Leaderboard

I was reading that the protective mini-islands are called dolphins https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_(structure)

Ironic, considering "them" was originally used properly in context until you broadened the definition to include the us/them divide, then denounced it as divisive. It's insidious how you weaponized a pronoun.

I feel your pain. Perhaps you should stop dating tennis players, Moon. Love means nothing to them.

It's "deaf". The brain has a hard time adapting to death.

That reminds me, are you interested in joining my professional hide-and-seek team. Turns out, good players are hard to find.

But we (scientists) are aware of relativity, so there is no difference in understanding. It’s a given that the measurement was made with our clock. And this has no impact on expansion. You could make the same flawed argument about any measurement affected by relativity, and yet GPS (for example) still works. You are overstating the impact of relativity; it does not render things unknown. It merely makes measurements frame-dependent, but with a known transform between frames. It's like saying that the fact that things can be written in both English and German means language has no meaning, as if one can’t translate between the two.

There is a detailed discussion of most of the points you raise in an article by the military historian and Pacific War expert Richard B. Frank called ‘No Recipe For Victory” available on the website for the National WWII Museum New Orleans https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/victory-in-japan-army-navy-1945 There had been a long standing division of opinion since January 1943 between the chiefs of the US Navy and the US Army over how best to achieve the unconditional surrender of Japan. The US Navy favoured a blockade that would have involved starving the Japanese population into surrender. The US Army favoured an invasion plan called operation Downfall subdivided into two parts: - i. Operation Olympic to seize control of the southern island of Kyushu which was scheduled to begin in November 1945 ii. Operation Coronet to invade the Tokyo region on Honshu about 1 March 1946. The argument over whether to go with a naval blockade or an amphibious invasion of the archipelago was settled in favour of the Army’s invasion plan at the Honolulu Conference in July 1944. Doubts then arose because of the massive casualties sustained during the invasion of Okinawa in May 1945 (49,000+ with 12,000 killed including the 4-star general in command of the operation). Admiral Nimitz privately said he could no longer support the invasion plan in the light of this, and even more concerns were raised by fresh military intelligence that Japan had moved such large numbers of troops and aircraft into Kyusuhu, that the US landing forces would be in a 1-1 combat situation with no numerical advantage there - a scenario described as “a recipe for a bloodbath”. The main problem with a naval blockade was that it would have taken a very long time to complete. The US Navy’s own estimates suggested that the Japanese would not collapse until 1947 at the earliest. Critics pointed out that the high level of social control traditionally found in Japanese society along with the ruthless suppression of dissent by the Japanese military government would have led to the prioritization of feeding those involved in sustaining the war effort, while leaving millions of civilians to starve to death - a prospect that even the most hawkish supporters of a blockade were reluctant to discuss in detail. There was also considerable concern in the USA about a possible loss of will to carry on fighting an endlessly protracted war in the Pacific against an enemy with no history of military compromise or surrender. Finally there is the question of the intense firebombings that began on 10 March with the 279 plane Meetinghouse raid on Tokyo which levelled 2 square miles of eastern Tokyo, and probably killed over 100,000 civilians. The Meetinghouse raid was quickly followed by similar raids against Nagoya on 12 March, Osaka on 14 March , Kobe on 18 March, and Nagoya again on the 19 March. - These raids were deemed a military success by Major Curtis Lemay who was in command of the USAAF strategic bombing campaign - and yet these raids had had largely ceased by May 1945 - why ? i. The USAAF had run out of incendiary ordnance. These raids had depleted their entire stock. ii. From May 1945 onwards the USAAF had to urgently redeploy southwards to support the US invasion of Okinawa which had run into unexpectedly intense opposition including sustained kamikaze attacks. iii. These fire-bombing raids had no discernible effect in weakening or deflecting the resolve of the Japanese leadership to carry on fighting to the bitter end - regardless of the civilian casualties sustained. As a matter of fact the Japanese government did not begin to consider any diplomatic solutions to end the war until the morning of 6 August just after the first atom bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, and when they did, the first Japanese diplomatic overtures were made towards the Soviet Union in the hope of enlisting their help in brokering a cease-fire - hopes that were promptly dashed when the Soviet Union belatedly declared war on Japan and invaded Manchuria.

Any time or length measurement will be the same, but there will be length contraction of the object, and it will experience time dilation. Two observers measuring the decay of muons, for example, will get the same answer for the half-life, but it won’t agree with the lab frame measurements. Without relativity you could not reconcile the discrepancy.

See, now you’ve gone and tainted it. Scrotum

This is only one frame. They must be moving with respect to each other to be different frames.

If your absolute unit is at 0°K, then you should probably seek medical advice ?

Them = autism spectrum conditions like aspergers or PDD. I'm not referring to people but to diagnoses, so them is appropriate. It's not my intent to other anyone or refer to them as being anything less than human. Even if I was still talking about a group of people, I still don't see why you'd be annoyed at me using the word "them" in discussion. "I call them a bunch of assholes" "I call them awesome". "them" isn't the problematic part, how you talk about "them" is. It's even worse than a numbers game, since nobody actually knows what the numbers are. The assumption is that the majority of people who have never entered into the psychiactric diagnostic process and have not had their brains scanned, make up the group that is known as neurotypicals/normal people. When all that can really be known about this group, is that their neurological and psychological states are as yet undetermined.

