imatfaal

Surely All Hallow's Eve; All Soul's Eve is one of the Holiest days of the Calendar. The important feast for Western Christians is All Saints Day - the celebration of those that have made it to heaven; the first of November in the modern reckoning. The day after that is All Soul's Day - the Day of the Faithful Departed; the second of November. But the day before All Saint's Day (which is also called All Hallows Day) is the eve of All Hallows or Halloween; the 31st of October. Scary amount of detail for a card-carrying atheist.

Cannot see how - we would need to know exactly the signal sent out and how we recieved it - LIGO is only reception. And I hope LIGO is busy getting more and more confirmation for a while yet. But we will hopefully be able to adapt LIGO to more specific tasks when the search for Gravitational waves is almost accepted to have been successfully accomplished. But if we were significantly sure of our modelling of black hole merger ringdown frequencies and LIGO kept on finding that frequencies were in error, and that this error was related to transmission time then you might be on to something. Which is basically what is done with Standard Candle Super Nova and acclerated expansion

You might substitute the phrase Manifest Destiny with the legal term terra nullius; this was how the British Empire justified its enormous landgrab. Land could not be claimed if there were people living on it - so the imperialists just defined the native inhabitants of USA, Canada, OZ and NZ etc. as "not people" . There is a brilliant book about Eddy Mabo and the Tores Strait Islands fighting this ruling many many years later

Dylan - Desire

Until you know what to look out for (in terms of disease of wild deer) then I might hazard that well farmed would be healthier - but an experienced hunter-for-food (and I know you have a lot of them in the USA - a few here IIRC) will tell you what to avoid and be wary of You eat the hung game when the first maggots drop to the floor!

Spooky action remains spooky. We know it is not only spatial separate we also know that it the state of the entangled particles is undetermined/undeterminable until measurement. The maths tells us that the results cannot come from a single predetermined distribution

As my Mother would say "Well then the day wasn't entirely wasted"

I don't even remember seeing the original - I presume it was so obviously bat-poo crazy that it got trashed and the miscreant got moved on to more secure accommodation before I became aware of my bad luck sentence.

a. I didn't say it was - I said it was invariant, and it is. b. Those papers really do not support your argument.

Oh that's clever. I understand know - thanks. Neat idea - the background rate of time was locked in the signal so we would have an "archaeological" time rate to compare our current rate with. Geez that is so far above my pay grade that I am getting altitude sickness even thinking about it. But I presume that as we have an pretty good alternative explanation for the acceleration (the uneven thermal emissions) then we have prima facie evidence that this time thing has not happened - otherwise we would have double sized anomaly

"Relativistic" would hardly ever refer to Galilean Relativity - it is generally used to differentiate between the realms of application of Newton Mechanics (Galilean Relativity) versus General Relativity / Special Relativity. In pre-Einstein mechanics there was absolute time and length - Einstein showed that Maxwell's work implied that it was light speed which was invariant and that time and length were variant. A clock frequency change due to relative velocity and/or change in gravitational potential are Relativistic corrections based on Einstein's theory and are only necessary when you have invariant c and equivalence principle.

But if it applies to everything then is it a change? You need an outside reference - and this proposal is universal so by definition there is no outside reference. An increase in gravitational potential would decrease tick rate compared to a fast clicking clock at infinite distance / zero potential BUT if your fast ticking clock is affected by the increase in gravitational potential then there is no change. This proposal would change both proper time for the observer and coordinate time of the fast ticking clock - therefore there is no actual change. Now the paper must find some way around this but I do not have time to work out what this is - but in general terms I can see no way of measuring a universal change.

In your post you quote a section of your own reference which clearly states that the clocks on GPS satellites require a 38 microsecond adjustment "to allow for the relativistic offsets" 38microseconds (a days cumulative error if relatvisitic corrections were not applied) is 11 km at the speed of light. You have quote-mined a paper that you clearly have not read

Absence of evidence is not absolute evidence of absence; but when the greatest mathematicians search fruitlessly for a simple solution for centuries I think that - on the balance of probabilities - one can assume that a simple solution does not exist.

It is only for falling - ie only under gravity. That is no initial velocity (trajectory implies a velocity) - but the actual direction through the earth makes no difference; any straight tunnel will take 42 mins to get to the other end of under gravity alone By the way; it wouldn't work You have huge tangential velocity which would mean that you would thump into the side/roof of the tunnel and bounce back and forth all the way through; the angular velocity remains the same all the way through a sphere - but the tangential velocity shrinks as you go deeper (ie the hole has lower tangential velocity but the vehicle retains its tangential velocity). It is actually even more complex than this - but enough to mean that it is pretty much non-viable; you have to be freefalling in a vacuum to cope with the speeds involved BUT you have to be constrained to stop the tangential movement smashing your vehicle to pieces. By the time we can do both - we will be using such technology that the need for gravity train will be past

