geordief

thanks .

Where did I say that? (and what "certain ideology " do you mean?

I don't think they came to protest (unless one is naive). They came as a show of strength and find support in numbers. (are you so dumb?) Apparently they had metal under their gloves and we all saw the heavy weaponry they were carrying as their latest fashion statement. Their slogans were incitements to violence which decent people hoped never to hear again. And by the way do we not know who the Nazis were?What they have done in recent history.? Oh ,not to forget that they support Trump which on its own is hardly a character reference. Someone downvoted me .I wonder why.

Imagine that and stare into the abyss. Still ,it makes me question his allegiance to the Russian meddling. He seems equally "loyal" to these Nazi scum so maybe we need to wonder why he is that way. Is "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" some kind of a prosthetic for what struggles to exist in most of us as some kind of a moral compass?

Have there been any theories as to what might happen in any of those 10^-43 seconds? Or cannot this be approached piecemeal?

Yes,I had forgotten that technique.I will give it another go and see how useful it is.

Is there any way to get around that? Among other reasons, I like to know what people in different parts of the world see when they look for the same thing as myself . EDIT: I have been told that DuckDuckGo is good on that count but can I also make google do it? Can I hide my IP address from google or "ask" it to disregard it?

Seems like you inspired the great JH with your tooth technique (none of my beeswax ,I suppose) Seeing as some of the less commercial moisturizers are also a possibility maybe we have dug deep enough for our craft

I wouldn't disagree except to add that the OP'S aim of proving a deity (even of the non-interventionist variety) may have been to attempt to achieve one of the few things that we can (almost) state as a fact that we cannot do. When I was young I was taught that we each had our own guardian angel. In my attempt to indoctrinate myself (well they couldn't do it without our help) I actually made space in my bed for the slippery fellow (can't remember if it was male or female) . As that book says (I think) "when I was a child,I thought as a child....." I was very proud of my mother who was a strong believer in Christianity until later in her life and told me close to the end that "there was nothing to fear"

Very interesting. I might have a go myself.

Metal strings? My nails were never up to that and I basically use my fingertips (I think Mark Knopfler does too) As for nylon(gut actually) ,my father played the classical harp and his nails were a wonder to behold . I once tried eating gelatine but never noticed any difference.

we are mixing metaphors .I am still waiting for the plumber to put the sink in.

a bit out of my comprehension zone, but just to clarify you are talking about a possible external gravitational and/or em field?

thanks.Hopefully that will sink in after a while.

How nice that things are sometimes simpler than at first imagined. So ,just to discuss a common or garden non-em wave. There is (say from a moving loudspeaker) a series of waves emanating from this source. I take it on good authority (yours) that the wave equations disregard the velocity of this source with respect to the observer. In this simpler (much simpler than light I imagine) scenario is there an intuitive (even bloody obvious perhaps) explanation as to why the moving source does not impart any of its velocity to the created wave? Or does Relativity again need to be introduced to understand this seemingly more mundane situation (acoustic waves)? Maybe that is what you are saying in your final sentence of your post?

Pardon my ignorance (genuinely**) but in a non-em wave scenario (say sound waves) does the wave also propagate at a speed that is independent of the velocity of the emitting body? Suppose a bullet pierces a metal plate, would the sound produced be heard by an observer "upstream" later than an equivalent observer "downstream" (in the direction of motion of the traveling bullet) -or would both hear the sound waves at the same time. (I do know that the sound would be higher pitched to the latter observer but would both receive the traveling sound wavefront simultaneously?) **there is a difference between one's ignorance being obvious to others and the "emitter" of the ignorance appreciating his/her own ignorance

I wonder if anyone would care to comment on bvr's post. Is it at all controversial ,any way descriptive rather than rigorous? (I have bolded one part of it) It is actually the way I like to think of this but 1) my technical level and ability is so low that I can have no confidence in my understanding 2) this is the first time I have come across this way of describing the scenario (it seems to provide the context I was asking for in my OP) BTW (and I don't want to bring up the observer/ observed scenario ) but when an observer measures a spatial contraction in an an object moving relative to him or herself at high enough speeds is it another way to see this as that the measurement arena * is contracted? Because for another observer ,moving along with the measured object no contraction is observed by "measurement arena" I include the observed object , the measuring equipment and the dynamic relationship between them (I like the word "arena" here but am perhaps "shoe horning" it a bit)

(apologies in advance for probably having already asked this -I plead obtuseness and a tendency to uneducatabilty so perhaps I will get lenience) It seems to me that Relativity at its basis boils down to the observed fact that light is always observed to be traveling at the same speed regardless of the relative (to said observer) speed of the object which emitted it. I understand that the reason for this is bound up in Maxwell's equations (which I have been unable so far to incorporate into my understanding) Are there any other ways of contextualizing this irrefutable fact that would allow someone with strong mathematical and theoretical shortcomings to feel comfortable with this property of light (not just light ,of course) ?

Yes I feel a bit lost too. I can't put my finger on what the differences are but it feels a bit like tunnel vision. Mind you , my interest in learning seems to have gone down a bit anyway and so the "blame" lies with me to an extent. It has made me think about how important the layout of a website can be (it seems a bit of an superficial comment but there it is.) EDIT: hang on , the main "Forums" tab feels a bit familiar ; maybe I will get the hang of it after a while.

Yes, I see. Perhaps now is the time to make the switch.(a bit of a habit to break)

Are there any broad based search engines that do not boost rankings according to whether the keywords are paid for (advertising)? And are there any search engines that do not feed you returns based on where you live or what they think would interest you based on your search history?

Yes ,that works better.

I remember a few years back (before Google) when searching was simpler. Not as efficient ,for sure but the results were not skewed by advertising or geographical constraints. As an example ,I have just been searching the term "upper landing" to satisfy my curiosity that it was indeed used to indicate an area in the first floor of a building. The first pages seem to be overwhelmed with some business location in America which is called Upper Landing" and I do not have the energy to create my own filter to weed all these unnecessary results out to find what it is that I want. Is there a search engine that will not track my IP address or try to sell me products when all I want is relevant information. I tried DuckDuckGo but it seemed not to make a difference.....

That would make sense as the sternamentoris (from the Latin word "sternutare" for "to sneeze") is situated in the palate as we learned in Medical School. It stimulates the sternumentory reflex but is notoriously difficult to pinpoint and many deny its existence.

Sneezing is fun. Whenever I have an inkling of a sneeze I try to bring it to fruition by staring at the ceiling. Quite effective. Incidentally I have heard ** it is unwise to attempt to smother a sneeze as air speeds in the nasal passage can be up around the speed of sound (ie very high and likely to cause internal damage) That is also why I never practice coitus interruptus **no idea if this is true.