Jump to content
Science Forums

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/09/2021 in all areas

  1. 1. With motion of any sort, there is friction. 2. If by 'reactionless', you mean that there is no NUCLEAR reaction, then I'll give you that. But a true reactionless drive would have no 2 parts which would 'react' to each other. Thus, no moving parts, no transference of energetic particles, no magnetism, no graviton technology, and a host of other examples. 3. There is no such thing as perpetual motion. That's like saying you can see past infinity. No, you Can't. 4. MY EYES ARE BLEEDING FROM READING YOUR WALLS OF TEXT WHICH HAVE ***ZERO*** ACADEMIC CITATIONS. NO PROOF!!! JUST STO
    2 points
  2. That's nice dear. But let's forget about feeding animals and talk about other human beings, shall we? Now tell me what your wonderful loving prophet thinks about flying commercial jetliners, full of innocent people, into office buildings, also full of innocent people? What does your Koran say about that? While you are at it, please explain why infidels deserve to be beheaded and their deaths recorded on video? As far as I am concerned, most organized religions are a form of insanity, but yours is absolutely the worst and the world would be better off without it.
    2 points
  3. Planck constant is routinely described as "representing the smallest quantity that exists in reality", or even worse, as "the smallest quantity imaginable". Certainly it is not the smallest "imaginable" quantity. Take Planck length - 1.61622837 × 10^-35 meters. Now imagine a smaller number. There, you did it. But is it fair to think of it as "the smallest quantity that exists in reality". In physics, people often adopt a philosophy where things that cannot be measured also "do not exist". From that perspective they might say that "nothing smaller than Planck length exists" - since it
    1 point
  4. Basically unless you have 80 billion dollars or are famous everything you do is meaningless and this is why, nothing you do will go down in history and someday will just be buried in others trash or be deleted such as typing on this forums right now someday this scienceforums.com will run out of money and all the things you have written down will just vanish. Now for famous and rich people they can just pay to have everything they have written down by others or saved which is treated like gold somewhere as long as the internet exists their writings and concepts will be saved as others actually
    1 point
  5. We have all heard about Epstein's Island where some of the richest most influential politicians and businessmen on the planet had sex with underage women. I wanted to go deeper into the systemic issues with the people in politics in this thread. What drives a wealthy and powerful person to want to have sex with a child or do criminal acts? Do we just have a bunch of criminals in power on this planet that are no different than the mafia and sex trafficking rings of standard criminals? I am not saying that all politicians and businessmen are pedophiles however some of them most definitely had we
    1 point
  6. 1.678 is NOT the golden ratio. The golden ratio is $\frac{1+ \sqrt{5}}{2}$, an irrational number. Even approximated to three decimal places the golden ratio is 1.618, not 1.678.
    1 point
  7. This is a set of video about if certain areas of society were honest I thought it was entertaining and very factual.
    1 point
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
  10. OceanBreeze

    very delicious

    How Did Honey Evolve in our Diet? Honey is probably one of the most ancient sweeteners used by humans. Additionally, it was probably consumed not only by us, humans, but Neanderthals. In fact, very likely honey played a role in the evolution of the human desire and taste for sweet food products. Honey has played an important role not only in food consumption but also in medicine and even embalming in burial. Its prevalence in the New and Old Worlds have also made it widespread in use even in early prehistoric periods. The earliest evidence for the use of honey comes from Spain from
    1 point
  11. Please provide your references to these many books and scientists who will tell you light has mass! The energy and momentum of light are related by E=pc . This is a special case of the relation E2=(pc)2 + (mc2)2 , which reduces to E= mc2 for massive particles at rest (p=0). Since light has no mass, only E=pc applies. This is known as the dispersion relation, which is the relationship between energy and momentum and has nothing to do with mass. We have empirical evidence that this is correct found in the so called “solar wind”, where light from the sun accelerates absorptive or refl
    1 point
  12. My friend, if I say: Gravity is not caused by the curve of space, but by the consumption of space.
    1 point
  13. I never witnessed any experimental evidence personally. So I doubt everything. I believe in photons because I think photon is the lowest unit of light. Light must be composed of something, and it's okay to call it a photon. I am very interested in light, I will read your articles.
