swansont

! Moderator Note Conspiracy theory discussion has been sent to the trash. The topic of discussion here is the use of element 115 for propulsion. It's apparent that discussion of Lazar's alleged history is orthogonal to the discussion of the science at play.

Absorption would make sense. Adsorption is a surface effect.

The topic of the discussion is element 115, not whether we've been visited by aliens. So this suggests that Lazar's input is irrelevant. ! Moderator Note Irrelevant to the discussion (as I mention above) and basically using the lack of evidence to confirm that there is a conspiracy, because all the evidence has been erased. The antithesis of scientific discussion.

Of whatever is carrying the current. The force on I1 will depend on the length of the wire and the magnetic field. The force on I2 will depend on the length of the wire and the magnetic field. You have current-carrying wires, and you asked how to find the force

I don't know what your point is. The animation does not reflect the system you had previously described. Ignoring the value of the oscillation frequency, you had described something that spent far more time at the extrema of the system.

"up to 4 hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard" A factor of 6 is significant, wouldn't you say? Brass is already a standard material for doorknobs and push plates. Unfortunately, so are plastic and stainless steel, which are often chosen for aesthetic reasons (they don't tend to tarnish)

So how is he a source of information on this? How is his interview relevant to the thread? I can theoretically come up with a list of >6 billion people who won't talk about element 115. Where does this dubious quote come from? I don't see it in the article, and your other link is a bing search.

Yes, if that's where the force is being applied. As studiot points out, if there is no angular acceleration the two torques present (one on the shaft, on on the edge of the wheel) must be equal in magnitude.

The force on a current is IL x B where B is measured at the place where the current is. (often it's given as the force per unit length, so you can model an infinite wire - F/L = I x B) The right-hand rule gives you the direction

T = r x F r is the distance from the axis of rotation to the point where the force is applied. In this case it would be the radius of the axle, if the force was being applied there. The torque from friction on the wheel would use the distance to the edge of the wheel, since that force is applied at the edge.

Yes. As I have repeatedly pointed out, Einstein based his theory on the invariance of c from electrodynamics, and applied the concept to kinematics. That SR is based on an observation from electrodynamics is not in contention. However, if your contention is that it is an electromagnetic interaction, then you need to present a model of that. Sooner, rather than later. But as we're discussing particles/objects traveling at a constant v, we know the net force on them is zero, per Newton's first law. Further, relativity applies to uncharged systems as well. Which makes this moot. Auuuuugh! We're on page 5 of this discussion. Get to it already.

Why charged and why do the fields have to be present? None of that shows up in any of your equations. They would seem to be irrelevant. I personally find this annoying, as with the repeated previews of what’s to come. Get on with it already.

Federal elections are described in the constitution. The president’s term ends in January. If, somehow, elections are suspended, he will not be the duly elected president after that. The speaker would take over, per the constitution.

What would the point of watching be? Why does Lazar have any credibility, in your view?

This makes a simple prediction: you have 115 protons and with a 3:1 ratio you need 345 neutrons, meaning you have isotope 460, which seems pretty ridiculous when compared to what’s been produced. Way too many neutrons. The claim that you can’t get there with alphas and tritium is naive, since that’s generally not how you produce heavy isotopes in the first place. ”they bombarded americium-243 with calcium-48” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscovium

Because it’s not magic

djkfslgdljfghdjkfg has been banned as a sockpuppet of Hshshdndjjshs

! Moderator Note You’ve proposed this before, still have no science to discuss, and were told not to bring this up again

What does this mean? Usually t is a variable. And if the attraction is gravitational, the speed will not be a constant. Again, what does this mean? a1 = 1 and 1a=0,1d/t^2 are meaningless.

! Moderator Note Discussion needs to take place here. If you are linking to a published paper or preprint, link to the paper itself. General links to your own site are in violation of the rules.

Brass contains copper, so that part is sort of expected. Similar effect for bronze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_copper-alloy_touch_surfaces

One could make the field change quickly. One ignition circuit I've had felt/sounded like a spring was compressed and then released. I assume there was a magnet or a coil that was part of that motion.

Not the same thing Electric susceptibility tells you how much you can polarize a material in response to an external electric field. Magnetic susceptibility tells you how much you can magnetize a material in response to an external magnetic field. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_susceptibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_susceptibility

! Moderator Note Split, as this is OT and not directed at the OP of the other thread

tmx3 has been banned at their request (technically the request was account deletion, but we don’t delete accounts. This is the closest we come) Foul language and abuse would have led to this result anyway