TheVat

@studiot At this point, I would love to delete that post, lol, and apparently sending false implications regarding orbital motion. FtR, I know that the near-earth area is not a closed cosmos packed into a compact Reimannian sphere in which I could with a large telescope inspect my bald spot in back. That would be a cool sci-fi story, however. I'm also aware that orbiting objects, though they may have constant speed, do not have constant velocity and are therefore under acceleration. I was indeed trying to whimsically point out that some usages of the term "force" can be misleading, pointing to why Einstein and others preferred to categorize gravitation as geometry.

Yes, as the last paragraph of my post alluded to.... In the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric, it can be shown that a strong constant negative pressure in all the universe causes an acceleration in the expansion if the universe is already expanding, or a deceleration in contraction if the universe is already contracting. This accelerating expansion effect is sometimes labeled "gravitational repulsion". It seemed to me that perhaps this vacuum energy was what Serg was driving at, but at this point I really have no idea.

Oddly, I find points of agreement with both Zap and Pete. (sorry, I should tag all names.... @zapatosand @Peterkin). Organizations can find useful metrics with such tests, but there may be some who place unwarranted confidence in them as long-term portraits of a human personality. As someone once said to me, in another context, "sure it's a crutch. But who doesn't limp sometimes? " When I'm having a nice sit-down with someone, I am not limping (unless they are so introverted as to be a black box mystery), but with only a set of very brief encounters, some kind of rough map might be helpful. My feel is that such tests are snapshots, not portraits. (I'm sure an old Meyers Briggs test aficionado would make something of the "feel" in that sentence...) That said, any test that can give some hints as to introversion/extroversion and to receptivity to new ideas, to name a couple, can certainly save you from some social pitfalls and cliff edges. Life experience has taught me how to recognize people who don't do casual humor or banter, a skill I wish I'd had earlier (the recognizing, that is). Or certain introverts who, when working, find interruption quite distressing -- also nice to know a little earlier. And some artistic temperaments deeply value quiet and verbal economy, and making a few words count for much. (this post veers ever farther from that virtue)

@SergUpstart, are you trying to talk about dark energy? Here's a little snippet..... In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy that affects the universe on the largest scales. The first observational evidence for its existence came from measurements of supernovae, which showed that the universe does not expand at a constant rate; rather, the expansion of the universe is accelerating.[1][2] Understanding the evolution of the universe requires knowledge of its starting conditions and its composition. Prior to these observations, it was thought that all forms of matter and energy in the universe would only cause the expansion to slow down over time. Measurements of the cosmic microwave background suggest the universe began in a hot Big Bang, from which general relativity explains its evolution and the subsequent large-scale motion. Without introducing a new form of energy, there was no way to explain how an accelerating universe could be measured. Since the 1990s, dark energy has been the most accepted premise to account for the accelerated expansion. As of 2021, there are active areas of cosmology research aimed at understanding the fundamental nature of dark energy... I found this wiki passage particularly helpful, in its description of a negative pressure throughout all spacetime.... The nature of dark energy is more hypothetical than that of dark matter, and many things about it remain in the realm of speculation.[24] Dark energy is thought to be very homogeneous and not very dense, and is not known to interact through any of the fundamental forces other than gravity. Since it is quite rarefied and un-massive—roughly 10−27 kg/m3—it is unlikely to be detectable in laboratory experiments. The reason dark energy can have such a profound effect on the universe, making up 68% of universal density in spite of being so dilute, is that it uniformly fills otherwise empty space. Independently of its actual nature, dark energy would need to have a strong negative pressure (repulsive action), like radiation pressure in a metamaterial,[25] to explain the observed acceleration of the expansion of the universe. According to general relativity, the pressure within a substance contributes to its gravitational attraction for other objects just as its mass density does. This happens because the physical quantity that causes matter to generate gravitational effects is the stress–energy tensor, which contains both the energy (or matter) density of a substance and its pressure and viscosity[dubious – discuss]. In the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric, it can be shown that a strong constant negative pressure in all the universe causes an acceleration in the expansion if the universe is already expanding, or a deceleration in contraction if the universe is already contracting. This accelerating expansion effect is sometimes labeled "gravitational repulsion".

That was the point of the rest of my post. Is something in my style constantly causing people to read one or two lines and then pull them out of context? I would certainly like to remedy this.