    1 point
  14. I'm being asked by another poster at this site about this notation, how are the symbols used, probably also how they appear on physics. So I have decided to make this public so that its not a wasted discussion and so others will learn as well. I'll start it all in segments in good time.
    1 point
  15. Yes. Gravity isn't a force, and Susskind says this around two or three times as well from his lecture. I've been saying it for years as well. You don't ever quantize fields, that are not actually fields. It's a wrong turn amd has led us to a wrong path, as the Idea butcheres the first principles of relativity, that is. That gravity is and always will be a pseudoforce from the curvature and distortion of the metric from contribution of these stress energies that are known as contributed from the real particles of the standard model. If you want gravitons, you'd have to say GR is wrong, and doi
    1 point
  16. I can't and will not, because I'd be laboring under a lie.
    1 point
  17. This following lecture is really good for the select few who have spouted a lot of nonsense concerning gravitons (;-) we all know who I'm talking about) because the lecture goes into talking about the gravitational waves. When asked how it is generated, Susskind clearly is careful not to say anything about gravitons. He states it's an analogue of how charges move. I made a quick post before, about how you can envision curvature much like how an electron circles round a proton. It's because it has an acceleration, what Susskind didn't mention though as I had before, some quantum effects does aw
    1 point
  18. Right heres the next lecture by Susskind, When I spoke about the relativitistic correction, ∇ = (∂ + Γ) It is also important to know how ot arises in general relativity for the Ricci curvature. It appears like R = ∂ Γ + ΓΓ because it has those essential space derivatives associated to the gradient with how geometry, more specifically curvature spreads through space with dimensions of inverse length squared . Again, to get the full relationship, you can simply expand (∂ + Γ)(∂ + Γ) with appropriate indices, and from it you find the parallel transp
    1 point
  19. If you want a more complicated look into it, you can follow my essay, where the torsion is non vanishing in bivector gravity theory. You'll find out how to expand the equation ∇·∇ = (∂ + Γ)(∂ + Γ) including how the gamma matrices (Pauli spin matrices) are involved as coefficients on the algebra. I don't expect everyone to be able to follow it as it a bit more difficult. https://bivector.quora.com/Final-Paper-for-Bivector-Gravity
    1 point
  20. Now, I know some of you really are interested in this, including the person who private messaged me, and while it is a complicated subject, and though I've given a very short rudimentary way for you to envision using them, they can be used in many different ways, such as replacing the acceleration with a Christoffel symbol, but then you need to start introducing the summation indices and from that you'd get the four force of gravity. Though it's not a force, it's just a notation symmetry to the which we think about the wat the force drops off 1/length^2. If you want to know more, here's Susski
    1 point
  21. Ivy, you'll find out soon, but a short answer is the derivatives of spacetime. when we speak of the operator, there is a correction term in the form of the Christoffel symbol. It is the Covariant derivative, which is the 1/length correction to the space derivatives. If you just have some patience, I would have got to this.
    1 point
  22. I distracted Dubbel however he will get to it.
    1 point
  23. What does any of this have to do with the Christoffel Symbols?
    1 point
  24. As tensions rise between the East and the West the chance of nuclear war becomes ever more possible as China, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States along with North Korea all have nuclear weapons, is it this planet's destiny to go through a nuclear war? It seems a all out war between China, North Korea, and Russia Versus NATO would ultimately lead to the usage of nuclear weapons by one side or another on military and civilian targets which if more than around 1000 nuclear weapons are detonated then that would spell the end of civilization as we know it, those powers having over 15,000 nucl
    1 point
  25. This is very similar to a heat pump. You are inputting 38232 J of energy in order to extract a total of 51646 J of energy, which includes 14200 J of energy provided by the burning of hydrogen, an external input! This is exactly the way a classical heat pump works! In fact, a COP greater than one is the rule, rather than the exception and your COP of 1.35 is very low! A classical heat pump routinely achieves a COP of around 4.5 This is more nonsense and I will move it to where it belongs, in Silly Claims. This is your last warning for posting nonsense and annoying other members.
