Leaderboard

You explained what it was. Is it your position that you did a poor job of explaining? My own view was that once some actual science was posted, the context of “system of theory” would become clearer. There’s really no need to announce this. Good luck. Yes, I believe that was the point of the replies. You should understand that people will only invest so much time in reading something that is quite likely flawed. When you bury the lede, you increase the odds of people tuning out.

This is meaningless. If you are projecting a shorter 4-vector onto a longer one, the result can never exceed the length of the longer vector, that’s just basic geometry. In other words, the longest a projection can ever be is that of a 4-vector onto itself, which, in Minkowski spacetime, is thus -1. Since the inner product is invariant, this is true for all 4-vectors in all frames. Consider a general 4-velocity of the type \[u^{\mu } =( \gamma ,\gamma v_{x} ,\gamma v_{y} ,\gamma v_{z})\] The inner product with itself is \[u^{\mu } u_{\mu } =-\gamma ^{2}\left( 1-v^{2}\right) =-\gamma ^{2} /\gamma ^{2} =-1\] as expected. So your claim is wrong. If this were true, the momentum of a photon would be zero. This is evidently false, as we know already from experiment and observation. Mathematically, you can show this in a similar manner as above. So again, you are wrong. I’ve already shown above that the inner product of a 4-velocity with itself is -1, so the magnitude of a 4-velocity in spacetime is always exactly c. Since the inner product is invariant, this is true in all frames, so it can’t be a function of the gamma factor. Also, if you look at this expression, you should notice immediately that the resultant magnitude of v does not correspond to the gamma factor you are inputting, so the expression is meaningless. You are wrong on this one, too. Yes, because all three points you have presented contradict both basic maths, as well as observation in the real world. It’s simply wrong.

In case anyone can benefit from this... A medium low cut glaze / polishing compound did wonders. I used Meguiars 205 with a microfiber pad stuck on to my random orbital sander on medium speed and it really came out well I put it on and wiped it about 5x total

From your document: "We believe that with the combination of the above factors and conditions in the interior of the planet, a thermonuclear fusion reaction is quite possible, capable of causing a deep-focus earthquake, the nature of which is still unknown." The cause of deep focus earthquakes is very well established and has been for several decades. The vast majority of such earthquakes occur along subducting plates. This is one of the core observations of plate tectonics, which the soundly estsablished paradigm of Earth science. You error here, asserting the cause is unknown, calls into question anything you may present relating to mantle geology. You also state: " Diamonds are known to form in magma." No, they are not known to form in magma. If you think they do you should have no problem providing a citation. There is a host of other faulty material in your paper, but I'd like to see your responses to these first before investing any more time on it.

The idea behind this article is the work of physicists on the study of the properties of warm dense matter (WDM) and thermonuclear fusion based on the reaction of muon-catalyzed melting (μCF). According to our calculations, when the magma moves through the magma channel, hydraulic shocks occur, reaching the power of several Terawatts, which is enough to “ignite” WDM. With the subsequent mandatory expansion of WDM, a collision of electrons and positrons with the formation of muons will occur according to the well-known scheme: e- + e + → µ- + µ +. "Born" muons will replace electrons in atoms with the formation of mesoatoms. Since the Bohr radius is inversely proportional to the mass of the particle moving around the atomic nucleus, and the muon mass mμ = 206.7 me is approximately 200 times greater than the electron mass, the size of the newly formed atom orbital will be ~ 200 times smaller than the electron one. Plus, replacing electrons with muons will leads to a decrease in the diameter of protons by ~ 10%. These facts will allow the atoms to approach to a distance less than two mesoatomic units [(~ 2aμ = 2h2 / mμe2 ~ 5⋅10−13m.) - 10%], which will lead to the start of the classical reaction μCF, to the fusion of atomic nuclei and the start of the reaction natural thermonuclear fusion, the energy of which may well be the source of mysterious deep-focus earthquakes. Magma as a generator of plasma and thermonuclear fusion.docx

In some cases, I agree wholeheartedly.

What experiment? The "4 humours" don't really exist. Snot is not a character trait. Melancholic does not really exist so, that's impossible. No experiment needed (or, indeed, possible).

