studiot

Doesn't the HUP also apply to calculations, whether or not they are for a real experiment ?

You may be suprised to learn that in the UK the modern idiom is to allow, nay encourage children to run around chattering and shouting in a (public) library. They even provide toys etc for this purpose. How to bring up kids who have no idea how to behave in public ?

Now here's the thing. You have cobbled together some standard electrical equipment and may or may not have hit upon an unusual, but useful configuration. However it should be noted that all the equipment you are using was conceived , designed and built strictly according to conventional electrical theory. Consequently they can be expected to perform according to that theory, and the original manufacturers will have tested to show that this is the case. Your diagrams and words here are at variance with each other and with your sundry videos. When asked about this, I'm sorry to say, you don't listen properly and expend a lot of effort answering questions that were not asked, whilst missing important ones that were.

Not all the research. But yes it is a plausible hypothesis. To have volcanic activity, trigerred or not you have to have buried molten rock. What evidence is the for buried molten rock on the moon ? Are you suggesting that the Earth was reduced to a molten ball after it had already cooled suffieiently to solidify on the surface at least ? Theres not going to be a crater on Earth on account of 4 billion years of tectonic activity and movement. Gravity favours accretion. It doesn't favour accretion into locally proximal lumps. The large lumps grow at the expense of the small ones. This favours the alternative hypothesis of the Moon and Earth forming at the the same time, over the chip off the old block hypothesis.

If it's all about responses, where did all that human creativity come from ? Why did Ugg wonder what lay over the horizon ? Why did Newton think about the apple or Kekule about the serpent ? Where did Beethoven's 9th come from or Wordsworth's daffodils or Coleridge's Mariner ? What inspired Bosch or Michaelangelo or Monet ?

I am mechanical by nature meaning everything to me has a mechanical aspect. My only understanding is that when a magnetic field interacts with a dia material the material induces a magnetic field of its own with oppositional fields. The mechanical aspect of that for me is when I described two cogged gears working together. Well here is a simple mechanical test for you. I said If you take a rod of a material and suspend it freely in a magnetic field. From the point of view of the object. A paramagnetic or a ferromagnetic rod will align its long axis parallel to the field A diamagnetic rod will align its long axis across the field (Faraday 1845) From the point of view of the field. The field in the vicinity of the rod will change. For most materials this will not be by very much. The magnetic field in the vicinity of a diamagnetic rod is decreased slightly, perhaps 0.001% - 0.1 % The magnetic field in the vicinity of a paramagnetic rod is increased, perhaps 0.001% - 0.1 % The magnetic field in the vicinity of a ferromagnetic rod is increased by up to 100 times or 10,000% Not sure what you mean by shorted. Did you leave the shorting wire in place and add a resistor ? Here is a useful device for describing things called black box theory. Very useful in circuit theroy but it also appears in mechancal theory. If A-B are the terminals of the primary of your transformer and C-D are the secondary, please indicate what these are connected to. The whole pint of Black Box theory is that for this purpose it does not matter what is inside the box, only its connections to the outside world. For your information the connection and layout information is commonly called the circuit topology. Thank you. Now I owe you an apology as I have found it in your second post. I think in the original post it was marked 'demo'. When you connect the motors, the first is a standard 120 volt motor and the second is a 12 volt motor connected in series across the 120 volts line (phase you call it correctly). I do not, therefore find it suprising that both motors will still run as the bulk of the drop will appear across the moter with the higher impedance (the 120V motor).

I'm at a complete loss to understand the point you are trying to make or what its relevance to this thread might be.

Hello John John and weelcome since I see you joined 2 hours ago. I also see your favourite subject is optics. Perhaps you would like ti fill ou a bit more so we can set the correct levels for discussion ? I thought your first post in the microscopy thread was very perceptive. But this curent thread suggests you are just starting optics as your terminology is somewhat adrift. There are many models of light, each suitable for a particular purpose. The photonic model is best suited to matters other than illumination (except for laser diode lamps). For illumination we tend to use other models whcih are rather simpler to handle. To illuminate something means to shine a light on it. It does not mean that the something emits photons itself, but that it reflects at least some of the light we shine on it. If that something emits light of its own accord we say that or that it is a source of light, not that it is illuminated. This is an important distinction in optical theory.

That's a lot of energy. The edge mountain ranges/escarpments are 3km high and tens of thousands of km long, normally associated with the sort of energy of whole plate movement/interaction. It may be that this energy could be supplied continuously over a long period, by the 'vortex' of roiling magma, as figs 2 and 6 imply. The question arises. The original craton material predates this activity and was stable for hundreds of millions of years. The material of the elevated plateau remains unchanged by process. The edge margin mountains should be heavily metamorphosed versions of this original material, not for instance solidified magma alone. A purely erosional hypothesis would mean that the edge material should be original craton material. I have been trying to determine the rocks in both places and wil let you know what I dig up. It is a great pity that no one else seems interested in this, the only truly scientific thread around.

If you don't wish to co operate I can't help you further. Sorry.

