MigL

If that means what I think it means, then you have at last, hit the nail fair square on the head. Here, I give you a like!! Then we don't agree on this Beecee. Everyone has the right to expect help, even if they don't do their part. But they should expect a 'punishment' of some sort, if they don't. Would Dimreepr have posted that line if we were discussing welfare recipients ?? Dmreepr should know that drug users are prosecuted ( and arrested ) for illegal drug use, yet they are not turned away at hospitals for complications with illegal drug use.

The 'duration' and 'length' of an event, in relativity, is equivalent to the projection on the spatial and temporal axis, of its rest frame ( proper ) length and duration. This projection is different for different observers, depending on their position on the spatial/temporal axis. IOW, depending on the speed ( and vice versa ). The frame has no physical effect, nor does it change anything directly. It is simply the point of view of the observer, taking his circumstances into consideration. It is similar to measuring your shadow in a North facing frame, as opposed to a south facing frame. In the first you will measure your shadow to be very long because the sun is at your back, while in the second, you will be facing the sun , and will see little, or no shadow.

Just about everything you've said. And people have been telling you for two pages already, but you simply ignore them and go on. That's no way to learn anything ...

Again, you are ignoring frames of reference. For an 'external' observer, the relativistically moving Muon has its time dilated, allowing it to reach the surface of the Earth. For an observer travelling along with the Muon, the distance to the surface of the Earth is contracted, allowing the Muon to reach the surface. The two FoR give differing observations of distances and durations, as measured from those particular frames. That is what people have been telling you in all of your threads. You do not understand the 'block' universe model, where an observer in a particular FoR sees a foliation, or slice, of the 4d hypercube, yet you keep bringing it up. Nor do you understand Relativity as you don't seem to grasp the importance of FoRs. Maybe you should start from the beginning and ask what happens in specific circumstances, instead of telling us what you think happens.

Energy of a system can never get to negative infinity ( whatever that means ); it can't even get to zero because of Quantum mechanical effects. Your 'logic' is mathematically flawed. What exactly is it based on ? Not good enough, Joigus; Ragingmoron hears Jesus' voice in his head ...

No such thing as perfect spheres. The amount of water on the Earth can't store much heat; after several billion years, most of the Earth's interior is still molten. Again, Studiot's first question is still the most pertinent ... Where is the evidence ?

In Canada, I can be fined for not wearing a seatbelt while operating a motor vehicle. It is a public safety issue, as seatbelts save lives. Why should I not be fined if I refuse to get vaccinated ????

You can be charged and convicted of negligence or involuntary manslaughter even if you do it unwillingly. If you chose to ignore quarantine rules, vaccinations, or even mask mandates, are you not being negligent ? This is a common theme I find myself coming back to ... Why do your rights ( not to be vaccinated ) supersede my rights ( to not get sick from you ) ?

People are incarcerated all the time for being a danger to the rest of society. They lose their right to freedom. It may be an unpopular opinion, but rights are not inherent, you are not born with them; they are granted by the society you live in. ( just ask a woman in Saudi Arabia, or a Uyghur in China ) At the beginning of the pandemic, If I were contageous, I could have killed more people in a nursing home than with a fuly loaded Glock 17, because with a virus, you don't run out of ammunition. So what is the difference.

I see you chose to ignore his first question ... Care to try again ? Or is this simply a WAG ?

Not exactly based on a novel ( script ? ), but C Nolan's movie, Interstellar, would seem to fit admirably. Based on ideas by K Thorne when he was consulting on the movie, Contact, and later adapted into a screenplay by C Nolan's brother Jonathan. It is 'accompanied' by a book by K Thorne, The Science of Interstellar. Koti's suggestion, R L Foreward's Dragon's Egg, provides excellent insight into effects around strongly gravitating objects ( neutron star ) and is a great read that I also highly recommend, but it doesn't provide for passages to elsewhere, or elsewhen.

No, it's more like ... A - There are only red , green and blue LEDs for each pixel of my TV. B - But I perceive yellow, magenta and cyan, so there must be more. A - No, those are variations/combinations of the three basics. B - But that is how I perceive them. Why must you be so mean, and not consider my feelings over your reality? And I didn't even call you any names. I was going to tell Dimreepr to 'go f**k himself' but he said he already does that with a turkey baster 😄 😄 . ( It's a difference of opinion people, lighten up ! )

Thank you for your well thought out response, CharonY. On the other hand, actual scientists seem to only consider two sexes ... Scientists Genetically Edit Mice To Have Female Only Litters With 100 Percent Efficiency (msn.com) All of the qualities I mentioned were also environment related. Blinders much ?

