Leaderboard

So far there is not even an inkling that this would work for biological systems. Critical reactions that we commonly associate with life happen at membranes. There are quite a few reasons for that. The most simple one is to counter diffusion. Molecules need to be in sufficient proximity for anything to happen and if important metabolites diffuse out of range, you are out of luck. In addition, gradients created with membranes are critical to create energy. Early life does not have the luxury of high-energy containing organic molecules. The formation of some sort of compartment is almost certainly a prerequisite to life as joigus mentioned.

I was looking for an example of "small nations... willingly being absorbed into bigger ones". Not an example of small nations remaining independent states while joining an organization that has both large and small members. Using your logic my wife and I have been absorbed by AARP.

Historically, after Newtonian formulation of mechanics, alternative formulations were developed, i.e., Lagrangian and Hamiltonian. In QM, after wave mechanics, matrix mechanics was developed. In QFT, there are S-matrix and path integral formulations. Which alternative formulations of GR are known today? PS. I think, in SR the parallel examples are Einstein and Minkowski formulations.

Since you never defined “thin” this is a pretty lame objection. A couple parts in a thousand is pretty thin. You’ve given no rigorous analysis as to why it should be any thinner. You still have not quantified these radiation levels or presented any sort of model. Fast relative to what? If the radiation is coming from all directions shouldn’t this increase the rate from the direction of motion? (doesn’t apply to EM radiation, of course, since that always moves at c relative to the observer) Do you have any independent evidence that radiation affects time? That time passes faster in daytime than nighttime, for example? ! Moderator Note Yes, since you have presented nothing that passes as science. Soapboxing is against the rules, and we don’t have a “supposing and guessing” section.

Interesting perspective given the largest war in Europe since WWII is raging as we speak. For example??? Many people in Chinatown in San Francisco consider themselves Chinese. I wonder when that part of San Francisco will "split back" to China, with the help of the Chinese military.

Some what? Three new questions is not an answer to my question. Agreed. If nukes exist there is a risk to the world they will be used. So from the perspective of the world, nukes are a bad idea. But from the perspective of the small country, nukes are often judged to be well worth it. Unfortunately, Israel is primarily looking out for Israeli citizens, not world citizens.