Thank you once again for pointing to a most interesting and thought provoking investigation. The idea of continental delamination but rising hot magma was originally proposed by P Bird in 1979 as an explanation of the Labrador trough. Here is a reference to this http://peterbird.name/publications/1979_delamination/1979_delamination.htm This was extended in 1981 by Dimroth as in this diagram. As discussion (references later) has since caused this approach to be discarded as no one has been able to make the necessary heat flows add up. See the discussion also in the scan. Further explanations are also introduced and discussed. The scan is from my copy of Global Tectonics by Kearey and Vine 2n ed I note that there is now a 3rd ed with nearly 200 extra pages. A (free) pdf is available here https://www.geokniga.org/bookfiles/geokniga-global-tectonics.pdf warning it is 66MB The conventional explanation, based on the Wilson cycle of breakup of continental crust (cratons) is greatly expand and firmly entrenched in the £rd ed. But it really is an excellent text as it examines the conditions of tectonic process as applied to the real earth geology and geography, including the mineralogical and rheological environments. A final picture towards our next exchange from Wikipedia. The real earth examples in the Nature article all relate to the breakup of the last supercontinent, Panges. So we need to go back about 200Mya and start there, because the examples did not all occur at the same time but over a period of about 200Mya to 50 Mya.

I really think it would be a good idea to try to focus your question. Take a look at this website and see if this is what you are really asking about. Then ask a few more detailed questions. https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/learning/ddos/glossary/open-systems-interconnection-model-osi/ Please note the statement Layer 7 The application layer. I am also going to say +1 for encouragement as this is a much more reasonable thread than some of your earlier ones and much more in tune with ScienceForums. We can actually help you with this one rather than argue.

Here is another viewpoint, but covering the whole globe. I note the Indian and african examples the raised upland is 'protected' from eroding rainfall by the escarpment mountains. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/56857/1/Blenkinsop%2C Moore - 2013 - Tectonic Geomorphology of Passive Margins and Continental Hinterlands.pdf

This is a good topic for you to do some experimentation on your own. For instance you seem to be suggesting that a steel ball felt heavier than a piece of wood. Take a short length of wood etcf eg a rule Spread out one hand and lay the rule across all the fingers of that hand. Now low some fingers, one at a time. Does the ruler feel any different as you do this ? One thing to remember is that our brain/nervous system receives an enormous amount of sense data. All our sense data is filtered so that only some reaches the brain. For instance can you feel the pressure of the ground on your feet ?

You want a 5 year course in computer engineering put into a nutshell on a discussion forum ? From your question paragraph you seem to be leaning towards hardware. Are you aware of the distinction between hardware and software or the layer model of computers ?

That was not 'my perception' at all. Please go back and read carefully what I wrote. You actually asked a question along the lines of 'What happened to the magnetic field ?' I answered this question. So please stop saying I have since answered another of your questions, which answer you have again ignored. Now here are two questions of mine What is you understanding of a diamagnetic material ? All materials, without exception, are diamagnetic. In some materials paramagnetism or its stronger cousin ferromagnetism swamp this diamagnetic effect. The interaction between a magnetic field and a material object can be viewed or classified according to the effect on the material object or the effect on the magnetic field. Both of these views must obviously 'match up'. The dia, para and ferro classification was introduced by Faraday's original work, when they had no means of probing the magentic field so he went for the effects on the material object. Later workersdeveloped means of probing the field and the so they are usually now described in terms of the effects on the magnetic field. But, of course they match up. Secondly can you explain what you mean by this ? Finally I don't know who removed the link in your original post but I can't find it now so have to rely on memory of that original bunch of videos you linked to.

Firefox This doesn't happen on any other website, just SF, by the way.

Reservoir of liquid water found deep in Martian rocks Image source, NASA Image caption, The discovery comes from analysis of data from Nasa's Insight lander, which took a seismometer to Mars Victoria Gill

I'm not having trouble with the posting action itself, but this is the sort of thing I see over 50% of the time when I try to move to a differnt page on the website eg from the browse tab to the activity tab. Now the ad box goes away if I left click outside the box and I am returned to the original page, not the new one I requested. But the second request then sends me to the correct page. I agree it is annoying and hampers the flow of usage. Note the page address changes in the address bar with the addition of google vignette

The word rift or rifting occurs 5 times in the abstract alone!

Isn't it just! and full of techie words with special meanings. So first thoughts. I have not experience of the escarpments the authors are describing. The onlymega one I have direct personal experience of is the Arabian peninsula escarpment. That is definitely a rift valley escarpment, still active today. It is estimated at 30 Myears old. The continental plates have shifted a long way inthe over 200Myears they are talking about, and oceans have opened and closed. So their comment that these escarpments occur at continental edges and are one sided (unlike a rift vally) may have occurred due to plate displacement over the timescale. One thing the new theory does not explain is the lack of deltas at the continental margins, building up new sedimentary land as England was built up on the edge of the Scottish peninsula of the old red continent. There are many small escarpments from the brecon Beacons to the Kentish Weald. I'm not saying I think it is wrong, just that there is room in our world for many different mechanisms and routes to escarpments and flat topped raised areas.

Well I think you have a case of positive or negative mutual inductance in the transformer, depending upon which way round the coils and jumper are connected. The total inductance is given by Lt = L1 + l2 ± 2 M when you connect the coils via your jumper or resistor, Where L1 and L2 are the individual coils inductances and M is their mutual inductance. I have been doing you the courtesy of taking seriously what you are showing, whilst taking the trouble to understand the connections. Please do the same for professional Engineers you have been consistently disparaging. I am a retired applied Mathemaician, not an electrical engineer, which means I have done a considerable amount of electrical calculations in my time. In one of your videos you asked acted incredulous about the fan continuing to work when you introduced an air gap, but have shown no interest in the elementary theory of air gaps and their effects that I posted last time.

It isn't only drugs that should be considered. So I don't know if the FDA is the only or appropriate body to be considered. Many substances, common in the past, have since been found to be carcinogenic. My toothpaste example is one such, another would be Benzene, another would be AMC (since we are talking in journalistic acronyms) or Amyl Meta Cresol.

What is an enormous electron wave ? Surely you are mixing up the x and y axes ?

Out of body experience. 😀