jimmydasaint

Found the explanation for gold. Electrons around the nucleus are in probabilistic shells. https://chem.libretexts.org/Under_Construction/Textmaps_and_Wikitexts/MVC%3A_Chem_1406/Chapters/02._Atomic_Structure/2.5%3A_Arrangement_of_Electron_(Shell_Model) Electrons can absorb energy from light and "jump" from one shell to a higher energy shell. They absorb at different frequencies for silver and gold. Silver s-shell electrons absorb light in the ultraviolet end of the light spectrum and reflect all the other colours evenly giving silver that silvery metal colour. Gold has s-shell electrons attracted with by an intense, 79 + charges from the nucleus. As a consequence, the electrons in gold following Einstein's relativistic principles, because, IIRC, the electrons gain speed/ angular momentum to avoid the attractive forces from the nucleus and also gain mass. The angular momentum orbit radius decreases. The light absorbed by the electrons is in the blue part of visible light, as opposed to the ultraviolet end of the light spectrum so that the remaining colours combine to give a yellow gold glitter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_quantum_chemistry Please correct as appropriate.

John, I don't understand the abstract and your comments on gold and mercury. Can you please simplify for non-experts just a little bit. Cheers mate.

Point out mistakes as much as possible, as long as you cite evidence. Just don't patronise a Scotsman, we don't take this well. I was not attacking Memammal. I thought he made a mistake . This theory is decades old - I presented the evidence using the References. Let's go forward by referring to the paper and I will show my openness and intellectual honesty in admitting my errors. Both of us should read the paper first and make comments later. From my brief reading of the paper, I can back up Memammal's conclusions that larger functional ligases occur from the smaller ligases. However, the researchers admit that the efficiency is low. was small. Earlier,the same researchers asserted the following statement: http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/4/9/170376#sec-2 Previously, other researchers have had to address the following issues raised by other scientists:: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3495036/

Don't be so patronising and sarcastic. Try to be positive and helpful instead of displaying your arrogance. I hope that your summary of the article will show knowledge instead of sneering at people. To help things along let's examine some evidence. The bibliography section will inform all of us about the date of the theory:

Hi mate, I am a bit puzzled about this article. It does not come from a journal and is, IMO, decades old as a theory for the production of complex molecules from simple precursors. I don't think it is news and would advise you to update it with a new article which is from a recent peer=reviewed publication. Cheers

I get your point about batteries, and agree that it is a sensible way forward, but recharging them would still need the high energy provided from fossil fuel power stations, IMO. I tried to find a comparison of energy outputs from fossil fuel burning and "cleaner" sources but could not find the info in ten minutes of searching. I did find this though: http://www.ausetute.com.au/fuelenergy.html It is a pity that I couldn't find direct efficiencies for each fuel but fossil fuels kick ass for energy output compared to other sources.

I was thinking about the efficiency of solar panels and unpredictable wind energy to power towns and cities, rather than solar powered cars. http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/power/2-how-efficient-are-solar-panels.html In regard to cars, I am considering that the cars would be using sources of power that can be renewed from non-fossil fuel sources, like the batteries you mentioned.

In my opinion, SJ, China have undergone an Industrial revolution similar to ours a few hundred years ago and are moving on to "post-Industrial Revolution days". I anticipate that they will lead the world in non-fossil technology and make it more accessible for countries that they border, causing a new revolution in non-fossil fuel power. Any country that can raise 640 million people out of poverty deserve to be noticed. They seem to be a complex capitalist/socialist society rather than Communist, and good luck to them! However, my question would be: is the energy too dilute to be useful to bring electricity to large towns? Do we all have to significantly change our lifestyles to accommodate a low fossil-fuel future? I am cynical, and hope I am wrong....

I hope you understand what is meant by deductive inference and read this: http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2414356/Biocybernaut_Institute_Aug_2016/PDF/3_ScienceArticle_WhaDoe4Chan.pdf?t=1505336873944 Then pull your big head out of your ass to understand my previous hypothesis. And goodnight! You cannot read scientific evidence and that is sad. Your huge ego gets in the way again! http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/2414356/Biocybernaut_Institute_Aug_2016/PDF/4_Partial-Differential-Psychophysiological-Surfaces.pdf?t=1505336873944

So you refuse to read evidence when it is presented to you. No time for niceties now - I did ask if you were a troll or a bullshitter and now the point is proved. Sorry, mate!

