Leaderboard

How might it lead to the proof of the existence of a creator?

No effects on humanity. One immediate consequence, physicists would better understand black holes.

What has Robert Stephenson got to do with it??

Causal: Cause and Effect Questions Designed to determine whether one or more variables causes or affects one or more outcome variables. A random variable is a mathematical function that ""maps""outcomes of random experiments to numbers. It can be thought of as the numeric result of operating a non-deterministic mechanism or performing a non-deterministic experiment to generate a random result.

Do you think that if there are (apparently) two choices, both are equally likely?

Sorry I'm not familiar with that. Can you give a bit more detail?

For starters, these forums would be swamped by a whole new tsunami of religious types in denial. Can you summarize?

to begin with,I would thank to you for your post and while I am not sufficiently sure for other branches of science (maybe in physcis) , the keyword given in bold is wrong in mathematics. And I will try to provide the exact description of that keyword. what does "ideal" mean in mathematics? Let E be a ring, and F be another ring with the condition of F< E , if; i)for every x ∈ E and for every y ∈ F x.y ∈ F and ii) for every k ,t ∈ F k-t ∈ F. then F is called as "ideal" of E. the most simple example is presumably this one: Odd numbers (T) and Even numbers (C) (sets) are each subsets of Z But C subset is specifically satsfies the given conditions above. Thus C is an ideal of Z (Z shows integer numbers (set))

It's kind of like you don't realize there is no paradox, and further, it has nothing to do with length contraction in inertial frames. No, YOU haven't. Your attitude and 'far removed from science' ideas have. None of us like talking to a brick wall; take other's comments under consideration, instead of jumping topics all over the place.

I'm sorry, perhaps you're right...

You're clearly talking bollox, why are you still here?

..I even gave the equation in the part of the post you cut off ...

I believe the conversion rate is 1kHz per volt. To check. Wavelength and frequency of light are closely related. The higher the frequency, the shorter the wavelength. IOW frequency and wavelength have both direct and inverse relationships.

No. What he is attempting to explain, at that point, is that anything with mass-energy ( and momentum ) curves space-time, just like the curved grid lines around a ball with mass in the 2 dimensional representation. Since the electron has very little mass-energy, the curvature is very small and localized, but the electron has a probabilistic nature and cannot be localized. The curvature, then, has to be probabilistic also. IOW, just as the electron has varying probabilities of being in different places, so should its gravity, or space-time curvature. GR, however is a classical deterministic theory. The space-time curvature is where the event ( electron ) is in space-time. QM and GR are based on differing paradigms, and GR, as it stands, cannot handle the indeterminateness of the electron's state ( or position, momentum, energy, or even time ) prior to wave function collapse. Google SuperString theory or Loop Quantum Gravity.

You seem to be overly interested in words and moot points. Saying just "thermodynamics" suggests either classical, chemical or equilibrium thermodynamics; all of them based on equilibrium. There's also statistical mechanics, but that's almost never called thermodynamics. And there's non-equilibrium thermodynamics, but that's such a misnomer (it's not about just heat, temperature, and the like) that everybody referring to it always mentions it by the whole name, "non-equilibrium thermodynamics," only to make clear that it's not thermodynamics (T, Q, etc.) Here are all as covered by Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics#Branches_of_thermodynamics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-equilibrium_thermodynamics You tell me which one you're referring to. There's also kinetics, but I'm not interested in climbing the tower of Babel. I meant (and I said) regions of phase space. Regions of phase space are not regions of 3-dimensional space. You're confusing both. I mean volumes in the way of, \[d^{3n}xd^{3n}p\] IOW, regions in a humongous 3Nx3N-dimensional space. It is in that space of huge dimension where sampling is robust. Macroscopic systems are ergodic, meaning that time averages give you a very good idea of phase-space averages (averages to all momenta and all positions) when systems are at equilibrium or going round and round in cycles. The molecules you describe as going up to the outer reaches of the atmosphere have to go back and recycle, participating in the overall thermal and dynamical processes, and exchanging the energy. That's the key. But all this is quite academic and, if pressed, I wouldn't be too sure of anything, the way you seem to be. Here's a much more intuitive explanation of why sampling in this way works even for chaotic systems: Tim Palmer's lecture at Perimeter Institute Lecture: Climate Change, Chaos, and Inexact Computing 11' 40''-16' 37'' (I copied the link starting at about the time when he explains the point.) I'm not an expert in climate change. @Area54 or @Ken Fabian can probably give much more accurate information and point out my excesses. I just wish to argue with my toolkit. And with my toolkit at hand, the arguments about "global warming" (however much of just a catchphrase that is) make a lot of sense to me.

