Leaderboard

But the link supports 60% of enhanced greenhouse coming from increased water vapour as a consequence of warming due to increase in other GHG's, ie water vapour as feedback. It is implicit rather than explicit - and the title, whilst impactful, could be misleading. Without the changes induced by change to other GHG's there would be little change to water vapour ie it does matter how the capacity to hold water vapour got increased - As for termites, I expect the total water vapour evaporating from an area of land to be quite large even in deserts and the contributions of termites via methane oxidation to be relatively small in comparison. Just to exist termites need and use water (carrying it up from underground sources), with significant amounts of water vapour apart from methane's oxidation. I just don't think it can be a big proportion or big contributor to local air humidity or to global warming - not zero, but not highly significant. I would also note that whilst more downwelling IR in lower troposphere is a consequence of Greenhouse Effect it is a local effect that doesn't directly impact the overall global heat balance; it is Top of Atmosphere - high troposphere to mid stratosphere where IR can radiate directly to space - that is most significant. Raised CO2 raises the altitude where that occurs, where such air is thinner and colder and radiates less. @Peterkin I still expect more loss of overall termite activity from forest and ecosystem destruction than any increase of termite species of concern eating construction timber in buildings. More broadly any cultivated land will have little opportunity for termites and grazing will limit available food for grass eating species. I don't know if there have been studies of changes to global termite numbers. Using wood in ways that lock up carbon make some sense, including selective harvesting of natural grown as well as plantations; as always, sound management is essential. Made more difficult for forestry because of climate change and the long time scales for forest growth. We are in a post-drought, post-fires climate phase around here - there is a lot of dead wood around; whilst many local tree species are drought and fire hardy there were still a lot of dead trees amongst the survivors. Lots of food for termites. Some will get eaten hollow and become animal habitat before the termites eat it all. I am seeing disruption to ecosystems from global warming that mean what comes back is not all the same as what came before.

I have found when using either the quote function from the input toolbar or the quote function for a previous post or part of one that you need to exit the editor's setting by hitting return a few times untl your cursor is a few lines clear of the quoted passage. I also find that doing this to separate several quotes is a good idea as sometimes the limits overlay each other.

! Moderator Note I hope you can understand why we can't let anyone promote their YouTube videos on a site made for discussing science. The written word can be scanned quickly for basic veracity, but videos take time, and the usual signal-to-noise ratio is horrific. If you can, please give us a summary of what you're proposing, unless feedback on your video was the only goal. If that's the case, best of luck elsewhere.

If you are going to live forever the value of life will be lost. Even the universe won't last forever, unfortunately. I was wondering what Elon Musk thinks of it: "I’m not actually a huge proponent of longevity," Musk replied. "I do think that having a good life for longer is better — we want to address things that can happen to you when you're old, like dementia, that's important — but I don't know, I definitely don't want to live forever." https://www.businessinsider.com/why-elon-musk-doesnt-want-to-live-forever-2015-10

Hello, Will. I hope you read the rules of Quantum Mechanics better than you read the rules of this site. Advertising your site or youtube channel is strictly forbidden. I suggest you post a suitably complete summary before a moderator trips over this post and bans you.

Gravastar is a way to go away from singularity. Relying on hypothesis on quantum gravity, which has not been quantized yet whether it will ever be done. A gravastar is filled with dark energy. That may link major subjects of investigation of the universe today. LIGO might differentiate a gravastar and 'normal' black hole during the merge. So, there is another alive hypothesis related to the subject.

Bringing up UFOs to bolster your ideas doesn't seem like a winning strategy.

The singularity of a BH lies in the future, rather than at the centre. So it's a time, not a position, from what I know. Now, you can call that the centre, for convenience, but it's a time, not a radius. Time and radius change roles when you cross the event horizon. That's what the maths says. What does that mean? I don't know. There are many things about black holes that I would like to understand better. Is the Schwarzschild black hole anything to go by, or is it just a freak of the equations of relativity for being so unrealistically simple? The only thing I can say is that theorists keep discussing them and the role they play in physics, including giant ones, microscopic ones that may exist, etc. There is no unanimous agreement about them. That's all I can say. The best thing about black holes is probably that they create conflict in our theories. I hope that means that research in black holes will usher in the next revolution in physics, but not much is certain about them except one thing: astrophysical black holes do exist.

