michel123456

On which field? On human behaviour at the age of 7 (IIRC) On mathematics at the age of 12. On latin at the age of 13.(it was resolved for a while but now entirely forgotten) On chemistry at the age of 14 (still unresolved) On astronomy I cannot remember I guess at the age of 10,12, On Flemish language at the age of 15. On women at the age of 16 (still unresolved) On politics at the age of 18 (still unresolved) On marine engineering at the age of 19 (I didn't pursue this field, still ignorant for the most) On architecture at the age of 18,19,20,21,22 On construction at the age of 19 till today. On town planning at the age of 23 On military at the age of 24, that inculdes human behaviour On Architecture (again) at the age of 25 On human (again) and social comportment at the age of 26, when I installed in a foreign country for living. On politics (again) at the age of 26 On history of civilizations at the age of 27 or so. On economics at the age of 30. On physics truly at the age of 40 (see here) On human (again) behaviour and social comportment on Internet fora at the age of 45 IIRC On how to survie in crisis time at the age of 49 (the most important point I should have realized at the age of 12). The same at the age of 50, 51,52,53 54. On human behaviour and social comportment (again-again) because I started to work for foreign investors in order to resolve the last point. And I certainly forgot a lot of other fields of knowledge. Most of them still unresoved. I guess all of them.

What a coincidence! At the age of 40, so did I. One beautiful summer night, staring at the full moon, I suddenly realized that I didn't know why that huge earth-like mass was hovering over my head. I thought then that I had no good knowledge of the world I am living in and decided to open books and learn about it. I suspect it was an existential quest not to die completely ignorant. I began opening encyclopedias, then vulgarizated science books, then some old (from the 80's) physics cursus. The internet came as a wonderful help and I learned a lot of things. Also because I was 40, I decided that I was not dumb. I say that because when I was a teenager I really didn't know if I was dumb, smart, or simply average. So. with the secure conviction that I am not completely dumb, it was impossible to swallow the scientific model as presented. IOW I was not anymore a spunge able to absorb everything, I was, and still am, like a solid rock that absorbs new knowledge with hard resistance. I have a lot (a lot) of objections that I want to discuss. Since nobody in my close environment was able, I tried a science forum, believing that science forums were the place I could find scientists. It took me not so ong to realize that science forums were place where you find really few scientists and a lot of teenagers. Anyway, now I am an addict.

Because the previous forum suddenly shut down. About 2 years of debates gone with the wind.

I cannot believe that makes 50.000 people. Even if the same one comes 4 or 5 times, it still makes 10.000 people. That's a lot. I think.* BTW I am glad to see you Spyman. Sure. They are easily detectable. Yes. When I first came here I had no idea about the rep system. It is a good feeling when you get + and a bad feeling when you get minus. From time to time I go checking my rep points (especially lately because I got about ten minus the one over the other). Hence these posts. *thus they are not humans.

You are correct. In this case profile views may be a function of time too. But Moontanman who is member 1 year longer than I am has less profile views than me. So it is not a direct function, something else is going on. And he has almost the double number of posts than me. AND he is funnier.

After all this time spend on this Forum it is still unclear to me. Is it Spacetime that is expanding or simply Space?

Yes I have the same query. If it was a bot then I would expect all members to have a similar number of profile views. I wonder maybe the reason is the mystical code at the end of my name (123456).

Keeping track today: Michel has 4,255 posts divided by rep 366= 11,63 It seems to stabilize. And 53,203 profile views.

+1 for Swansont positive answer. _____________ Side note: As I wrote above, my plus-minus rating is like blank shooting, I don't use the Forum rating system here since the derailment was not serious.

I have made my comments I am sorry if you found it disrepectful. The worst way to analyze the situation is that i was attacking simultaneously 19 members. It was not personnal. What i want to say is that for being a crank you need to be able to be creative, that is not a gift anyone has. I think that many scientists are so full of knowledge that it becomes more and more difficult to find any opening to new ideas.(1) Why so many cranks in physics? Maybe it is a phenomena that comes from bad documentaries, like it happens in history and archaeology. And also because physics are (IMHO) so terribly badly explained, and poorly understood. Relativity is a perfect example. It is now an over-100 years old Theory and the internet is full of questions, new books are published, it is a mess. people who believe having understood Relativity (PhD's) fight against other PhD's on which one has understood better. it is incredible. (1) a good example here is the model of cosmology. It has created a mesh of interconnected explanations that do not permit to escape. It is a spiderweb, a prison. But if one analyzes individually each part of the mesh, it is hallucinating. We have everything a crank needs. A singularity (endless dicussions about zero & infinity, what is nothing, how can something arise from nothing etc.). You have Negative gravity from Inflation Theory. You have 96% of the universe missing. And so many many other material for cranks.

