swansont

This "The Emperor's New Clothes" reboot isn't very good. And that's a huge problem. Then do the modeling.

! Moderator Note Which means that surely you recall rule 2.7, which says (in part) "members should be able to participate in the discussion without clicking any links" IOW the material needs to be posted here and discussion takes place here

You don't have a theory. There is no math. Without math, you can't make precise predictions. For some interactions spin does explain why they occur and others don't. But that's all covered already by QM.

Another drawback of the node system is that if the enemy knows you are online and communicating, you have drastically reduced the uncertainty in your location, and are suddenly very vulnerable to attack.

Your link isn't about submarines (the vehicle), it's about cables that are under the surface of the ocean. Average ocean depth is 2-3 km, and some parts are much deeper. So you'd have to spool up several km worth of communications cable inside the sub in order to connect. After you've finally found one of the nodes, which doesn't seem like it would be easy. Then you have to remain stationary while you talk, lest you rip everything apart. Now you're hooked into a party line, where the enemy can listen in or spoof your communications (like when the US tapped Soviet undersea cables during the cold war). I don't think anyone is going to buy into that.

It's from National Treasure. Meaningless words, in the context of a conversation. Steradian is the unit of solid angle. It makes as much sense to say "kilometer, looks to be the answer"

Please get into the habit of providing links to information, if it’s not your work. Such as things you quote. Snorkel. Albuquerque. I can do it, too.

One what? Both ends of what? You aren’t helping here, focusing on a detail when you haven’t explained the big picture.

Yeah, I told you it was slow. You said it didn’t exist. No need to detail it fir me: I told you about it. Are you ever going to detail what this “thing” is? This is like listening to half of a phone call.

MRO mission was > 10 years ago, and the technology for missions is locked in earlier. So it’s not exactly new. Satellites have one difficulty that a surface station would not: the Doppler shift will have a wider range and change more rapidly. This might have an impact on the bandwidth Ka band has been used in Gigabit satellite communications, so the number for MRO is limited by something else. Which you have not identified. I will give a hint to help with Strange’s question: research the moon corner cube retroreflectors, which they use to measure the distance to the moon.

They use ELF signals to communicate with submerged subs. Slow, but it exists. How is sending this “thing” - that you have not explained - to the bottom and back faster? Why is not changing your mind about an attack a desirable outcome?

Evidence? No, it’s not. Your equation for the mirror was typed See? (I copy-pasted it and removed the formatting) Now all you have to do is explain what you think you’re doing with it

Is this based on the topic you didn’t explain in another thread, and didn’t link to? why use lux and lumen? Those are units that assume the human eye is involved? why switch fonts in the middle, making it hard to read your already incomprehensible math? (Throwing an equation into a post without context is pretty useless)

? Them?

What concept? What “thing”? What alleged problem are you allegedly solving?

! Moderator Note Even if the links weren’t in violation of the rules, they are hand-written in an image file, you can’t copy-paste anything for a response. Having the images in a separate document means I have to do extra work to read through this. And both reactionless motion and perpetual motion violate well-established physics. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This looks quite ordinary. Hard pass.

Neither space nor time is a substance

I’m not sure what you mean by “the geometrical explanations” Time and space are related because the speed of light is invariant - the same in any inertial reference frame

This administration has had more defections than any recent democrat admin, and more former officials in jail. How is this “overstating” ?

Once the recovery of resources becomes viable, there’s going to be a lot of wrangling over rights and claims. AFAIK right now, nobody can own anything in space, according to a treaty, but no countries likely to be active in this activity has signed it. Also that international law would apply - it’s all international waters. So there could be an “old west” vibe to this. Making claims and having others not recognize their validity. Unsafe/unethical mining techniques.

It may just be referring to the already-known shortcoming of not being a quantum theory, and failing at some scale (very intense gravity/short distances)

I think the recognition that there are asteroids containing valuable resources is the least controversial aspect of this discussion. As in, nobody is questioning that they exist.

This reads like word salad. Cotton hydrogen bonds? I know Sensei mentioned laser cooling in the context of the Doppler shift, but what all does that have to do with anything regarding the research you cited? Sensei was pointing out that 3.4 eV is not nearly enough to ionize a bare hydrogen atom in its ground state. Nothing about hydrogen bound to anything else. Why did you make all of these links to Sensei's profile?

Heating things up in space is typically less of a problem than cooling things down. Though cooling tends to be easier for very hot items

My brain apparently added the “non”