Strange

can we have a vote among those who have adult children and feel they are alienated from them and not cared by them ?

Do you think that will be statistically significant?

In sound file analysis reportedly images spelling things such as "Leave now" were found, is this possible?

How can a sound contain an image?

 

Also frequencies were around 44kHz on average

That is well beyond the range of human hearing. And beyond the range that can be encoded in a standard audio file. And probably beyond the range that can be reproduced by most systems. I am not aware of frquencies like this having any noticeable effects on people (unlike infrasound).

Another way that I know this is expressed is that theoretically an object could travel faster than c but is nothing that can accelerate that object to such a speed. Another way that I know this is expressed is that theoretically an object could travel faster than c but is nothing that can accelerate that object to such a speed. (to imprint that speed). I don't know if a law expressed in this way is a law. It enough to detect ONE object faster than c to proves us wrong (like is enough to see a single black swan to in-confirm that "All swans are white") and that object will have that speed on it's own independent to the speed of other - that we are aware of - so no need for it to be accelerated).

There are hypothetical particle called tachyonw which only travel faster than light (they can't be slowed down to the speed of light). There have been experiments to detect such things but currently there is no evidence for them (and no real reason to believe they should exist).

Also, my question is: this is not a paradox also? Because in "day to day experience" the velocity adds up. If I'm on the ground stationary and throw a rock, that rock would have a speed. If I'm in a moving vehicle and I throw a rock that rock would have a combined speed for a stationary observer (related to my position and speed)

.

The thing is, we think that speeds add linearly (you throw the rock at 5 mph from a car doing 60 mph, and as a result the rock is travelling at 65 mph) but that is only because at everyday speeds the error is too small to see. In fact velocities don't add linearly. The sum of two velocities is given by:

[latex]s = {v+u \over 1+(vu/c^2)}[/latex]

If you are in a car doing 90% of the speed of light and throw a rock at 90% of the speed of light, the combined velocity will be 99.45% of the speed of light.

Axiom 2: If light would travel faster than c than that light (beam) would "travel back in time" not sooner than the time it started (t₀). It is this true?

No. Although, if faster than light travel or communication were possible, it would be possible to pass a message back in time. I don't think that is the same as travelling back in time.This would cause all sorts of things to do with causality (the effects could be seen before the cause).

Using the assertions I come to the conclusion that objects can travel faster than c but is a problem of measurements and detections in which we define our Reality.

I don't really know how you come to that conclusion.

This might be relevant: http://blogs.scienceforums.net/onablog/2012/10/15/an-open-letter-about-your-new-theory/

In my tests of parallel circuitry just now, with 12 resistors, it seems that each resistor in parallel with each other resistor in the circuit was having the exact same amps as the input amperage

Can you explain how you determined the current in each resistor?

 

And a resistor LED measured at 150 kohms

An LED is not a resistor. It has a non-linear voltage-current curve so the measured "resistance" will depend on the applied voltage.

 

lit up, parallel with 11 resistors with resistances between 100 ohms and 8 kohms.

The LED will light if there is sufficient voltage across it. You don't give enough information to say whether this is expected or not.

Can you explain what you mean; you question isn't very clear.

I assume "Engineering Math" means the mathematics used in engineering. But what is "Engineering Physic"?

In my tests of parallel circuitry just now, with 12 resistors, it seems that each resistor in parallel with each other resistor in the circuit was having the exact same amps as the input amperage

Can you explain how you determined this.

And a resistor LED measured at 150 kohms

I'm not sure what you mean by "a resistor LED" but you can't measure the resistance of an LED with a meter. It has a non-linear voltage-current relationship (i.e. it is not a resistor) and so the measured resistance will depend on the voltage.

lit up, parallel with 11 resistors with resistances between 100 ohms and 8 kohms.

As long as there is still sufficient voltage across the diode, it will light up. You don't provide enough detail of your set up to comment any further.

It's as if the very resistance itself was being negated as a concept in this circuit.

It sounds more like you don't fully understand what is happening.

 

There would be more that simply rely on relativity being correct.

As does much modern technology. Most modern semiconductors are now at the point where quantum effects need to be taken itno account in the design of manufacturing processes and the design of the individual components (transistors, LEDs, wiring, etc) on the chip. If quantum theory were wrong it would be very obvious. And this depends on SR being correct.

Is there a link to those 100 experiments on Einstein? I only found a page with about 25, and they all seemed to be different versions of the exact same experiment.

And Wikipedia has like 4 more, but they seem to be explainable by alternative means.

Some may be different versions of the same basic idea in order to eliminate other possible explanations, or to increase the accuracy.

There are also many thousands of tests which are equivalent to directly testing SR, for example tests of Lorentz invariance. Some of these have been done to extraoridinary levels of accuracy.

Because it has a protective layer of aluminium oxide, which is not soluble in nitric acid. This is, in general, why aluminium is resistant to furtehr oxidation or other forms of corrosion.

Don't thank me, thank Google! (I had forgotten the lunar caustic name completely)

"It was once called lunar caustic because silver was called luna by the ancient alchemists, who believed that silver was associated with the moon."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_nitrate

We would need to take a gluon 'strand,' and then add electrons to be excited and move around the neutrons.

What is a "gluon strand"? Why would electrons move around neutrons or gluons when they are both electrically neutral?

Your idea starts out wrong and goes downhill from there.