I I think no.(because in fact,it seems that there is no meaningful correlation between these two conditions) Also, CharonY 's reply is a bit supporting this , especially here in turkey if we were to comply the doctors ,I think,we would potentially die even earlier. Almost All of my family got catched to covid19 and sadly, my mother returned at the side of death but why? I think because of the unqualified medical service. I do not mention the non existence of cure or vaccine for this new disease, but the doctors... the most common thing here we see turkish doctors write drugs, commonly even random. yes, without any examination it is really not an extraordinary to see turkish doctors write many drugs. as result: There was nothing to do with tension ilness (i.e. no problem with blood pressure and etc all other details(i.e. blood illness)) but after the 15 days cure in hospital (she had slept) according to the doctor who examined her, my mother's illness changed to blood pressure. (because they did something we do not know and also after going out from the hospital, one drug was given for blood pressure (I can also write the drug's name: seneloc) anyway, I am sure that was nothing to do with my mother and blood pressure problem (i.e. disease). but the doctors thoght that she had had blood pressure problem. my mother did not continue that drug and still she has no blood pressure problem. but unfortunately I commonly observed this: whenever the doctor is not capable to give a response to the case, she/he writes / prescribes the drugs. result 2: I do not believe the quality of modern science. the case might be better at somewhere or in comparison to in the past (but not passing 1400 years before) however, in far past,I think the better system might have existed. do you agree that we would find us in a well ordered uncertainty if we were to do everything in compliance of existing doctors ' advices ? because it is almost impossible. in fact, I do not blame anyone , but the system is not good enough. UPDATE: sorry ,I missed some points. (I was also supposing we were in medical science forum) yes ,I agree that science could make us live longer. why not? but the system is not sufficiently good really in the current status. Also one should take into account that science was not always being satisfied/obtained by education. some useful keywords: intelligence, knowledge, science, education.

What in the name of Bob are you talking about?? Is there some point to this? Some sort of anti-evolution thing maybe?

Somewhere on the evolutionary tree, we had a common ancestor(s) that carried those common traits and then the respective lineages diverged to what they are today..

OK, the fact that you mention Adam and his immediate offspring as factual is enough for me to know this discussion is not leading anywhere useful. Some biblical myths are inclusions from Babylon. Ezra re-edited the Torah, because it had been lost after Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed the Second Temple. The myth of the flood from the Epic of Gilgamesh is very recognizable. Another one is the story of a man whose wife cannot conceive, so that they arrange that it is the slave who is going to play that role --Abraham--. The latter story is foreshadowed in the Nuzi tablets over and over, and over again. Also in Mari --Mesopotamia. It is more than likely that they picked it up by the rivers of Babylon, because they came to know it was a common Babylonian story. Also you say all deities in the Bible stand for God. We already know this cannot be true -beyond any reasonable doubt. There are also inscriptions speaking of Yahweh and his Ashera (his wife). The existence of a pantheon of gods is very clear in the archaeological record. Baal is not, as you seem to suggest, another representation of Yahweh, but the bull god that appears in many places of the Middle East and features prominently in Exodus, different in name and in the statuettes --in the human form, El, sitting and serene; while Baal, aggressive, in smiting position, and using his strength. It's Baal-Zebub, the Lord of the Flies, that in Christian iconography became to be known as Satan. Yahweh, in the Sinaitic depictions, looks nothing like El. Why would he? They are different gods from different regions. Are you going to believe what a book which was copied again and again, recompiled hundreds of years later after its partial destruction, probably recited at some points; or are you going to believe the fragments of script that are dug from the ground and tell us what the Canaanites of that time probably believed? Faith-based religion is not like a message passed down in its pristine form generation after generation; it is more like a game of Chinese whispers played throughout the centuries in which you never know what the message is going to become. That much we already know beyond any reasonable doubt. Understanding the process, rather than the details, makes it very easy to see how you can throw in a new element and make it part of the broth, keeping some words but changing the meaning, etc. Like your kefir. It is the lack of logical strictures which allows to do that. This appears not to be true: https://weareisrael.org/spiritual-seed-2/male-child/betulah-vs-almah/ But, when Eliezer recalls his story to Rebekah’s father (Bethuel), he calls Rebekah a young woman (עלמה, al-mah’), a sexually mature woman at the prime age for work, because he was not privy to her actual sexual status. Helenization of Roman Jews started in the 4th century BCE, but found strong resistance that culminated in the Maccabean revolt during the Seleucid rule. So they were not completely Helenized, especially considering the Maccabeans were successful, unlike the rebels of Masada. It was after the diaspora that most transcriptions of Torah appear only in Greek, at least in Europe. But the sect of Qumran still copied the Bible in Hebrew, and I'm sure the rebels of Masada also did so, at the time of the Jewish revolt. Some of the parchments have been found to appear to have been dropped on the ground of the caves in Qumran as the legions came to arrest them. Those texts range from old copies to contemporary copies --at the time. They are all in Hebrew.

