MigL

Maybe that is why you are so jaded, and calling people ( borderline ) bigots. It's due to your 'environment'. Most of us get along perfectly well with gay people, and we have good laws that protect their rights, while protecting my rights to not like the same practices they do. Differences are what makes the world go around. I will bow out of this discussion because I feel it has come full circle and INow is discussing evolutionary fears for our dislikes, completely forgetting, again, the large toll the AIDS epidemic toook on the gay community starting in the 80s, and, although now controllable, still no cure. There are too many inconsistencies in the arguments being made. CharonY has posted some excellent material indicating the mostly learned response ( nurture ) for our likes, dislikes and attractions, and quite a few others concur. Yet there are those who still argue that for homosexuals, likes and dislikes as well as who you are attracted to, are not learned, but innate ( nature ) The former member Cosmologist did so, as well as Stringy continuing to I just wnder. If a lab rat can be made to enjoy eating poison by stimulating the 'pleasure'centers in its brain, could a 'straight' human be made to enjoy homosexual sex by doing the same ? And would that eventually change that person's sexual orientation ? ( the germans probably performed such experiments in WW2; I saw it on Else: She-Wolf of the SS )

I just love it when some confused person has to use a YouTube video to back up their claims. Try a good Science book instead; YouTube is NOT peer reviewed. Maybe you should realize that we have sent interplanetary probes ( now interstellar ) on fly-bys of the outer planets, including Pluto ( and pictures sent back as proof ), using the Newtonian gravity model, which happens to include G . Do you even stop to consider what accuracy G has to be known to ( never mind the Cavendish experiments) to be able to plot and execute near orbital trajectories at the distance of Pluto ?

If you are in free fall are you experiencing a force ? No. And an accelerometer attached to you will not show any acceleration. If something stops your free fall, will you experience a force ? Most definitely. If that something is the ground, it will stop you dead ( literally ). Even if you are not falling, but simply standing on the ground, you will feel a force equivalent to your weight. And yes, that is GR.

Bullcrap, INow. You have a dislike for the guns that plague your society, and you want to get rid of those guns. Yet you don't want to get rid of, or incarcerate, all the people who use guns, as you'd have to double the number of jails you have. So it is possible to distinguish something from the person doing, or using, it.

This is a common procedure in Black Hole dynamics.. The use of Rindler frame/co-ordinates transforms the infalling observer to a stationary one, where the Event Horizon accelerates outward. See Here Rindler coordinates - Wikipedia

You ask, or make the most inane statements. Realize that in Physics we deal with models. And if the 'reality' of the situation can best be represented bysomething accelerating, or a made-up particle which might not really exist, or any number of other assumptions which are unsupported, we explore them, and see if they lead to consequences we can observe and measure.

We never learn, do we ? 40 years ago people were saying this about homosexuals and who they choose to love. 20 years ago they said it about gay marriage. Now, Intoscience has to say it in defense of his aversion to homosexual ( and other ) sex acts.

Are you sure you're in the right thread ? I believe he explicitly said the acts 'disgust' him(self), not others practicing those acts. At which point you accused him of bigotry. I think that 'special badge' has gone to your head and is clouding your judgement. Maybe the jacket patch ...

I understand what you were attempting Joigus, but those 'on-shell'/'off-shell' descriptors don't really cut it as definitions for me. Neither does Genady's idea that all photons are virtual because they all interact with electrons. To me, a real particle is measurable; a virtual particle is not. By my definition, then, a virtual particle is below the measurable threshold of one quantum of action, while a real particle is above that same threshold.

If I may simplify further ... The classical model of light treats it as a wave or a 'corposcule', but not necessarily a photon. The Quantum Mechanical model introduces the concept of a well defined photon, while QED, being a quantized field theory has, by necessity, mediator particles, virtual photons, for the Electromagnetic and other fields. ( and of course magnetism is an electromagnetic phenomenon ) This does not preclude real photons from the QED model, of course.

