beecee

Ball lightening, sprites etc, are simply different facets of how our atmosphere reacts under certain conditions, including the Earth's rotation, and can and does produce many phenomena such as you mentioned, along of course with examples of illusions and mirages caused by the reflection/refraction of light. Here are some examples. https://www.google.com/search?q=atmospheric+phenomena&sxsrf=ALeKk03cMbPHG-MrifvC1UWUUazOdSAgqQ:1612640310139&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=0ap9Z3cm67gxUM%2CiZR0waQ3gl3aPM%2C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kTPWV8Omn81rA_nx-yVjTdGOtg8UQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjfgNimgdbuAhXFH7cAHaQcBusQ_h16BAgUEAE#imgrc=0ap9Z3cm67gxUM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expanding_Earth extract: "To date no scientific mechanism of action has been proposed for this addition of new mass. This is a big obstacle for acceptance of the theory by other geologists. It is a well known fact that the earth is constantly acquiring mass through accumulation of rocks and dust from space, as are all other planetary bodies in our system. According to NASA, "Every day about 100 tons of meteoroids -- fragments of dust and gravel and sometimes even big rocks – enter the Earth's atmosphere."[21] The majority of this debris burns up in the atmosphere and lands as dust. Such accretion, however, is only a minuscule fraction of the mass increase required by the growing earth hypothesis." ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Not sure how any of that has anything to do with the evidenced based, scientific account of plate tectonics. http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~blackman/ast104/evidence.html

My condolences also on the passing of your mate. In recent times, I had to get my 13.5 year old Rottweiler put down...great age, but still a hard distressing decision to make. Back on track, I pinched these wise words [or words to that effect] from yourself in another "Time [again] " thread....Whether time is real or not, it is more a philosophical question and physicists are not that concerned, other then the need to use the concept in our models etc. I certainly accept it is real though for the reasons given.

It is as far as Einstein's theories are concerned, and as yet we have no reason at all to doubt them. We observe simply at a rate/time it takes photons to reach our eyes. Changes or passages of time simply depend on one's frame of reference. These are indisputable facts, as evidenced many times. Instead of your continuing statements of certainty, do you have any evidence? or perhaps a new hypothesis?

More accurately, time is the interval between sequential events, whose measurement depends on one's frame of reference, and is interchangeable with space.

Time is real...space is real....spacetime is real...the universe "is" spacetime. It is nothing more the the three spatial coordinates, along with time. It can be bent, warped, twisted etc, in the presence of mass/energy. Time is relative dependent on one's frame of reference, and is interchangeable with space. There is no universal now. Something need not be "physical" to be real.

OK, as an interested amateur, my understanding is that light/photons are never at rest. I also understand that light can never be stopped. It is though absorbed, re-emitted, reflected, refracted etc. eg: Light passing through a denser medium. Essentially, from one's point of view, light may seem to have slowed when passing through glass, but it is the absorbion and re-emittance that takes time. There have been experiments I have read about which claim light has been slowed or/and stopped. In reality these have been "tricks" in which I understand that a particular part of the wavelength overtakes another particular part, or similar trickery. I'm not sure what happens with BEC's but have a sneaking suspicion, it is another form of trickery. I use the word "trickery" for want of a better word. Am I correct in my assumptions?

Spacetime is not a fabric per se. Curved/warped spacetime, in the presence of mass/energy, is what we feel as gravity. Gravity is spacetime geometry. Why? We don't know.

I like Lawrence Krauss' speculative scenario that the universe arose from "nothing"...nothing being redefined as the quantum foam...

Two wise statements that deserve highlighting imvho!!

Our best model according to the evidence, tells us that time [as we know it] came into existence, along with space [as we know it] at t+10-43 seconds. Time is also a interchangeable quantity with space. The age of the universe of course is calculated by observational data of the oldest stars and the expansion rate. The following may help in your misunderstanding of time and the universe.... You seem so certain about your claims, and yet you are not a cosmologist. Secondly, even our scientific theories, are just our best estimations at any particular time, that do grow in certainty over time, as they continue to align with observational data and make correct predictions. eg: GR predicted a 100 years ago, that gravitational waves would be a result of a catastrophic collision/merger. Also to alleviate your misunderstanding, the BB applies to the observable universe only. Whether the universe is finite or infinite is unknown at this time.

Light/photons or EM radiation follow geodesics in spacetime. What we feel as gravity, is simply spacetime geometry in the presence of mass/energy. The following may answer some of your other questions...https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/a11332.html#:~:text=Can space exist by itself,No.&text=no arena in which matter,by matter%2C energy and gravity. Special & General Relativity Questions and Answers Can space exist by itself without matter or energy around? No. Experiments continue to show that there is no 'space' that stands apart from space-time itself...no arena in which matter, energy and gravity operate which is not affected by matter, energy and gravity. General relativity tells us that what we call space is just another feature of the gravitational field of the universe, so space and space-time can and do not exist apart from the matter and energy that creates the gravitational field. This is not speculation, but sound observation. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I was confused by the seemingly contradictory highlighted part [by me] and E-Mailed the author to clarifiy...Sten Odenwald. He E-Mailed back that the underlined/highlighted part was a typographical error .

