Leaderboard

Why? Change doctor It is easy.. If you have decimal e.g. 1111 factors will be 101 and 11. If it is e.g. 111111 factors will be 1001 and 111. And so on. You just have to answer question if number of decimal ones is dividable and has factors by itself. 91 is not prime. It is dividable by 7 and 13. 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 1111111 is dividable by 1111111.

Yes you are seriously mistaken. Just think of a solid heavy weight swung round on a long string. The centre of rotation is the hand holding the other end of the string The centre of mass is somewhere inside the heavy weight. Just to be precise, "the centre of gravity is on the line through a body leading to the centre of the Earth, that the weight of that body appears to act." And the axis of rotation is determined mostly by external agencies. Might be better to phrase this The centre of gravity or centre of mass of a body may change if the configuration of the parts of the body changes. And the axis of rotation is determined mostly by external agencies.

..but OP nowhere said it is sequence of binary ones..

Polio is an RNA virus; more than one vaccine has been developed for it.

Some day in the far, far future mankind will travel the stars; this is inevitable, it is in our genes. Believing this I have been contemplating how we get to where we want to go. I do not believe we can carry enough fuel to propel us, nor do I believe we could find the fuel we need along the way. Having said that the only choice we have is to use another source of energy that we have not considered before. That source of energy gravity. Gravity has an almost limitless power; it holds planets in orbit around our sun and solar systems together. I believe we need to find a way to use the pulling force of gravity to pull us in the direction we want to go. We lock on to the gravity waves of a far-off galaxy and let it pull us in that direction. The speed at which we travel will along this wave will increase exponentially exceeding the speed of light and beyond. Just a thought What's your thoughts on this-?

Hi Studiot I understand what you are saying (makes sense) but for most purposes there is very very little difference...to the point that they are commonly interchangeable. The gravitational gradients we generally deal with are pretty small relative to the objects we normally consider in mechanics, and any reorientation of the object does insignificantly little to change any difference...they pretty much move together. When someone says COG they usually mean COM.

Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of this ancient centrifugal separator we use at work. A slurry is pumped into a large, filtering drum which is rotating rapidly. The cloth filter traps solid particles ( mostly sulfur with some triisobutyldithiophosphinate ), and although pumped in asymmetrically, the slurry/solids disperse around the perimeter and effectively become filtering media. If this didn't happen, the imbalance would ruin the bearings in a matter of minutes.

Here is a thought. There are many mathematical ways of representing or describing any particular physical phenomenon. But there is only one chain of physical reasoning that leads to it and the one physical phenomenon of interest. All valid mathematical representations should end in (predict) the same physical result. Since you want a test physical phenomenon to predict, please predict the value of the Lamb shift.

Galaxies do not create significant gravitational waves (note that "gravity waves" are something completely different). And even the "large" gravitational waves we can detect from black holes only move things by a minute amount. There isn't enough energy to move anything much. Plus, it would just move things sideways and then back again. Not propel you anywhere.

A dream is nothing more, than a sea filled with life, full with the broken hearts of those before, experiencing pain and strife, wishing upon a star of light in which send theirhearts a soar, upon their gaze and flying wings, they jump in the sky searching for something more, in their flight they see the lands in which they never knew, and on catching the light in which they had dreamed, they discover something new, That the world in which they once inhabit was nothing but a dream, and that the knowledge in which they had captured is not quite exactly what it seemed, they had not flown into the sky, but through a looking glass. And upon reaching the end they realize something finally at last, They had not been flying but simply seeing through their own eyes, peering through a telescope, viewing their own demise. And upon viewing of the world they see others fall, those who are all still looking to the sky, hoping to hear the sirens call. So it is the dream in which I hope, to escape this land of mine, to understand the stars above, before running out of time, to finally touch the edge of the universe, before it is to late, to inspire those who dream of the impossible as well, before the world is consumed with hate, p.s. not sure how you wanted me to respond so I wrote my own poem! p.p.s. not good at poem structure soooo it might be a little bad. I do not know If this is guided towards me or not, but I don't know, build a boat I guess. Power only exists for those who believe in power, I just wanna make cool things and fly around because its fun!

