Leaderboard

Not a joke but I thought it was a surprising reimagining. This is street artist Banksy's latest offering.

That's a United States District Court. Federal case, as Swanson noted. State and federal courts are entirely separate systems, so much so that for example double jeopardy laws don't apply - a person can be tried for murder in state court, be found not guilty, but then be tried for murder as a federal crime (where state lines were crossed, or federal lands or entities were involved). This judge was appointed by Trump, is sympathetic to conservative legal causes (something no judge should openly be, ever), and so his Amarillo courtroom is a travesty waiting to happen.

It involves a federal agency

A necessary but not sufficient condition, I agree...

It does not follow from this, that "with speculation, there is a good and original observation." It does not follow from this, that "with a bold conjecture, a great discovery will be made."

I saw it, "Enough of crackpots...". May be I'm considered as crackpot so I must mention two geniuses: "Without speculation there is no good and original observation." Charles Darwin. "No great discovery was ever made without a bold conjecture." Isaac Newton.

No, mathematics is not the machinery that runs the universe. Is the "tool" to describe the laws but does not explain how they are implemented.

Right, but this does not prevent us to think in how the laws are applied over the particles to make the universe run. As you said in that post: Still sailing I think.

"The Feynman Lectures on Physics": https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_07.html (just with a google search) Thanks for the readings. Very helpful. +1 I stay with: "No one has since given any machinery." I think all those geniuses didn't have the opportunity to know about computers and virtual games...

The need for a mechanism. Another ship that sailed long ago. Incidentally, [...] and, Now, who said that? William of Ockham is the busiest dead philosopher ever!

If I were down to my last cup of coffee as I was starving on the side of the road and some stranger stopped by to give me some pithy unsolicited advice, I think I'd go ahead and pour the coffee on them.

I think ... I believe .... I remember when science used to start off with "I observe ...".

Why would you get uncivil? Give the arguments. I think we are all civil here, aren't we? I am especially curious why you think it needs 'a real physical effect', i.e. imply that there must be a causal explanation. I notice sometimes people are disappointed when I explain e.g. time dilation: people miss a 'mechanism'. This is the same problem Lorentz and Poincaré had, if I understand history correctly: Lorentz e.g. hypothesised that the ether is expressing a pressure on objects moving in it (that would be a 'dynamical solution', and I suppose what you call 'a real physical effect'); Poincaré never got rid of the idea that there must be a preferred inertial frame, like the ether, but there is no method to find out with any physics experiment. But long since then, the physics community opted for Einsteinian relativity. It explains all relativity effects without reference to an ether. Ockham's razor at work: when the ether does not contribute anything to an explanation, we can drop it.

Toxoplasmosis is a champ. Half the world has it, and most never have symptoms, and it spreads from cat litter boxes. The parasite's survival is dependent on a balance between host survival and parasite proliferation. T. gondii achieves this balance by manipulating the host's immune response, reducing the host's immune response, and enhancing the parasite's reproductive advantage. Once it infects a normal host cell, it resists damage caused by the host's immune system, and changes the host's immune processes. As it forces its way into the host cell, the parasite forms a parasitophorous vacuole (PV) membrane from the membrane of the host cell. The PV encapsulates the parasite, and is both resistant to the activity of the endolysosomal system, and can take control of the host's mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum.

It seems pretty obvious that parasites that damage or kill their hosts will eventually become less numerous, if they adversely affect the survival of the population of the host. Generally the ones that do the most damage are ones that jump from one species to another, like the covid virus did. You then get an evolutionary race of parasite vs immune system. In the end, the most successful parasites will be the ones that can evolve quickest, to keep ahead of the game.

As to Ashtekar, Plebanski. It kind of boils down to successive changes of variables to get from a Lagrangian formulation to a Hamiltonian one, that's amenable to QM. The logical path is Palatini action -> Plebanski action -> Ashtekar Prime crash course (Lee Smolin, Perimeter Institute): https://pirsa.org/09070000 I do not properly distinguish between Lagrangian, Palatini, Plebanski, Ashtekar. Lagrangian is the focus. The rest are successive ways of reducing the number of "generalised coordinates" until the theory is really more user-friendly. A particularly illuminating step is when the curvature tensor is reduced to an expansion in a self-dual part and an anti-self-dual part. The content of Einstein's equations being that the anti-self-dual part is identically zero --something like that, I forget lots and lots of details.