Dear honorable scientists and average people, Ok, I am sorry for making you wait. Please have in mind that pressure (especially time pressure) will never give us good answers and well-conceived ideas. Now concerning gravity. Please answer the following questions for yourself: 1. We know that electromagnetic radiation (or light) exists in a huge amount of different frequencies with also a huge amount of different properties. This radiation or light is being created by all types of objects, beginning with the stars, gas clouds, even planets like Jupiter. So the first question is, if a person is floating in space, is it being hit by all kinds of radiation coming from all directions and with all types of intensities? I suppose that yes. 2. Is light in its different frequencies able to push massy objects (some kind of light sail effect)? I suppose that yes 3. Does light at lower frequencies have much less energy than light at very high frequencies (gamma radiation)? We should suppose that the intensity of a ray of gamma radiation should have maybe 100.000 times the intensity of a similar ray of visible light. Right? 4. Now imagine we have to compare a person standing on the ground of earth and another person floating in space very far away. What is the difference? Why would this person be attracted to earth? There must be something in the condition of this person that should change while moving from one position to another. Am I right? 5. So let us study this situation: The person floating in space is being hit by all kinds of radiation coming from all directions. But what happens with the person standing on the ground? Is this person also being hit by the same radiation? No, definitely not. Why not? Because there is no radiation coming from below the ground (actually, the ground itself might produce its own radiation, but for practical reasons, we should only concentrate on the radiation coming from deep space). We should define this as a "gravitational shadow" created by earth. Earth is blocking a huge part of the radiation coming from space, right? 6. And this "gravitational shadow" is inversely proportional to the square of radius r. The closer an object is to earth, the bigger the shadow of earth is on the object. At the same time, the object also creates a "gravitational shadow" on earth, so we have actually electromagnetic radiation pushing earth towards the object and electromagnetic radiation pushing the object towards earth, am I right? Well, now we have the following issues of why you might think that my model would never work (I admit that): 1. If the sun is by far the object in our solar system to create most of the radiation (actually it is not, but it is in our position on earth), shouldn´t the sun push us away from it? Well this might be what we would all think at the beginning, But there are several variables we should pay attention to. First, the sun does not produce a lot of high frequency radiation (almost nothing). This type of radiation is rather created by special events very far away like two colliding black holes. So there might be radiation coming from millions of colliding black holes just behind the sun, radiation that is being blocked by the sun. Second and very important is the effect created by this gravitational shadow on photons. As was already confirmed, gravity is bending the light of not only stars we can see close to the sun, but also of stars further away. If we would have to define the bending of light by the sun, we should say that the only light that is not being bent should be the light coming from the opposite direction of the sun. This means that the sky as we see it is an altered version of the real sky, the entire sky is being slightly altered by the sun. This means that the "effective shadow" of the sun should be quite bigger than its actual size. A third condition is that the light coming from all directions is not the same with the same intensity. Far away from the sun, the intensity of light should be (approximately) the same from all directions, but close to the sun, we have light that is still being attracted strongly by the sun hitting us from outer space, while the light that has already passed by the sun to hit us should be of a much lower intensity (redshifted). So if we divide the radiation arriving at our planet in two halfs, we have one half of a high intensity that is being concentrated by the sun and another half that is of lower intensity where light is being dispersed. When we stand on the ground, we are being very slightly pushed to the ground by an altered radiation and Earth is being pushed against us, being hit from behind, because there is no radation coming from below us holding us in position (in the air). I suppose that the force on earth towards us is much much stronger than the force pushing us down, therefore the mass of small objects does no longer matter when calculating the acceleration by gravity. Of course you will now all laugh about this funny idea, because its not easy to imagine that there are x-rays pushing us down to the ground, but consider that we might still be very far away from detecting all kinds of radiations or particles (maybe currently defined as gravitons) or even "pressures" and that this model of gravitational shadows can apply to all kinds of radiations and the sum of all of them can be responsible for gravity. On the other hand, you will mention that not all radiation penetrates the atmosphere, but even radiation hitting the atmosphere should push the earth. Also you might say that below the surface of earth, there will be a point where there is no more radiation. Well, this does not mean that earth is not being pushed against us. Also it is possible that gravity decreases at a certain depth, once the radiations and forces are again the same from all directions. Ok, please tell me what you think about this crazy idea. Please don´t insult me. Don´t forget that we currently have no idea what gravity is. We only have a model that seems to be very useful to make quite accurate calculations. And dont forget that space is huge and very little changes or deviations of light can have tremendous effects. Imagine the effect of slightly blocking, deviating or redshifting the radiation hitting our planet from one side versus the other side. And yes, the strange orbit of Mercury would be the result of a combination of gravitational shadow and light sail effect. Close to the sun, the light sail effect finally seems to increase. And I think it is better if people propose things that are refuted or not than having nobody showing up with new possibilities/ideas. If you want, consider this a good joke and laugh. It´s healthy to laugh. At least now I can continue with my duties. Thank you for your attention and good luck with your future projects! (Wo)mankind needs you! Kind regards, Thilo Müller

Well, the logic of that argument is that large aggressive nations should be absorbing smaller nations right now, as we speak, before they get the chance to get nukes. If it's not happening, when the haven't got nukes, then your argument falls flat. You can point to Russia to try to bolster that argument, but there's no evidence that Russia is trying to absorb smaller nations. Crimea was only nominally Ukrainian. Nearly 100% of Crimeans would have called themselves Russian before they split back to Russia. The territory that Russia holds in Ukraine is not dissimilar, and the territories that Russia took control of in Georgia were the same. The people considered themselves Russians. In any case, small nations are willingly being absorbed into bigger ones, and queueing to get in. That's the case directly with the EU, and indirectly with the USA, who like to govern other countries by economic means, not an upfront takeover. And China have cottoned on, and are quietly doing the same thing to much of Africa.

So for you the sun is an object that is constantly absorbing space. That is interesting. It is like throwing a spear through a waterfall. Please give me a -999 reputation. Lol. I don´t care. I prefer to have answers to my questions.

You don't know much about the EU then.

It was more than it was worth.

Please read the following sentences: "Gravity can only be explained by taking into account that there is a spacetime curvature." "The only proof of a spacetime curvature is gravity." "Because there is a god, we build a lot of churches." "If we build a lot of churches, there will be a god." "If the sun is shining today, I will ride my bike." "If I ride my bike, the sun will be shining." If you are interested in a new logical way to explain gravity, please send me a message, before this topic is being removed by the Einstein fanatics.