Leaderboard

Although I have a certain interest in science, and have even done my own research, my job is an artist. I decided that art is a great way for me to convey an idea and give something to think about. This is my oil and acrylic paintings Antigravity girl Space conquerors Spaceship Earth Rocket people Rocket fish Elon Musk spaceman city Flying saucer principle Dark city Darkest night Robots bar UFO contact

My first forum "Hypography" is now almost nothing but nut jobs. Hard to even read many posts, they contain so much nonsense it almost funny. They need swansonT for a few months...🤪

Yes it is now just about entirely populated with nutcases and cranks- and not even interesting cranks, at that.😄

The CoM doesn’t move if it starts at rest and there are no external forces.

No, you did not. Rediscovered just the wheel. Widely known and used even by CPU engineers to save space in the CPU registers.. Really huh, I thought I discovered something ground breaking there. It just goes to show that by going through and presenting your ideas to others it will allow for an honest critique of your work and updating my previous falsely held beliefs. I honestly thought I had something there for a second, could have saved a lot of time just posting the idea when I had it. Self Reflection: The above section is very misleading in which it states that I had the idea the other day when in fact I had the idea about a month ago and have been working on it on and off sense. I would not say that I put to much effort into it, however it is enough to justify a little bit of anger at myself for not asking about the idea before hand. I want to apologize for the deception on my part. My whole topic starter kind of also feels very "showey" or giving the impression that it is world changing thing. That was not intentional and was probably my ego slightly showing along with me being impatient when writing it up. I will try and work on that the next time I have an idea and want to share it with others on this forum. The reason that I am sharing this is to self reflect on my current actions so that I can better improve on my later posts along with trying to become better at understanding different things. Also I want to have a sort of something that I can go back to and view for future reflection.

Excellent work. Distinctive and evocative.

No that is not what I said. Mentioning the most dangerous (to life ingeneral and humans in particular) was my mistake (although others seem also to have followed suit). You question was clear enough. However after I realised my mistake I added the part about finding the answer to your question at the bottom of the oceans. Since this is homework I cannot mention the landform explicitly. But look at the bottom of the oceans for one of the largest landforms on the planet that has been volcanically active for hundreds of millions of years (and still is), yet poses the least threat to humanity.

And even on some other so called science forums.

They won those contracts on merit, and that money would have gone somewhere else (Russia or another telecoms company) if not SpaceX. SpaceX charge NASA about $55 million per astronaut to LEO. This compares favourably to ~$90 million (and steadily rising) the Russians were charging, and the predicted $90 million the Boeing's Starliner will charge. The FCC's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund has been awarded ~$20 billion to help improve rural internet access. This will go anywhere the money is deemed useful. Starlink has been awarded less than $1 billion of that. It seems money well spent on what has become vital infrastructure. It's a priority for many governments -in the UK Labour pledged to spend £20 billion rolling out more fibre optic in the last election, most of which would have gone to BT (a telecoms company). SpaceX a private industry with the US government as it's current primary customer at the moment. Companies like Lockheed Martin for instance, or any pharmaceutical company in the UK (NHS). The Lunar lander was already being developed before the contract was awarded, and will still be developed even if the contract is lost (Boeing and Dynetics have challenged the award. If successful one of those companies will get the money, though apparently they were asking for a lot more than $3 billion). It's part of the the Starship project, which is what will try for Mars. As far as i can tell it's funding has thus far been entirely private. If you have info on it do share because it's hard to find any data on this. It already has a commercial award in the form of dearMoon - a billionaire has paid for a lunar flyby. Maybe, but they would have made access to LEO several orders of magnitude cheaper (they have already achieved one order of magnitude). Again, where would you rather this money go? NASA and the FCC are spending this money whether SpaceX exists or not.

100 years is a very long time frame.

Closed timelike curves don't work that way, not even with stable ( ? ) wormholes. Take a look at these lecture notes from K Thorne ( he gets to wormhole time travel near the end ) II-121.pdf (caltech.edu)

It certainly is! Important that is. As I have often said, some of these [those with no obvious or lilely mundane explanation] should be investigated under the auspices of the scientific methodology. Let me say Moontanman, it is rather pleasing to discuss this subject with you, and the reasonable position you seem to have taken. Far better then discussing it with what I term the "nutty brigade"

You can do this by dimensional analysis. If the air is made up of just nitrogen, \[\left[P\right]=ML^{-1}T^{-2}\] (units of pressure) And your fundamental constants are the mass of the nitrogen molecule, \( \hbar \) and \( c \) (the speed of light.) \[ \left[\hbar\right]=ML^{2}T^{-1} \] \[ \left[m_{N_{2}}\right]=M \] \[ \left[c\right]=LT^{-1} \] Your pressure must be, \[ P=\left(m_{N_{2}}\right)^{j}\hbar^{k}c^{l} \] Gathering all together, \[ M^{j}\left(ML^{2}T^{-1}\right)^{k}\left(LT^{-1}\right)^{l}=M^{j}M^{k}L^{2k}T^{-k}L^{l}T^{-l}=M^{j+k}L^{2k+l}T^{-k-l}=ML^{-1}T^{-2} \] So the power equations are, \[ j+k=1 \] \[ 2k+l=-1 \] \[ -k-l=-2 \] whose solutions are, \[ k=-3 \] \[ l=5 \] \[ j=4 \] So your pressure would be the order of, \[ P=\frac{\left(m_{N_{2}}\right)^{4}c^{5}}{\hbar^{3}}\simeq2.5\times10^{51}\:\textrm{Pa}\simeq2.5\times10^{45}\:\textrm{atm} \] That's like \( 10^{29} \) times the density at the centre of the Sun. I think you're gonna make a black hole. Don't do it at home! Even though this is just dimensional analysis, if you take \( m_{\textrm{air}}=.7m_{N_{2}}+.2m_{O_{2}}+.1m_{H_{2}} \), you get a better approximation for the average mass of the air molecules.

Evidence shows there are some measurable effects: The brain grows in size: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121008082953.htm The brain is better integrated: https://news.psu.edu/story/334349/2014/11/12/research/learning-languages-workout-brains-both-young-and-old

Close to the surface of a large body of water, it is very common to have an inversion, whereby the cool water cools the air immediately above. So then it would not be true that the temperature decreases upwards within the layer. The opposite would be the case. For example this explains why Chicago is sometimes visible from a point 60 miles way on the far side of Lake Michigan. It is what is called a superior mirage, and its cause is the bending of light in an inversion layer above the lake: https://www.abc57.com/news/mirage-of-chicago-skyline-seen-from-michigan-shoreline

https://thelanguagenerds.com/

Don’t laugh too hard if you have asthma, but when I eat too many chilies it’s plasma

Being safe, and 'feeling' safe are two totally different things. One iis a reality, the other is a perception based on our biases, mis/conceptions, and life experiences. So yes, he may well 'feel' safer, and be totally justified saying so. You are angry that HIS perception is not the same as YOURS ?

So here is exactly what I pointed out (after your words): According to Newton's laws of motion, there is no way the frame to move in any direction (up or down) because of an internal rotating mass. We speak about internal forces/momentum that means the frame should never move in any direction. Since the experiment says "it vibrates" then, what Newton has to say about all these?