Leaderboard

Sure. Another thread I had in mind was not on dinosaurs, but on numeral systems:

Is the only reason that our mathematics are 10 based because we he 10 fingers and the first calculator was only our fingers ?

Institutions, that teach or place, scientists, can , and often do, have biases. The science itself, can not.

Thanks, both of you.

I don't think so. I don't think our ancestors couldn't use pebbles, sticks etc. for calculations.

It is certainly a very significant reason but not something that can be proven. As Lorenz says, 10 only has two factors so 10 = 5 x 2 and we have two hands with 5 fingers on each. and we see many primitive and not so primitive cultures from around the world that have an equivalent scratch mark of the '5 bar gate' where counting goes 1, 11 111, 1111 and then a new symbol for 5. So 5 units make a 'hand' and 2 hands make 10. But also as lorenz says, 12 = 2 x 3 x 4 and the next such is 2 x 3 x 4 x 5 = 60 Which brings us to the ancient Sumerians and Babylonians who had a number systems based on 60. These numbers which lead to our modern measures of time and angle. Interestingly the ancient cultures in the Americas has even more complicated bases (360) as they measure calendar time not hours, minutes and seconds as we do. A fascinating subject. Thank you for raising it +1

Yep. It doesn't make sense otherwise. From an efficiency standpoint, powers of 2 are better for computers (e.g. 8-bit bytes and 64-bit CPUs). And 12 would be more useful, because it can be divided up in more ways (i.e. into 2, 3, 4, or 6 parts).

You realize that 'oval' is derived from the Latin word for egg ( ovum ) ? ( what a relief; I thought you were asking about your mis-shapen penis )

Newtonian Physics says the period of an orbiting object is T = 2pi R^(3/2)/(GM)^(1/2) Thus 1/(2pi) = R^(3/2) / T(GM)^(1/2) Square both sides: 1/(2pi)^2 = R^3 / GM T^2 Move GM to the left side of the equation: 1/GM(2pi)^2 = R^3 / T^2 Invert both sides GM(2pi)^2 = T^2/R^3 So what Kepler's law states is that for any central body, there is a specific relationship between R and T Newton keeps the relationship. It just includes the mass of the central body, so if you know any two of T, R, or M. you can find the third.

As Genady notes, we’ve already reached the conclusion that ChatGPT is not a credible source. It’s not peer-reviewed and no way to trace any expertise. It’s true that there’s no reliable way to directly detect it, but I think most of us are not shy about asking for citations or justification for any dubious claims. Plagiarism may go undetected, but BS will still be challenged.

If this is occurring just after sunset, could it not be a shadow cast by that island from below your horizon. This should cut out the red end of the spectrum leaving just a blue backfill from Rayleigh scattering.

oh wait...you're point is he had a levitation lever hidden in his sleeve? Well, sure, there's fake levitators out there But THIS video confirms the truth about levitation: it can also be real 3:44 has the levitation part. He is levitating bare chested. No tricks, no hidden levitating mechanisms. Warning: The dude is levitating in his underwear, so graphic content ahead. 'if' it's been on AGT, it must be fake.. people walk away with millions of pounds on the basis of the tricks they perform on AGT. Some tricks are just tricks or the mind, it's in the nature of the performance to be tricks of the mind, and like sleight of hand, entertainment purposes only, not to be believed literarily... BUT The reason levitation tricks are considered worthy is inherently because of the ability to go beyond the normal boundaries of science. If that were not so, the judges would give the levitations a red buzzer. The whole point of levitation is: People can levitate, its official. Its not like 'trick of the mind' its just a trick for entertainment Matter of fact nothing entertaining about a person floating a few feet above ground level!? Shaolin monk window cleaners....apply to Tibet Window Cleaner Agencies they are accustomed to cleaning windows of houses 1000 feet above ground level on the summits of Everest

Someone's dogma consciousness, not internally evolving will be overcome with eventual external acceptance in some shape and form at one's lost opportunity expense, call it fate. It's also possible this external consciousness does not actuate at all. Afterall we are talking about a subject matter that is not defined adequately in the first place to warrant any such narrow HW default view from the get go Every private view of anything is valid, and indisputable within ones own 3lb atomic mass. It's not easy lazy in the public forum of ideas and discussion, particularly a "science" forum. Any relevant idea's sensibility and underlying logic/rational are weighed, measured, analyzed. Crosstalk errors of private/public communication seems inevitable, whether individually or small group of a particular scientific discipline. Varying understanding/interpretation of scientific theories (e.g., QM) are highly visible Could be wrong, but I don't believe this is a dogmatic echo chamber where incest of logos lives A famous reported incident of Galileo comes to mind when trying to show the moons of Jupiter to a vatican high wig No, no need to look, truth of it is in this book, just look here

Showing, no one can (can you, one way or other), we can only discuss, using limited science we have. Anyone can make a case