Silvestru

The model describes how the universe expanded from a very high-density and high-temperature state. Many people make this confusion.

Hello forum, If you are interested in a short paper on the Construction of "KAGRA: an Underground Gravitational Wave Observatory" in Japan. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.00148.pdf

You sure proved me wrong there interested... I am just mentioning this so you don't correlate any scientific views with age, I am 26 which I guess would be pretty old for a Polar bear.

Can you please explain to me how you got from "light doesn’t need a medium" to him saying that String theory is BS? Where's the connection here? What's Aether have to do with String Theory.

Apologies for going off topic but: I down-voted you because I am trying to go through big posts and understand the subject and you keep going off topic and just plain saying nothing. You consider this post to carry worth? After someone politely explained that light doesn't need a medium to travel? (please don't start a debate in this thread about this)

That wasn't me but it reminds me of an ironic quote I read recently: "If you keep making jokes like that, somebody is going to shoot you, father." - Mary Todd Lincoln You had a down vote for no reason on a thread I was reading. I up-voted it a few minutes ago. Probably it went to 0 because there were no other votes. but still weird. This is pretty weird actually. Especially how it is displayed to me in the bottom right corner. You just see 0 votes on this post?

I like how the current system works, the only problem that I have noticed is that some people with negative rep, stop giving a french man's f*** and go in full hate mode. I really don't care that much but It's really hard to get a plus in the physics section (you have to write a whole essay and put work into it) while you can get 5 at once in the joke section let's say. Me for example I have a good reputation yet I have very little science knowledge. Some people might take my word for some posts over someone else with a negative rep that they acquired in religion section let's say even though that person has more knowledge on the subject. (I am not saying rep should be assigned by categories, maybe just eliminating this up vote option from Joke sections or religion or speculation and leave this for actual science threads.). I am really interested in the opinion of someone with negative rep on this thread.

I cannot speak much about cancer but we find many "suspiciously clever" ways of survival in nature. Your story made me think of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicrocoelium_dendriticum - a parasite that goes through a very lengthy process to grow and live. (I bolded the parts which I find scary) This parasite becomes snail excrement to get eaten by ants to mind control them to live and reproduce inside cows to eventually go out as cow dung..... Apologies for not providing input on the specific Cancer topic.

Wow Swansont, you are the real deal.(after reading the whole blog and comments.) Would be glad if he would officially admit to being wrong one day. Looking forward to read more of your old blogs. You should start doing it again.

I am so bad at painting that I would die or be forced to beg Can I exchange a song for a painting so I can buy some bread?

True but on long threads it's hard to keep track of the BS so instead of 5 members writing 5 different messages asking for proof because the OP just requests the forum to disprove him (which very often happens), you could just mark this as burden of proof fallacy and the marker would appear for his post/posts. I just think it would be fun to see that.

This is a bit of a stretch buut. It would be amazing to have Logical Fallacy buttons on each post that would only pop up as a marker if let's say 3 members voted on that fallacy. Many times I recognized straw-man arguments and I often appeal to emotion. It would be awesome and fun to objectively mark posts like that. What do you guys think?

Woops, sorry my bad. I don't know why I remembered as such. No bad thought intended, I'm glad it was sorted out.

Hello Fishyboi. You are currently a new member. Take some time to get familiar with the forum rules and different sections. In a day or two you will become a full fledged member and you will be able to add a profile picture.

Mhm...So you were waiting for me to say: Oh fresh, I recommend the Sweet Potato Casserole Topped with gooey marshmallows and coconut crumble, just for you to come back with this information? That boiling it is better? Talk about a loaded question...

That's why I was hesitant to quote any arguments in the physics section of the forum. However I also don't really understand the relevant maths or physics of it so I can't judge.

Re-adding the initial comment that sparked my attention.

Maybe you are confusing Universe with Observable universe. That's why I underlined it. Earth is in the center of Earth's Observable Universe. Maybe someone else would like to confirm/dispute this argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

You posted in the Anatomy, Physiology and Neuroscience section. I recommend a cook book for this question

Sorry koti, just saw this. By definition, you (the observer) are at the center of your observable universe so I guess Earth kinda is in the center of the Observable Universe as we know it. Of course not the actual universe.

Slit* - refers to the small cut in the paper or what have you.

The idea of an infinite past is really interesting but it's mainly being approached from a philosophical side with no real evidence to really back up either side. If you check the wiki link on Temporal finitism, they disprove the idea of past infinity using a set of logical arguments. That has 0 scientific value and doesn't say much. Let's postpone this discussion another 10-20-n years haha waiting for some scientific advancements that might shed some physics light on this question Apologies for the off-topic spin OP.

See The Tristram Shandy paradox There seems to be much debate on the notion that time is infinite in the past. So I guess I will not go further with this. Thank you Strange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_finitism

Can you please give an example of an infinity that has an end from a temporal perspective? Do you mean that if I run from 1:00 PM to 1:01 PM there are an infinity of "numbers" between 0 and 1? because that wouldn't really be a temporal infinity but a mathematical one.(if that makes sense) So I am asking about a non mathematical example.

iNow was questioning the source not the title.