Strange

There might be. We don't know enough about the conditions necessary. Really? Or maybe inevitable.

! Moderator Note I agree. We are not being asked to write the essay! It is energy that bends space-time. And (as we know from E=mc2) mass and energy are equivalent. Gravity is just how we perceive this curvature of spacetime. It causes things to move together, even in the absence of a force. One analogy that might help, is to consider two people separated by a few miles and both travelling due north. As they get closer to the North Pole, they will get closer together (following the lines longitude). But nothing is pushing them together, it is just the curve geometry of the Earth's surface. It is just an analogy to visualise something that is stretched and curved (and even twisted) by the presence of mass. Even without understanding the math, you might get something out of this description of how the equations work: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/einstein/ (If you find it confusing, don't worry. It is!)

So hen why did you say: "I found Phase velocity in the special relativity" ? There is no reference to phase velocity in special relativity. You are making things up. And being inconsistent. What do you mean by "real"? Please provide a reference to support this claim.

Where, exactly, does special relativity say anything about phase velocity? You need to provide some support for your assertions. As far as I can see you have just made them up.

Is this the same as currying? (I have never seen this notation before .... )

! Moderator Note This is the third identical thread you have started.

Or engineering? (Depending on the answer to "better at what?" maybe)

Why would you want to turn people into foetuses and have them grow up again?

How would you test this with an experiment?

There were some things that Wallace and Darwin got wrong. There was a lot they didn't now about. The basic principles still apply; but we know it is a lot more complex now. Go on then. And then maybe people can explain the specific things you don't understand. (But maybe you should start a new thread to ask these questions.) No one said you were wrong. Well, there is the "fact" of evolution (it happens; that can't be denied) and then there is the "theory" (evolution by natural selection) that explains how it happens.

That is all science cares about: how things behave, not what they "really" are.

! Moderator Note One topic per thread please. This has nothing to do with simultaneity.

It means it has nothing to do with science. Unless you can provide some evidence that this "soul" thing (whatever it is) exists.

I don't think that is the purpose of moderation. We enforce the rules and clean up the mess left by those who won't follow the rules. Kind of a cross between border patrol and trash collectors.

Yes. As long as a mechanism for evolution exists: some form of heritability of characteristics, variation in the population, source of new variation, etc.

If we come up with some more "fundamental" theory, then you will still be able to ask "how does that work". So no, there will never be any "ultimate answer"; there can't be.

There is a bit of discussion of this here: https://www.quantamagazine.org/why-mathematicians-cant-find-the-hay-in-a-haystack-20180917/ (not sure if it adds anything, other than the observation that we are more familiar with the infinitely rare rationals because we can write them down)

Damn!

! Moderator Note 1. iNow is not a moderator 2. We don’t delete threads 3. Thread closed

You need to ask? *raises eyebrows*

! Moderator Note You cannot reintroduce your idea in this thread. You have an answer to your question. Thread closed.

Nailed it. Especially the second sentence! Yes. If you only use a phone you can’t see the “Moderator” label (only just noticed that).

Ah, bless

Beliefs are of no value. How would one test for a preferred frame? And why have all such tests failed?