I've heard there's a $10,000 fine, if you walk up that ramp... When I used to love in Eastern Nebraska, there was a point when I considered moving to Iowa. Partly because it seemed like a place that got really fun and interesting every four years. Not that it couldn't be every year, if you're in the right spots. 😁

Sorry I didn't catch this earlier. One (possibly dumb) answer is: freefall. When an object is freely following a space-time geodesic, say around the earth's CoG. While the object may be said to "obey" gravity, one can also say that the object in freefall is experiencing no force and is simply following the curvature of spacetime. OTOH, one may also say that matter is forcing the space around it to bend. I think this directs us to the point others have made, that gravity, whatever it is, cannot be pinned down narrowly by words. And underscores how insufficient the word "force" is in labeling all the nuances and properties. That's one reason why I am leery of terms like "pseudoforce, " which try to tweak our conceptual understanding without really getting us anywhere. . And I see that @Markus Hanke in the nighttime (on this spot on Earth), came along and expanded beautifully on this point already. OK, whew. You got there. And if there are any besides us here who are familiar with Kripke (do not confuse with the cop in West Side Story), then congratulations on having a foot in both universes. Really, I think the same can be said of Kripke's pain fibers example. We define the "C-fibers" on their functional role in the brain, so it may be that pain and C-fibers firing ARE necessarily identical. And the same for gravity, as a rigid designator. Whatever attraction between large masses there is in a universe, that is gravity. Gravity is simply the short handy term we use for am aspect of a process where matter/energy gives rise to space-time and the bending of geodesics in proximity to massive objects.

This is an approach to ontology that is sometimes called a "bundle theory, " and goes way back to David Hume. Physical entities, rather than having any sort of substance, are construed as bundles of properties. They ARE their properties, rather than some thing that HAS properties. (plus one to your whole post, BTW) I think bundle theory is quite germane to modern physics, which as @swansont noted is pretty much a black box operation insofar as Aristotlean "stuff" is concerned.

This explores the possibility of viral transport with PM 2.5 particles... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-81935-9 The rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 in the COVID-19 pandemic had raised questions on the route of transmission of this disease. Initial understanding was that transmission originated from respiratory droplets from an infected host to a susceptible host. However, indirect contact transmission of viable virus by fomites and through aerosols has also been suggested. Herein, we report the involvement of fine indoor air particulates with a diameter of ≤ 2.5 µm (PM2.5) as the virus’s transport agent. PM2.5 was collected over four weeks during 48-h measurement intervals in four separate hospital wards containing different infected clusters in a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Our results indicated the highest SARS-CoV-2 RNA on PM2.5 in the ward with number of occupants. We suggest a link between the virus-laden PM2.5 and the ward’s design. Patients’ symptoms and numbers influence the number of airborne SARS-CoV-2 RNA with PM2.5 in an enclosed environment. (I realize the topic may be meandering a little here, so am open to moving this elsewhere if that works better)

First, great post, +1. Second, quick clarification for anyone uncertain about an overtone window -- I think our ferryman was subject to some mischief from their auto-correct and meant Overton window, the term named for political analyst Joseph Overton.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Heather Cox Richardson, eminent historian, on how, politically, the dog has finally caught the car: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ Offers a fascinating (and disturbing) history of how politicians have used the abortion issue and magnified the degree to which conservatives opposed the procedure. And created the mythology of "pro-abortion." Try to think of anyone you know who actually favors abortion as a desirable method of birth control. Anyone who's looked at the record knows that it is Republicans, opposing sex education, access to contraception, reproductive counseling, and women's rights more generally, who are responsible for most of the abortions in my country.

Thanks for visiting, @DrDon. Good luck with your 5th or 6th book (I hope this ordinal number indeterminacy does not reflect some sort of Schrodingeresque uncertainty as to the book's existence). Regarding "This brings up a more important point is that the mapping of words onto scientific concepts is a dangerous endeavor. It is highly unlikely that any word can be mapped into a concept so well that it is impossible to find an exception. There will aways likely be a qualification of some sort. Accordingly, don't hold onto words very hard. They will fail you. Instead, understand the more nuanced scientific principle for which the word is nothing more than an imperfect and ultimately inaccurate placeholder." This should induce caution in all armchair philosophers who want to reify certain words.

I appreciated @CharonY's point that one might just as well promote vitamin D or melatonin, for immune support, which have a clearer causal path in reducing severe illness than does ivermectin. In some places, turmeric (curcumin) was promoted as protective in its immune-boosting properties. I would make a guess none of these are as protective against grave lung problems, re covid, as reducing PM pollution and urban air pollution generally. Not only do small particulates harm lungs and vascular linings, but they can ferry viral particles if they get into more enclosed spaces.