I am not sure that is correct. Quantum Computation and Quantum Encryption are both massively enhanced by a deep study of Quantum Mechanics - but they can both be approached with a black box approach; eg this box can be in |1>, |0>, or Sqrt(2)|0> +/- Sqrt(2)|1> and the state does not survive first measurement etc. You do need the basics of quantum superposition and entanglement, and how this relates to computational methods - quantum unitary transforms and fourier transforms etc. There is a great Quantum Computation course on edx.org - It is run by Umesh Vazirani (who is very cool) and whilst hard work is comprehendible by a layperson with a goodish grasp of maths

! Moderator Note Please do not Hijack Speculations topics with your own questions about mainstream accepted physics - we keep the Speculations threads to allow Users to promote and defend their ideas and it is too much to ask them to defend received science at the same time. Too many branches also make the threads very hard to follow. Thanks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_A https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment Just to give the usual example - our GPS satellites would not be of much use if we were not able to calculate the frequency offset with which to set the clocks on board. GPS is reliant on timing and the clocks on board are at a very different gravitational potential (meaning they run faster 45 microseconds a day) and are moving with high relative velocity compare to the earth's surface (meaning they run slower 7 microseconds per day); the net result , because the effect of the gravitational potential is higher in this case, is that the clocks on board the satellites run faster by 38 microseconds per day. This is enough that if we did not correct for this clock speed difference you would not be able to use a GPS system to find your house after a few minutes, your road after a couple of hours, and your town after a few days! You might want to check on the scientific / mathematical use of the word logic.

! Moderator Note Questions about the validity of Hafele Keating and Gravity Probe A (and successive experiments) regarding time dilation under GR split off to new thread. Please do not hijack Speculations Threads with your own questions and arguments - it is hard enough for a User to defend their ideas without having to cover branches to topics

Well then there is your proof

Good. Perhaps steer clear of the lounge/politics/philosophy for a while; when all the endless and unanswerable banter gets too much it is nice to find solace in the empiricism of science and the cold logic of mathematics. We cannot agree even on a definition of God - but we can tell you the required frequency difference for the clock in a GPS satellite to run at the same tick as a clock at sea level; and we could have told you decades before first artificial satellites

There is a lovely proof - it was first shown by Newton or by Hooke depending on who you believe* http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/mechanics/earthole.html * must be a bugger to be a staggeringly great scientist like Hooke only to be in the same city at the same time as Newton - who was not only greater but also notoriously did not get along well with others

1. Science does not really prove anything - it shows that the models it is using and the theories they are based upon are valid under a certain range of circumstances. One piece of good evidence that goes against a theory (within its zone of application) will show the theory is seriously flawed - this could not be the case if the theory had been "proved". In mathematics you do prove things - but we must also bear in mind that all proofs are contingent on the preagreed rules and axiomata 2. Science does create theories purely on non-direct evidence - until recently the idea of gravitational waves was such an idea. We have still not detected dark matter directly. 3. Legally; first you have to remember that you have to work within a particular jurisdiction - laws of evidence vary from country to country (and even within countries) . Circumstantial evidence can be fine and tends to be denigrated by the press and fiction more than by the courts and lawyers. If you think about it dna trace, fingerprints, material transfer etc. are all "merely circumstantial" - they tell you only of a persons whereabouts and interactions but most often not about their actions or state of mind. The main difference between direct evidence and cirumstantial is the inference that the jury may draw from it. If a witness says def A attacked B - then if jury believes witness then it is a small step to inferring guilt; as it is evidence of the action in case. But if a witness say he say def A walk into room, lots of shouting, sounds of a scuffle, and then A walks out followed by B with a broken nose it is much harder to infer guilt; there is evidence but multiple different conclusions can be drawn This is from the Californian Criminal code section 224.

Exactly! I love numerology because I cannot get my head around the idea that anyone could think (after a moment's contemplation) that it has any basis in reality and because it is so easily spoofed. It also follows that one of my absolute favourite reads is Foucault's Pendulum - and, of course, within that the Comte de St Germain. Funnily enough the immortal Comte was also one of the alleged creators of ... you've guessed it ... the Voynich Manuscript

I am pretty sure not. But cannot yet prove it. If you rearrange for a I think you get [latex]a =\frac{ (\sqrt3 \sqrt{b (3 b^3+4 n^3)}-3 b^2+6 b n)}{(6 b)}[/latex] If b and n are +ve integers then it is obvious that every term except [latex] \sqrt3 \sqrt{b (3 b^3+4 n^3)}[/latex] is an integer. So for a to be an integer then that term must also be an integer (ie if it is less than 1 then no matter how much you add to it - or whatever integer you divide it by it will always be less than 1. or if it is greater than 1 then it cannot be irrational for similar reasons). I feel I should be able to show that cannot be the case - but I cannot

42mins from anywhere to anywhere via gravity tunnel