Anecdotes are not sensible data to make personal or public health decisions on. However, it does seem that many, possibly most, people have mild or no symptoms. This has frequently been in the media, including TV. However, a significant proportion suffer sever consequences and many of those die. So it is silly to try and dismiss it. But yes, Star Trek is not real. 🙂

They're just having fun and their parents know where they are. 😉 I just like the poetry of those songs and it neatly fits the topic, just something to think about (even the diversity of the kids on stage).

It never crossed my mind. Well, it did, but it was a virtual process.

Surely you're joking... ...Mr. Joigus

Two very important concepts you don't seem to grasp. The universe, in the Big Bang model, evolves from a smaller version of itself, where separation between non-gravitationally bound objects decreases, as you go further backwards in time. The logical end result of this backward trip in time, is a singularity, but there are many reasons to discount the singular universal beginning, so we conjecture a hot dense initial state. Once expansion ( and/or inflation ) starts, we have an era that is dominated by radiation, as electrons cannot sick to protons to form atoms. The ambient 'energy' ( temperature ) is like in the Sun, a plasma, and only when the temperature drops below 3000 deg C , will electrons bond to protons without ionizing. If we consider this temperature, and factor in the approximate expansion of the universe since the end of the radiation era ( slightly more than 1000 times, we get the temperature of the CMB ( I believe G Gamow first did this calculation in the 40s ) of 2.7 deg C. And sure enough, Penzias and Wilson found the CMB in the 50s, at just that temperature. You cannot be 'outside' the universe. Saying that 'if you cannot visualize it it doesn't exist', is a cop-out for that reason. Where is the center of a doughnut shape, if you are INSIDE ? And since anytime you are looking into a distance, you are in effect, looking back in time ( finite speed of light ), it makes no sense to consider only 3dimensional volumes. You need to consider 4dimensional space-time. Can you visualize that ??? Both of these concepts also explain why the CMB has not passed by you. The CMB is the relic radiation of EVERY POINT in the universe, not a specific location, so it can never pass you by on its way to somewhere else. One final point... You ask us to discuss your conjecture based solely on 'logic' ( not mathematically defined logic, but personal subjective 'logic' ), yet you demonstrate that you lack the basic knowledge of even some of the things you are trying to explain, such as Dark Matter. ( I would hate to hear what your take on Dark Energy is ) You are basically asking people to waste their time discussing your conjecture, as all indications are that any mathematical model will be similarly flawed. You wan't to build a skyscraper, yet you lack the foundations to build it on; why not ask questions where you lack knowledge, and build a foundation. Then you'll have some idea as to what kind of building you can build on those foundations

You seem to have missed the bit that said: "unless the photons scatter off of something (e.g. dust)." When you see a laser beam projected into the sky, you are seeing the light reflected by dust and water particles in the air.

Observers not in line with the laser will not see the photons, unless the photons scatter off of something (e.g. dust). The number of photons in the beam is large but not infinite (and can be found knowing the wavelength and power)

Has anyone ruled out the usual confounding variable that people overlook in doing correlations? Many nobel prizes were awarded quite a long time ago. Acknowledged atheism was rarer in the past. . If you looked at people who won awards for playing the serpent, a disproportionate (by today's standards) number of them would be theists simply because it's a medieval instrument and most players were around before atheism was common. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(instrument)

not nice, the center of a donut is in the center of it even if youre inside it. It is nice because the center of the donut is nowhere inside the donut, i.e. there is no place inside the donut where you can travel to the donut's center of mass. Take your ball and go home.

You must be from Papua, New Guinea. ( don't worry about it, you wouldn't understand that either ) Anyway... So long, and good luck finding someone who cares about your crap. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

