swansont

It’s expected that easily-found data should be looked by the person starting the inquiry. Expecting others to dig it up is lazy. AFAICT Argentina has had pretty high inflation for several years. Go find the numbers.

Easily found with a search engine (sort of. the wcrf promises the data by country but it’s not on the page they served me) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_cancer_rate US is ninth highest for cancers excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (303 per 100k people). Japan 30th at 265, China 62nd at 200. (I suspect how long you’ve had heavy industrialization pouring carcinogens into the environment has an impact.)

! Moderator Note Discussions of hacking aren’t permitted under rule 2.3 https://www.scienceforums.net/guidelines/

These critics of evolution typically have an agenda and also have a poor understanding of evolution (partly because what they “learned” came from people with a poor understanding) Argument from incredulity isn’t really a counterargument.

No. There’s nothing that says a gene has to appear only after it would be an advantage. Neutral mutations exist. Eye color is a common example. If, somehow, blue eyes conferred an advantage, we wouldn’t have to wait for a mutation. How so?

I will note that nothing has been removed. Your posts have all been gathered into one thread, since there’s no reason to start multiple threads on the same topic, and it was placed in speculations, which is where it belongs, according to our protocols. Fe was used an actual experiment that matched a mass increase with an excitation energy, though I misremembered which isotope. It was Fe-65. The mass difference was measured in a Penning trap. I was not referring to Fe https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.132501 Shouldn’t the mass decrease if it’s higher in a nuclear potential, according to your hypothesis? Potentially yes, see above. The existence of an equation does not mean that it was derived from valid physics principles. The fact that you and I are posting means this is “published” so I don’t know what your complaint is Now that you’ve posted a more extensive work, let’s look at e-e+ annihilation. Your description very confusing, but you get two 511 keV photons out of it, and this is purely an electromagnetic interaction. No strong interaction, and it follows E=mc^2, which is in disagreement with your hypothesis.

We’ve locked the door behind Frank Martin DiMeglio

Using the word in its definition doesn’t really clarify much. What about intent to survive would circumvent natural selection?

What specifically do you mean by intention?

The amount spent on research also has to be placed in the context of a nation’s economy, as CharonY pointed out some time ago, and the available infrastructure. The US GDP is 10x that of the UK, so spending a lot more shouldn’t be surprising. And if the company doing the research is in the US, then the money gets spent in the US. Other countries still send people to the US to get educated, so one might think the infrastructure for academic research might be better. Spending money is moot if there’s nobody/no facilities to do the research.

Put another way: The theory of evolution is more subtle and complicated than any Cliff’s-notes-five-paragraph summary you might read, and, like any science topic, is more subtle and complicated than what you learn in high-school.

Any science to post? Or is this just wand-wavy shouting?

How is it that the mass defects of nuclei match with E=mc^2. That an isomer of Fe (I think it’s Fe-57) has the expected mass increase in the excited state, with respect to the photon energy? Any actual experimental evidence to back this up? Any theoretical basis for it? (i.e. can you derive these equations?)

No, it must be posted here. Not links, not attachments, and not word documents. See rule 2.7 https://www.scienceforums.net/guidelines/

! Moderator Note Merged with previous thread covering same subject As we had previously discussed, it’s probably strongly influenced by that and the rest of for-profit healthcare