michel123456

I wish that was mainstream physics. But is this mainstream physics? look here.

Fine: in 100 days you have zero rep. ---------------- I have the feeling that Capn could make money with selling neg rep.

Make it cumulative: 365 a year. ------------- Edit: don't take that too seriously.

Yes. If the aliens Spyman is suggesting are living in the same time frame than we are, looking in our direction they see us as we were in the past. IOW they see nothing because the Earth was not there yet. Also, if we had the chance to observe aliens in our telescope, that would be aliens "in the past". Communication would be difficult because in their telescope looking at us they would observe us in their past too, so they see dinosaurs at best. If I understand correctly.

Sorry, I read the question as "what is the probability for the child to be a girl?" The other solution is that the child is a boy. There is no third choice. And there is no dependence from the fact that the one child is a girl. It is not asked "what is the probability for both children to be girls knowing nothing".

what do they look like?

(bolded mine) Well in history the barbarians ruled over the Roman Empire, the vikings won, the mongols won. Even the Romans won over the Greeks (in this case the Greeks were the educated ones). If the aliens are "smarter" and more educated than we are they will not waste their resource in weapons as we do. We will exterminate them.

Good question. The light-clock diagram bothers me to. Scenario 1. I am at point A. I throw a stone to the mirror in front of me and start immediately to run to point C. If the mirror don't break and reflects the object, the stone will come back at point A, At point c I will miss the stone. Scenario 2. I am on a train moving. When the train passes through point A, I throw a stone perpendicularly to the rails. The Stone hits at point B on a gigantic mirror that extends parallel to the rails. At point C the stone comes back and bumps my head. (i must be very unlucky to manage doing that) Scenario 2 supposes that the stone will have lateral initial velocity. I wonder what happens for light. Do photons carry lateral motion? (what you call 'transverse beam")

A rectangle equilateral is the same under 3 rotations and under mirroring. what does that give mathematically I don't know.

In agreement with Swansont, I have the feeling that Kristalris considers the space-time crystal as a cosmological feature. I have understood so far that a space-time crystal is a kind of device you have to build.

So why don't you do it the simple way and count/remove the repetitions?

Why equilateral?

(bolded mine) "inflated at an infinite rate" is the modern wording for "apparition". All this conversation reminds me the middle ages. ---------------- (edit) To me the only healthy way to reach the question is the following: take as granted ONLY what we evidence shows and build a theory afterwards. Not cherry picking in order to match evidence with existing theory. What we (think we) know is: 1. The Observable Universe is finite in space & in time. 2. The O. U. is flat. 3. The O.U. is expanding. 4. We can assume that the O.U. is NOT the Whole Universe but is a good sample of the W.U. Point 2 combined with point 4 suggests that the W.U. is infinite. IOW we are supposed to be actually observing from the inside a finite "bubble" part of an infinite W.U. SO IMHO it is wiser to first understand roughly but correctly the bubble we are living in before jumping into wild speculations on how an infinite W.U. could have been "created", if that is even imaginable.

The wiki article on space-time crystals is very short. The other info I could gathered from the links is very technical. I don't quite understand what a space-time crystal is for a concept. From wiki bolded mine. What makes it different from a wave?

Yes it works fine. Great improvement.Thank you.

You're the best Cap'n ! Does it work already ? It doesn't show up for me.

thanks. unfortunately, the search gives only 5 or 6 pages, not the entire catalog. There must be a limit somewhere i guess. Also i cannot search the topics i have started, I can only search the threads I have posted topics in.

Well you may be right again. What i propose is not THE solution, it is just the beginning. If war continues to be legal then there is no hope to ever end IMHO.

There are 3 possibilities: a. they are less intelligent than we are. b. they are exactly stupid just like us. c. they are more intelligent. case a. makes them animals; we will exterminate them case b. makes them ennemies, we will exterminate them case c. makes them extremely dangerous ennemies, we must exterminate them ASAP.

Hi, me again. I'd like to extend the time line of My content. It is restricted to one year and I have a hard time to remember where I posted what and under what name for more than that period. Can I do something to get my list of posts older than 1 year ? Thanks.

The OP syllogism looks correct to me. The premise "size of a proton" does not produce an infinite universe in finite time. Only an infinite size at the beginning can produce an infinite universe in finite time . As Arch2008 wrote: "the possibility that the whole universe may have been infinite right from the beginning cannot yet be ruled out." although "infinite right from the beginning" is a very hard concept to grasp. That is not what i call simply a beginning, it is an apparition.

MD can be represented as a cube. Mass is the vertical axis. Time is horizontal (front) Velocity is horizontal (back) Distance is the product of Time with Velocity, i.e. the grey surface. The yellow surface is Momentum. The entire cube has units of mass times distance (kg m), something like torque (or work).

Correct. First of all you need Law. Generally speaking, war is permitted under specific circumstances. So you should first forbid war in any circumstance, creating new laws. Secondly you should have means to enforce the Law, I suppose that was your question. There are no such means yet. At this moment the only thing that we see is the victorious nation putting on trial the defeated after war. Instead of having a trial before war. But if you want a trial before war, the people you put on trial must be justiciable, which is not the case at this moment IIRC. A chief of state is not above the law in his home nation but is almost untouchable internationally. That must change too. It's a long road. ----------- Ah, and also one must have in mind that war is not always an accident. There are people who want war, there are people who make money from war.

The principle is that the one who pays for war is not the same guy with the one who wins from war. Justice. Nations should behave like a person. When there come an issue with your neighbour, you don't go and smash his face 9or at least it is illegal to do that). Let's be the same for nations.