swansont

The cursor should show up outside the box. If it’s inside, at the end of the text, hit return once or twice.

We didn’t have space-ready atomic clocks back when we were doing moon missions. Further, we are in the sun’s gravity well, and we’ve done measurements that used the different potential we sample as we orbit the sun (since the earth’s orbit isn’t a circle) in tests of local position invariance. https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.6145 As for reasons not to do it, it’s a matter of cost/benefit. Without a compelling theoretical reason to think we’d find something new, it’s doubtful anyone would fund it. (The reason they did the Hafele-Keating experiment, since nobody was expecting a novel result, was that it was cheap - $8k - so the ONR funded it)

The issue is whether Morto knows it. I don’t think they can read your mind, and we can only go by what you write.

Electrons have the smallest nonzero amount of charge anything can have. There are a relatively large number of them available to move, so even at a few mm/sec, you can get an appreciable current.

Predictions are exact. Measurements will have uncertainty. But physics tends not to predict fundamental properties, unless they are zero.

! Moderator Note There is no need to mention it since it’s not relevant. No need to respond to the modnote. Why is this required? I’m sure there are places in Antarctica where g has not been measured. Is there any serious doubt that gravity exists there? It’s not part of theory, so how is it a weakness? GR doesn’t explain evolution, either. It doesn’t matter, since it’s not expected to. And being the ultimate theory is not a criterion, either. That said, GR has passed every experimental rest that’s been done.

! Moderator Note We aren’t discussing your theory here; it’s not your thread.

All clocks are related to GR; they will all be subject to time dilation. However, they might not have the precision to measure the effect. (note that the second description - the spin flip - is how many atomic clocks work)

It becomes more apparent when you can see the feature causing it https://twistedsifter.com/2014/01/the-sky-shadow/

That thread was about the NIF, which isn’t an approach that was designed with commercial energy generation in mind. So that thread isn’t discussing the question raised here. But AFAIK nobody yet has an answer to “How to construct economical fusion reactors?” since nobody has built one yet, and there’s no guarantee that any current approach will get there.

! Moderator Note So, no model. Closed.

“Most lab leak proponents don’t mention that most major Chinese cities have one or more active coronavirus laboratories.” https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2214427119 That would change the alleged odds. Quite dramatically, I would say. If, say, half of the major cities had such labs, and that’s where such an outbreak would be expected… 50% doesn’t seem astronomically small, but that’s just me.

The responses you get from the bot are just rehashes of whatever information is available to it during its “training” so you really can’t rely on the accuracy/veracity of any summary you get, especially if the topic isn’t settled, mainstream science. I’ve seen examples of it coming to erroneous conclusions from misapplied logic.

! Moderator Note What are you offering up here: a discussion of the AI bot, or of your proposal of consciousness? (that will tell me where to move this; it’s not a topic for the lounge)

So what you have is a vague guess. It’s a far cry from that to having science to discuss. You lack a mathematical model, and thus can make no specific predictions.

It’s a matter of scale. The nuclear attraction gives an energy scale of MeV, while the electrostatic is of order 10 eV. And that’s for bare charges, not some induced dipole or quadrupole. The electron can be closer than the Bohr radius, but it doesn’t stay there.

I don’t see where you’ve calculated any probabilities. How do you conclude that this is astronomically unlikely? Just how small is such a probability? Isn’t a zoonotic origin more likely in a large population center where there are wet markets? How many of them are there?

! Moderator Note Speculations requires some combination of a model, evidence, and testable predictions. What you have here falls well short.

All of your references talk about inert gases in their titles - not oxygen.

It’s been observed in earth’s gravitational field at distances on the order of a cm, and speeds of order a meter per second. You just need a good enough clock. There was a proposal that because there is rest mass, there is an associated frequency, since E=mc^2 and E=hf But AFAIK this was not widely accepted as being meaningful

What “substance” is measured with a ruler? What is vibrating in a cesium atom?

But you did mention it. And you’re dodging the issue. Why not?

That wasn’t your assertion - no mention of nervous system until now. It was simply breathing rate. You need to quantify this (and there’s no indication you have), and remember that length, area and volume scale differently.

https://theconversation.com/5-senses-in-fact-architects-say-there-are-7-ways-we-perceive-our-environments-193179 Some think there are more

Oceans evaporate, but there’s also rain, so there is a limit to this effect.