Strange

No you are not. You said, "As you can see, the particle disappears when it moves too fast" which is not true. It does not disappear. So you are lying being deliberately inaccurate about "the result of the very high frequency anharmonic oscillation." Also not true. There are about 30 posts where you have mentioned quantum theory. And you were the first to introduce the topic.

Perhaps to help keep the mask a tight fit? So you breath in through the filter material, pressing it tighter against the skin, but you breath out through the valve so it doesn't break the seal against the skin. Maybe. Or to prevent breathing out redistributing particles trapped in the filter?

It only disappears because the display cannot render the intermediate positions (or, if it were a physical object) because the eye cannot react that fast. You are playing around with optical illusions. This has nothing to do with quantum theory. I'm not sure why this thread has been allowed to drag on for so long.

That was one reason given (by someone who thought they might have broken something but was too scared to go to the ER)

Nice animation showing how deaths from covid-19 compare with other causes (in the US) over time https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1712761/ Another good source of data: https://ourworldindata.org/

Yes. Or, as an alternative, you can describe it in terms of photons with lower energy. But you cannot mix the two descriptions.

I have seen some anecdotal reports that ER/A&E attendances are much lower (fewer people out and about breaking legs and things).

Wavelength is the distance between peaks of the wave, not photons. Individual photons have an associated wavelength (or frequency), which changes with relative speed between source and observer.

! Moderator Note Move to Speculations. Please note that this section of the forum requires you to support your claims with either evidence or a mathematical model. As you are saying that special relativity is wrong, and therefore all of modern quantum theory, you have a bit of an uphill struggle. Good luck. ! Moderator Note Having read though your post in more detail, it is so full of errors and misunderstandings that there seems little (no) chance that you can defend this. I will leave the thread open in the hope that you are willing to treat this as a learning opportunity. Please don't disappoint me.

Agreed. I was in south-east Asia when one of the previous outbreaks happened. People were dying and countries were taking drastic action but it was treated as a bit of a joke in Europe. The UK is about 2 or 3 weeks behind Italy. So they don't even seem to have learned from the experiences in their own backyard.

I'm not quite sure what the disagreement is. To add a bit more detail, the UK is currently at about 500 deaths a day. Even if it had already reached the peak (it hasn't the death rate is still increasing exponentially) then that would be 15,000 deaths for the month, which is about 1/3rd of the average death rate. And, as noted, each of these deaths puts a much greater strain on the heath service. Yes, isolation and quarantining will help reduce the height of the peak (but possibly not the total number of deaths). But the UK was late to do this and, initially, rather half-hearted. We had scenes here of the army being called in to take coffins away because the funeral services were overloaded. So the UK could see what was coming and did nothing. Countries have had months to prepare and plan but still seem to be reacting as if it was all completely unexpected.

Note that Italy and Spain (who now appear to be passing the peak) had something like 800 deaths a day; say 24,000 a month. The UK (and US) will soon exceed that. People who die of because of Covid-19 are mainly those who end up in hospital and often in intensive care. The vast majority of the other deaths take place at home, in a normal hospital bed, at the scene of the accident, etc. Therefore Covid-19 puts a much greater strain on the health system. There is some interesting analysis of the age effects of both "normal" deaths and covid-19 here: https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

Microwaves are fairly commonly used for this purpose.

I don't think anyone has ever said that. However ... Some good advice on mask wearing here, if you are going to wear one: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1246262176337334272.html

"You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means." ~~~ ooooh ~~ scary ~~~ threats ~~~ I don't think we are going to be too embarrassed by a screenshot of us reminding you that rule 1 (of the rules you agreed to when you joined) is "be civil". I hope that, one day, maybe you will grow up enough to be a little bit embarrassed by your childish rants here.

13mh13 has been suspended for 4 weeks for being ... well, being themselves, I guess. After due consideration (about 3 seconds) 13mh13 has been permanently banned.

! Moderator Note Have a month off. You can use that time to find a forum where your immature posturing is appreciated. ! Moderator Note You could look up the word "censor" in the dictionary, while you are at it.

