beecee

I'm mortified!!!!

That of course depends on the agenda the person doing the examination has...eg: I have had to deal with many UFO nuts who claim they have dilligently researched UFO sightings and they have come to the weird conclusion, that Alien visitations are real and so are the medically inspired anal probing many of them do. In simpler language your claim of examining holds no water with me. Your exitatations along with your claims do little to impress me.

Again in simpler language, firstly self praise is no recommendation, and of course whether terror related or not, is beside the point, which you keep evading...that point being the matter is how any individual could purchase so many military style weapons and ammunition, is beyond comprehension and reason and highlights how bloody out of date and stupid your second amendment is, and how arrogant and stubborn individuals and politicians must be to religiously support such a constitution.

Weren't you? I said and asked, "would you kill to protect some bit of amendment written in 1790, after a bloody war for independence? You don't believe in the year 2017 that such a thing is now grossly outdated"? You answered as follows. Let me add that taking into account that self gratuitous remarks and claims are widely ignored and generally count for nought. So? I mean the simple fact of the matter is how any individual could purchase so many military style weapons and ammunition, is beyond comprehension and reason and highlights how bloody out of date and stupid your second amendment is, and how arrogant and stubborn individuals and politicians must be to religiously support such a constitution. What has that got to do with anything? It has nothing to do with archaic, crazy gun laws or the non existent of them, nor the macho He type men that believes he needs an AK47 by his bedside for protection. Really, who do believe you are fooling? When you're shown to be short on logic and argument, just muddy the waters a bit.

And yet when I ask you if something installed in 1790 could not be grossly outdated in 2017, you answer smugly, "that's easy, no". Every decent country in the world has seen the need to change laws, constitutions, governmental procedures, etc as the march of time sees them as outdated. In other words if the cap fits, wear it. As an aside when the first cars rolled off the assembly lines, did not they have to by law have someone walking in front of them waving a lantern?

No matter how much or how often you and the NRA distort the truth, in time I believe the decent Americans will see that change does eventuate. A shame that in the meantime, the NRA and its associates will be responsible for many more probable deaths that may have otherwise been avoided. Glad you agree. Again many Americans will I believe see that change does take place. Not all are of the same stubborn arrogant macho frame of mind as those associated with the NRA. Just to counter the furphy our macho gun lobbyists like to push re gun control having no or minimal effect....... https://www.sciencealert.com/the-largest-dataset-we-have-shows-powerful-evidence-gun-control-works/page-2 extract:

I did ask if any of those crying about protecting their so called constitution would kill to protect it...I suppose taking up arms does answer that. So you would kill to protect some bit of amendment written in 1790, after a bloody war for independence? You don't believe in the year 2017 that such a thing is now grossly outdated? Particularly with the advanced forms of weaponry available. And wear does this right to bear arms stop...I mean what about hand grenades? And I see after doing some research that this so called bill of rights and the second ammendment actually stems from Influence of the English Bill of Rights of 1689 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) Yet it appears our English friends have obviously updated without any fear or favour re and constitutional offence. All I can say as an outsider is thank f%&$#@* Christ I live 12,000 kms away with 25 million other of my countrymen and we are not affected by such arrogant, stubborn craziness!

The question I am prompted to ask the supporters of the current open slather for guns in the USA and their so called right to bear arms, is would they kill to protect this so called right.

https://phys.org/news/2017-10-heavy-chemical-elements-theory-quantum.html A series of complicated experiments involving one of the least understood elements of the Periodic Table has turned some long-held tenets of the scientific world upside down. Florida State University researchers found that the theory of quantum mechanics does not adequately explain how the heaviest and rarest elements found at the end of the table function. Instead, another well-known scientific theory—Albert Einstein's famous Theory of Relativity—helps govern the behavior of the last 21 elements of the Periodic Table. This new research is published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Quantum mechanics are essentially the rules that govern how atoms behave and fully explain the chemical behavior of most of the elements on the table. But, Thomas Albrecht-Schmitt, the Gregory R. Choppin Professor of Chemistry at FSU, found that these rules are somewhat overridden by Einstein's Theory of Relativity when it comes to the heavier, lesser known elements of the Periodic Table. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-heavy-chemical-elements-theory-quantum.html#jCpRead more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-heavy-chemical-elements-theory-quantum.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jacs.7b05569 Abstract The reaction of 249Bk(OH)4 with iodate under hydrothermal conditions results in the formation of Bk(IO3)3 as the major product with trace amounts of Bk(IO3)4 also crystallizing from the reaction mixture. The structure of Bk(IO3)3 consists of nine-coordinate BkIII cations that are bridged by iodate anions to yield layers that are isomorphous with those found for AmIII, CfIII, and with lanthanides that possess similar ionic radii. Bk(IO3)4 was expected to adopt the same structure as M(IO3)4 (M = Ce, Np, Pu), but instead parallels the structural chemistry of the smaller ZrIV cation. BkIII–O and BkIV–O bond lengths are shorter than anticipated and provide further support for a postcurium break in the actinide series. Photoluminescence and absorption spectra collected from single crystals of Bk(IO3)4 show evidence for doping with BkIII in these crystals. In addition to luminescence from BkIII in the Bk(IO3)4 crystals, a broad-band absorption feature is initially present that is similar to features observed in systems with intervalence charge transfer. However, the high-specific activity of 249Bk (t1/2 = 320 d) causes oxidation of BkIII and only BkIV is present after a few days with concomitant loss of both the BkIII luminescence and the broadband feature. The electronic structure of Bk(IO3)3 and Bk(IO3)4 were examined using a range of computational methods that include density functional theory both on clusters and on periodic structures, relativistic ab initio wave function calculations that incorporate spin–orbit coupling (CASSCF), and by a full-model Hamiltonian with spin–orbit coupling and Slater–Condon parameters (CONDON). Some of these methods provide evidence for an asymmetric ground state present in BkIV that does not strictly adhere to Russel–Saunders coupling and Hund’s Rule even though it possesses a half-filled 5f 7 shell. Multiple factors contribute to the asymmetry that include 5f electrons being present in microstates that are not solely spin up, spin–orbit coupling induced mixing of low-lying excited states with the ground state, and covalency in the BkIV–O bonds that distributes the 5felectrons onto the ligands. These factors are absent or diminished in other f7 ions such as GdIII or CmIII.

