MigL

I like that ...

Yes they do. But such interactions tend to make the accretion disk planar; see Saturn's rings for an example. Further, such interactions would be random, and would produce random radiation. The inspiralling accretion disk produces a very specific radiation pattern, polar jets, of the type associated with orbiting charges. All 'active' Black Holes display such jets; some around early massive galactic center BHs produce jets that outshine the parent galaxy, and are known as Quasars. Since the infalling plasma of the accretion disk is in free fall, why is the radiation apparent/accessible to an outside observer ?

Sure old man. Thursday of what year ? The new advertising model is a definite improvement. You don't have to click any windows closed. However, when I'm reading posts I always think there's a video attachment, and I'm disappointed when it's only an ad.

We had this discussion a few years back, and @Markus Hanke participated in it. At the time, he convincingly stated that an accelerometer attached to a free-falling charged particle shows no acceleration, so there is no reason to radiate. I'm willing to re-open the discussion, perhaps in a split-off thread as it is off-topic here, to address your question, as well as my own ( which is at least, more closely related to the OP ) The accretion disk of a Black Hole strips atoms of their electrons, leaving charged particles spiraling towards the Event Horizon. These charged particles are in free fall, and BHs with accretion disks emit massive amounts of radiation as polar jets. It would seem that observational evidence supports radiation from free falling charges.

I just need my 'fix', String Junky. Doesn't matter where it's from.

The Sun converts 620 million tons of Hydrogen into 606 million tons of Helium each second ( from Wikipedia ). The energy of the bound state of the Helium nucleus is manifested as a mass deficit or binding energy, totaling 14 million tons every second. This 14 million ton mass deficit/binding energy eventually makes its way to the surface, where most of it is radiated into space as energetic radiation, and makes life possible on our planet. Pretty darn amazing for something that is not real and only useful for calculations. Actually the mass of the three quarks that make up nucleons ( protons and neutrons ) is only about 2% of the nucleon's mass. The rest is binding energy of the color interaction. By your logic 98% of the 'mass' of a nucleon is not 'real'. IOW energy is just as 'real' as mass. We don't actually measure mass; we measure weight. Mass is determined from energetic interactions, such as reaction to a field ( Earth's gravity being most obvious ), momentum conservation in collisions, etc. This 14

Boots are a different matter; I have 20 year old cowboy boots that cost $600 Can back then. None of my sneakers or running shoes are over a year old. But while on the subject of comparing/complaining about totally different things ... I have a fully automated espresso machine that only needs water, coffee beans and the push of a button. It cost me $2500 Can two years ago. It is currently not working properly, and needs over $400 Can in repairs. I used a stove top percolator for a bit. I like the aroma when it percolates but hate the wait. So I bought a $150 Can Nespresso machine and use $30 Can for 100 pods from CostCo instead of $15 Can bags of coffee beans. The espresso is fast, just as good, and I can almost get another two machines for the cost of repairing my 'good' one, never mind buying another. Someties 'better' isn't always a better idea. ( I just had to get this story off my chest; it makes me so angry ! )

running shoes are disposable; buy cheap ones. Expensive ones only line the pockets of large corporations that use child labor to manufacture them. And are a status symbol for spoilt rich kids.

OMG ! Et tu, Bufofrog. Reading Capiert's posts actually hurts ... Now you're doing it too ?

There is no such thing. The relationship is between energy and mass. They are different facets of the same thing; one being the ability or potential to do something, the other being the resistance to doing something. Are you maybe under the impression that light is energy? That is another common misconception because we get energy from the Sun as light. Light is siply the vehicle that transfers energy from the Sun to the Earth. Both renergy, and mass, are properties of systems ( and/or matter ), and so light has the property of energy, but it has no mass. However, in special circumstances, its property of energy can be converted, so that energetic ( but massless ) light gives rise to two particles with mass ( but much less energy ). The process can also be reversed so that two massive particles can annihilate to become a photon of light. These processes involve many other properties of systems ( and matter ) such as momentum and charge, which dictate if and how the processes evolve. As Sensei mentioned, the subject gets complicated very quickly; I hope I helped with some of the basics.

"Context of the quote' refers to the rest of the speech embedding the quote. "Times and circumstances when it was made' refers to a time and situation/place. Did you enjoy that ? 😄 ( sorry, couldn't resist )

Quantum foam 'exists' ( ? ) at a scale where space-time becomes chaotic, and virtual particles b( the ones without a defined position or momentum )pop in and out of existence ( for an undefined time ). How would you specify a position relative to it ? You can consider anything a medium, but what is actually 'waving' ?

A person who does not take into account the context of a quote, or the time and circumstances when it was made, is an even more stupid person.

An Electromagnetic Field is a value and direction ( vector ) associated with each point in space. A Medium is a particle at each point in space, that has an oscillation as part of its motion. A Photon is best described as a point ( dimensionless ) quantum particle that is 'smeared out' over a volume with no distinct edge. But in its other model of a wave, an 'exact' value of its energy will make its wavelength infinitely long, so it is in no way related to its size. You may have gathered, by now, that quantum objects don't act the same as macroscopic objects. So, I ask, again, why do you think quantum particles, like photons, would need a medium like macroscopic objects, such as water waves, do ?

They would ask "Why is a medium needed ?". They might also ask about the formatting of your posts ...

