geordief

Nemo's Garden in Italy is interesting.Is it an underwater still? https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/nemos-garden-underwater-farm-italy-spc-intl/index.html "Floating six to 10 meters underwater, plants in Nemo’s Garden are separated from any outside pathogens and pests, while still having access to freshwater that occurs as a result of desalinated condensation within the biospheres, Gamberini says. Also, he notes, the relatively steady temperature of the sea water is an ideal environment for plant life"

You have wifi balls? Didn't buy them in Venezuela I hope

Quite the bot whisperer aren't we? You are a hell of a guy too

I am from a time when "ecological living" was considered a virtue on it's own account That we should live in harmony with our environment. When it became obvious that we no longer had the option to trash the planet I was actually pleased. If we did not have the basic decency to adopt lifestyles that were respectful of our environment ,then we were going to be forced to do so willy nilly. Should I feel ashamed that my ideals have been foisted upon the unwilling majority?I don't know but we are where we are. As for these and other megalomaniac geoforming ideas,I get that they are now part of the panic process but they are better suited to Musk's motley suicidal crew of Martian explorers(we are better rid of them)

Just an interesting aside but underwater farming seems to be a "thing" if only of local benefit https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/nemos-garden-underwater-farm-italy-spc-intl/index.html "Nemo’s Garden is the world’s first underwater cultivation system of terrestrial plants. Located off the coast of Noli, Italy, southwest of Genoa, the farm consists of an array of suspended, transparent, dome-shaped greenhouses called biospheres, anchored to the bottom of the ocean."

Hard to imagine this will not be a tool in the locker of vicious criminals or military interrogators who will turn over their victims to a real or supposed AI machine as a further "turn of the screw" or just a sadistic distraction. Certainly in movies anyway.

For me (and my fellow sloths) it must be because they are too hard.

Trump also has his own secular infallibility doctrine. He makes "perfect" phone calls when they seem to an outsider to be anything but. He is also able to declassify documents by the power of thought. Perhaps they might give him the job in the Vatican and he can blow smoke up their arses when the election result is announced by his cronies

study humanists? Do you mean "study humanity "? But I agree it is possible to have a satisfying life on your own terms but if you are too caught up in others' priorities your life can go past without much benefit accruing. "To live outside the law you must be honest"

Salami for the goose ,salami for the gander?

It will likely be an extension of the user and if we can form attachments to inanimate objects(is that the/a definition of materialism?) then we will get very defensive of programs that will likely be tailor made to our own personal characters)

Will AI affect prostitution/the sex industry? Clive James described the brain as the biggest sexual organ (maybe not verbatim) Telephone sex? (if it was good enough for Bill Clinton..... ;-) ) Talking dildos?

That's a great story.We do have a dog who comes into that category. I don't think he has fleas though although we will double check that tomorrow. I am learning both fleas and bed bugs are actually visible to the naked eye so dust mites are looking more likely now. One of us had shingles a few months back and I wonder if that may have predisposed her to reacting to them more so whereas she may have tolerated them better in the past.

Will AI have a beneficial effect in that all advertising will likely now be done by it and so put out of business all who presently work in that field and whom I would otherwise willingly cast into the the nether regions of Dante's inferno? (Maybe propagandists too)

I have lots of these and they date back some 30-60 years.(so no washing instructions on them) Now I think I may have bed bugs or similar in my bed and so I want to clean the bedding. Easy enough with sheets but I am not sure about the woolen blankets as the (=my) rule with wool is to wash at a cold water temperature-and this may not be very effective for killing these bed bugs My suspicion is that it may be possible to go to a warmish temperature without damaging them but not the 90%that I am using on the sheets. I doubt this is a problem many here will have faced but I can't seem to find another discussion forum dealing with washing clothes or similar. Maybe ,I can use one as a Guinea pig first to see if they take very hot water without shrinking. I don't suppose just airing them (for a few days) would do the job.

Well ,the last massive particle that remained before all the fuel supplies were exhausted would be travelling at a finite speed (below c) And if the size of the initial system was increased without limit would there be an equation that would come out to c in the limit? (Hope my limits are not self contradictory)

I accept that I sometimes have the idea that if we have a system with mass and we convert its mass progressively and in a directed manner to energy so that it accelerates in a particular direction until the very last amount of mass in the system is converted to energy... if we make that system arbitrarily as large as say half the (observable?) universe would that give a mathematical equation that would show that the final speed was a limit that was the same as c? (yes I am thinking of a theoretical nuclear rocket half the size of the universe that burns itself up as fuel)

Not a question but I was addressing @StarEagle1 's idea that " If someday we could actually fly at (near) light speed," to point out that we already did this. I then asked " Is the actual barrier that of attaining light speed wrt a frame of reference that we are initially at rest with? ie accelerating to light speed from and wrt an initial frame of reference..."

I meant it the same way as @zapatos clarified it.If we find or choose a suitable reference point, we are moving wrt it at a near light speed(the neutrino was a good example) With most objects we only move at slow speeds but ,with the example of the neutrino not only can we say that the neutrino is moving at near light speed wrt to us but we can also say that in the frame of the neutrino we are moving at a near light speed wrt it. So in that sense we are moving at a near light speed even though we think we are not moving (I know you know this of course)

I thought we were already flying at light speed if we choose the appropriate frame of reference. Is the actual barrier that of attaining light speed wrt a frame of reference that we are initially at rest with? Ie accelerating to light speed from and wrt an initial frame of reference?

So we are just trying to make predictions about quantum processes in the presence of extreme gravitational (and other?) conditions. There is no attempt to fuse the two models into one overarching one? If ,as you say quantum processes are understandable in curved space and we say the mathematical singularities are just quirks of the model ,what is the problem? Will progress just be incremental and softly softly catchee monkey?

Do any of the ongoing theories for a QFT for gravity explore a unified field including all the existing fields plus a gravity field?

Are they responsible for or have a role in determining the curved spacetime? Is the gravity field entirely distinct from the other fields or do they have any properties and behaviours in common? Would there be as many interactions as there are fields (so as many interactions as there are fundamental particles)?

"Everything is fields",I heard Sean Carroll say in a lecture. So I am wondering how they work. How do they interact with each other(is it via their particles/excitations?) and what is speculated to be their relationship/interactions with the gravity field? As I have understood it there are as many fields as there are fundamental particles. Is there any idea of why there are as many fundamental particles as there are ?

Would such a universe have to be one where everything happens at the same time and in the same place? (perhaps to paraphrase in reverse a couple of well known definitions) Have there been any speculations along those lines? With time and causation being such perennial fascinations it wouldn't surprise me.I may have seen something similar a few years back but can't recall where I saw or whether it was purely theoretical or if there was any more to it.