swansont

It’s the slope of the function, y = f(x)

Safety note: these green lasers can “bleed” a lot of IR if there is no IR filter and can be an eye danger since your eyes don’t have a blink reflex for the IR, and there’s a lot of IR power relative to the green light. https://www.technologyreview.com/2010/08/12/121205/the-danger-of-green-laser-pointers/

This is moot, since fusion does not deal with significant amounts of bulk material. It also depends on the material and wavelength. Some materials are quite transparent at certain laser wavelengths. Fiber optics depends on this But you don’t want the EM radiation to penetrate, you want it to exert pressure. “NIF does this by amplifying and focusing 192 laser beams onto a tiny hollow metal cylinder at the centre of which is a peppercorn-sized capsule containing the hydrogen isotopes deuterium and tritium. X-rays generated from the walls of the cylinder blast off the outer surface of the capsule, forcing the rest of it inwards thanks to momentum conservation and causing the deuterium and tritium nuclei within it to fuse – in the process releasing alpha particles (helium nuclei), neutrons and lots of energy.”

It may be difficult to tie a single event to climate change, much like you can’t tell for sure that seatbelts saved a life in certain accidents. But it becomes clearer when you look at the statistics of all the events.

It’s the gravitational potential - the height change is the major contributor, not the change in g - and atomic clocks don’t rely on radioactive decay.

Yup. Yeah, right. Making stuff up? Accuse others of what you’re doing? That’s the Trump playbook.

Growth rate has been slowing for decades https://www.statista.com/chart/28744/world-population-growth-timeline-and-forecast/

That tells you where the scattering event occurred. It doesn’t tell you the neutrino path, because you don’t know where the neutrino originated. You might estimate the angle, but how do you know the momentum of the neutrino? When I was a postdoc, we did an experiment where we knew where the originated, because they came from beta decay in a magneto-optic trap, so the source was localized to a small volume. We couldn’t detect them, though, but could deduce their momentum by detecting the beta, the daughter nucleus, and any orbital electrons that were ionized in the decay process, for decays where all the particles were co- or counter-propagating.

I’m sorry, have you met science? Science questions the world, makes models, and compares them to evidence. If you don’t have evidence, you aren’t doing science. And these are the requirements for speculations. So let’s have the evidence to support your claims, or this gets shut down.

! Moderator Note Responses to inquiries need to be mainstream science, rather than pet theories, which can only be discussed in their own thread in speculations

What’s the evidence that this is the case?

! Moderator Note A. It’s their thread, and B. It’s brought up in the OP

Why have a fight with a language model that has only a casual relationship with the truth? (And I should take my own advice)

The conditions are not the same, so you won’t get that result. Are you being deliberately obtuse? We weren’t discussing the crew. No, that’s not what the article says. On the other hand, when it’s on the side when our planet completely blocks out the sun, the thermometers plummet to minus 250 degrees Fahrenheit (-157 degrees Celsius). -157 is not in the dark side in sunshine

There’s nothing inherent in the equations that says the zero-mass particle must be a photon. i.e. it applies to all zero-mass particles.

The Webb isn’t in LEO You have no reference for “they don't want them to get cold”

And your reference for this is...? What's the point of discussing things if you're just going to make stuff up?

That's not accessible now, though. That's a lander that's not returning. I've seen a study where DNA was stored at temperatures below -20ºC and was stable for 24 months. The units that have only recently been available to the ISS don't get that cold. Once the temperature issue gets solved for LEO, the next issue is radiation.

And how accessible is the moon?

Yes. Perhaps you need to refresh your memory of it. You can’t stay in the shade, and even mirrors heat up. You have to get away from earth to leverage the cold of space. In LEO, where it’s relatively accessible, it’s difficult to maintain something cold. Out where you have the Webb telescope, you can. What’s the point of storing it where you can’t get it?

Circular reasoning. You’ve assumed a coverup in order to assert there’s a coverup.

It’s not actually a deep freeze in earth orbit, for one. On the moon, for example, the temperature can hit 100 degrees C.

I just read that US automakers are threatening a strike for a 40% increase in pay, which is the raise that the CEOs of some major automakers have gotten the last 4 years. Going to be interesting to hear how they can’t afford to pay the people who actually do the work

They released his fingerprints

Since the velocity addition formula can be derived from the Lorentz transforms, this would mean relativity is wrong. Do you have any experimental evidence of this?