Nobody is going to take life advice from anyone who still watches movies on VHS tape. That is not Hi-Def streaming, Blu-ray, or even standard DVD, but 4 generations old !!! Keep up with the times, Rip Van winkle. Back in my younger days I tried picking up lesbian couples in bars/clubs I frequented ( the 'hunt' is often more thrilling than the 'kill' ). These were the 'lipstick' lesbians you might see in a Porn film, not the 'lumberjack shirt', croppped hair type, and needless to say, it never went well because they knew, that if they so chose, they could have had any man in the place. And who made you the bigotry arbitrer ? I have often stated how ridiculous it is when these sorts of labels get thrown around. So what if he doesn't like anal sex and is heterosexual ? Does he have to tell his wife he likes it simply to satisfy your standards for bigotry against homosexuals ? Are you going to put us all in a room where we chant over and over "I like anal sex", and in between pray to God for forgiveness and the strength to change ? Are we then going to do the same with homosexuals, all chanting "I like vaginal sex", and praying to God, because we certainly can't have them remain bigoted ? Actually they already have 'canps' like described above all over the Southern US, that bastion of anti-bigotry; they are camps for conversion therapy.

This would be the effect Dr Lincoln is referring to in the video, better explained by our own Dr Swansont. This is still a classical interpretation and I had thought the photon 'takes time to be absorbed/emitted' with conservation of momentum considerations was a good QM interpretation. I guess it's time to research another interpretation.

We are aware of cases where the speed of light is exceeded in some particular medium. Not the speed of light in vacuum, mind you, but the speed of light in that particular medium. This results in a lovely blue emission called Cerenkov Radiation, but, no causality violations of any kind. I don't imagine your hypotethical intelligent community would note any causality violations either.

My apologies then ...

The literal definition of 'atheist' is "a person who does not believe in the existence of god or any gods", according to Merriam-Webster. Can that person prove that ''fact' with any observation or evidence ? Of course not. So 'atheism is also a 'belief', until Genady, or anyone else, can prove otherwise. ( claims that he was born a non-believer notwithstanding )

What has the new-fangled technology brought about ? I miss the good old days when you went into a bar to talk to real, drunk women ...

Why complicate matters. The current systen has been worked out over a couple of hundred years to be self-consistent.

Religion is a belief. Similarly, Atheism is a belief that there is no religion. Neither has effective proof or evidence, so what exactly is the difference ? The only viable argument is that one is 'more likely' than the other, but, as we are all human, we all have a 'built in ' ( nature ) belief system which can be further influenced by the environment ( nurture ).

Massless phtons at 'rest' are not supported by any realisic model, unless they are non-existent ...

Very much like Exchemist, even after having been around for over 10 years and gained some respect for my scientific opinion, when dealing with the likes of Markus , Mordred, Joigus, Swansont, and others who are no longer active in the Physics forum, I always ake sure to ask questions, not be confrontational and defer to their expertise. It is made easier by the fact that they are always willing to help, and are never condescending

No one seems to want to address the logical inconsistencies of the argument being presented by some. Homosexuals cannot help liking who, and what, they like; they are born that way, and conversion therapy does not work. Heterosexuals like who, and what, they do because of learned behavior, and being reasonong beings, can change their likes and dislikes. Can INow, or Phi, please explain this line of reasoning to me as I do not understand it. One of the above, bolded statements must be false.

Absolutely right, INow and Phi. Heterosexuals should stop disliking same gender sex. And homosexuals should like opposite gender sex and stop being so prejudiced. After all, these are learned behaviors as Phi states above, and can change if we want to. Except, I would have never thought Phi to be a supporter of Conversion Therapy. ( logical inconsistency much ? )

Melodramatic ? Moi ? And again, there is a vast diffeence between a personal dislike, or disgust even, of specific actions ( or sexual activities ), and a dislike of groups of people ( who may or may not engage in those activities ). I can tell the difference.

No, you don't. Apparently the 'new' approach is to have every one else recognize and abide by your 'egocentric' world view. If I dislike, or find an activity distasteful, I don't engage in that activity. If I like, or find an activity 'tasteful', I will engage in it. That seems to apply to most people ( not just me ), heterosexual males and females, as well as homosexual males and females. The only ones 'on the fence' about their likes and dislikes, are bisexuals. Who is anyone else to tell me what I should like or dislike ? Isn't that the problem homosexuals have had until recently ? Maybe 'tolerance' implies everyone has a choice as to what, or who, they like.

Hate to sound like a grumpy old man, but it's too darn cold for a brisk walk in the fresh air. Judging by the rest of your 'rebuttal',I'm surprised you were able to comprehend my post ... Have you gotten a clue yet ?