Strange

Good ones. I think only one of those is on the Crackpot Index! (I have done approximately zero work so far today; but have just committed to have some stuff done by the end of the day ... that I don't know how to do!)

The only thing that might make you think "I wish I had covid-19 instead"

Perhaps because we are living through a post-apocalyptic movie, the forum seems to be attracting a larger that usual number of people with their own wacky ideas about how the world works. So I put this together, partly based on my own observations but also a few pinched from the Crackpot Index (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html).

Bones are the traditional source of phosphorous. (Where you get them from is up to you ...)

I have a hypothesis about this, but it would be off topic.

Why do you think I am afraid of a redundant statement? Of course it is right (just redundant). The whole numbers divide well into two groups: prime and non-prime numbers. (Where you are including 0 and 1 in the primes; I don't think deserves a new name). Christ. It's like some child's joke.

Your insistence on "inferior divisors" appears to be redundant. Can you name any integer that has divisors larger than itself?

Well, one possible explanation for (some) dark matter would be if there were a large number of small black holes around (they would, as you say, be invisible). Attempts to detect them (by looking for gravitational lensing) has not shown any evidence. So if they are there, there are not many of them.

I have no idea what that means. Which journal will it be published in? Why are you wasting time on a science forum?

They were on the menu of a restaurant I used to go to regularly. Sautéed in a sticky soy sauce. Delicious.

Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice [or greed] that which is adequately explained by stupidity." And, "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain" (Schiller)

It can be insulting, but it can also just be factual. (But the advice to avoid it, in case, is probably good.) For example, "Athos, Porthos and Aramis, the so-called Three Musketeers" would be OK. But "Boris Johnson, the so-called Prime Minister" not so much.

Black holes don't disappear.(*) But the second part is a reasonable description of a black hole: the inside is effectively sealed off from the rest of the universe. The event horizon is like a boundary between this universe and the bubble inside the black hole. (*) If Hawking radiation exists then really tiny black holes would evaporate but we don't have nay evidence that such tiny black holes can be created. (And we don't know fr sure that Hawking radiation actually happens.)

You didn't answer the questions. You didn't even attempt to answer the questions. You just dragged in some irrelevant nonsense. Is that because you can't answer the questions? Please just answer the following questions 1. Where does 2/3 come into the relationship between those numbers you have listed? It is hard to understand your description with all its non-standard terminology, but it sounds like you are saying that there is some relationship between prime numbers ("ultimates" as you call them) and non-prime numbers ("non-ultimates") that involves 2/3. But no primes (other than 2 and 3) result in an integer when multiplied by 2/3 or 3/2. And no non-primes result in primes when multiplied by 2/3 or 3/2. Maybe you mean the ratio between the number of "ultimates" and the number of "non-ultimates". Well, that is obviously false as well (see below for an example). But maybe you mean something else. So please explain where 2/3 comes into it. 2. What does it mean for a set to "oppose" another set? In the first 100 integers, there are 27 of these "extended primes" (so called "ultimates"). And therefore 73 "non-ultimates". 73 and 27 are not in the ratio 3:2. So, hypothesis falsified, I think.

Fixed it for you. Shouldn't that be "Lots of anti-neutrino stars"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segment_tree

I can't see how it is complicated. It seems perfectly clear to me. (But I have understood almost nothing that you have said.) Where does 2/3 come into that? What does it mean for a set to "oppose" another set?

Energy is not conserved on cosmological scales (because energy conservation only applies to a single frame of reference). Also, if the universe is infinite (and we have no way of knowing if it is or not) then there is no limit to the mass-energy. Actually it will approach c asymptotically. Which means it will never quite reach c; even after infinite time. That was thought to be the case. But the discovery of dark energy suggest it is more likely to keep expanding forever, and expand at an increasing rate. What is "the infinite time loop"? And how can there be one if nothing is infinite? No there isn't. And I assume your god is eternal, with infinite knowledge and power. Therefore it cannot exist according to you. Preaching is against the rules of the forum. So, in summary a series of incorrect and/or ignorant statements, followed by some incoherent noises, followed by a appeal to a mythical being. Not sure what you have posted this on a science forum. ! Moderator Note I am feeling generous, so I have moved this to Speculations, rather than Trash, in case you want to try and defend this drivel.

The definition "0, 1 and the primes" seems pretty clear to me. But it also says "nonnegative noncomposite numbers" which also seems a pretty good definition. So this is the primes before the convention was adopted that 1 (and presumably 0) should not be included among the primes?

You can buy a chainsaw on the Internet. But to use it safely you need training and safety equipment.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200327-can-you-kill-coronavirus-with-uv-light So, yes it might. But it is very dangerous and it is hard to imagine where it would be useful. What is wrong with soap and water?

! Moderator Note This forum is not a place for you to advertise your YouTube channel

Good point. Abstraction is another benefit of data types. For example, C has no real concept of a string type. So to manipulate strings you either have to deal with individual bytes (or larger characters) in memory or your all library functions do do operations on strings. Other languages have support for strings built in, so you can simply add two strings to concatenate them, and so on. Some languages have built in support fo complex structures such as lists or dictionaries. Low level languages like C have to use pointers and functions, making the code harder to understand and more prone to bugs.

There are languages that have little or no concept of types. For example, in Perl, you can assign the value "123" or the value 123 to a variable and then treat that variable as a string or as a number (variables are prefixed with '$' in Perl): $s="123"; # A string $i=123; # An integer # Do arithemtic on both print $s + 1, "\n"; print $i + 1, "\n"; # Do string operations on both print substr($s, 1), "\n"; print substr($i, 1), "\n"; This program will print: 124 124 23 23 So it treats strings and integers identically. Now that looks really convenient. Why worry about types? Well, one reason is security (finding bugs). After all, you can pass a string to a function like sqrt (the square root function). Which is fine if you say $x="4"; sqrt($x), that returns 2. But what if the variable has got set to some non-numeric value by a bug in the program? What is the square root of "banana"? (According to Perl, it is zero). So maybe it would be nice to have the program check that you aren't doing something silly / dangerous like trying to take the square root of a string. That is where type checking comes in. Some languages are a bit stricter than Perl. So Python doesn't make you say what type your variables are, but it doesn't allow you to pass a string to a function that expects a number. Some languages are a bit stricter. So C / C++ require you declare every variable with its type. Others are even stricter still. It may be quicker to write a short program without worrying about types. But by the time you have to write (or, even worse, maintain) a long piece of code, you will be wishing for strong type checking. Which is why Python has added it as an optional extension. Another benefit of types, is that it allows the compiler to make some optimizations it might not be able to otherwise. For example, if you say that a variable is of type "byte", then the compiler knows it only needs 8 bits of storage. If you define a variable as "float" or "double" then the compiler knows they need 32 and 64 bits, respectively. Similarly, adding two values that the compiler knows to be integers can just require a simple "add" instruction. If it knows they are floating point variables, then it knows it has to do a "fpadd" instruction. If they are string variables then it knows it can needs to append one sequence of bytes onto the other.

There are several variants of the virus, because virus mutate very rapidly. These variations have been used to track the source of infection. Scientists are trying to understand if it changes the infection rate or the virulence. (I haven't seen any definitive results of this yet.) Other teams are trying to understand if the widely varying seriousness is related to the genetics of the patient. What!? It can attack various internal organs. I'm not even sure there is any such thing as "the bones of the soles of the feet".