Bingo!!! I missed probably the most important extraordinary evidence of BH's. Off with my head, on goes a pumpkin!! Thanks MigL Like I said earlier, Professor Laura Mersini-Houghton has been rather quiet of late.

I certainly remember Professor Mersini-Houghton's controversial paper when it was released in around 2014, and before the first discovery of gravitational waves, that aligned with that of BH's colliding/merging. I havn't heard much of her since. And of course we also have many papers of other models of gravity, parallel universes [another of her predictions] and other versions of cosmology. That's science. But the facts remain, that the present model of cosmology, including the evidence for BH's, is that which is overwhelmingly accepted by the science community. I also recall an otherwise great astronomer that pushed "Steady State" rather then accept the evidence for the BB as currently recognised. And certainly, while cosmology in general still has some problems, the current model that entails the BB/GR, still fits our observational data better then anything else. As an amateur, and ignoring the convincing evidence of gravitational waves and the BH templates they fit, I would ask anyone questioning the existence of BH's, to explain to me the observational data of spacetime, the orbital velocities of stars, and other phenomena around what we propose as BH's, in another way. Newtonian theory predicts what we could call "Dark Stars" first hypothesised by John Michell in the 1700's. It did not though predict the continuing compulsory collapse at the Schwarzchild limit which GR does. Not sure what you mean by the "second cosmic speed"

Nothing but nothing can get out of a BH. By definition, a BH forms when the surface of a gravitationally collapsed mass, reaches the escape velocity of the universal speed limit, of "c", or the speed of light. Once this is reached an EH forms, which coincides with what is known as a mass's Schwarzchild radius. Once this radius is reached, GR tells us that further collapse is compulsory, up to at least the quantum/Planck level where GR fails us. As the mass collapses to this level, it is ripped asunder by the tidal gravitational effects to its most basic fundamental components. Once the quantum/Planck level is reached, GR fails us and we are only able to guess. Most scientists and cosmologists though as far as I know, reject a collapse to a singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvature and density, which then speculatively assumes a surface of sorts at or just below the quantum/Planck level. Or we can speculatively accept a wormhole and ERB to an outpouring and White Hole. NOTE: While White Holes and wormholes are allowed for by GR, we have absolutely no observational evidence for their existence. Hawking Radiation is a prediction based on the scenario that if virtual particle pairs happen to pop into existence just outside the EH, one of three things can happen...[1] Both escape and annihilate...[2] Both immediately fall into the BH, or [3] One escapes and becomes real and which we see as thermal radiation, the other falls into the BH and because of the law of conservation, becomes negative, which subtracts ever so slightly from the overall mass of the BH. The CMBR is of course evident everywhere we look at 2.73K and is logically assumed to be the left over relic heat from the BB. We don't know what DE is but it is assumed to be responsible for the observed acceleration in the expansion rate of the universe, or a property of space itself.

https://phys.org/news/2021-01-science-rival-covid-health-threat.html Attacks on science rival COVID-19 as a public health threat: As public health experts feared, COVID-19 cases and deaths surged in the US following the Thanksgiving holiday, when millions of Americans ignored pleas to forego traditional gatherings. In a new Essay published 28th January in the open-access journal PLOS Biology, "Anti-science kills: from Soviet embrace of pseudoscience to accelerated attacks on US biomedicine," vaccine and infectious disease expert Dr. Peter Hotez explains how the richest country in the world allowed the pandemic to spiral out of control. extract: Dr. Hotez revisits a dark chapter in the history of the Soviet Union—the "Great Purge," when Stalin persecuted and executed scientists and millions of other so-called enemies of the state—to remind readers of the terrible fate that can befall citizens when their government leaders exploit science for political gain. the paper: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001068 Anti-science kills: From Soviet embrace of pseudoscience to accelerated attacks on US biomedicine: Abstract: The United States witnessed an unprecedented politicization of biomedical science starting in 2015 that has exploded into a complex, multimodal anti-science empire operating through mass media, political elections, legislation, and even health systems. Anti-science activities now pervade the daily lives of many Americans, and threaten to infect other parts of the world. We can attribute the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans from COVID-19, measles, and other vaccine-preventable diseases to anti-science. The acceleration of anti-science activities demands not only new responses and approaches but also international coordination. Vaccines and other biomedical advances will not be sufficient to halt COVID-19 or future potentially catastrophic illnesses, unless we simultaneously counter anti-science aggression. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly, this isn't peculiar to the USA. We have our own anti vaxers in Australia also, and those that refuse the lockdowns, wearing of masks, social distancing etc. I also received this from an old mate now living in England...Scary is an understatement!!!