OK Sammy. I have finished my kebab and now am watching a nice Netflix movie. Neurofeedback presents a halfway house for my initial opinions; even if they were erroneous. However, if I give you a scientific reference at least try to read it. Have you ever read a scientific paper? Does it justify your arrogance? Anyway, read this: http://www.biocybernaut.com/projects/

You wasted my fucking evening with no analytical comments whatsoever. I stated an opinion and you seem unable to separate opinion from fact or hypothesis. I would rather enjoy a nice kebab than argue with a know-nothing moron.Once you actually learn to read a scientific paper and understand it, come back and argue. Goodnight!

No analysis whatsoever. Are you a troll and a bullshitter, or only a troll. Do you understand about EEG?

OK, you don't seem to understand what I am talking about and vice versa. If you have an electrode giving a small voltage to a brain centre in a lab rat, it can replicate hunger or satiety. Now what would the EEG look like? If you have a readout and you can replicate the ionic depolarisation, will it not replicate the rat behaviour? I found this, slightly contradictory article about the uses of EEG, what is your analysis? http://themindlab.co.uk/detecting-emotions-with-eeg-patterns/ A more accurate description by you should be in the following lines, as this is a Science Forum: The evidence is not there yet to show a feedback mechanism for EEG. Your ego gets in the way of your answers. And another. Bring your analysis and give your opinions clearly when they are opinions. My posts were opinions and I must clearly state this prior to further discussion: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40708-016-0051-5

OK. If a person shows a pattern "A" for joy and this is reproducible then there is a profile for that individual called "joy". If the signal can be replicated by electromagnetic means, let's say by microwaves or terahertz waves, does it not recreate the initial mind-brain conditions that existed previously for "joy?" I thought stimulation of the brain with tiny electrodes could cause people to feel hunger or pain. Using small electrical pulses could reproduce a feeling - why not using electromagnetic waves? Your argument please.

IIRC, there are about 13 factors for clotting to occur perfectly. Heterozygotic males, namely XhY, have little Factor VIII or IX but DO have platelets to aid clotting . So, if I am correct, some clotting still occurs although it is imperfect.

Hi Laura, Slippery slope to mind control here, which I do not approve. If a person feels pain and it is registered as an EEG trace, there is no reason why it cannot be fed back to the patient to replicate the pain. What about a person experiencing sadness or anger a catalogue of EEG traces is linked to these?

Gene products called cyclins I assume, from memory, that they are proteins. The cell is forced into apoptosis if there are genetic anomalies in the cell cycle. I will give you more info when I do some additional reading.

I would find it totally wrong to speculate without having all the facts at our fingertips. Be patient and all will be revealed to you, and you may be given medical advice from genetic counsellors. In the meantime, as a parent, I would need to do some further reading and would choose sites such as the following: http://www.friendshipcircle.org/blog/2012/05/22/13-chromosomal-disorders-youve-never-heard-of/ If you need help in understanding any of the disorders, please respond and I am sure someone will help you. Good luck

You are right, of course, we need a theoretical basis to explain the formation of heavy elements. I like the theory of the triple alpha process - IIRC, it was proposed by Hoyle. who suggested that three alpha particles had the correct resonance (in the excited state) energy to form carbon. I take your point and agree with it. I hope they are proved correct.... https://www.faraday.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/CIS/polkinghorne/lecture4.html

Thanks for that quick answer. Of course, heavy metals are required for the photochemisynthetic method. That makes it a health and safety hazard then and so unlikely to be used unless there is a secondary reaction where the acetate made is converted into a carbon-based fuel. That is a whole new field of investigation.

As a former biomedical scientist, forgive me for being a bit sceptical but, it goes with the territory. The modelling activity was very interesting however... Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-08-dino-killing-asteroid-earth-years-darkness.html#jCp

I don't understand what the Abstract says. Could you please explain this in plain English mate and give us a recap of GR while you're at it. Thanks/

It seems that cadmium is seeded into bacterial culture and then the cadmium is crystallised, as a sulfide compound, on the surface in the form of semi conductors. The presence of cadmium is a limiting factor here. How much of it is present in the Earth (estimates?) and what is the use of the acetate which is made as a photosynthetic product? IMHO, this is exciting but at the first stage of making a useable fuel source for humans.

Interesting but looks highly theoretical. When has a black hole interacted with a neutron star? When has a black hole been characterised close up?