Leaderboard

They certainly are the Methuselahs of the strongly-interacting matter. Everything else decays in a tiny fraction of a blink or in the time it takes to sip out a coffee. But I agree. It's probably a green[?]-swan kind of issue. With every year that Super Kamiokande keeps running, it becomes increasingly unlikely that we will see any single proton decay. Looks like stars will die long before protons do. Yes, that's funny. One is related with the speed of light and the age of the universe. The other with the strong coupling. I wouldn't say it's impossible for them to be related, but it's not very compelling, to say the least. This idea of dividing the size of the universe by the size of a proton is not new, btw. Dirac thought of it many years ago. This hypothesis has fallen out of favour for a series of reasons. 1040 seemed to be the central scaling factor. Some of these ratios had to be fixed with a root, like (1040)9/4=1090 which is the number of photons, or the entropy of the observable universe. The whole 'theory' reeked of numerical mysticism, aka numerology.

I've been asked to help save a mauled cat (stable ATM - I've cleaned and debrided the wound with saline, cleared back some pelt, and applied vetericyn as a hydrogel over the gaping wounds - she's now sleeping and doesn't seem febrile). The veterinary option doesn't work for the cat's owner, and I have enough basic medic skills that I offered (reluctantly) to do what I can. Two big openings which suggest canine upper and lower jaws coming in and ripping out some hunks. Looks like the visceral peritoneum is intact, with skin and fascia torn away. Emough missing that it would need either a very tensioned purse string suture or some kind of graft (clearly beyond me). There's a whiff of infection, so I want to leave it open for now. What is hard to tell is if there's any suture pattern that will really close things up and not rip when she moves. The alternative is "healing by secondary intention," where wound stays open and collagen fibers start to grow over and form scar tissue. This will leave bald spots prominent

No, not at all. As swansont points out, the term is used to refer to mass issues involving frames of reference. Mass of any kind is a resistance to acceleration. Coordinate mass is simply a coordinate dependent mass that you've been speaking of: Say your proper (physical) mass is 80 kg and so is your coordinate mass relative to the frame of your shoe. Relative to the frame of some muon, your mass is still 80 kg but your coordinate mass (some sites call it relativistic mass) would be say 500 kg. Notice that all we did was an abstract change of reference frames (coordinate systems) and there was no requirement for energy or acceleration. Mass is physical and frame independent: it is 80 kg in any frame. But coordinate mass is a frame dependent abstraction, ranging from 80 on up to any arbitrary value depending on the coordinate system chosen. Notice also that no mention of location was made in any of that.

The coordinate mass is just a proxy for total energy (rest mass energy and kinetic energy), so it’s redundant. The mass that shows up in most of the equations is the rest mass. Coordinate mass has nothing to do with center of mass calculations. “coordinate” and “proper” are used to refer to issues involving frames of reference

Eh, I kinda doubt that this still true at this point in time. Also, the Trump flags next to F*ck Trudeau stickers is jarring. That is certainly not universally true. There are aspects that are certainly different from US conservatives and in some cases (e.g. firearms) it is because they cater to a radical minority. So I would say that Canadian extreme right has less sway over the party than in their equivalent in the USA (which at this point is largely dominating the party). However, especially on the provincial level conservatives are adopting (perhaps milder) US style campaigning and have sowed vaccine skepticism (https://www.nationalobserver.com/), tend to ignore climate change and for some reasons are obsessed with trans folks. Looking at the US election, 44% of Canadian conservatives prefer Trump over Harris (36%) (https://www.environicsinstitute.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/read-the-report6589c781-7dd1-40c2-b3ad-372bb98c1aa1.pdf?sfvrsn=cac8947f_1). That is clearly more US Independent territory than Democrat. Likewise, on abortion rights, Canadian conservatives are far more in favour (66%) compared to the US Republicans or even Independents (34%/58%) but still less than US Democrats (89%). Canadian Liberals are closer to US Democrats (91%). Economically, on statements of social and economic justice (i.e., government should do more to make sure racial minorities are treated fairly and government should reduce income gap between poor and rich), Canadian Conservatives (62% and 58% in favour) are close to US Independents (64%/50%) than US Democrats (93%/87%). The percentage is still higher than US Republicans (36%/34%). Still, while Canadian conservatives as a whole are are more to the left of US Republicans, they are closer to Independents rather than Democrats. Some surveys do show further movement to the right in Canada, especially in some provinces, suggesting that the polarization in USA, which has been largely absent until ~2019 in Canada might also start to settle in.

I'm sure I missed most of the subtlety of @studiot's point, but if as he seems to be saying, (-1)*(-1) only has a value of +1 by convention, then reading it backwards, -1 is simply a label for the 'other' root of +1, isn't it?. This instantly reminded me of my picture of +/-i being axiomatic labels for the roots of -1. As someone who habitually conceptualises ideas in geometrical terms, the paralellism is certainly apparent when the two relationships are expressed as rotations of a unit vector in the complex plane: two rotations of 0 or pi radians restore the unit vector; two rotations of +/-i*pi/2 give the negative unit vector. ... or to preserve the state of the unit vector under zero rotations. NB this is far from the OP objective: just trying to better explain what seems to have been seen as a daft idea.

So these atoms are there. They're not a vacuum. They're a background. Why is it high-precission tests of the standard model haven't found them yet? Hadrons of all kinds, from high-energy beams and jets would certainly scatter off SU(3) bound states, with a very sizable cross section. On top of that, they are 1043 times more abundant than ordinary neutrons, so the luminosities would be over the roof. Why haven't we seen the littlest inkling that they're there? Don't think for a moment I haven't noticed you aren't answering any of this. This thread is starting to smell with a really foul stink.

P is momentum the equation Swansont posted is called the energy momentum relation. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy–momentum_relation

Why does Trump even have a following? Because emotions and fear drive human behaviour. No one understands this better than Trump. I want Elon to pull 2 trillion out of the U.S. economy and see how that goes. And a cell phone is a too powerful tool for most of us.

Well, the choice of the proton isn’t about convenience, it’s about its physical significance. The proton is stable; we’ve never seen it decay, and it stands strong under SU(3) symmetry, even when U(1) breaks down. That’s what gives it physical meaning beyond just being a handy reference. It’s not a random choice, it’s a backed by what we know from experiment and theory.

With Trump's words it's not sanewashing, it's total reconstruction and fairy tales. Even listening to Trump at the most basic level, his speeches are content-free, discombobulated word salad, consistent with a person whose cognition is falling apart. It is incredible that half the US population actually give this bloke a pass to be President of the United States and have access to it's nuclear codes.

Here's one relevant paper, Spatial and temporal dynamics of the endothelium, from the Journal of Thrombosis and Hemostasis. There's a breakdown of their findings that includes the measurements. The paper itself is more about how the phases of hemostasis are far more integrated than previously thought, but the research quotes the relevant studies they're based on. There's 154 references, and I'll bet one of them is the actual measurement parameters.

"A grain of sand is halfway in size between an atom and the planet earth"