swansont

If one had a decent grasp of physics, one could simply derive the values. Unless you are claiming G, h or c have changed, which would indeed be crazy, this is baseless. Not having a decent grasp of physics is why you get the down-votes, and why you will convince nobody.

In the kind of bulb being described, it’s not excitation, which would have a discrete spectrum. The filament heats up, and we get a continuous blackbody spectrum.

Based on what? You don’t reflect a magnetic field. It makes little sense to discuss magnetic field behavior as you do light. You keep asserting the field would pass through a mirror. But you have provided no justification for this assertion. No. EMP stands for electro-magnetic pulse. It’s electromagnetic radiation, aka light, aka photons. Where does the field go as it “emanates” but has reached steady-state? For a wire, the field is circular, centered on the wire? Where is the “sink”? When your scenario violates physical law, it’s impossible to use physical law to derive a valid conclusion.

This does not seem to address any of the three issues I raised: Where did I define anything? I don’t even know what “quantity of counteraction to forces” is supposed to mean. You have not defined it, and not even described it consistently Why quote me in your response, if you are going to ignore my questions, and just post more unsubstantiated nonsense? You've introduced yet another term, Er, without explaining what it is or where it came from.

It wouldn't "reflect" but it depends on the mirror. What properties will make it 100% reflective? Magnetic radiation? What is that? I asked about the EMP. Are you under the impression that these are the same thing? This claim is based on what, exactly? One of several problems here is that the emitter is inside in this scenario, and will also absorb photons. Another is how you make mirrors that reflect at 100%. You can't actually do it, but if you are going to idealize that you can, the method matters. If it involves the permeability getting very large, then that means any magnetic field is going to be inside the mirror, and not escape it. It's basically how you build magnetic shielding.

Why would the EMP pass through it? As I’ve said before, trying to treat the field separate from the source is problematic. It’s also not a given that the magnetic field would penetrate the box. If you could do this, yes, it would release all the photons at once, but since you can’t do this, it’s a moot point.

That’s valid if you have eliminated the scenario where Belichick is a better coach than most, and the Patriots have amassed better talent than most other teams. (In part because they work well within the salary cap limitations)

So? What’s your point?

And I want to know where someone said that, because my recollection is that it was the analyst’s take. Not a retelling of the navy’s position. And I’m nauseated enough having to listen to Tucker Carlson once.

“If the solar industry had to supply all of it” implies your analysis is based on 100% solar. Which is a ludicrous position. And? Is anyone suggesting otherwise? You don’t need 1000 coal or gas plants if 500 will cover the load. So you don’t have the same capital costs. No, it’s not like that. You said yourself that the plants are being used, so it’s a pretty bad analogy. Renewable energy is cheaper in many, many cases. That’s not politics. Overall cost of electricity in the US doesn’t seem to have been negatively impacted. 2013-2018 it went up ~5% https://www.statista.com/statistics/183700/us-average-retail-electricity-price-since-1990/ 5% is lower than inflation, so in terms of buying power, the cost went down http://www.in2013dollars.com/2013-dollars-in-2018?amount=100

The navy didn’t say that, the guest did, and yes, it’s different. Defying the laws of physics is not merely beyond our capabilities.

An actual driver can’t be watching all those things, either. Why couldn’t you have multiple cameras and a VR helmet? The remote driver turns their head, and the view changes accordingly. I don’t think that’s the problem. The problem is latency. Buffering has already been pointed out, but signal delay is the real killer (literally) How long does it take for the signal to reach the remote driver? The minimum latency is 2x that, and it gets subtracted from the response time. In some ways, it will be like every remote driver is driving drunk.

Do you not know what you claimed? There’s a written record. You said the navy is “now admitting these sightings are of objects that at least appear to be beyond the capabilities of our technology.”

1. This is based on the false premise that solar is all or nothing. Your questionable claim about being “hugely expensive” is moot, in addition to being unsupported. 2. There are countries that already generate most of their energy from renewables, 3. That’s not what “subsidy” means 4. This has nothing to do with growing food under solar panels

So give me a time stamp

Where in the video? I heard them say the navy’s position is that they don’t know. I also heard them speculate, but neither person is with the navy.

Civilian autopilot systems are cheap? Cruise missiles are cheap? “low-cost” may be in military terms, where a few million dollars is low-cost, because the item is being compared to a jet fighter. That’s one of the strategies. Lower tech, lower cost, but having more of them. Or just having them. Some countries want submarines but can’t afford nuclear, so they get diesel-electric, which are very quiet when operating in electric mode. Some have huge, but relatively poorly-equipped armies.

! Moderator Note Plus we did this before, and it got locked.

Where is that reported?

That is something you are imposing on the discussion. It’s one possible category of unexplained behavior

His justice? I’m missing some context here. This doesn’t clarify what you meant by “previously punished”

https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/u-s-navy-confirms-videos-depict-unidentified-aerial-phenomena-not-cleared-for-public-release/?fbclid=IwAR3L18F_eN0aPwb2WKXLr3Zj7j2-XVqJXjCeA8xuCtEeUIBOcSWNTLsCoLE "In a series of statements obtained exclusively by The Black Vault, the U.S. Navy confirms three UFO related videos represent what they call “unidentified aerial phenomena” or UAPs." ... "The Navy’s official position now confirms TTSA’s claims, at least, in part." I can't reconcile the statement that this is the official navy position and the release that was exclusively to some website. (and since I've seen quotes that imply the information was more widely released, I think the "exclusive" tag was misused)

"homemade drone-missile" hitting a specific target sounds like movie-plot tech, which it sort of is. Fiction writers are free to make things up, which is why it's fiction. Is there any indication that such devices actually exist and fit the description of "cheap"?

Since evolutionary fitness depends on the environment that one is in, if you don't know the environment you can't possibly know what adaptations might be necessary. And if you do know, you won't know what mutations will be present. You might, under some circumstances, be able to predict that an organism will adapt to a climate that is e.g. cooler or warmer (or not, and it will die out) but it's much harder to predict what specific genetic change will result in that adaptation. e.g. there are multiple ways to adapt to a colder environment, or to a shift in sources of food. You might not know which pathway a given species will follow. That will help, as it may eliminate certain possibilities. Were human evolution or influence factors under discussion?

The analysis doesn't work if you look at this on a molecular basis. One molecule doesn't "know" if it's part of a group that has fewer molecules in it. Hot vs cold is a matter of temperature, which relates to the average KE of the molecules, and thus to their speed. Faster means more collisions per unit time, which increases the pressure, which tends toward expansion (if that's possible) PV = nRT for an ideal gas. If the temperature goes up, the volume has to increase (at the same pressure). There's only one direction it can go. Up. Colder, more dense air tends to collect lower.