One thing I forgot to mention in this post If you did go ahead and repeat Galileo's supposed experiment of dropping two unequal weights from the leaning tower of Pisa, you would find that they both fall at the same rate, and you would measure the acceleration of the two unequal masses at 9.8 m/s/s. Further you would find that the a in Fi=mia is equivalent to GMe/r2, and, upon setting Fi=Fg ( or mia=GMemg/r2 ) that mi and mg are, in fact, equal. This is actually a deep, and surprising, result, as it shows inertial mass is equivalent to gravitational mass. Even A Einstein pondered why this should be so, and may be what Joigus was referring to here

I'll side with Janus. F=ma simply defines the relationship between two ( or possibly 3 ) variables. Usually force is proportional to acceleration when mass is constant, but the other way F is proportional to m when a is constant, also works.

There is no distinction between push and pull; both are forces. However there are many forces, and F=ma is a generalized force equation expressing what happens to a test mass, m, when a force is applied to it. It is also known as Newton's second law. The other equation F=GMm/r2 is a specific kind of 'force', that expresses what happens to a test mass, m, when exposed to the gravity of another body of mass M. This is also known as Newtonian Gravity, and the model is accurate in most situations, although in some situations involving hi energy/lo separation Gravity is better described by a geometrical space-time ( which is not a force ) model, GR . The two equations can only be set to equal when dealing with the gravitational force of mass M, on test mass m. And in such a case ( as Swansont showed ) we notice that the mass m cancels from both sides. This means the acceleration induced by a body of mass M is independent of the test mass, m. IOW, all test masses, no matter what their m is, accelerate/fall at the same rate when exposed to the same Gravitational Force of object M. In the case of M being the mass of the Earth, we realize that climbing to the top of the leaning Tower of Pisa to drop a bowling ball and a golf ball, and timing their time to fall, is not necessary. They both fall at 9.8 m/s/s. ( disregarding air resistance, of course )

Sorry if I didn't explain myself well enough; lower birth rates leading to aging population problem. Currently countered by immigration from high birth rate countries to low birth rate countries. But what happens when most all countries go to a low birth rate as in the extrapolation ? If there are less young working people to pay taxes, there is less money available for the greater number of the elderly pensions. The system becomes unsustainable unless people work, and are able to work, to a much older age.

Interesting. While your assertion is not accurate, in general; entropy increases as more and more as the available information becomes unavailable. The global increase in unavailable information has been occurring since the beginning of the universe, even though, locally, entropy and available information can increase. The place where your assertion makes sense is where ALL information relating to a Black Hole is 'stored'; at the Event Horizon.If a BH renders all information crossing the EH, unavailable, then the area of the EH is proportional both to its entropy and information. Hawking and Bekenstein showed the entropy is indeed proportional to the EV area, and so, temperature, and Hawking 'black body' radiation at that temperature. Similarly, I believe it was E Wigner who showed that a limit exists on how much total information can be accumulated in a space before collapse into a BH with an EV whose area is proportional to that information. This limit is about 1069 bits/m2. The information, and entropy, is localized in Planck sized domains on the surface of the EH, and surprisingly, these domains have some interesting connections to Loop Quantum Gravity.

Any non-secular system of law, like Sharia, will discriminate against all other non-Islamic religions. And possibly, some sects of Islam also. A diverse group of people needs a secular system of governance and laws. ( meandering once again 🙂 )

Those same projections also show that the average age would be about 85, and for the system to sustain itself, retirement age would need to be about 95. ( I pulled those age numbers out of my rear; but I assume you know what I mean ) Medicine, biology and genetics had better start working on keeping us healthy, capable and cognizant well past that age.

That may be. But a Chomsky or Russel would probably do a good job before age 65 also. I hope it won't be much of a problem, as J Biden will surround himself with sensible and capable people, even if he himself, is incapacitated. But the other buffoon, who surrounds himself with a*s-kissers, would be a major problem.

I wasn't aware that P Crone had passed. I notice the 'sketchy' literature you're considering, refers to Muhammad as 'the praised one', or religious literature, which makes it 'sketchy'. On the first page of this thread, however, I mentioned some historical literature which pre-dates Muhammad's religious significance to Islam. In some Muhammad isn't even referred to as 'the Prophet', rather, the first of the 'Arab Kings'. See the first of these sources Brock, S.P. (1982). "Syriac Views of Emergent Islam". In G.H.A. Juynboll (ed.). Studies on the First Century of Islamic Society. Southern Illinois University Press. p. 20. Nevo, Yehuda D.; Koren, Judith (2000). "Methodological Approaches to Islamic Studies". The Quest for the Historical Muhammad. New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 420–443. Nigosian, Solomon Alexander (2004). Islam: Its History, Teaching, and Practices. Indiana University Press. ISBN 0-253-21627-3. I might add that, I myself, haven't read a lot of this and can't attest to their validity; just some 'skimming', so my opinions might not have very solid foundations.

True. But you have to admit the probability of a person 'losing their wits' in the 4 years of a Presidential term increase almost exponentially between the ages of 70 and 90. I'm not sure how it works in the US, but in Canada, once a person reaches 80 years of age, he/she is subject to yearly driving competence tests. You could call it age discrimination, but it is a recognition of our general human limitations. Similarly you could require politivians over a certain age to be tested for physical and mental condition, but that could be easily manipulated by a President who appoints his physician. ( remember the 'glowing' assessment D Trump got, while being overweight, and obviously crazy ? ) That is why I would prefer age limits on essential politicians. The US is not the only one with problems. In Canada we have senators appointed for life, and some are in their 90s, who spend most of their time sleeping, yet they can hold up, or veto, legislation passed by elected and accountable members of Parliament. Our Senate is called the 'house of somber second thought'. In their dreams, maybe.