If you are not actually going to answer the questions asked, then I give up. In summary: 1. You appear to be claiming that there will be a net momentum, which violates known physics. 1a. Although you also deny this, so I'm not sure what the point of all this is. 2. If your model supports this then, obviously, there is something incorrect or, more likely, missing from your model. 3. As you are unable to say what the source of external energy is, I assume that might be one of the missing factors in the model. 3a. But as you are unable to answer any detailed questions about the model (appearing to assume we are all mind readers) it could be anything at all. Good luck. I can only repeat Ghideon's suggestion that your learn some basic physics before assembling random collections of (poorly described) currents and wires and then asking people how they work. I also suggest that next time you pose a question like this, you provide a detailed and correct description at the beginning. Label everything. Say what they actually are: don't call a wire, a "pin"; don't call a coil, a "weight", and so on. And then fully answer any questions. If you are going to keep bits of the model secret and lie about what the components are, you are not going to get helpful answers.

No, I had no idea. I just assumed they were labels to identify the objects. OK. So we have two electric currents, I1 and I2. I2 is in a loop around a core, forming an electromagnet. What is the source of that current? I1 is in a length of wire. How long is that wire? What is the source of the current? Where is the rest of the wire in relation to this setup (ie. it must form a closed loop) If the wire carrying I1 is going into the page, I don't understand what the pin C is doing? Is it going through the wire sideways? Alongside the wire? Is this pin relevant? Is it also metallic and have any current and or magnetic field associated with it? And you still haven't said what the external source of energy is or what the whole system pushes against.

Wait ... what !? I1 is a magnet? You have never mentioned this before. It was just a pin a moment ago. I2 is inducing the magnetic field around I1? So I2 is a magnet? Or an electric wire? I thought it was just a weight. If I2 is a wire, what is the source of the current? So the red rectangle is a ferromagnetic core, or something. And I2 and red-box form a solenoid? What do the green chevrons represent? The north pole of the electromagnet? Or ...? Is the magnetic field B2 changing? (It must be to induce a field in I1) And therefore the current in I2 (if it is a wire). If so how? Sine wave? Square wave? What is the source? So this is all some sort of bizarrely complicated electric motor? I am just so confused now. I am going to have to go and lie down for a bit. Have you ever been diagnosed on the Autistic spectrum? That might explain why you post partial explanations: because the rest is in your head you assume others must know about it too.

What are the "forces" you talk about? Are they hitting (bouncing off) each other? Are they attached to each other (with strings, rods, springs or...)?

I am trying to make sense of this. It is as cyptic as everything else you have posted. So we have a round pin (I1: black circle with blue cross) that rotates? I assume that is what the green circular arrow represents? What makes I1 rotate? That is: what is the source of energy for this rotation? And a weight (I2: black oval) that ... what? Is moving towards I1? Is that what the green chevrons represent? What makes I2 move? That is: what is the source of energy for this movement? What is the red rectangle? Is it moving? Is that what the green chevrons represent? What makes it move? That is: what is the source of energy for this movement? You say the weight (I2) rolls around I1. Is that what the green circular arrow represents? The path of I2? (In which case, what do the green chevrons represent?) And what makes I2 roll around? Is it attached to I1? Is it just friction? But it doesn't appear to be attached to I1 - but is that what the red rectangle represents: a rod attaching I2 to I1? You have still not said what the external source of energy is. Is the first "another weight" the same thing as the second "another weight"? I really have no idea what that "explanation" is supposed to convey.

You still have not said what the external source of energy is. If they are just acting on each other, with no external source of energy, then there cannot be a net change in momentum.

What did I say about not making incomprehensibly cryptic replies? So, as that is an answer to "what is the source of external energy" I assume that this "weight and pin" are separate from the rest of the system are are either propelled at it (forming the external source of energy that causes the change in momentum) or are expelled from the system (thus conserving the total momentum). If this guess based on your meaningless sentence fragment is wrong, then it is up to you to explain fully, and in detail, what is the external source of energy that makes your system move?

You appeared to. You said that there is a net momentum in your object. If you are not saying that the laws of physics are wrong, then you have simply forgotten to tell us what the external energy source is.