Peer review is not meant to be “fair” (what does that even mean?) - on the contrary, it is designed to be as critical as possible, so as to really put the ideas within the publication to a rigorous test. It is the most effective way to tease out any problems; remember, you want to end up with something that actually works, in the sense of the scientific method. You are missing the salient point. Science has nothing at all to say as to the existence or supposed characteristics of anything that isn’t part of nature, including any and all notions of deities. This is quite simply outside the domain of applicability of science, because the very notion of “God” is not amenable to the scientific method. So science neither rejects nor endorses the Christian faith, because it deals with a different domain of enquiry. However - and this is the important point - if someone proclaims an element of their faith as being objective truth, then this claim will of course be challenged by science. Some such claims may turn out to be compatible with scientific evidence, so they are fine; others may not be, and those will be rejected. To give a simple example - if someone claims, based on certain readings of the Bible, that the Earth is ~6000 years old, then science will certainly reject this, because that claim is evidently false based on all available scientific data. So the issue isn’t faith and belief - the issue is only when people try to misrepresent their beliefs as objective, scientific facts. That’s what’s called a category mistake, and it will always be challenged.

You present two postulates ... Which don't jive with accepted Physics, and with no backing evidence, and no explanation of how these postulates are manifested. Then immediately launch into an explanation of quantum spin ???? That's not how we do things. Back up your assertions.

What does the above mean? Does it imply that there are three spatial and three temporal dimensions? If so, how is that compatible with observations?

Ophiolite earned my gratitude when he,in his previous incarnation of John Galt rebutted my detractor with a "there is no such thing as a stupid question" I have been meaning to ask him how he rates his judgement (circa 2017) that it would not be possible within a short space of time (pretty sure he said or indicated a timeframe of months) to find anyone to admit to have voted for Trump. My estimation of his judgement was so high that I have waited with bated breath over the past 4 years for his prediction to come to fruition. Also very disappointed at his support for Scottish (or any) Nationalism . That apart(as I have told him) his posts are generally well worth the entrance fee. On another of the Science forums babe (for those who know her) sent a small amount of funds to another poster when he was down on his luck to help him get sorted....

Likewise, mate, but it would be several beers. There’s a few on a smaller site where I’m an admin with whom I’ve connected on FB IRL, but I generally don’t mix my real name and online persona if I can avoid it. A really long time ago I connected with Cap’n Refs for tacos and we were joined by another person posting at the time. That was fun. I also met up a former NASA employee I’d interacted with on yet another site long ago. He and I had cocktails and enjoyed many great conversations with him and his wife when they came to town. That was all before I got married and had kids, though. Life’s rather different now than then.

After a while you get used to people, and having them around; you almost know what hey are going to post on any particular subject. There are many people I've butted heads with, over the years. INow, Ten oz, Phi for All, and, anyone remember Overtone ? I have developed a great respect for all their opinions, and would love to have a face-to-face discussion over a beer. Some people have left, and sometimes they come back, but post infrequently, as Ten oz now does. Hopefully, when they have time, Mordred and Strange will join us again. Some are gone for good, like Imatfaal, AJB, and Dr Rocket. We are that much poorer for their absence