I see it as more then just speculative. We essentially know nothing about space and time at the instant of the BB, where our laws break down and where infinite densities are approached and we also know nothing about the mathematical singularity at the core of a BH for the same reasons. Both occurred or occur at the quantum/Planck level. Any matter/energy entering a BH, is essentially broken down into its most basic fundamentals, the same basic fundamentals that evolved through phase transitions and false vaccums at t+10-45 seconds. https://www.uu.edu/dept/physics/scienceguys/2001Aug.cfm#:~:text=When matter falls into or,the rest of space-time.&text=Once inside the black hole's,be squeezed into the singularity. extract: "When matter falls into or comes closer than the event horizon of a black hole, it becomes isolated from the rest of space-time. It can never leave that region. For all practical purposes the matter has disappeared from the universe. Once inside the black hole’s event horizon, matter will be torn apart into its smallest subatomic components and eventually be squeezed into the singularity. As the singularity accumulates more and more matter, the size of the black hole’s event horizon increases proportionally". :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Again, while we certainly cannot be sure 100% of what happens inside any BH EH, we can I believe trust GR to a large extent, and at the same time understand that while it predicts both the BB and BH singularities as regions of infinite densities and spacetime curvatures, it also fails us at these regions. That tells me that we can reasoanbly trust its predictions once inside the EH, at least up to the quantum/Planck level where it fails us. https://www.space.com/what-happens-black-hole-center "It could be that deep inside a black hole, matter doesn't get squished down to an infinitely tiny point. Instead, there could be a smallest possible configuration of matter, the tiniest possible pocket of volume. This is called a Planck star, and it's a theoretical possibility envisioned by loop quantum gravity, which is itself a highly hypothetical proposal for creating a quantum version of gravity. In the world of loop quantum gravity, space and time are quantized — the universe around us is composed of tiny discrete chunks, but at such an incredibly tiny scale that our movements appear smooth and continuous. This theoretical chunkiness of space-time provides two benefits. One, it takes the dream of quantum mechanics to its ultimate conclusion, explaining gravity in a natural way. And two, it makes it impossible for singularities to form inside black holes. As matter squishes down under the immense gravitational weight of a collapsing star, it meets resistance. The discreteness of space-time prevents matter from reaching anything smaller than the Planck length (around 1.68 times 10^-35 meters, so…small). All the material that has ever fallen into the black hole gets compressed into a ball not much bigger than this. Perfectly microscopic, but definitely not infinitely tiny. This resistance to continued compression eventually forces the material to un-collapse (i.e., explode), making black holes only temporary objects. But because of the extreme time dilation effects around black holes, from our perspective in the outside universe it takes billions, even trillions, of years before they go boom. So we're all set for now" And both exist where GR fails us and logically where matter/energy should exist at its most fundamental levels.eg: quarks/electrons. Yes, of course, but as per a BH singularity, we know nothing about those regions that exist at the quantum/Planck level and the instant of the BB. The BB for example, only starts aligning with current physics and GR at around 10-45th seconds. No one yet has mentioned anything about pre BB times, if that is at all a reasoanble concept, since space and time, (as we know them) evolved at that point. Whatever state it existed before the instant of the BB, (or the post quantum/Planck era) is unknown, as is the state of space and time at a BH singularity and the same quantum/Planck era that follows that. But I'm only a poor old bastard that has now retired, so while what I say are my own thoughts (reasonable I hope) it is of course based on much of what I have read and researched with regards to reputable data and references on the subject. The point to remember is that most cosmologists and scientists today, reject the singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvatures and densities as unrealistic. I'm inclined to agree with that for whatever it is worth. And all open to modifications and/or error corrections from our own online knowledgable people.

I thought you didn't understand it.

I realize it is not your assertion ( see Phi's Quora link ), but I have a problem with this statement The CMB radiation is homogenous to 1 part in 100,000 for RMS variations of 18 uK ( after subtracting out dipole anisotropy ). See here ... Cosmic microwave background - Wikipedia So I have to ask ... What concentration ? What plane, or line ? If anything, they are evidence of quantum fluctuations in the pre-inflation era, and in no way indicative of any universal extent in a particular direction.

! Moderator Note Oh gosh, don't be sorry! Thanks for the time we got to waste with you! Bye!

Exactly. This plus the increasing rise of authoritarian tendencies and simple minded support for narrow populist messages across the planet has me wondering what happens next and what a weakened US could even achieve. Another challenge is that people (John Q. Public) are so distracted and occupied by catnip social issues like anti mask and anti vax and abortion and inflation and related topics that they never even bother to engage with the actual big deal issues like hundreds of thousands of troops preparing to invade sovereign countries.

A song for the occasion.................

