ydoaPs

You're right; he might just be incompetent.

He's not an idiot; he just deliberately misrepresents physics and biology.

Bad grammar doesn't absolve you here as you specifically set that comparative in the context of all of the forces making it take the function of a superlative. Well, you're wrong. Gravity is by far the weakest force.

The proportionality constants are, what, 20 orders of magnitude apart?

When did the Marines get a nuke program?

So, you'd have to have a harmonic shield? Star Trek is right again! I wonder it this was swanont's idea.

Yes, 1 is close to 0. It's about 1 away from 0. See: number line.

No it wasn't. It was the calculation of the total spent.

One would think one of the people who can actually do these things would have taken Randi up on his challenge, proved psychic powers exist, and gotten a million USD richer.

Gravity doesn't cause spacetime geometry to deviate from Euclidean space; it is the deviation from Euclidean space caused by energy. And that's largely the point of the analogy in question.

The change in spacetime geometry IS gravity. If you look at the equations, the left hand side is represents the geometry and the righthand sign is the mass-energy. Gravity doesn't cause spacetime geometry to deviate from Euclidean space. Gravity is the deviation from Euclidean space due to energy.

The idea is that gravity is a change in geometry from euclidean space. Things traveling in a straight line from the reference frame of the traveler appear to be traveling in an arc from an outside reference frame.

In your other thread, you've indicated that you don't know the underlying mathematics or physics involved. It's not a realistic amount of things to learn over a summer as you're in geometry now. You should put this on the backburner (even disregarding safety concerns) until you've learned multivariable tensor calculus and some physics. I mean, without the physics background, the accelerator is useless. You can smash protons into a target, but you'll have no idea what you're looking at unless you know the physics.

Obligatory xkcd: Indeed. It's fun math too. Yay tensor fields!

Low voltage circuits and particle accelerators are very different beasts. If you don't know what you're doing, you could easily kill yourself.

Also, they behave entirely differently. The divergence of magnetism is zero. The divergence of gravity is negative. So, as swansont said, they concern different tings, but also they don't even look the same. [math]\bigtriangledown{\cdot}{B}=0[/math] [math]\bigtriangledown{\cdot}g=-4{\pi}G\rho[/math]

Because, as I've said multiple times, the universe only began in a trivial sense. It has always existed. We're not talking about something coming from nothing; we're talking about something which has always existed. Given that, I see no reason why something couldn't pop into existence from nothing. Nothing (by definition) has none of the rules our universe does and as such has no notion of conservation or causality.

From your other thread, I'd say you need to learn A LOT more before you can attempt this safely.

You can get college textbooks online. Most of mine are cheaper at Amazon than they are at the university bookstore. There are also free courses online such as KhanAcademy and MIT.

Hi. I'm an Evangelical Christian.

Heh..........cox.......

Saying that you're wrong (and giving justification for that claim) is not ad hom. "Civil discourse does not extend all the way to walking on eggshells to accommodate fragile egos."-swansont Now kindly point out where I insulted you and then used that as the basis for you being wrong. What I did do was say your example was an obvious choice for false memory and give ample reason to think this.

You can slow it, but not stop it.

It still depends on where it was drilled. Through the equator? Pole to pole? Some other diagonal?

They don't They don't. It sure is. It sure does. It even applies to things like murder cases and running stop signs. Care to say anything else blatantly false about psychology?