Once again, in general terms autism isn’t a condition that needs to be “cured” - it’s a difference in brain connectivity, hence “neurodivergence”. Suggesting to someone on the spectrum that they need to be “cured” so that they can better fit into a neurotypical world is not just unhelpful, it’s deeply disrespectful. This really sums up everything that is wrong with the medical establishment’s current approach to autism. Furthermore, you cannot “fix” autism any more than you can fix other forms of neurodivergence such as Down Syndrom (e.g.) - these are not learned or acquired traits, they are differences in brain structure. Instead, the thing that would be helpful to people on the spectrum who struggle with sensory issues, executive functioning, social interaction etc is to give them specific supports to develop techniques that will help them address their specific challenges in everyday life. For example, if someone struggles with organising and coordinating everyday tasks (quite common for autistics), then there are specific organisational techniques that can help with this, and these can be learned. People who are more severely impacted could be offered “assisted living” arrangements, and so on. I am of course aware that there are certain very severe manifestations of autism, and people affected by those will struggle greatly. But even here, the answer is to offer the specific supports that they need, not try to somehow turn them into neurotypicals - which isn’t possible. Apart from the fact that I don’t know what FMT even is, the answer is no, I wouldn’t. The reason is simple - I have made peace with being on the spectrum, and I am very content this way, even given the various challenges I face in everyday life. If I was somehow magically given the opportunity to be reincarnated, and be given the choice if I was to be ND or NT, I would choose to be on the spectrum again, without a moment’s hesitation. I can’t comment on this, as I don’t know what it is like to be NT. Sure...it’s just that my idea of relaxation will likely be very different from yours. Generally speaking, relaxation to me means silence and solitude; quiet contemplation and investigation; or intellectual stimulation by working out some mathematical/physical/philosophical problem, just for the fun of it. I often spent extended periods out in nature, in some remote and beautiful place far away from people with just my tent and my eReader. Or I thru-hike long-distance trails. Or I volunteer for some social cause that is meaningful to me. After I do these things, I feel a sense of peace, insight and meaning. What I would never do is spent my relaxation time in a crowded and noisy place full of people, while intentionally altering my mind through ingesting intoxicating substances. How anyone could possibly consider this “relaxing” or in any way meaningful is so far beyond me that I am not even trying to understand it. Each to their own, I guess. Yes, this seems to be fairly common among people on the spectrum, but it’s by no means a universal trait. I don’t experience this at all, for example, and neither do most of the other autistics I know. The opposite - being overly and unduly fearful and cautious - appears to be more common. Precisely Which does not mean we trivialise the very real challenges people on the spectrum face...but yes. No need to apologise, I didn’t take offence at all Yes, because being neurodivergent in a world designed by and for NTs is no stroll in the park, since most NTs don’t appear to possess enough metacognitive introspective awareness to see their very own social conventions as being social conventions, but mistake them for solid unchanging reality. This makes it very hard to accept anyone who does not conform to those conventions...and since too many NTs also don’t appear to possess the cognitive empathy required to tell that they are causing hurt and suffering through their rejection of those who don’t fit in, a proportionally higher suicide rate amongst people on the spectrum is the inevitable consequence. Am I the only one who sees the sad irony here? This is true, but the reverse is just as true - the most severe forms of autism also affect only a small proportion of people on the spectrum. The vast majority of us sit somewhere in the middle. Honestly - can you not see what a condescending statement like this makes an autistic person feel like? And that’s after you claiming earlier that it is us autistics who have no sense of cognitive empathy...go figure 🤨 Generalisations of this nature are not helpful to anyone, least of all to autistics themselves. What are you trying to really tell us here? I usually hold back when discussing autism with NTs, but on this occasion I’ll be perfectly blunt with you : unless you are on the spectrum yourself, and have close relationships with other people on the spectrum, you are not in a position to make any claims about what it is like to be autistic, and what autistic people really need and want (hint: mostly it’s just being accepted for who we are, and given some basic supports for the challenges we face). Academic study of this subject does not qualify you to claim you know what it is like being autistic, or how “disabling” you think it is. I can tell you, based on some of your remarks here, that you know less than you think you know about the actual experience of it. So I strongly suggest you dial it back a notch, because the direction this thread is now going is not a good one.

it's just a hypothesis

The modern type of science defenetly not. Ancient people lived about as long as we do, and a meager increase in life span is associated not with science, but with comfortable conditions If science could do anything, we would have lived at least longer than a few thousand years ago, but even this is not. Scientific advances are truly zero (or not for the common people)

Of human hands is brick made, against nature, of nature's materials. See the Tower of Babel.