Windevoid

Was that a good or a bad? "great deal"

The name is from wind and void. The universe seems like a case of circular logic. Is the universe an example of circular logic? As in, the idea that it explains itself. Even if there is/was a "god", it would go "God explains existence, and existence explains god." Anyone else see something wrong with this?

In my tests of parallel circuitry just now, with 12 resistors, it seems that each resistor in parallel with each other resistor in the circuit was having the exact same amps as the input amperage, so I suppose it's like 2 amps in with 24 amps useable. And a resistor LED measured at 150 kohms lit up, parallel with 11 resistors with resistances between 100 ohms and 8 kohms. It's as if the very resistance itself was being negated as a concept in this circuit. Volts seem have the same effect.

Hm? It looks like the thread got unlocked? Lucky?

In my tests of parallel circuitry just now, with 12 resistors, it seems that each resistor in parallel with each other resistor in the circuit was having the exact same amps as the input amperage, so I suppose it's like 2 amps in with 24 amps useable. And a resistor LED measured at 150 kohms lit up, parallel with 11 resistors with resistances between 100 ohms and 8 kohms. It's as if the very resistance itself was being negated as a concept in this circuit. Volts seem have the same effect. Did somebody just say that LEDs only depend on voltage?

In my tests of parallel circuitry just now, with 12 resistors, it seems that each resistor in parallel with each other resistor in the circuit was having the exact same amps as the input amperage, so I suppose it's like 2 amps in with 24 amps useable. And a resistor LED measured at 150 kohms lit up, parallel with 11 resistors with resistances between 100 ohms and 8 kohms. It's as if the very resistance itself was being negated as a concept in this circuit. Volts seem have the same effect.

I don't know for sure, but I think amplification means more energy. Interesting.

I mean that it seems that the string with the body of the guitar assisting seems louder than just the string alone.

Well, I don't know about that, every source I read, online, and offline calorie counts on nutrition labels, says that I should need over 2000 calories, I weigh like 185 pounds, so it's not like I live efficiently, and that's the sedentary count. I'm not sedentary. And almost all days, I only eat between 500 and 1400 calories. Recently these past two weeks, it's been about 700 calories a day.

Well, I don't know about that, every source I read, online, and offline calorie counts on nutrition labels, says that I should need over 2000 calories, I weigh like 185 pounds, so it's not like I live efficiently, and that's the sedentary count. I'm not sedentary. And almost all days, I only eat between 500 and 1400 calories. Recently these past two weeks, it's been about 700 calories a day.

Doesn't look like very many experiments as of this point in the thread. And the ones that are there don't seem to be very rigorous.

I'm looking at JSTOR, but I'm not getting anything except a bunch of math papers. I remember that the tests of relativity were easily searchable on places like Wikipedia, but Wikipedia doesn't mention a list of tests for the Law of Conservation of Energy. So where can I find, say, a list of tests in a version I understand and know they are experimental tests, and get a feel for how many there are?

That's what I was getting at.

It's called a guitar. Not sure it's over unity.

Is there a link to those 100 experiments on Einstein? I only found a page with about 25, and they all seemed to be different versions of the exact same experiment. And Wikipedia has like 4 more, but they seem to be explainable by alternative means.

Oh, made a mistake. I looked at it from the wrong angle, that's all. You're right.

Did you read what Daedalus said?

Nice answer. I get few of those.

It seems to just be an issue of no "evidence". What exactly is "evidence" then?

So, I guess that means math can't prove anything, just predict things.

Here for now.

I didn't see a better section to post at. But if you have an idea, the moderators can move it.

How can math prove anything? It is an extension of the mind. It can't say what reality does without doubt. It just says what other people have seen, probably only a few cases. As far as I know, it is not made up of rigorous study of every detail, it is just blanket statements.

The moderator keeps locking some of my threads, so I can't get more replies or show new evidence to investigate.

I mean, it doesn't say anything about the objects in a space. One space of one time and space can have a roll of tape, and another space of the same size and area can have a multimeter in it. Besides, it's just and indication of the sameness of laws. It can't make laws.