imatfaal

Quite the opposite - we do experiments that would give one answer if there were local hidden variables and a different answer if there were entanglement. The observations show much more likely entanglement - or some other essentially non-local effect. There are still tiny lacunae which means that the possibility space of local hidden variables is not completely, utterly, once and for all, and no-returns closed out - but the overwhelming likelihood is non-locality. It is odd; live with it - but use the maths and get right answers so we will worry about interpretations and deeper insight when more empirical info is available. The balance of evidence at present is fairly clear - when we get new empirical observations that may change. But the endless speculation that something must be wrong due to your gut-feeling, einstein's uneasiness etc is worthless - we go with the preponderance of evidence

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/opinion/home-should-not-be-a-war-zone.html?_r=0 Great Article by STANLEY McCHRYSTAL

The ratio between distance travelled by light and the time taken is 1 in Planck units - so to an extent the above is true by definition; the top of the equation (distance in a lightyear) and bottom of the equation (time in a year) will be the same magnitude so that the ratio (ie speed of light) equals one

It is only the dimensionless constants that you might have any success with (you won't) - most commonly looked at is the fine structure constant alpha which is about 1/137 Feynman in QED

Zapatos - I agree with you but that paragraph is very weasely when read critically: "Current medical ethics and the jurisprudence of death and dying authorize practices that intentionally hasten death." "Lawful forms of hastening death include:" Completely sorted then - these are authorized and lawful. "These ways of hastening death (with concomitant physician participation) are probably legal and probably in widespread use." These practices are tolerated and a blind eye is turned on the whole (very few states/nations have legislated - and where they have informed consent and competence are crucial) but in the majority of jurisdictions this is an administrative act rather than a legislative; ie those who have the decision to investigate and prosecute decline to do so rather than those who write laws making the act legal in the first place.

Long posts are one thing - frankly I think they are a touch self-indulgent - but copynpasta of oneself in multiple posts on varying topics is asking too much of the membership.

When entangled both particles share a state of quantum superposition (this is a joint state which cannot be simplified into two normal states) - measurement perforce means that the measured particle is now in a normal state as it breaks the entanglement; the non-measured particle is also in a normal state

The speed of light flows from the fact that it is electromagnetic radiation propagating in wave form through a vacuum with a certain vacuum permeability (mu zero) and a certain vacuum permittivity (epsilon zero) - this combined with Maxwell's equations allow you to calculate the speed of light in a vacuum and shows that it must be invariant. It was from here that Einstein started

! Moderator Note Utter nonsense from beginning to end - laced with insults and arrogance; you did get one thing right - it's being locked. If you wish to try again with fewer personal comments and a bit more desire to learn rather than preach then you may - but any posts such as above will be locked

Someone not too far from this keyboard once went round a large London gallery named after a sugar brand with a selection of boards with printed names of works with made up artist names - the one next to a dehumidifying control unit stayed up for about three weeks. Photos exist of visitors crowding round to read the details

! Moderator Note Again - thread locked B John Jones - this mixture of guesswork, preaching, and wild assertion is UNACCEPTABLE. Read the Guidelines to the Speculations Forum and the Rules of the Forum.

! Moderator Note B John Jones OK - enough is enough This is a science forum - you can tell by the name; this discussion space was not intended to allow expression of the memberships' wildest pipe-dreams. This thread is nonsense and you have failed to reach the level we require for discussions in Speculations. This thread is locked - you do not have permission to reintroduce the topic. If in the future you do have enough data to create a hypothesis or the beginnings of a model then PM a staff member with a request to reopen.

Fatih If you want a further - and I would guess - higher challenge what about generalising to the number of rectangles in a given rectangular grid Merged post follows: [/mp] So that you can hide your admission - not a chance. You are lucky we don't pin that post to the top of the forum :-D [mp] I have just done the rectangles in a rectangular grid and it is not much harder once you see the patterns and are careful to be neat and consistent in how you count

Why twelve periods? More likely 12 and a third - or no real pre-ordained subdivisions till astronomy and mathematics was sufficiently advanced. There is evidence of a lunar calendar from around 8000 BC in Scotland - but then not much use for a solar calendar when it rains all the time They would measure distance same way we do - take a stick and make sure it is the same length as the previous stick you used to measure distances with

Changed his name; I guess in a hissy fit cos Phi deleted his video link. Pretty clear in the rules that we don't want threads created / posts made purely to promote videos/other websites

Actually there is already a huge amount of cross fertilization in the sciences - to be honest science is almost defined by the group method of working. It has been many years since any new science was predicated solely on the work of one man - we build upon the work of others and quite often those others are in different disciplines although more often different sub-disciplines of the same overall area.

I think it is also necessary to state that quantum spin differs from classical angular momentum due to the fact that it is intrinsic to the the particle - you cannot change the quantity of the quantum spin of a particle whereas the classical angular momentum is changeable with an external torque

If mentalistic is meant to pertain to mentalism - then perhaps the old usage is apposite "Mentalism is an ancient performing art in which the practitioner simulates supernatural mental powers." xposted - damn

John will, of course reply, for himself but it would immediately occur to me that "a contempt for criminality" is not the same as "harsher punishments". I might go as far to say that the lower levels of crime and the harsh system of punishment BOTH flow from the contempt for criminality.

Is there a connexion between states which admit to the possibility of entanglement and those which form part of non-commutable pairs of observables; ie you can know the charge both positive and negative - these are not entangeable, you cannot know both the spin on the x and the z to arbitrary accuracy - particles are spin entangleable.

regarding sales of weapons - and this particular gun in particular http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/helen_ubinas/20160614_Ubinas__I_bought_an_AR-15_semi-automatic_rifle_in_Philly_in_7_minutes.html

We always have been...but it is still going. I haven't read the article - but I am sure it has echoes of the use of discourse in mental health care brought up by Foucault in Madness and Civilization which was a deliberate reintroduction of the work of George Canguihelm etc. Twas ever thus -- and this is why we have an evolving living language rather than a dead static one

Number of small squares AND number of squares made from groups of smaller squares (2x2, 3x3 etc) - I presume this as I have not checked the maths Fatih Nice one Fatih. These proofs will get you more credit if you show more working But your formula seems to work for me. I did it to double check your numerical result - but not to check your formula [mp][/mp] I did it by first considering your 7*9 example to produce a formula for a 7*9 BTW - this is a quick scribble and unchecked; I hope I havent made a big mistake I then generalised this equation (note I set b=a+n) I then simplified this equation to give a simple formula - and then checked that it was the same as yours by making the same substitution of b=a+n in your formula

Firstly - not sure you could with the electromagnetic repulsion. Secondly, I don't think you could annihilate to photons as you would need at least two particles to remain to conserve the net -2 charge. There are other properties which would also need to be conserved - remember in particle / own anti-particle annihilation all these things cancel out - well everything apart from the things that can be carried off with the photon I guess that if you had enough energy inherent in the system to force them to close proximity then you would have enough for other particle creation and you would create a handful or more of short-lived particles which would cascade decay to two negatively charged stable particles

This is how the weapon of choice of mentally ill mass murderers is advertised something is very wrong