https://phys.org/news/2017-10-gravitational-detectors-dark.html Gravitational wave detectors could shed light on dark matter October 3, 2017 Schematic illustration of the cloud formed around a spinning black hole. The black hole loses energy E_S and angular momentum L_S through the growth of the cloud and emission of gravitational waves. Accretion of gas from the disk transports energy E_ACC and angular momentum L_ACC. The balance between these phenomena depends on the mass of the particles forming the cloud, and it determines whether the cloud can grow. Credit: University of Mississippi A global team of scientists, including two University of Mississippi physicists, has found that the same instruments used in the historic discovery of gravitational waves caused by colliding black holes could help unlock the secrets of dark matter, a mysterious and as-yet-unobserved component of the universe. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-gravitational-detectors-dark.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.06311.pdf Gravitational wave searches for ultralight bosons with LIGO and LISA Abstract: Ultralight bosons can induce superradiant instabilities in spinning black holes, tapping their rotational energy to trigger the growth of a bosonic condensate. Possible observational imprints of these boson clouds include (i) direct detection of the nearly monochromatic (resolvable or stochastic) gravitational waves emitted by the condensate, and (ii) statistically significant evidence for the formation of “holes” at large spins in the spin versus mass plane (sometimes also referred to as “Regge plane”) of astrophysical black holes. In this work, we focus on the prospects of LISA and LIGO detecting or constraining scalars with mass in the range ms ∈ [10−19 , 10−15] eV and ms ∈ [10−14 , 10−11] eV, respectively. Using astrophysical models of black-hole populations and black-hole perturbation theory calculations of the gravitational emission, we find that LIGO could observe a stochastic background of gravitational radiation in the range ms ∈ [2 × 10−13 , 10−12] eV, and up to 104 resolvable events in a 4-year search if ms ∼ 3 × 10−13 eV. LISA could observe a stochastic background for boson masses in the range ms ∈ [5 × 10−19 , 5 × 10−16], and up to ∼ 103 resolvable events in a 4-year search if ms ∼ 10−17 eV. LISA could further measure spins for black-hole binaries with component masses in the range [103 , 107 ] M, which is not probed by traditional spin-measurement techniques. A statistical analysis of the spin distribution of these binaries could either rule out scalar fields in the mass range [4 × 10−18 , 10−14] eV, or measure ms with ten percent accuracy if light scalars in the mass range [10−17 , 10−13] eV exist.

https://phys.org/news/2017-10-scientists-elusive-giant-black-hole.html Astronomers have identified a bumper crop of dual supermassive black holes in the centers of galaxies. This discovery could help astronomers better understand how giant black holes grow and how they may produce the strongest gravitational wave signals in the Universe. The new evidence reveals five pairs of supermassive black holes, each containing millions of times the mass of the Sun. These black hole couples formed when two galaxies collided and merged with each other, forcing their supermassive black holes close together. The black hole pairs were uncovered by combining data from a suite of different observatories including NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, the Wide-Field Infrared Sky Explorer Survey (WISE), and the ground-based Large Binocular Telescope in Arizona. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-scientists-elusive-giant-black-hole.html#jCp <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No, not at all...You have fairy tales and mythical nonsense, you most certainly do not have a model.

No, hogwash...Light like all of the EMS, travels in transverse progressive waves. Some people seem to revel in their apparent notoriety.

