Silvestru

I was reading about this recently. Here, the photon is loosing energy to the gravitational field. Photons have mass (not rest mass) so they bend space-time just like mass. So photons are interacting with the gravitational field > Gravitational field is related to the curvature of space-time so the photons have an effect on the curvature and that includes the rate of expansion of the universe.

To be fair, there are sources that... try to expand on this law lets say. But not to say it's wrong the way that the OP did. https://kaiserscience.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/is-the-universe-leaking-energy-law-conservation.pdf

Hmm the main problem with reading it is that it doesn't read as physics paper but as a teenage blog in some parts: (from the "paper") To end with the conclusion: PyotrD, I didn't understand/find your "proof" for your original assumption in your paper to be honest but I am low level. Would you be happier if we refer to it as The law of conservation of mass-energy? I am also adding a related quote from Feynman as I saw you liked quotes so much in your paper.

There are many insects that camouflage by looking like plants.

Haha this broke my system. You have a real knack for science. I'm sure this conclusion was reached after much research. What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return This theory has absolutely no observational evidence behind it but I am sure you wont mind. Just food for thought.

Haha just to anger the gods (SwansonT) I will say Brian Cox. But on serious note, Freeman Dyson should make more appearances. I'm a fan. His whole family is made up of geniuses.

Well...ignoring the fact that you didn't read my previous comment about how it's a property.... it's called the Law of Conservation of Energy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy Lets take your example about the expansion of the universe: New "volume" is created as space expands but it also releases stored gravitational potential energy which converts into intrinsic energy that fills that volume. It all evens out. This is also a part of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

I think you are talking about the density parameter (not a constant) but you are wrong. Ok but energy is a property. It is not expanding. The quote from MarkE was: It's like me saying that the viscosity is expanding, what about location or boiling point? Those are also properties. Are those also expanding?

Can you provide a paper on this or a serious source? The Zero-Energy universe is BS as far as I know.

Hmm..not sure I agree and I have pretty limited knowledge on the subject but I will try to argue with some points. Mass can be converted to energy and the other way around so what is conserved is mass-energy. What if there was nothing else? And that point was everything. And everything is expanding. Energy is not expanding.

The Universe right now is expanding evenly and symmetrically. It does not (as far as we know) have a centre. So it's not like everything is distancing itself from a single point like an orange exploding. Big Crunch does not describe pulling everything back in a single point like an opposite of the Big Bang. As I understand, the Big Bang describes the expansion of the Universe from a very dense and high temperature state whereas the Big Crunch describes the expansion reversing and matter collapsing into black holes. But Big Crunch is not really supported by much observational evidence.

pavelcherepan is being very open for a constructive discussion and frankly I admire his objectiveness. Sensei, don't bring appeal to emotion into this talk. I want to hear Pavel tell us his thoughts from his perspective as a Russian citizen.

The polish version is spelled Paweł. Ok ignore the weird L but in polish they spell it with W.

Thank you very much Area54!

Hello forum, I would really appreciate your help with what I'm sure is a simple IFERROR formula. I want the first column to adopt the colour and text of the column with the higher number. As in the example below the cell's with higher number (2) adopt the text and colour of the heading. I would really appreciate your help!

Hello gunfun777, welcome to the forum. With that said, this is a discussion forum and we should be able to have a talk without any external site/videos/files that need to be downloaded. If you want to talk about something please paste your ideas/questions or quote someone else's. Everything should be in the thread .

Back in On-Topic Land: So Ten oz, you were right, Governments are slowly starting to at least show discontent.

Raider5678, dimreepr, guys... come on. Really?

The scary part is that the first two countries you mention are in the top of the most weaponized and have some of the strongest armies in the world. They would not take lightly to infiltration of their mass communication. People with wool over their eyes tend to fight with more fervour for their "country" . To be honest, if there would be a vote in my country that sounds like: "We acknowledge that the people in North Korea(let's say) are being controlled, manipulated and oppressed so we want to inform them of this by broadcasting "real objective" news that tells it how it is to these people. As this is dangerous we want you, the population of South Korea(lets say) to vote for or against this initiative." - I think I would vote No... It's easy to type from my desk chair but the truth is that such countries that do not hesitate to use aggressive methods are scary and the first thought is to not get involved and hope you are not caught in the crossfire.

It's pretty hard to pierce the veil of national propaganda so I am not holding my breath on that one. And even if a big number of citizens would go to the streets I think it would look a bit differently that a protest in my country or yours. I think they would be welcomed with water cannons, smoke grenades and rubber bullets and of course it wouldn't show up on the local media and social media. I heard Russian hackers are pretty capable. Pretty hard to rally up a big group without media these days...

Quoted the article I was reading. Didn't really think about the term used but you are right. This is exactly the kind of information I am looking for. Factual. But Ten oz what is your opinion on why no country or union is taking a strong enough stance against this? To preserve the global balance of power? To avoid a 3'rd world war? This reminds me of the plot to Doctor Strangelove where the Soviet Union had a doomsday device and they planned to make it public to the world so no one would mess with them or else...

I agree but at this point, this behaviour is just ignored. Doping in Olympics, Crimea, Russian deserters getting off'ed in UK and really so so much more... It's clear that there are no real consequences by this point. We have a saying in my country: "The dogs bark but the bear keeps walking." Love the quote haha For the second part, of course it is worthy of discussion. Some people think they should be against Russia just because everyone else is but they have no idea why, if you stop and talk to them about it. Making a good choice without any though background behind it is no less sheep-like than following and believing a dictator.

What are your thoughts over this ping-pong of power to get around the two consecutive terms law between Medvedev and Putin? How democratic is that objectively speaking? And what are your thoughts over Putin's win here. (I'm surprised a thread about this has not yet been opened.)

I don't think that was the point of Gees's comparison. Like if I said that 2 tons of cement is enough to crush a tortoise. And you argument is that I'm a monster who hates animals. Gees, I have followed this thread closely from the sideline and I can say that even though the members might not agree or might try to clarify your initial thoughts on page one, they have been very coherent and open to productive discussion, giving arguments, something that you started doubting on this forum in a previous post. And about the subjectivity of truth, and how it is viewed, there are many quotes by philosophers out there, you mentioned the Europeans and the Indians but after reading your examples, embarrassingly a quote from a fictional character from a kids show came to my mind. I can't say much about truth but I can definitely agree with other members that right and wrong are very situational and subjective. Absolute truth I think needs absolute knowledge. That would violate the laws of physics. If you could step outside space and time (bear with me) and you would see space and time as finite (let's assume they are), like a circle, I guess in this scenario there could be truth. It's the only way I can think of it.

Hello forum, I have a form of ADHD and I started taking Ritalin for a few weeks. I commonly hear Ritalin getting prescribed to kids so I was wondering why. Why isn't it so popular for adults? Are neurologists/psychiatrists reticent in prescribing it for adults? Thank you!