studiot

If you have genuinely discovered something new what a shame you are clearly determined not to emulate your countryman who introduced the periodic table we still use today. Scientists have been trying for some time to fit conductivity (super or otherwise) to the layout of the table. for instance using the Mott transition temperature and energy. One day it will happen. Sorry you don't want to discuss this. However it is clear you don't wish to discuss details, despite claiming (twice) that your hypothesis explains this phenomenon.

How does is this compatible with this ? Wikipedia SpaceX Starship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starship Low Earth Orbit is defined as above 100km. Here the air is at around about minus 100oC The pressure depends upon the component here is the relevant equation and physics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_height

This is a better expalantion of Beer's Law than Wikipedia Chemistry LibreTextsThe Beer-Lambert LawThe Beer-Lambert law relates the attenuation of light to the properties of the material through which the light is traveling. This page takes a brief look at the Beer-Lambert Law and explains the u... Are you aware that 'disperse system' is also a specialist chemical term ? It embraces mixtures where one material is distributed throughout another so that the result acts as a single entity. As such it covers sols, aerosols, foams, colloids and so on Another important Law is the Phase Rule, which can describe the range of temperature and pressure that your 2 component system can remain stable. I am taking your proposal seriously and trying to discuss the details.

Thanks for the lightening quick response, but do you know what the Beer Law refers to - it is not dispersion it is transmission. You made a prediction, where did it come from ?

The point is that it is your idea and your idea is really easy to feasibilty test. In a suitable chamber, you need to introduce a disperse system at a range of concentrations (obviously including your resultant conc from the 50kT) and measure the Beer law coefficient. Have you any evidence of this having been done ?

I notice that this ahs nothing to do with either the original post or my reply. It is preaching pure and simple.

If you really have a definite predictive physical explanation of either the Earth's magnetic field or Superconductivity, as you have claimed then we mare all interested because both of these have yet to be fully descibed and explained by current theory.

The original question asks for an explanation of the difference between an image and a likeness which is a technical question. This threas seems to me to have now taken a definitely proselytising turn. Consider your left hand and your right hand. The are alike or they have a likeness. but they are not the same. They are only an image in a mirror.

I'm still waiting for the explanations of both the earth's magnetism and superconductivity. All you have told me so far is that they are different, which I agree with.

USPS ???? For the past week or so the posties around here have been delivering dressed as santa. It is some management iniative to promote the Royal Mail. And furthermore Sunday last a whole posse of bikers in santa costumes rode up to the local hospital ro deliver their annual gift to the children's wing. 😄

Well How am I supposed to know that your last line is different from the one above it. Or are you telling me that there is no connection between refraction, reflections and interference ? what about all the other line with 'and' in ? This is very poor scientific writing, in my opinion.

Shame on you you've shattered my illusions if you are trying to tell me that the tooth fairy and santa claus do not exist. If the latter who has been delivering my mail this past week ?

I am the centre of the universe and have been since I was a baby - a fact well known to my parents. 😄

Yes good idea. In what way is the Earth's magnetic field related to superconductivity ?

lol Google was unable to translate. Since you can obviously do this please do so.

Thank you for that extended reply. Was that from an AI ? I ask because LLms do not read the message of questions put to them but are constrained to display an answer, just as their forerunners, the digital display in instruments and calculators, was so constrained. Unfortunalely you repsly does not even begin to offer the explanation I asked for. Note I did not ask for proof of anything I asked for an explanation .

Did you read the rules at SF about posting discussion material lately ?

Where was it posted ?

I'm sorry, was it on the previous page or did I miss it. ? Where is the maths in all this ? Lot's of pretty pictures and idol worship, but where's the beef ?

When your original post is fit for other members to draw from perhaps you would like to explain what underlies your link between gravitation and inertia. The two are currently regarded as different independant phenomena and the fact that, as far as we have been able to determine, they offer the same values is just a fortuituous accident of the unverse.

I would have thougth any parent or grandparent would have first hand experience. Facilities for games, school dinners, practical subjects like woodwork, science are regularly being sold off by schools around the UK and have been for some decades. Some universities now use circuit simulation only instead of hands on electronics, mechanics etc. Or else, like Exeter they have simply closed the Chemistry department.

With the accountants and centralists now firmly in charge of education would members like to comment on the trend to reduce or even remove all practicals from the curriculum at all levels from primary to university. How is this impacted by the current expanding crop of 'demonstartion videos on Ytube and the like ?

Yes of course, but just be glad you are studying under the MKS metric system. There is also a unit of force called the kilogram-force or alternatively kilogram-weight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram-force This short tutorial may also help BBC BitesizeWeight and mass - Forces and movement - KS3 Physics - BBC...Weight and mass are very different. Find out more with BBC Bitesize. For students between the ages of 11 and 14.

I understand and sympathise with your need to obtain marks. Perhs you could discuss the issues with you teacher ? Remember I said you have to start somewhere, you can't do it all at once. So teachers will not tell you everything at once, (I haven't done that either) but good teachers will take the time to explain further to those, like yourself, who are interested enough and intelligent enough to know a bit more. Mass is one way of measuring the quantity of matter in a body. This definition becomes important when studying forces and dynamics.

Then I agree with you that the question was poorly worded, especially as it was an exam question. I also agee that it was not clear what force they were asking for since you have evidently been taught to distinguish. However there is also not enough information to answer the question since I would assume (as any schoolboy and KJW) that the object was on Earth since we are not told otherwise. KJW's diagram relies on gravity so there must be a third force acting on the spring balance if we take that as the object. This, of course would be the weight, W, of the balance . But KJW asked for the reading not the force acting, and there is a difference. Since you have come across vectors can you say anything about the vector sum of the two or three forces that are acting ? Did you also understand the difference between the two equations I wrote for you? Have you come across the equation W = mass x g = mg ? Finally can you think of another distributed force ? This becomes important in situations where no one in their right minds would say that a pair of equal and opposing distributed forces mean zero force on an object. Hopefully this discussion is helpful.