetic reversals. But remember there is much we do not know and there is not enough evidence to confirm either proposal. What did you think of the Christian website modern interpretation ?

Just because you would like it to be true doesn't validate this statement. In fact quite the reverse situation is true. The peak of scientific effort being directed towards revealing details of a 'designer' occurred between 100 and 300 years ago and has been declining ever since. Today it is probably at an all time low point. Hello Mender, I see the relevence of your "nom de forum". Nice. I'm sorry that this thread has been allowed to wander far and wide off the stated topic which is a valid question on a scientific forum concerning what we know about geological history. Indeed I admit to veering off myself when you introduced the proposal of intelligent design. Sadly you chose to challenge my additional comment suggesting we leave discussion about belief systems rather than answer my point as I asked when you responded. So my point and question as noted in my first quote still stands unanswered by your response quoted below. So let us return to your original question aboud Noah's Flood. Firstly you might be more comfortable with this explanation that arguing with 'aethists (which I am not) or about intelligent design. Here is a link and the beginning of the article You also seem prepared to listen so here is an interesting unconventional but scientific explanation of the 'Flood'. It is a known (in modern times) fact of mechanics that a spinning top has two stable positions and can flip between them, so that the spin axis reverses itself. There is a proposal that at some time past this happend to the Earth so that the North and South poles of the mechanical spin axis interchanged. (Please note this is not the magnetic pole reversals which are quite a different phenomenon) Peter Warlow wrote a book about it called The Reversing Earth, which suggests this sudden flip caused whateve water there was to slosh around the globe like a giant tidal wave. Note again it is not generally accepted that it did happen, but it is accepted that it could happen within current scientific knowledge.

If things are really as bad as painted, it's funny how many Mexicans want to get into the US, and that number is rising again.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-56462390 For those who might be vulnerable.