DrP

Micrometer? (small scale caliper as mentioned above).

Playing advocate - it IS a reason that many STOP believing in god (which is on topic). The 'no show' of god and whether its existence is 'scientifically decidable' or not is very relevant to why people stop believing in god or not, no?

If the water idea were not possible for some reason then how about slicing the sharp points off and cutting it into a central cuboid and several pyramid or dome shapes. These individual shapes might be easier to measure and have their volumes calculated from their dimensions - then add them. I guess it depends on just how irregular the shape is and whether it can be cut up into regular shapes and their dimensions measured or not. PS - I don't necessarily mean to physically cut the object. Just measure its dimensions and cut it up mathematically into more manageable shapes (if possible - depends on how irregular it is). That or an estimation averaging the irregularities to regular shapes and adding their volumes.

If such an entity classed/defined as a god (the creator of our universe or something) chose to interact and communicate with us and make itself know then why would that not be scientifically decidable? If it is then it is testable and observable unless it is hiding. I disagree and would state that you can use logic and scientific reasoning when looking for a god. Especially if it is one defined in a religious book. It is trivially easy to scientifically test the claims of religious books and show them to be untrue for example.

Not a scientific reasoning then, just the feels? - That's the same argument a lot of believers use to justify their belief. "Look at the beauty of the world, listen to your heart and decide, I can't possibly see a world without a god". You've got to forgive yourself and move on. ;-) There are a lot of good things in Christianity - the ability to forgive others and yourself is one of those things. It is understandable why people believed it for so long like CharonY said: ...so why would you have expected to believe anything else? It was what you were taught. It was pretty normal for people to believe it.

I think you are over thinking it. I think it was a throw away comment 'good for you'.... which was probably a mixture of sincerity and maybe some sarcasm in some ratio or another. Why wouldn't it be good for you? If you get something positive out of it then good for you. If not then drop it. I have gotten strength from it in the past - but maybe I could have gotten strength else where as I do today. Others do. I just had to stop lying to myself (and by extension others).

I agree - you can make up any old explanation you like - it doesn't make it correct. You could say it is chi moving about, invisible worms, just your locus of focus or whatever you imagination wants to dream up or invent. I like the phrase - 'locus of focus'... it rolls of the tongue nicely and I reckon it is the best explanation of what is happening during Tai Chi and with what people are describing in this thread imo.

It is definitely a thing... but what do you mean by 'it works'? They get the 'feeling' that their chi is moving around their body. OK - undisputable that they get they feeling... but what is disputed is their claim that it is the bodies spiritual energy moving about under the control of the practicing party. They have no way of proving such a claim or substantiating that this energy even exists. The body if full of nerves that feel and tingle... even more so when the mind focuses on them. Focus on a specific area and you 'feel' it more. Move that locus of focus around your body and the sensation moves with it. :-)

Was in my 40s.

1st place got nearly twice the seats compared to second place. That's a landslide imo. I don't think the term 'Landslide' is exactly defined for election victories - it just means you won by a huge amount - which they did. Nearly twice the seats of the Lib-Dems. Looking at the percentages then maybe not - depends on the definition - but it was convincing no? Farage's views are still very popular. Maybe - but it will be just as close I reckon. Who really knows until we do it? I'm down with it. I think there should have been one a while back when it was pointed out to the public that the leave campaign was a fairy tale and they spent too much. I remember at the time when the leaflet from David Cameron's lot came round in support for the EU and my farther was going mental about the waste of money from the government in advertising nonsense about the EU. Any discussion with him about any positives about the EU is met with extreme dissonance and anger and claims of lies and brainwashing and treason. I expect there are many more like him that will never change their mind even when presented with clear facts that contradict their horrible and ignorant beliefs about foreigners.

I think that's wishful thinking and bias when interpreting the results. The Tories are a brexit party (hard or soft I don't care). You can't not count them towards the leave vote. Also, if The Brexit party got a third of the vote alone then that is still a land slide. I'm not convinced a second referendum will give a different result at all. I agree there should be one though -- with a regulated, legal campaign by both sides.

OK. I do think it's the same as people feel when they do Tai Chi though. I'd like to know how these people think it is any different.

Dozens signing in to say that they get it too.... WE KNOW - everyone can do it. Please answer: HOW IS IT ANY DIFFERENT FROM TAI CHI??

