Leaderboard

To be honest I'm a bit disappointed with most of the comments. A bit too much falling back on the old truisms about serendipitous spin offs IMO rather than providing examples of how LHC has been delivering them - because not all research projects do deliver them. thewowsignal might not be contributing much to the discussion but it is a good question. Sure, the LHC's budget is small by the standards of the global economy but that is a disingenuous argument; it isn't a pot of money just waiting for uses to be put to, most of it - more than exists it seems, via borrowing and money creation - is spoken for and still leaves them short. There is no shortage of alternative uses where tangible benefits would ensue, that aren't getting enough. There are tradeoffs. Even the old "space programs delivered so much" thing - where truly massive amounts of government funding delivered some tangible technological advances with economic benefits - dodges the question of whether equivalent funding of other kinds of R&D would have done as much or more. These aren't arguments that much impress me. As science research project budgets go "high end" things like the LHC are very high cost and it is a legitimate question whether they are good value - because there are no shortages of underfunded research projects, with that same innate potential for serendipitous spin offs. Yes, pure research has delivered spin offs with useful applications and I am generally supportive of most kinds of R&D - and I'm pleased that some nations that can afford it do so. I think a complete understanding of the building blocks of matter, even without spin-offs does represent something intrinsically valuable - but not unquestioning support when it comes to how to get there. It isn't entirely clear to me that it is best achieved by this research project rather than a different one.

It doesn't matter if they aren't spotted. The interesting question is which side of a zebra has the most stripes? And of course, it's the outside. Last time I bought zebra, the clerk scanned the wrong barcode and I got charged for rhino.

Maybe not intended but I see this as yet an analogy for entanglement. Assume a couple is married and then separated by some (great) distance. When one (random) individual of the married couple dies we immediately know that the other party has become a widower or a widow. The immediate change from wife to widow (or husband to widower) does not need a signal.

Since the energy of the light can't exceed the mass energy of a star, and the mass of dark matter exceeds the mass of "normal" matter, this seems trivially falsified. Take the example of the sun, which you should have worked out. 4 x 10^9 kg/s converted to photons, which means about 1.2 x 10^16 kg/year, or ~ 10^25 kg per billion years. The sun's mass is 2 x 10^30 kg. There just isn't enough light.

Well I don't think this speculation should be lightly dismissed. On the other hand I think that it is as simple as you make out. We already have terminology for things which display the characteristics which define what makes a particular type of cell. But we have more general terminology starting with the word system. And cells represent particular types of system, but not the type you seem to be thinking of. The Earth can certainly (and often is) regarded as a system for some purpose or other - there are many types of system. So I suggest to you, since it is your speculation, that you consider recasting your thoughts in this more conventional terminology, so you can have more profitable discussions with others. The basic characteristics of a system is something we can draw a boundary around which divides the system from the rest of the universe, also called the surroundings. Properties, processes and objcts that are wholly inside the system, wholly outside the system and cross the boundary as a result of interaction between the system and its surroundings can then be identified and evaluated. This model is a very powerful tool.

Kari Lake, election denying trump game playing candidate for Arizona Governor, has officially lost the election there

Bah. We just spent more than twice that on advertisements in the US midterm elections and all just so ONLY one incumbent lost their seat nationally. People who churn their own butter or milk their own cows think I spend too much on both products at the grocery store. They’re welcome to hold that opinion, and it plus $2-3 will buy you a half decent cup of coffee.

LHC gets tons of data about QCD background and rules out wrong hypotheses and ideas about how matter behaves. It provides an excellent school for engineers and experimental physicists. It fosters collaboration among nations. But maybe you're right. We should throw money at other --more worthy-- causes. Here's another one that's in sorry need for more money:

Does this differ in any meaningful way(s) from how we experience existence while awake? Life could be a dream, sweetheart… 🎶 🎵 🎶

Indeed so. In fact the naming of the equations is somewhat arbitrary and discipline dependent. Classically both the wave equation and the diffusion equation were derived from the more general telegraph equation by setting some of the coefficients to infinity or zero.

Sounds like you've already made up your mind and are just here to complain.

I'm in general agreement but would say it differently. Life is consciousness and the first demand of consciousness is survival and the second reproduction. Second is to have fun to both feed your soul but also to maintain your desire to survive. Third, and most importantly, is to try to leave the world a better place than you found it. In every way you want to leave it better. Fourth, fight death with every living breath. You can age gracefully as you seek the fountain of youth. If you find it just hope you're still young enough to enjoy it.

I can respect that.

I like and agree in most part the basic premise of the views of the OP. In fact if that is all religion is designed to do then I'm in. Anything that promotes a healthy and happy standard of living for all life is surely a good thing, no? I also agree that "if" god is real then I would imagine god to be unimaginable, as I have stated before. But I'm also happy with the notion that there is no requirement for god in the first place.

'Low Tide' - (Barry Blitt)

Having an equation does not supply a reason for why the property holds, since there is always the question: "Why does the equation hold?". So I see that my reason is not in conflict with the formula. The same formula could apply to my reason. Note that the previous post is not quite right: photons are also Riemann Spheres/Anti-Riemann Spheres. The math is just the math of Riemann Spheres (stereographic projection and the like). It means the computer running the Universe knows on what circles what properties are located. The computer can read this by orientating the particle appropriately.

Ukraine has no missiles to attack far airfields. It is work of Biden. NATO is attacked by two missiles. Zero are downed of two. Ukraine shot down 73 missiles out of about 100. Who hump up?