Agreed, that's the way I see it also....In case I did confuse anyone when I said It is our models that are real, and have best and accurately described what we observe as close to reality as is possible. Something does not have to be physical to be real imo. I'm an old bugger too.

As a lay person with an interest in science and the scientific methodology, my perhaps simplistic view is as follows....Space is what exists between you and me, or between the planets and their stars. Time is what stops everything from happening together and the means by which the intervals between sequential events are measured. Spacetime is the four dimensional framework against which we locate and calculate events. The concept of spacetime follows from fact that the speed of light, "c," is constant and does not vary with the motion of the emitter or the observer. It is essentially a description of reality common for all observers, while at the same time, the measured Intervals of space and time when considered separately will vary between observers and different frames of references. Gravity of course as GR tells us, is the geometry of spacetime in the presence of mass/energy. All are essentially real: Space is expanding and the source of what we know as Dark Energy. Time is essentially interchangeable with space and is a variable quantity. Spacetime can be bent, warped, curved, lensed in the presence of mass. Any errors, alterations or corrections? Please be gentle with me. 😜

And let's hope that your congress, both sides, vote honestly and logically for the impeachment of the redneck rebel rouser that urged that mob on. Sadly though, just has occurred in Australia, the truth and sincerity in a movement/protest for justice, is often infected with the extreme agendas that others see as an excuse to push. And as it often happens, then the extremes of the other side, they then use that as an excuse to paint all with the same brush in attempts to discredit them. As is often said, politics is a dirty business...a shame it isn't always an honest business.

I have come in late on this debate, but I believe what I have to say is relevant. Yesterday we celebrated Australia Day, the day in 1788 that 11 ships anchored in what today is known as Sydney cove or Circular Quay, after sailing out from Mother England and 8 years after Captain James Cook mapped the east coast of Australia. Many terrible things followed in the next few decades, with the dispossession of lands from the local indigenous population, as well as rape, and murder in establishing the colony of Sydney and moving beyond the east coast into a land near as big as mainland USA. In celebrating Australia Day [and I am still slightly hung over from that] protest marches also took place in most capital cities, by primarilly indigenous folk, against the many injustices that took place creating this nation, and in changing the date, as in their eyes, January 26th 1788 was simply to them "Invasion Day" The protest march in Sydney was predicted to be about 6000 strong which was going against the established covid 19 rules of no more then 500 people. Negotiations took place between the leaders of the protest movement and the Police, where a solution was found in that the protest marches would split up into groups of 500, separated sufficiently to enable all who wanted to take part, to take part, as well as obeying covid 19 rules. The marches in Sydney were all peaceful with the BLM movement in the USA being one focus of the local discontent, as well as the prime reason of changing the date. That didn't stop the usual extremist appearance that happens in many reasonable protests, albeit not until the end of the marches, when a lone idiot of some white supremest movement was arrested, along with four others that resisted Police directives. I remember many years ago when a young union delegate, marching in one of the Anti Vietnam war moratorium marches, that were also peaceful, until some extreme members of what was known then as "the socialist Labor League" began ripping down street signs, until [not the Police] but the majority of fair dinkum anti Vietnam war protesters physically stopped them until their arrests. https://www.news.com.au/national/australia-day-police-vow-crackdown-on-invasion-day-protests-across-the-country/news-story/7c1abc3c0672086fdeae0c57a6f0fc83 The lone idiot was not in the Sydney march but in Canberra... "Canberra, a man wearing a Make America Great Again cap and waving an Australian flag was forcibly removed from an Invasion Day rally by three men in bikie colours. As he drove away, the assembled crowd cheered." from the link......

The first evidence of water on the Moon was made by a space probe called Clementine from memory which they crashed into one of the Lunar Polar craters, back in the early nineties.