I heard somewhere that long continuous truss bridges like that will sometimes have their support columns centered on a small artificial island (e.g. a big pile of rock) to serve as a buffer against ship collisions. It's my understanding that nothing will really protect a support column from a container ship, unless it's actually islanded in that way. The ships are just too massive now, averaging much greater mass than in the 70s when construction began.

Sounds like junk science.

Kelvin Klein. For your absolute unit.

It’s often said that lazy people make the best engineers as they look for simpler quicker solutions

I'm start with this statement which is rather erroneous but rather than point out the mistakes I will instead describe the quantum vacuum in accordance with the mainstream. From that the errors will become more readily obvious. I will be including related formulas so may take it a bit (in case of cross posts lol). Lets start with the period prior to inflation the hot dense state. We all agree its a tiny region at an immense density and temperature. In our models we feel the energy density is roughly \[10^{19} K\]. So everything is in that thermal equilibrium state. All particles are in thermal equilibrium. At that temperature if you apply the Bose-Einstein statistics formula you will find you have roughly 10^90 photons. This is an equivalency its actually a quark/gluon plasma state other particles can exist but recall we cannot distinguish any particle species. Here is the Bose-Einstein statistic. Don't worry I don't expect anyone to be able to use these formulas. \[ n_i = \frac {g_i} {e^{(\varepsilon_i-\mu)/kT} - 1}\] In that formulas the effective degrees of freedom is 2 for photons. I gave you an article with the pertinent details earlier on. That's your low entropy state. Now lets look at the quantum vacuum including zero point energy. Were all familiar with the quantum harmonic oscillator. This was one of the earlier studies on universe from Nothing scenarios. Including Guth's original inflation which unfortunately had the effect of "Runaway Inflation". Now one of the problems you have in that quoted section is your likely not aware that when particles come into existence they have to obey numerous conservation rules. The relevant one is conservation of charge in this particular case this includes matter and its antimatter pair. For photons it is its own antiparticle the distinction lies in its circular polarization. anti-photons are Right hand polarized while photons are left hand. This rule also applies to other particles such as neutrinos. Hopefully you can see a problem with your negative and positive universe scenario. Particularly since anti matter is readily formed in numerous processes including stars. https://www.space.com/21889-solar-flares-antimatter-particles.html not to mention we collide matter particles and can can produce antimatter. Knowing that how would this correlate to you negative and positive energy universes ? Something to keep in mind, just like an electric circuit where you cannot measure voltage by placing your test leads on the same copper wire until you have a potential difference between the two lead points. One cannot determine how much energy a vacuum contains between any two coordinates with there is no difference in its potential energy. We can however look for indirect evidence Casimarr effect is one example. The main problem with the zero point energy quantum vacuum is that observations vs calculation show an error margin of 10^(120) aka the vacuum catastrophe. There are plausible solutions to this still underway. \[d{s^2}=-{c^2}d{t^2}+a({t^2})[d{r^2}+{S,k}{(r)^2}d\Omega^2]\] \[S\kappa(r)= \begin{cases} R sin(r/R &(k=+1)\\ r &(k=0)\\ R sin(r/R) &(k=-1) \end {cases}\] lets start with the FLRW metric we wont need curvature so we can keep it set at k=0 c=1 following formulas will be in normalized units. We need to describe two field of lets go with photon/antiphoton for simplicity. Under QFT we have two operators the creation/annihilation operators. They further correspond to their propagators as well but we don't need that detail. QFT uses them to model how particles are created subsequently destroyed. This link details how it applies to the quantum harmonic oscillator aka zero point energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_annihilation_operators#Ladder_operators_for_the_quantum_harmonic_oscillator In essence the positive and negative modes of the harmonic oscillator propagates the operators. Where the operators correspond to particle I wont go into too much detail to see if you have any comments/questions up to this point. However this is the zero point energy field and how it can give rise to particle production in essence.

Is it not 33 for Trump and 67 for Biden?

This statement is extremely misleading to the point of being just simply wrong - yes the initial state was “dense”, but “tiny” is a difficult to define term here, and it most certainly wasn’t a “fireball”, and there was no “explosion”. This statement comes from a really bad source. It’s not a sphere. That’s a common misconception, the Lambda-CDM model only meaningfully describes how the universe evolved after a certain point in the very early universe. It has little to nothing to say about how the initial state came to be, since this requires physics that we do not yet have. Yes, but it does so from every point - all distances increase over time, so there wasn’t one central point where everything started.

I read every comment and all I get is "You're Wrong!" No one has the courage to share what they believe is the truth. I am not arguing or standing behind the standard explanation and theories. It's all just information as far as I am concerned and I won't consider any of it TRUTH until the day its proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If you disagree with the current explanation of the beginning of the universe then publish your theory and set the record straight. I am simply cutting and pasting what is printed on the websites that belong to several of the major Universities and institutions that you and others received your degrees from. Anyone can disagree with anything but can you prove it is wrong or are you a contrarian like many of the people on this site?

It wasn't a criticism it was an observation, but however you spin it them = people. Because it's subconsciously dividing people, it's not about how you talk about them, we can all hide our feelings when them is bigger than us, it's about how we think about other people; it's easy to call them assholes, when everyone else does. Like I said it's an insidious word/concept.