Do you honestly believe you can simply ignore the comments we are giving you when those comments do in fact call into question the validity of your idea ? Tell me if a particle cannot travel more than a millimeter without encountering another particle how does matter and antimatter seperate ? I have given you the mean free path of particles prior to the CMB which is far less than a mm. Can you not address that question ? I am only on the first paragraph of your hypothesis. I haven't even gotten to how you believe you solve Galaxy rotation curves for DM. Lets try another angle of approach ignoring DE what causes the original expansion if matter and antimatter are in equal portions prior to being able to seperate ? Expansion requires a cause and energy doesn't exist on its own. Can (and dont give me space cubes, space isnt a substance its simply volume) quantum foam is simply a fancy descriptive for the degrees of freedom of particles residing in space. can you answer that question ? The Big bang isn't the pop media explosion you see on TV. An explosion radiates outward and has a preferred direction and point of origin. Evidence shows the universe is homogeneous and isotropic in its expansion (Google those terms and also Google the Cosmological principle) I would also read the balloon analogy link I provided earlier. for the record I really don't care what you wish to believe. If you wish to believe pink unicorns waving magic wands filled with pixie dust created the universe then that's your business. You not insulting my ego with a bunch of random conjecture with no true physics expressed nor any applicable testable physics to mathematically prove or disprove your hypothesis. That simply shows me the lack of effort on your part to properly present a model. It's also not meeting the criteria that is required in the Speculation forum. I suggest you review these guidelines. Now here is question. Are you aware our Sun produces antimatter ? https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/when-the-sun-gets-violent-it-shoots-antimatter-at-the-earth-9193888/ How does that work with your theory of antimatter galaxies ? When ordinary Stars can and do produce antimatter. Please note we can also detect the difference.

No one is insulting anyone when I am simply pointing out you need to properly understand the topic. If you don't know Cosmology you cannot fix it. Especially when you don't know any of the formulas or evidence involved. the term Baryogenesis is a simple example. It literally describes the matter and antimatter imbalance of baryonic matter. You could have simply Google'd that term and gotten that answer. If your going to get insulted everytime I try to explain Introductory level Cosmology to you then we will never have an intelligent discussion of where your idea doesn't make sense. Or work.

IF youre going to differentiate the exelerating expansion and the expansion of space to simply invalidate my theory you are just splitting hairs man. you know what I mean. thank you though ill clarify By clump imean get more dense. cmon your point does not invalidate my hypothesis My idea has nothing to do with other peoples nonsense and even bringing it up is a low blow and yes another notch on the scientific communities state The way you test it is by logically seeing is if answers the problems that have already been observed! jesus man how are you a moderator on this forum I cant reply to you. this is hilarious.

All digital reverses order KE=kinetic energy PE=potential energy Kinetic energy is equal to potential energy or the equation is as follows KE=PE + 0. Manipulate it and you get KE-PE=0. The zero refers to digital zero. An identical equation is KE=PE(1). Manipulate it and you get KE/PE=1. The one refers to digital one. From the equation KE=PE you get 4 identical versions listed below: 1) KE=PE + 0 --> KE-PE=0 2) PE=KE + 0 --> -KE+PE=0 3) KE=PE(1) --> KE/PE=1 4) (-1)KE=(-1)PE(1) --> -KE=-PE(1) --> -KE/-PE=1 In equation 1, kinetic energy is positive while potential energy is negative. In equation 2, kinetic energy is now negative while potential energy is now positive. This is due to reverse order. In equation 3, kinetic energy and potential energy are positive while in equation 4, kinetic energy and potential energy is now negative. Again this is due to reverse order. In physics, a negative variable refers to opposite direction or opposite effect. All math and physics equations are defined as digital one and zeros. Everything in this universe is digital and everything exists on time frames as digital holographic images. Like digital DVD players or computers there exists reverse order by a process of simply pressing the reverse button to reverse the motion of actions encoded digitally on a cd or dvd disc. Commercial DVD players reverses the movie smoothly. Likewise the universal time frames like frames of a digital movie will reverse order in motion because it mimics the digital technology. This ends the frames of the universal book world. Digital one and zeros simply refers to on and off. In the equations above such as KE-PE=0, positive is neutralized by equal magnitude negative to annihilate to zero as off. In equation KE/PE=1, positive and positive creates one as on. Likewise -KE/-PE=1, negative and negative creates one also as on. So that confirms that all math and physics equations behaves as digital and must eventually reverse order in the negative direction. Real-time time frames will eventually reverse order in the opposite direction to close the universal book world. Because I cannot mention God in this forum, I will just make reference to an entity in a higher plane of existence. This is when this entity takes over the past time frames as an opposite reaction will take place.

Are you going to bother to deny that you've only been skimming my posts because there's plenty of evidence to the contrary. I don't mind people skimming my posts. People are busy and they don't want to take the time to sit down and study someone else's speculative theory. I get it. But you being so cynical if that's the case--that's what bothers me.

Dude just drop it. Im going to another place or another person who gives a crap.