Agreed. Extra-nice topic. The Bible on this: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/spinors-and-spacetime/B66766D4755F13B98F95D0EB6DF26526 https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/spinors-and-spacetime/24388801C4B4BA419851FD4AF667A8F0 'Twistor' is another key word to look for in this concern. Twistors require masslessness, so it's a bit more of an adventurous approach. But very worth taking a look too.

To whichever reference you choose. It won’t matter. You can’t have two realities. I think you are diluting the notion of reality to the point where it’s meaningless. How would they measure different results? The velocity relative to the crystal is what matters. They would only measure different velocities if there was a preferred frame, but there isn’t.

Evidently, not so famous and not so widespread, as I lived in five countries, among four religions, on three continents, and never heard of him.

LOL. Cats are known to collapse wave functions. That's their job in this world.

Who? Or what ? Are words used by you to pass information to me in form of a question,you expecting an answer. That 'information' is predated by consciousness and emptiness.How can I answer about that? We talk of emptiness...using a word empty...that which we don't know about...what is it? But there is a word for it.in my case consciousness is synonymous with existence,and I happen to exist because I know there is no existence (emptiness).from that diagram consciousness and emptiness is fundamental.we know of consciousness cause we happened to be conscious. The question should be how does that lead to Spacetime fabric,dark energy,dark matter,normal matter and the four fundamental forces of the universe.

They are the exact same thing. The string

There's a direct link between the theoretical formalism and the elapsed time. So what? That's the thing we're trying to explain. You said something about "causal efficacy", but things can't cause themselves, so that was nonsense. Your earlier point about detecting the ether's motion is also nonsense, because that's not the same thing as having an effect. It was established way back in Einstein and Lorentz's time that, for whatever reason, time dilation and length contraction are coordinated in such a way that they have the same effect regardless of the ether's velocity. As for proving the ether's existence, I've tried to explain that time dilation is evidence of something that causes time dilation, and an ether is one conceivable explanation but not the only one. So the relativistic argument seems to be that spacetime and real space are equally valid because they're both "models". But real space is simple, intuitive, and easy to explain. One can think of it as a network of little cells (Roger Penrose has called it a "spin network"), so proximity could be implemented as connections between cells, and distance along a path could be the number of cells on the path. And those cells could potentially be related to quantum-mechanical phenomena. What is the equivalent structure for spacetime? What underlying physics could it possibly represent? Why should people accept the apparently ridiculous proposition that a structure combining such obviously different phenomena as duration and extent can be anything more than a mathematical convenience? The final justification for relativity so far seems to be, not that spacetime provides a physical explanation for time dilation, but that theories in general don't have to provide explanations, because they're "just models". Which to me seems like blurring the distinction between science and religion. Maybe this would be a good place to end the thread. I'm not sure I can stand reading these excuses anymore without getting uncivil.

The Planet Nestor being our nextdoor neighbors and providing its math model of FOD=6_4 compared to Earth's GOD=GOOD=7_4 is the BIGGEST news in history! What the hell is up with you?! Did you notice that NASA's Artemis I Moon Mission lasted 25.5 days?

Nestor has 6 continents/4 do or don't touch its equator/4 LARGE land areas. 64% of its surface is liquid or frozen water. Its LARGE moon has 4 primary phases of 6.4 days each thus 6-day weeks & 4 weeks in a 'moonth'. Lunar year of 306 days + 6 day week + 4 days = 316 day solar year. Their ancients observed 6 moving objects in their heavens/4 can be seen during the day/4 cast shadows on Nestor. Their Venus is at .6 AU & their Mercury .4 AU. Besides Nestor, their solar system has 6 planets/4 are or are not gas/ice giants. Etc. I've been sharing this with NASA and others for 20 years. I presented All 'True64 Earthlike Plan-its' Are Built64 on 7_4 (like Earth) Or 6_4 (like Planet Nestor) as a poster at the NASA Conference Missions for Exoplanets: 2010-2020 held at the Pasadena Hilton April 21-23, 2009. The tweaked version of that one-page paper and more can be found at the link in my signature. NASA recently sent the unmanned Artemis I to the Moon on a 25 1/2 day mission. Why that odd number? That's the lunar cycle on the Planet Nestor. Synchronism: 3/15/23 13:35 "The plan." - ad United Healthcare. "NASA Apollo 14 Moon Mission" - I Dream of Jeannie on AntennaTV