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1605/1605.09187.pdf The Fermi Paradox is Neither Fermi’s Nor a Paradox: Abstract: The so-called Fermi paradox claims that if technological life existed anywhere else, we would see evidence of its visits to Earth—and since we do not, such life does not exist, or some special explanation is needed. Enrico Fermi, however, never published anything on this topic. On the one occasion he is known to have mentioned it, he asked “where is everybody?”—apparently suggesting that we don’t see extraterrestrials on Earth because interstellar travel may not be feasible, but not suggesting that intelligent extraterrestrial life does not exist, or suggesting its absence is paradoxical. The claim “they are not here; therefore they do not exist” was first published by Michael Hart, claiming that interstellar travel and colonization of the galaxy would be inevitable if intelligent extraterrestrial life existed, and taking its absence here as proof that it does not exist anywhere. The Fermi paradox appears to originate in Hart’s argument, not Fermi’s question. Clarifying the origin of these ideas is important, because the Fermi paradox is seen by some as an authoritative objection to searching for evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence—cited in the U. S. Congress as a reason for killing NASA’s SETI program on one occasion—but evidence indicates that it misrepresents Fermi’s views, misappropriates his authority, deprives the actual authors of credit, and is not a valid paradox. Conclusion: The so-called Fermi paradox misrepresents Fermi’s views about the feasibility of interstellar travel and the possible existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life, uses his name and authority for ideas originated by Hart and Tipler, and asserts a logical paradox where none exists, so it is difficult to see any valid use for the phrase. It’s not Fermi’s idea, and it’s not a paradox. Fermi asked “where is everybody?”, questioning the feasibility of interstellar travel, but not questioning the possible existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life, so it seems clear that Fermi’s name should not be used for a so-called Fermi paradox which depends on interstellar travel, and which does question the existence of extraterrestrials—the opposite of his views. Fermi’s question might more accurately be called Fermi’s question about the feasibility of interstellar travel, to avoid mistaking it as an argument against the possible existence of intelligent extraterrestrial life. The argument “they are not here; therefore they do not exist” was first published by Hart and extended by Tipler, and might be called the Hart-Tipler argument against the existence of technological extraterrestrials. This is not exactly the same as the Fermi paradox, but it is the simplest answer to the question “where is everybody?” if interstellar travel and colonization are assumed. It seems misleading to cloak the Hart-Tipler argument with Fermi’s name and authority, because doing so deprives the true authors of credit and attributes views to Fermi which he did not hold. Some people may feel that the so-called Fermi paradox is a sleeping dog that should be left to lie, because it is established in the scientific literature and public mind, but most people would agree that clearly mistaken and misleading terminology should be corrected. The issue is important, because the Hart/Tipler argument was cited as a reason for killing NASA’s SETI program on one occasion in the U. S. Congress, and under the guise of Fermi’s name and the claim of a logical paradox, it may continue to inhibit funding and research in that area of astrobiology. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While we as yet have no definitive evidence as to whether extra-terrestrial life exists beyond Earth, it is still rather presumptuous of us to presume it doesn't exist. The "near infinite" extent and content of the universe, along with the stuff of life being everywhere we look, indicates that Abiogenesis would have taken place elsewhere. How common is it? How many examples have reached human type intelligence? How many may have exceeded that intelligence?, are all questions that are unanswerable at this time. Will we make contact with any intelligent species in the future? How really conceivable is star travel? Have any intelligent species ever visited Earth? are other unknown dependent questions that also need to be answered and which we have no evidence for as yet. At least in my opinion, the two great barriers of time and distance, are the reasons that as yet no contact has ever been made, and may make it difficult in the future. Sadly mankind's greatest ever question/s, may not be answered in my lifetime. What are your thoughts and scientific speculations on these questions?

This is now rather dated [1998] but I assume it still holds scientifically true...The BB applies to the "observable" universe. http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html

Here's another in Argentina...... https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/dinosaur-unearthed-argentina-could-be-largest-land-animal-ever-180976813/? The skeleton is still far from complete but paleontologists say what they’ve found suggests the dinosaur may be more than 120 feet long A paleontologist excavating a 98 million-year-old fossil which may belong to the largest land animal ever. Researchers first started unearthing the creatures remains in 2012 at the Candeleros Formation in the Neuquen River Valley, Argentina. he fossilized bones of what may have been the largest animal ever to walk the Earth are slowly emerging from the ground in Argentina, reports Amy Woodyatt for CNN. Beginning in 2012, paleontologists set about excavating a hulking set of 24 vertebrae as well as elements of the pelvis and pectoral girdle from the Candeleros Formation in Argentina’s Neuquén Province. At first, it wasn’t clear to researchers what they’d found, only that it was enormous. Now, in a new paper published this month in the journal Cretaceous Research, paleontologists say the remains suggest a type of long-necked, plant-eating dinosaur called a titanosaur, potentially the largest ever unearthed. They can’t yet speculate as to whether the gigantic bones belong to a known species or something new entirely, but, per CNN, the team says that the specimen could be even bigger than a 122-foot, nearly 70-ton titanosaur called Patagontitan. Researchers have dated the new specimen to around 98 million years ago, reports Harry Baker for Live Science. more at link......................... What I find amazing about this is the description given under the photo thus..."A paleontologist excavating a 98 million-year-old fossil which may belong to the largest land animal ever. Researchers first started unearthing the creatures remains in 2012 at the Candeleros Formation in the Neuquen River Valley, Argentina. (CTyS-UNLaM Science Outreach Agency)" And the article is dated as per the following................. SMITHSONIANMAG.COM JANUARY 22, 2021 3:31PM

Who would have thunk it! Great question, and great answer.

Done and dusted! hopefully!