Strange

How can you use a conductor as the dielectric? The nearest thing I can think of is using a (reverse-biased) diode as a capacitor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varicap

Is this quoted from somewhere? I don’t know a semiconductor can send a current “through itself” but static charges are not affected by a magnetic field. They only experience a force if they are moving. Hence a current is required. Note that your first sentence (quote?) is correct: the positive charges are holes, not protons. Holes act as positive charge carriers in semiconductors.

Let's ignore this (it is just random words strange together, as far as I can tell) and get back to the subject of the thread. What is your question? You say it is simple, but I don't even know what it is.

This is just gibberish.

I don't think the word "logically" belongs in this discussion. It seems to be your incoherent thoughts, expressed using words in non-standard ways. Is it? Or do we just use mathematics to (approximately) describe how the universe behaves?

The "state" of your bank account can be described by a number which represents the amount of money in the account. What is the number 0 representing in the "state of the universe"? What is an invisible green thought? Of course you are finite. You are certainly not infinite. Oh, very good.

If it doesn't exist, why label it? And what is there to discuss? You are making it difficult. More incoherent words. If a "null universe" is a nothing, how can it be above other nothings? You are making no sense. Maybe you should just start again: what is your question? What is the question? 0 is a finite value. So are 1 and 2 and 3. All numbers are finite.

Maybe you need to ask a simple, clear and unambiguous question. After all this time, I have no idea what you are asking. absence of change And there's the problem: you use words to mean something completely different from their usual meaning. I could never have guess that "finite state" means "absence of change". It is like saying "three bananas" means "dancing a waltz at midnight".

It could be an application of 0. But only if you define what has the value zero. What do you mean by "finite state"? (You are using words in a way that seems to make sense to you but I don't know what you intend by them.) It is just poorly defined. So poorly defined as to be meaningless. And what is the point of the question anyway. If you don't get to the point soon, then this thread might not last long. As the universe has space, time and energy, how could it ever reach your hypothetical state of being non-existent? Your questions make no sense.

Ok. So you are talking about a universe that doesn't exist. That seems fairly pointless. There is nothing to say about it. It could be an example (not a definition) of nothing. It is not a definition of zero because that is a number and numbers are not defined by physical objects - not even ones that don't exist.

If there is no space and time, that means that the universe does not exist? What do you mean by "absolute value"? This has a meaning in mathematics, but it is not clear if that is what you mean. What do you mean by "finite state"? How are you defining "potential"? I would have thought that if something is impossible then its potential is zero.

No. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_set What do you mean by "state of the universe"? 0=0 is not "nothing" it is an equation. It has the same truth value as 1=1 (if taken as a logical predicate). Are you just talking about a universe that doesn't exist or something else?

I don’t know what it would mean for the state of the universe to be 0=0. So, no, I don’t agree.

The value of what is zero? What is a “null universe”? One that doesn’t exist? There are vacuum solutions to the Einstein Field Equations where the energy of the universe is zero. Is that the sort of thing you mean? Sounds like the null set, but I don’t really know what you mean?

x=x is true for any number, not just zero. There is a lot more, mathematically, that can be said about zero. For example, it is one of the axioms of the set-theoretic definition of integers. It is the additive identity for the integer field. And so on. I cant make much sense of your first point. No

So it sounds like higher ideation is roughly equivalent to [good] imagination. I wonder if the existence of this appel du vide explains why some people have a fear of heights: because they think "I could just jump" they are afraid to be there in case they do? (And I am not afraid of heights because I have no imagination!)

Or Fujioka as it would be written today.

! Moderator Note Consider it done.

I assumed that was the case. But I just wanted to highlight that you never said that. That is the first problem. The second problem is that you need to provide references to support what you say, for example: You need to provide references for: 1. The reign of Shimbar-Shipak being 1025-1008 BC 2. A solar eclipse in his 7th regnal year 3. The dates of solar eclipses around that period These need to be specific, not just a link to a website (and certainly not a suggestion to use Google). For example, you need to quote the relevant sentences that provide the relevant information. I have no disagreement with your claims because I know nothing of the relevant history and you have not provided enough information to disagree with. I am just trying to explain what you need to do to make your case. But, as this has nothing to do with science, you might want to find a history or archaeology forum to discuss this. I have not noticed that anyone here has a significant knowledge of ancient history. Good luck.

Fourth time: What is the physical mechanism for this expansion? Creation of matter? A big bubble in the Earth? Or ... ?

Let's try and sort out the basics. Are you saying that: a. the dates of these various rulers need to be changed? b. the dates of eclipses are wrong? If we can clarify that, maybe we can make some progress.

I don't know what "higher ideation" means. I tried looking the word up, but it didn't really help! Does it mean "more imagination" or something else? (If it did mean that, it might explain why I have never thought such a thing - probably also the reason I don't have a fear of heights.)

Another article on this: https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/12/two-independent-analyses-confirm-ligos-discovery-of-gravitational-waves/

He is not just repeating things he has heard. He has made these opinions known over many decades.

I would be interested to know how she got from 1/3rd to "all humans". I have stood on the top of tall buildings and cliffs and the idea of jumping has never occurred to me. It just seems bizarre. No, don't worry. You haven't done anything wrong. I am just sceptical!