I don't think there is enough info to give you a proper answer. Sorry. Unless I have totally misunderstood you I would think that the drying time would be dependant on the formulation of the cake ingredients as well as drying temperature, cake thickness and flow rate of the passing nitrogen. Moisture level in the cake will influence drying times too. You could formulate your own drying time equation for a given cake formula of given thickness by looking at differing nitrogen temperatures and flow rates maybe. What type of cake is it? Chemical particulates? What about vacuum? Drying in vacuum oven allows reduced temperature drying and faster too of course.

Do we have equations for the energy of a gravity wave yet? Like h.mu or something? I assume planks constant isn't relevant here as it isn't electromagnetic and I do not know if gravitational effects are quantised or not? I wonder if there is a new constant waiting to be found that equates the energy of the gravity wave with the wavelength.

How would that work? Would we need an equation that defines the energy of a gravity wave or something? If we have detected a gravity wave then can we measure the energy of it (Like h.mu or something)? I expect that h might not have anything to do with it but if the energy of the wave can be defined then we can use know formulas for energy maybe to swap out E for mC2? Get an equation that relates mass to gravitational potential energy or something? idk - I am not making sense as I don't fully understand it, thus my question. How does a theory of quantum gravity help us define the substance and state of matter inside the singularity itself (or even speculate upon its nature)?

Maybe it's in there as a blowing agent to 'puff up' the char a little to make it a thicker layer. Maybe. In intumescent paints they tend to use melamine. It is more stable in the paint than the baking soda and decomposes at a much higher temperature (~340C) suited to blowing up an intumescent char.

Whether I believe that I did or that I did not doesn't change the fact of what actually happened.

We all know that though. This is a science site, so we are well versed on the fact that whatever we believe it doesn't impact on reality. (Apart from things like placebo effects... but even that is a belief that effects the well being and make up of a hugely complex human body... placebo's might effect biological machines but they won't effect the laws of physics).

OK - I missed this thread over Christmas:-

There is a lot about Starlite that doesn't add up. The video on Tomorrows World looked impressive and there are some good reports. However - that it was never taken to market suggests a problem. Looking at the char it looks siliceous to me rather than carboniferous. I wonder if the paint, that clearly works so well in the TW test video, breaks down after a few weeks and falls off or something like that. If not then why would none of the companies that investigated it take it up? Why would Maurice Ward not let the formulation known to the world? There are writings to say he didn't want it being used commercially and that he wasn't offered enough money for it etc... again - none of it adds up. Why turn down a fortune just to be greedy? It (Starlite) looks similar to what you get if you take water glass and mix in some clays and other heat resistant fillers. Maybe some mica platelets or some alumina silicate fillers that are refractory. Siliceous clays and the like. If this is the case you would get something similar to what was seen on Tomorrows World (admittedly not quite as impressive, but they could have hammed up the video with a cooler burning flame or something to make it look more impressive for the TV, who knows?) that would paint onto an egg and give a pretty good attempt at protecting it during attack from a blow torch (especially if it was set up on a cooler flame). The problem would come a few months later though... coating of this material will probably go flaky and just crumble off over time (several months?). I personally think that Starlite was one of those products that 'almost' made it but wasn't good enough for what ever reason all those companies that rejected it and Maurice Ward were not telling us. PS - IF it was real and had no problems then Maurice Ward was a serious arse hat for not sharing it to the world or at least passing the secret to others that could make money out of it. That product could have saved many lives by now but the world has been denied it because of one man's greed. He was offered millions for it iirc. OK - rewatching the TW clip it DOES look like a black char - suggesting carbon. How about some melamine formaldehyde resin loaded with clays and alumina silicate powders/particulates? I do not know, obviously, but as I said above - there must have been something wrong with its long term stability or a problem with long term substrate adhesion or something else otherwise it would be on the market.

There is no maybe about it. It is written there clearly.

yea - I thought there might have been... I did a quick search to try to find it because I thought I'd read something... but couldn't find it. Please feel free to delete this or merge with the other. My question still stands though. Does anyone know the mathematical relationship between the kilogram and plank's constant? I might try to look for it later when not at work.... ....aaaaand it's in your link already - thanks.

He is clearly talking about religious faith in the OP.

He's got a point here. We know what definition of the word faith we are discussing. Religious faith. This is different from using the word faith to simply mean to have hope I think. Hoping something will happen isn't the same as having faith it will happen. The faith part seems to suggest more surety of the outcome of events where hope admits the chance element and merely wishes for the desired outcome rather than expecting (knowing) it.