Yes that was a nice WIKI explanation and certainly invalidated the "time linked to matter" nonsense. Again, while we have no empirical evidence re that first instant post BB, the logic of Sten Odenwald's answer appears to align with current knowledge, and data already achieved in particle accelerators etc. And it certainly has a ring of beauty"about it in my opinion.

The only point being made in actual fact, is that despite the power of science in general and cosmology and GR in particular, and the knowledge they have revealed to us, some cannot bare to imagine the the Earth/Milky Way and universe were not evolved for their benefits. They cling to the deity mythical nonsense for comfort, and out of some fear re the myths that have been traditionaly pumped into them from school age.

You can reject what you damn well feel like...It doesn't make your claims anymore valid. In time as is the case with all you lot trying to rewrite 21st century cosmology, or as per the many evangelistic crusades others like to implement, all will be lost in cyber space and mean nothing. Take it easy, OK?

Speaking as an outsider from a country with Gun control laws, I observe the fact that Americans in general, and particularly their government/congress, lack the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the NRA. This mob rightly or wrongly remind me of that hateful orginization called the Klu Klux Klan. My commiserations to all in your country that have unnecessarily and needlessly lost loved ones.

Hmmm, is this worth a dozen(?) issues of Playboy magazine. I was thinking more along the lines of what is left and the possible scenario I explained. or as per http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/EternalBlackHole.html

Apologies, I was not aware of your reading/comprehension difficulties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_solution_(general_relativity) yes, as I said, you have it arse up.

Yeah, sure, but that is because science was virtually non existent. Humanity could not explain the Moon, Sun, night and day, even Summer and Winter. They had a need for an explanation and the easiest explanation was some deity or creator. We now know better. We are even able to reasonably explain the whole observable universe, at least back to t+10-43 seconds. We don't need any mythical deity anymore.

You have it arse up. Matter emerged from spacetime at a distinct time from t=0, as I have mentioned and as logically described based on current knowledge. And I see that Strange has again invalidated your erroneous claim.

Bingo! Of course!!

https://phys.org/news/2017-10-evidence-life-earth-meteorites-splashed.html Evidence suggests life on Earth started after meteorites splashed into warm little ponds October 2, 2017 Life on Earth began somewhere between 3.7 and 4.5 billion years ago, after meteorites splashed down and leached essential elements into warm little ponds, say scientists at McMaster University and the Max Planck Institute in Germany. Their calculations suggest that wet and dry cycles bonded basic molecular building blocks in the ponds' nutrient-rich broth into self-replicating RNA molecules that constituted the first genetic code for life on the planet. The researchers base their conclusion on exhaustive research and calculations drawing in aspects of astrophysics, geology, chemistry, biology and other disciplines. Though the "warm little ponds" concept has been around since Darwin, the researchers have now proven its plausibility through numerous evidence-based calculations.Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-evidence-life-earth-meteorites-splashed.html#jCp ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/09/26/1710339114 Origin of the RNA world: The fate of nucleobases in warm little ponds: Abstract Before the origin of simple cellular life, the building blocks of RNA (nucleotides) had to form and polymerize in favorable environments on early Earth. At this time, meteorites and interplanetary dust particles delivered organics such as nucleobases (the characteristic molecules of nucleotides) to warm little ponds whose wet–dry cycles promoted rapid polymerization. We build a comprehensive numerical model for the evolution of nucleobases in warm little ponds leading to the emergence of the first nucleotides and RNA. We couple Earth’s early evolution with complex prebiotic chemistry in these environments. We find that RNA polymers must have emerged very quickly after the deposition of meteorites (less than a few years). Their constituent nucleobases were primarily meteoritic in origin and not from interplanetary dust particles. Ponds appeared as continents rose out of the early global ocean, but this increasing availability of “targets” for meteorites was offset by declining meteorite bombardment rates. Moreover, the rapid losses of nucleobases to pond seepage during wet periods, and to UV photodissociation during dry periods, mean that the synthesis of nucleotides and their polymerization into RNA occurred in just one to a few wet–dry cycles. Under these conditions, RNA polymers likely appeared before 4.17 billion years ago. Perhaps this should be in "Science News" My apologies. I have no questions but just deemed it an interesting article.

Or perhaps as per my edited addition...."Or could this after more thought be answered by the fact that spacetime is not curtailed by the absolute universal speed limit? Does this invalidate Odenwald's answer re spacetime and matter"?

Just as a thought experiment, if I could remove the singularity/mass from a BH, would the BH still remain a BH, that is, would it maintain its shape. What I'm thinking is that as there is in effect only one direction within a BH, (critically curved spacetime) how can any signal actually get back outwards towards the EH, telling it that the mass/singularity has gone? Or could this after more thought be answered by the fact that spacetime is not curtailed by the absolute universal speed limit? Does this invalidate Odenwald's answer re spacetime and matter?