I chose "Another planetary system". However, my personal beliefs are as follows: 1, Life most likely exists elsewhere in the observable universe, though technological life is most likely extremely rare. 2, There is no reason to assume UAP's/UFO's are anything as fanciful as aliens visitations, and most likely not. 3, Space is so vast and the odds of simultaneous existence so low, even if technological life did exist elsewhere, then the likelihood of communication between any from differing star systems is pretty much zero 4, If technological advanced intelligence exists then we have absolutely no way of even contemplating what it looked like, or what, if any, its intentions might be. 5, It's possible we (humans) are the only technological intelligence in the galaxy. Its also possible that if we continue to advance technology and also manage to survive long enough we may spread out across our galaxy. However Its my personal belief is that our A.I development will attain the singularity that some predict and that this will then become the dominant intelligence capable of interstellar migration and occupation (assuming this becomes one of its goals). Obviously all this is speculation and just my personal beliefs based on what I currently know or understand. Out of all the possible answers to chose from in the poll, I felt this was the most likely of the options.

Perhaps they don't think we're ready, or they're still trying to figure out an interface through which they can communicate with us. How do you communicate effectively with a species that reacts to you with violence and fear? (fight or flight) How do you communicate with an intelligent species that has never encountered extraterrestrials before? One possible answer is the ETs are simply making themselves known. Dr. Jacques Valleé, a leading researcher of the ufo phenomenon, has suggested that the current revelation of ufos with greater and greater frequency could be an intentional form of mass collective conditioning. In short: we are in a preparation stage. The ETs come into our atmosphere, elude our fighter pilots with aplomb, and disappear. Message: We're more technologically advanced than you but are not choosing to hurt you. You don't have to be afraid, and should not attempt to attack is. Such attempts are futile. They continue to show up, seemingly at random, and allow themselves to be periodically witnessed. Slowly but surely the idea of their presence is less and less frightening or taboo in human consciousness. The problems of societal panic and collapse are circumvented. No sudden moves. As a side note, Arthur C. Clarke explored this idea in his classic novel: Childhood's End. @Moontanman You will recall from the film "The Phenomenon" that the schoolchildren who claimed to have interacted with physical alien beings in Zimbabwe in 1994 said they received telepathic messages. This would indicate that the ETs do not communicate verbally as we do. Obviously this poses a major problem for establishing an interface of direct communication, especially since human beings like to "shoot first, and ask questions later".

Interesting article in Scientific American. It relies on a somewhat conventional explanation of "alien probes", but is a provocative piece nonetheless. Maybe the Aliens Really Are Here, By John Gertz on June 21, 2021 "But if so, it’s probably in the form of robotic probes—something both UFO enthusiasts and SETI scientists should be able to agree on" https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/maybe-the-aliens-really-are-here/ The interstellar travel problem could be solved by manipulating wormholes, which are theoretically consistent with the general theory of relativity. https://physics.aps.org/story/v2/st7 I don't know if this was your point, but there is a similar argument stating that aliens would never want to visit Earth because we're so inferior to them, so why would they bother? I don't think this argument has any merit whatsoever. Any moderately intelligent species, let alone one that might be significantly more advanced than we are, is likely to be curious and want to explore its surroundings. Curiosity and an interest in exploration are innate attributes of intelligence. In addition to innate curiosity, there are concrete material benefits of exploration. Humans are spending significant resources to go to Mars, and there's barely a shrub of vegetation or unicellular organism to be found. What energy would human society expend if we could efficiently and safely travel to thousands of exoplanets every year? The scientific benefits would be enormous. Here are only a few reasons why an alien species might be interested in Earth: it harbors incredible biodiversity and a vast array of organisms to study its atmosphere & ecosystems it's dominated by an often violent species that possesses nuclear weapons, and is beginning to venture further out into space it's natural habitat is on the brink of collapse, thanks to the aforementioned violent species it is resource rich, harboring an abundance of heavy metals and other valuable materials And these are just assuming the ETs are benign and passive. Perhaps their own planet has become inhabitable for whatever reason, and now they're looking for a new place to hang out. If humanity discovered an exoplanet as valuable as Earth that we could feasibly visit - we would be there regularly. But suppose, like Earth, such an exoplanet was inhabited by an irrational and violent species that attempted to kill us whenever we entered the atmosphere. In such a situation, (assuming we had no interest in annihilating this unpredictable indigenous species) covert incursions / remote observations would be the next logical alternative. In other words: wait until they grow up.

We are currently all on a ship traveling through space and eventually something is bound to go wrong. What we are talking about is developing an escape from our current ship and moving on.

Magnetic levitation and the Northern lights disagrees with you . Also a car doing a 180 is not the same as a reversal of polarity . I'm sorry I have to leave this forum , was hoping to find some intelligence here but I was sadly mistaken .