You just got a feeling of what a crank receives when he begins his own thread.. You got angry and you are ready to take it personally with me. I have nothing against you. I trapped you in an uncomfortable situation that's all. The minus 3 I received means that there are here at least other 2 that are feeling uncomfortable. They don't have the courage to show up because they have no idea on what it is to get an idea. I may be wrong on that but that is my feeling. I don't think AJB for example gave me a minus, he simply answered. So simple. I think it is an old idea. But why not, I accept that. +1 for Davidivad. As a side note, my ratings are fake. I don;t use the Forum rating system. Good +1 for studiot Yes. But that is not an idea, that is a correct analysis. I'll wait till Monday. Good. +1 for AJB Side note. It is terribly difficult to put AJB in an uncomfortable situation.

I am pretty sure other members who know me better understand if I am serious or not. Your (first and second) answer(s) was (were) not in the frame of the question. So I have to give you zero.

Cranks are serious so be serious. And no plagiarism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_is_made_of_green_cheese

As you wish. I will rate this as a null answer. Zero for Strange.

Everyone has ideas? Lets make that a challenge. We have here in order of appearance elfmotat CaptainPanic studiot StringJunky swansont hypervalent_iodine Ophiolite Strange Phi for All Arete Janus timo Cap'n Refsmmat mississippichem ajb physica s1eepI want from each one of them a scientific idea on monday morning on my desk.

About Alexander Pope. He didn't made a library with scientific books full of knowledge. He made a grotto. WICNASBALTWBDPTTJDNSUTAS new Internet acronym

It may be the first time that a quote from a poet is well received on this forum. Hmm, I must be wrong, this quote has been used before. Usually it is called "cherry picking". No?

First of all, this forum : It's about science so it is expected to find only scientists here. Which in fact does not happen. There are less than 10 PhD's here. The vast majority of members are not scientists. Many are teenagers. So it should not be surprising that all those "no-scientists" have peculiar ideas. Call them cranks if you like. To me these are thinking people. Much better than the billions who don't care about science and spend time gaming or talking about football, cars, shops, sex. Now, why so many cranks? Imagine a Forum for actors where there are no actors, or a Forum for painters where there are no painters.

'non-mainstream scientists'? You mean a crank?

Alexander Pope was a poet, not a scientist.

That was a very (very) old one. on the same idea: At a construction site. A chimpanzee comes and ask for work. What can you do? Asks the foreman I can do brick masonry, answers the chimpanzee. And the chimpanzee indeed gets the job and works fine, even better than his fellow human workers. After a month, the foreman goes to the chimpanzee and tell him that a circus came in town. Why don't you ask for a job at there? Well, that is a strange idea says the chimpanzee. Why would a circus need a mason?

Yes. I didn't say the contrary. I do not question wether an event from our past happened or not. The question is rather wether this event is somehow "frozen" in time, or if the spacetime coordinate where this event happened is now open for another event to happen. Note that this hypothetical "new event" would not be observable by us. All this follows from the idea of "moving" through time. in replacement of the standard concept that ressembles an extrusion, where objects translate from event to event keeping a kind of "existence" "frozen" in time.

Yes that is pretty much what I mean. I prefer the concept "mutualy exclusive" because when you say "You can't occupy T1 and T2 at the same time" it looks like introducing "time over time" and many people will come with objections on that. If T1 and T2 are mutually exclusive, it means that when you are at coordinate T2 then you have left coordinate T1 empty. Which is truly amazing because it opens the door to a new universe. Something like this below (iI have posted this before somewhere on this Forum) This is a kind of spacetime diagram, time is on the vertical axis, space is on the horizontal axis. We are the black dot at the intersection of the time & space axis. Note that the space axis travel with us in time. The black dots are objects that travel with us in time. These are the objects that we can observe through our yelescopes. The black dots represent the universe as we see it. The red dots are (speculative) objects that travel "behind us" in time. The red dots belong to our universe but we cannot observe them, nor interact with them. Click on the image, it is a gif Note to Swansont: a photograph is an object that travel in time together with the central black dot. It is not an object that stay in time.

I would choose another movie.