swansont

Yes, we’ve known this for quite some time.

I’ve only seen it in terms of atomic de-excitation and tunneling

Has that ever been observed in nuclear decay?

Ah, so that’s the strawman you’re “dismantling”

I would think that other available sources of electricity would set the price. You can’t just choose to jack up the price. And if a business realizes that fusion isn’t cost competitive they won’t build the plant.

Who is telling Biden this? Actually telling him, not mouthing off online. —- At this point in the 2016 cycle, Clinton was polling about 10 points above Trump. Polls aren’t votes. There’s a lot of campaigning left to do.

Likely, and some descriptions might be a little sloppy and use “bigger” to refer to the energy (or mass), which is ~125 GeV (GeV/c^2) as opposed to a proton, which is slightly less than 1 GeV

I’d be interested to know where you heatd that. I’d be surprised if there was a physical size associated with it. It’s not a composite particle, so there are no constituent parts. It can’t decay in steps; once it decays it’s not a Higgs anymore. But the decay products could also be unstable.

Cold neutrinos, perhaps. But where are you going to find a space with only neutrinos in it?

No. There are multiple problems with that scenario. Spin, Pauli exclusion, a mechanism to form a bound state, lack of evidence of an electron being a composite particle even if you could. Probably more. Attacking this from a position of ignorance about physics isn’t going to go anywhere useful.

Electron capture is slightly affected by pressure. Otherwise no. (There have been a few anomalous results showing some temperature effects but they aren’t repeatable)

We don’t, in fact, “know” this. Neutrinos would only be present if the decay involved the weak interaction. Nope. This is fiction, based on flawed understanding.

Which one, hydrogen or carbon? It’s different. Nuclei have to overcome the Coulomb barrier (electrostatic repulsion) to get close enough to fuse. Two protons don’t fuse easily (you’d form He-2) but deuterium and tritium do; they require about 0.1 MeV. It’s not an exact number, because the particles can tunnel through the barrier

No you claimed fusion was “not gonna be cheap” and have not done anything to back up that assertion.

But you’ve claimed rather more than this. I don’t think there’s any argument that intelligence can improve your chances of survival. From an evolutionary standpoint it’s a tradeoff of whether it’s worth it, because a bigger, more complicated brain requires more resources. Mounting evidence of what? That other organisms have intelligence? That’s not a paradigm shift. Are there scientists who think there is no intelligence in other animals? If “mind in nature” means something else, then you’ve not communicated it very well. I do object to the way intelligence is used in some cases. If you took this same approach in physics we’d look at how an object accelerates when dropped but reaches a terminal velocity, or how a fluid in a system moves faster when pressure is lower, and ascribe it to intelligence, which is ludicrous. It dilutes the meaning of intelligence to bandy it about so casually. As for the wall of text, that’s generally agreed to be an ineffective technique. You should not rely on the reader to pick an example. You’re making the argument, so you should be in a position to present the best example.

I can’t help but notice this doesn’t address the point at all. Just distraction.

1. Trump does not get held to this standard, one of many “accurate reporting” issues that exist (sins of omission ate still sins) 2. Sleeping in is completely consistent with having jet lag.

This isn’t the “humor” section And…? Is there an official expiration on jet lag? The one-hour DST shift messes me up for a week.

But again, we’re skipping past the discussion of whether to do it. Would it stop the media penchant for peddling narratives? Does anyone think they would pivot to actual reporting, or go on a “dems in disarray” binge that would put the current “reporting” seem restrained. My bet would be on the latter What happens when some big flaw is revealed in the replacement candidate, that comes to light when they’re placed under scrutiny? Are you going to replace that candidate, too? edit: take a look at all the stuff about RFK jr that’s come to light recently, only because he’s running for president.

Because rocket launches never fail and deposit their payload back on earth (either immediately or from a decaying orbit).

The sun’s mass is 2 x 10^30 kg, and it converts about 4 x 10^9 kg per sec into other forms of energy (ultimately, sunshine) The volume comparison isn’t relevant. The earth isn’t made of (mostly) hydrogen, nor is it undergoing fusion

6 + 200% makes no sense to me. This sounds like an example made up by someone who doesn’t understand math, and is just throwing some numerical terms together. 200% of some number would make sense, but that’s multiplicative, not additive

The clamor is fueled by media hype (it’s not actual news, nor is it reporting) that feeds on itself, just “but her emails” (which I hope everyone realizes was a massive failure of responsible journalism)

There is an order of operations in math (you multiply and divide first), but perhaps you should use an example that isn’t nonsensical. Adding numbers and percentages, for example. How does 200% + 6 become 12 + 6? 200% of what?

I fail to see how intelligence would reduce randomness, though you don’t specify what randomness you’re talking about. If I flip a fair coin, the odds of heads or tails is 1/2. My intelligence has no effect on that. So perhaps you can clarify what you mean, instead of appealing to these vague notions.