! Moderator Note Your duty HERE is to make yourself understood, and you're failing. If you don't understand something, ask a question about it (something short, without ALL THE GARBAGE you think is necessary for some reason). Please focus on a single concept at a time, and stop tossing in everything that pops into your head. Your signal to noise ratio is unacceptable.

Oh, now I get it ... Kitchen sinks, haircuts, Range Rovers and walnuts, IE "volume"--> space Garbage in --> garbage out. In the years I've been a member never have I wanted to start dishing out down-votes more than now.

Numbers are more fun than just N → Z → Q → R Consider the equation x2 - 2 = 0 This has no solution in N, Z, or Q In other words there is no rational solution But let us propose a solution and represent it by the character £ Now taking inspiration from the form of complex numbers (a + ib) let us consider expressions of the form (a + £b) We will find that we have a complete number system that follows all the four rules you mention and the equation has a solution in this number system! This number system is the usual rational numbers plus one irrational number, £. I have disguised the fact that we usually call £ the square root of 2. So number systems exist partway between Q and R. Our simple system does not contain a solution to the equation x2 - 3 = 0 as it cannot write the irrational number square root of 3 in terms of root 2.

I think why many folks liked Biden is that he is able to project empathy (which I think would be considered a common human trait, but apparent not nowadays). However, in the past I had the impression (though I do not follow US politics that close, so may misinterpret it) that he tended to be light on the details and policy side. That being said, during the townhall one could clearly see that he did his homework. I actually liked that (and one of the reasons why I liked Warren, she seemed pretty on the top of her game when it came to these specifics).

I don't have Wireshark running on this machine, but i don't think it will show the files that are activated , only the service. I think you can get the files from top or ps (ps -au maybe)

Well, since Markus has expressed his desire to join a Monastery, I think that definitely answers the OP question. But, some words to Markus... ( no offence meant, just trying to lighten the mood ) A young monk arrives at the monastery. He is assigned to helping the other monks in copying the old laws of the church by hand. He notices, however, that all of the monks are copying from copies, not from the original manuscript. So, the new monk goes to the head monk to question this, pointing out that if someone made even a small error in the first copy, it would never be picked up! In fact, that error would be continued in all of the subsequent copies. The head monk, says, “You make a good point, my son.” He goes down into the dark caves underneath the monastery where the original manuscripts are held in a locked vault. Hours go by and nobody sees the head monk. The young monk gets worried and goes down to look for him. He sees him banging his head against the wall and wailing. “We missed the R! We missed the R! We missed the R!” “Father!” cries the young monk. “What’s wrong?” The head monk with tears in his eyes replies, “The word is CELEBRATE!"

Formalization and Structure of Religion starts in the remains of the Roman Empire. I don't see how formalization and structure of religion continues without suggesting civilization and an ingroup outside the national borders. A simple test of an iron curtain walled off society is this test that even the United States seems to fail. We require international media, connection, option, power.

Normally I shouldn't answer because it's off topic. But like swanson or Phi will soon sanction me...let's go. Scientifically speaking it is yes or no. Do you want the real and the false at the same time? Are you alluding to quantum superposition or what? I am no longer responding to the off-topic message.