Read your linked article; thanks for posting. I don't think I'll ever understand the papers that have led to these conclusions, but they seem to rely on 'mathematical tricks', somewhat similar to renormalization, to make sense of the non-sensical. But if these tricks, such as entanglement entropy and quantum extremal surfaces inside event horizons, point us in the right direction and towards a quantum field theory of gravity ( like Hawking did with his 'semi-quantum' evaporative radiation ) so much the better.

The quark model was proposed by Gell-Mann and Zweig in 1964, as part of a classsification system known as the 'eight-fold way'. The criteria for sorting quark 'flavors' was estabilished long before any experimental evidence for quarks. IOW, the 'purpose' of the quark model demands that they have the flavors dictated by SU(3) symmetry, just as reproduction model of the human species dictates the sorting into male/female sexes. Neither is sufficient on its own, and any other sorting is superfluous. What is the purpose/reason for extra sex classifications ? ( and thanks for making a lier out of me; I said the previous would be my only post on the matter )

I think we can all agree that for the purpose of reproduction of the species ( human, that is ), only two sexes are needed. One is not enough, and three ( or more ) are superfluous. That doesn't mean that there are not people who don't fully fit into the male, or female, grouping; but for the criteria of reproduction, there is no third ( or 4th, or 5th ) category to place them in. One has to ask, then, what is the purpose ( or agenda, if you will ) for having more than the male and female sex classifications. Please explain. Thank God he's not Mexican, or you'd imply he was lazy. Or Oriental and a bad driver. Or Italian and a mobster. Can you see what is wrong with that line of thinking, Stringy ? I had hoped this thread had died, because I really don't like having people I consider friends call each other 'dicks', or make thinly veiled implications of transphobia, homophobia or racism, so this will be my only post on this thread. But I would like an answer ( I will still read ) as to WHY a third sex is needed, and what is the PURPOSE of the differentiation. Is more 'separation' really desirable to more 'inclusion' ? Is this just another social engineering exercise ? Is it to make some people, who feel 'different', feel better about themselves ? What am I not seeing ?

I would assume by 'ocean of energy' that gave rise to 'matter' after the inflationary period, he means the radiation dominated era that gave rise to the matter dominated era.

I see the Taiwan situation getting out of control, IF China chooses military aggression ( highly unlikely ), neighboring countries like Japan, South Korea, even Vietnam, Australia and India will be drawn in, at which point the US will be forced to participate. I see the Ukrainian situation more like Yugoslavia. The US will join in only if Europe gets its act together and decides to finally police its neighborhood. So while I can see military aggression being more likely on Russia's part, I cannot see Europe mounting a combined opposition. Where would northern Europe get its massive oil/gas imports from if Russia shuts off the pipelines ?

First it was a math question. Then a language question. Now, it's a cooking question. You guys wanna make up your minds ?

So ... As a count, you might have 5 eggs. But as an algebraic expression, you have 5*egg ( where egg is the unit ). I guess it's important to know what you are talking about.

I realize it is not your assertion ( see Phi's Quora link ), but I have a problem with this statement The CMB radiation is homogenous to 1 part in 100,000 for RMS variations of 18 uK ( after subtracting out dipole anisotropy ). See here ... Cosmic microwave background - Wikipedia So I have to ask ... What concentration ? What plane, or line ? If anything, they are evidence of quantum fluctuations in the pre-inflation era, and in no way indicative of any universal extent in a particular direction.

So did russia, with their limited access to the Black Sea ( and the Mediterranean ). Did that give them the right to annex the port of Sevastopol, or the whole Crimean peninsula ?

Somewhat like you on science topics. ( no, I didn't give you a neg rep ) China isn't just threatening Taiwan, but other nations in the South China Sea. They are actively building 'islands' in the ocean, and claiming they are part of the Chinese land mass in order to extend their territorial limits. Their military spending, and build up, is the largest in South East Asia, and is destabilizing the whole area, by forcing countries like Japan, South Korea, and even India and Australia, to increase their militaries. These are not 'war games' we are considering, but a powder keg whose fuse is already lit.

No idea, INow. Our Prime Minister likes to talk the game, but doesn't have the means, or the stomach, to back it up. Canada is, as a result, not taken seriously in international matters.

The history of Taiwan is an interesting one. Chiang Kai Shek was a Nationalist, who fought along the Allies in WW2, but was defeated in the civil war of 1948 by Mao Zedong's forces. He, and his followers retreated to the island of Taiwan, to set up their own Government. While fairly brutal at first, he grew Taiwan's economy and democracy, to be elected president 5 times to 6 year terms. The Republic of Taiwan has always been a thorn and an embarassement for the Chinese Communists, but until current times, re-taking the island would have totally destroyed it and rendered it worthless. I still don't think they can afford to try to take it forcibly, but with their economic might, they may be able to pressure other countries into not giving assistance, or recognition, to the island state, so as to re-take them without using force. Either way is a shame, as Taiwan will either be destroyed, or suffer the fate of Hong Kong.