    1 point
  26. Okay, whatever I have disrupted your lectures now continue it, I wonder sometimes what happens in the alternate universes I am not here in. I have significantly altered the timeline of the scienceforums.com, did I have the right?
    1 point
  27. Ya, i know , link = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D'Alembert_operator
    1 point
  28. One way to calculate the precession of the planets is by averaging the interplanetary gravitational interactions over the orbits of the other planets. It is reasonable to do this, since the precession period in question is very much longer than the orbital period of any planet in the Solar System. Thus, by treating the other planets as rings, we can calculate the mean gravitational perturbation due to these planets, and, thereby, determine the desired precession rate. However, since Venus rotates much more slowly than any other planet, its precession period cannot be accurately cal
    1 point
  29. You are talking about my favorite operator!, *Gets Excited*
    1 point
  30. Ok, to understand the Christoffel symbol, I hope the notion of curved space and its unification with acceleration as the warping of gravity is also understood as a prerequisite because the aim of this post is not to teach the literal understandings of what you read in popular science books, but rather to break down what gravity is when it is manifestly spoke about in mathematical physics. Ok... So hopefully you will already know about basics of Euclidean space ie. The coordinates of ordinary flat space as x + y + z Algebraically speaking, this can also be written as the powers
    1 point
  31. I don't think time exists in reality either. I think time is same idea with lenth and weight, it is created by human, it is kind of concept exists in our mind. But it is NOT a fact that can be dilated.
    1 point
  32. He's not talking to either of us, he is talking to the OP.
    1 point
  33. Success, I got one of the cranks to leave the forums, Victory is MINE! I guess you couldn't handle having to learn "Real Physics".
    1 point
  34. "String field theory was to be the theory of interacting strings. To describe interacting objects, you need a quantity called the Lagrangian (that's L in Kaku's equation). ... Now Michio Kaku's equation is clear. It is the Lagrangian describing the interaction of strings." I hope this has humbled you, maybe you don't know as much as you think you know, now watch the lectures.
    1 point
  35. Write4u..... YouTube videos, without any academic citation, are just conjecture. /discussion
    1 point
  36. Dubbel, This dude PeterAX, is a flaming crank just ignore his stupid bullshit and move along.
    1 point
  37. And organised religion is really the organisation of hate rather than a belief structure of love. Religion is destructive on the whole because fanaticism breeds it like wildfire.
    1 point
  38. Huh? The precession of planets are well understood, Mercury was the first planet to have its precession accurately explained by Gravity, what precession are you talking about, and why are you talking about it? The posts I've read in my time today are so unclear, I am wondering what it is half the time the OP's are trying to articulate? If I cannot understand, that is not a good start. I only wonder, if a system of questions are not articulated properly, what are others thinking outside of my own reading of trying to understand.
    1 point
  39. You know I have whored out all my ideas and inventions for anyone to steal and I have got nothing for it, There aren't enough viewers on these forums. I feel like I have wasted 3 years of my life by posting these things here and caused a potential security risk to my inventions still being possessed by me and not some evil company or government, but on a upside It is free hosting for them.☹️ I will always be grateful that the science forums has been a good home and allowed me this opportunity to express myself and Inventions on the Internet. Meh, They can look!
    1 point
  40. I designed a battery once, what is it, I'll tell you. Radioactive hydrogen emits ultraviolet radiation. We had glowing compasses in the military that had phosphorous that absorbed the UV from radioactive hydrogen and thus glow at night. So what you do is impregnate layers of a transparent plastic with radioactive hydrogen. Make them thin sheets. Then sandwich these sheets within photocells. Now you have a battery that lasts 20 years. Cheers, Devin.
    1 point
  41. First of all, does light have inertia? The most simplest of model would say yes. In fact many books and scientists will tell you it has a mass. This is because it's energy has units of mass so we write for the mass of a photon m = E/c^2 Why though when a photon is commonly said to have no mass at all? It may be faulty, but one school of thought will teach you that light has mass but no matter. There's a simple experiment which may support this. When a photon is absorbed by an atom, or any system, it contributes to the matter of the system. So technically speaking, some distinguish be
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...