Genady

Another bit of R. Fenyman wisdom to those pretending to be deep thinkers: The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.

Then, your reference to Galileo's incident is BS because as you said, he was (my emphasis)

To the contrary, people ask you to show, but you just keep talking and talking and talking.

Sure. Another thread I had in mind was not on dinosaurs, but on numeral systems:

I see now. Yes, it's good. No need (for me). It's good enough.

Inspired by another ongoing thread, I imagine that if these dinosaurs were really as smart as primates but escaped the extinction, their descendants would have a heximal numerical system.

Is a use of quinary system by people known? We have a convincing explanation of its use ready.

Count me in.

An answer to this question could represent how high a surveyed group values intelligence. For example, most drivers believe that their driving is above average. I think this is so because driving skills are valued high. Not so sure about intelligence. I'd guess, it would be relatively high in Boston, MA and much lower in Harrisburg, PA.

We use decimal system because that's what we got from Hindus via Arabs, adopted it and have it spread. The reasons are historical. I think, this happened too late for the number of fingers to be an important factor.

Not so sure that seeds in plants are generally oval. But most others can be easily explained. For example, eggs need to get out of the body. What shape would you suggest for this process to go smooth?

I don't think so. I don't think our ancestors couldn't use pebbles, sticks etc. for calculations.

Regardless of the topic, 10^5 (10 raised to the power of 5) is 100,000 rather than 10,000.

@exchemist I didn't see it but by the mod note above I guess I've selected and quoted the Bible statement in your post instead of the original one, and the system showed it as if it was your quote. If this was the case, my apology.

One can get many inconsistencies if one mixes freely these two different models. To be consistent, one should not generally do it, although it works sometimes if applied very carefully and in a restricted domain. In particular, if you use Newtonian perspective, then there is no speed limit. And if use GR, then the galaxies do not move faster than light. Each picture is consistent within itself.

No, it is not. A Newtonian perspective would need to find an energy source causing the observed acceleration of galaxies. You said above that there is no mass, but this is not so. Galaxies have mass. You've also said above that the universe expansion is "space stretching", but it is not so from a Newtonian perspective. It is so from the GR perspective.

But we already have a correction to Newtonian perspective. It is GR. Newtonian perspective doesn't work in this domain.

We don't need Bible for that. There are computer programs, not very complicated, and "when calculated correctly, they play the entire sequence of the Pi number".

I think the moderators already have one, e.g.,

Why? Is there a problem?

One does not need a high IQ to realize that this is a wrong forum for this question. Brain Teasers and Puzzles:

QM is not mathematics. How a theory of mathematics can be applied to anything which is not mathematics?

n is proportional to q. This means that making q twice as big makes n twice as big. n is proportional to r. This means that making r 3 times as big makes n 3 times as big. Now, what happens to n if q is made twice as big and r is made 3 times as big? n should become 6 times as big. I.e., n is proportional to q*r. For example, in my last derivation on step 1, F(r) is some function of r. It depends on r, but it does not depend on q, i.e., it is independent of q. "F depends on r" means that if r varies, F might vary. "F does not depend on q, i.e., it is independent of q" means that varying q alone does not have any effect on F.

1. Given n=F(r)*q 2. Given n=G(q)*r 3. From 1 and 2, F(r)*q=G(q)*r 4. From 3, G(q)/q=F(r)/r 5. To hold for all q and r the two sides of the equation in 4 have to be constant. Let's call it, c 6. From 4 and 5, G(q)=c*q 7. From 2 and 6, n=c*q*r QED If any line is unclear, let me know.

I think that there is something out there which we perceive as the object. Just like we perceive these patterns of light on the screen as words written in English.