Fair warning - if our sunken locker owner is swimming towards philosophy (which may be where this thread was always headed) then truth is, in the correspondence theory, a statement which correctly corresponds to an external state of affairs, i. e. to a fact about reality. The correspondence theory, at least as Bertie Russell advanced it, is associated with metaphysical realism. So, if a realist utters the phrase "gravity is curved space-time, " and holds that to be true, she is NOT merely suggesting that gravity is a mathematical model with some curved geometry in it, or that objects move as if space were curved, or that we're just passing around some handy tools to predict where Mercury will be next Tuesday. She is saying that space-time is curved, just like the rail on that rocking chair except much more strangely. IOW, a statement is being made that purports to objective truth. Just saying, not all definitions of "true" would presume a subjective stance.

Ha! Not to derail the chat (and ball bearings can really derail), but the gift was from a friend who did mechanical work at a small airport, and they were aviation ball bearings. A canning jar full of them. They have always existed. At least, that's the vibe they give off, sitting on various shelves and end tables over the decades.

BTW, bit of confusion on @dimreepr location. Beecee refers to Trump as dimeeper's former President, and Kamala as his current veep, but the profile puts him in UK? Not terribly germane to the topic, I was just curious.

@beecee -- as I was catching up, I saw this bit in your posts.... While I agree with many of your ideas, this struck me as a little facile. The logic seemed on the order of saying "Pancreatic cancer patients are mortally ill. Therefore we shouldn't be concerned about sterilizing their rooms or feeding them or supplying meds. " We have hospitals to make people well, even if they sometimes fail. If we determine as a society that prisons should be places of rehabilitation, then we don't want to let them become harsh and cruel just because the rehab doesn't always succeed with every prisoner. Or because some prisoners have acted cruelly.

All it needs are a few ball bearings.

My wife once received ball bearings as a gift, which suggests that some people really need that long list. Abstractions, like nothing, can be defined conceptually, saving the chore of infinite cardinality. Concepts like nothing depend on some sort of duality, because "the absence of things, " needs the presence of things to gain meaning. Nothing/something is a duality, each dependent on the other.

Like Bufo, I think it would be good to see some solid peer-reviewed trials that make it past a preprint server. Otherwise, this sounds a lot like the hydrochloroquine mass psychosis all over again. Given the reports coming mainly from southern US states of people taking ivermectin in its veterinary dosage (i.e. horse body mass preparations) and getting quite sick (some have shed the linings of their intestines, which comes out as a sort of rope-like extrusion - aren't you glad to have that detail?), I hope that the hysteria can subside and see if any meaningful facts emerge. If vaccines are in short supply many places, that's not a logical argument for taking snake oil. There is never a "front line" justification for an off-label use of a pharmaceutical when any positive effects (beyond placebo) are unproven. (if you're just looking for a placebo, try dropping some TicTacs in a pill bottle) Also, as was the case with 'quine, sometimes the on-label uses are of vital importance and a rush on supplies can deprive others in great medical need, e.g. people suffering from tropical parasites, people who really need their horses to make a living, et al.

I have invited Dr. Don Lincoln, physicist and well-known science author, who works at FermiLab, and who was quoted in this thread here.... ....to join this discussion. If he declines, I will let you all know, so as not to leave you hanging. Mr. Jones suggested I'm a name dropper - I can only add that I have carefully not mentioned my long-ago acquaintance with Isaac Asimov, which I humbly offer as evidence to the contrary.

We're blind elephant fondlers, gradually working our way around the beast. Davy, Will do. Going out a door ATM, so might be a while.

I have Don's email -- he was the resident physics expert at my erstwhile science forum for a decade. Would you like me to invite him here to comment?

So, have to ask, is string theory physics? Or, because we don't know to what degree it might describe the real world, is it a theoretical framework that lies on the borderlands of metaphysics? String theory seems to describe a landscape of possible universes, most of which intelligent life can never behold. At least, with Davy's long-fingered lemurs, we can go to Madagascar and look at quite a few of them. (careful, they will steal your glasses)

Observations are just that -- they are not logic. Logic lies in statements about what has been observed. One can easily stumble in interpreting an observation and make a fallacious statement about it. And draw false conclusions. We humans have a glorious history of doing that.... I observed the sun come up in the east this morning. The sun appeared to be moving across the sky, so I conclude the sun was moving while the Earth was standing still, and that the sun orbits the Earth. So "my logic is simple" didn't get me too far towards the truth, did it?