1
Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology / Re: No Evidence of the Exodus?
« on: 15/05/2023 14:15:51 »
If exodus didn't happen, why am I here and not there?
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can Light Experience 'Time'
« on: 14/05/2023 08:49:12 »
Time is what separates sequential events*. A photon cannot experience sequence as it has no memory.
*an original statement, but apparently my predecessor Prof A Einstein said "time is what prevents everything from happening at once", an arguably anthroponormative definition but having the same import.
*an original statement, but apparently my predecessor Prof A Einstein said "time is what prevents everything from happening at once", an arguably anthroponormative definition but having the same import.
The following users thanked this post: neilep
3
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 14/05/2023 00:09:34 »
New readers:
Note the difference between physicists ("consider a spherical cow in a vacuum.......") and mathematicians ("an instantaneous sample of all the photons in the universe......").
Or as others have put it, "Rocket science is two equations. Rocket engineering is a lot more complicated."
Note the difference between physicists ("consider a spherical cow in a vacuum.......") and mathematicians ("an instantaneous sample of all the photons in the universe......").
Or as others have put it, "Rocket science is two equations. Rocket engineering is a lot more complicated."
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
4
New Theories / Re: Universal Utopia? What's The Universal Terminal Goal?
« on: 13/05/2023 11:34:55 »There would be some optimal and balanced compositions for different cases in different conditions and importance.A well-known problem with databases. The customer always asks for an accurate, up-to-date, database. The supplier asks "which do you really want?" Big problem with medical research: we know exactly who entered the trial 5 years ago, but we don't know who died yesterday. So how many people do we need to recruit in order to decide whether the procedure actually extends life? The quicker we get the answer, the more lives we can extend (or not harm) by our proposed intervention, but the less confidence we have in that decision. So we recruit a bigger sample, but the trial may end up doing more harm if the intervention turns out to be harmful, so we gradually expand the numbers if it looks promising, but at some point the cost of the trial will exceed any profit we might make by putting the procedure on the market, or if we expand too slowly someone will come up with a better solution.....
The following users thanked this post: hamdani yusuf
5
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 13/05/2023 11:18:48 »
I think you have answered your own question quite elegantly.
Einstein said that repeating an action and hoping for a different result is madness, but two random samples of the same thing is not a repeat - definition of randomness! So the question is what level of confidence you require to assert that they are samples of the same distribution.
The power of the χ2 test is it can tell you not only the extent to which your samples may be said to be representative, but also if the fit is "too good" - evidence of a failure of the mechanism, such as a bit of the primary beam getting through your supposed filter.
Einstein said that repeating an action and hoping for a different result is madness, but two random samples of the same thing is not a repeat - definition of randomness! So the question is what level of confidence you require to assert that they are samples of the same distribution.
The power of the χ2 test is it can tell you not only the extent to which your samples may be said to be representative, but also if the fit is "too good" - evidence of a failure of the mechanism, such as a bit of the primary beam getting through your supposed filter.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
6
Just Chat! / Re: Can someone assist me with some scientific terms?
« on: 13/05/2023 06:24:33 »
We start with observations and develop hypotheses that model them and predict the next observations. When we have gone through the loop a few times we can identify theories (a guess at the mechanism behind the obs) and laws (robust mathematical projections of what will happen in the wider universe, regardless of the mechanism).
Thus we have a law of gravitation F = GMm/r2 that is good enough to put a satellite into orbit, but no idea of how bodies actually attract each other apart from the theory that mass bends spacetime.
Underlying all this is the common language of mathematics which is based on the mutual acceptance of certain axioms such as those of Euclidean geometry (similarity, identity, parallelism, etc) with useful theorems (statements that can be rigorously proved as long as the axioms are true) such as Pythagoras.
As far as I can see, a conjecture is a mathematician's hypothesis: a theorem that looks reasonable but hasn't been proved.
The difference is that mathematical proof is singular and positive (if A then B, QED) whereas scientific proof is continuous and negative (we haven't found a system that doesn't obey Newton's laws).
Thus we have a law of gravitation F = GMm/r2 that is good enough to put a satellite into orbit, but no idea of how bodies actually attract each other apart from the theory that mass bends spacetime.
Underlying all this is the common language of mathematics which is based on the mutual acceptance of certain axioms such as those of Euclidean geometry (similarity, identity, parallelism, etc) with useful theorems (statements that can be rigorously proved as long as the axioms are true) such as Pythagoras.
As far as I can see, a conjecture is a mathematician's hypothesis: a theorem that looks reasonable but hasn't been proved.
The difference is that mathematical proof is singular and positive (if A then B, QED) whereas scientific proof is continuous and negative (we haven't found a system that doesn't obey Newton's laws).
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
7
Question of the Week / Re: QotW - 23.05.05 - How fast does evolution happen?
« on: 08/05/2023 17:34:13 »I reckon no other creature comes close to man in terms of sexual activity.You clearly have not studied bonobos or sparrows - God knows how they find time to eat!
You could calculate the R factor for any STD, but you need two measures: the "known source" factor - how many people will be infected from a single source, and the "source density" factor - what proportion of the sexually active population is actually infectious at any time. The success of the COVID virus is in its long pre-symptomatic infectious period, meaning that the second factor was several times the preponderance of symptoms, but most STDs express themselves before the carrier has infected many others. Problem with AIDS is, I think, the subtlety of its early symptoms.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
8
Just Chat! / Re: If Religion Wants To Survive...
« on: 07/05/2023 15:05:54 »Is this a good deed?Starving a dog is never a good deed.
Report: Kim Jong Un fed uncle alive to 120 starved dogs
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
9
Just Chat! / Re: A question for our paragon of aeronautical erudition, Alancalverd
« on: 05/05/2023 16:33:21 »
One limiting factor with propellors is tip speed. As it approaches Mach 1 you get lots of noise and stress for very little additional thrust. Anyone who has heard a T6 Harvard plodding round the sky at 200 mph will know the buzz-saw noise of its huge 2-blade prop. You can get more thrust at high speed by having more blades, but each blade is working in the turbulent wake of its predecessor at low airspeeds, where you want lots of thrust for takeoff and landing. The compromise rarely exceeds an airspeed of Mach 0.6 (~ 400 mph) with the prop tips just beginning to scream.
The compressor fan of a pure jet isn't required to produce thrust but to stuff lots of subsonic air into the combustion chamber. Interceptors like the Lightning have prominent passive nose cones to slow down the airflow, and the intakes of the Concorde Olympus engines are still something of a trade secret. Thrust mainly comes from the exhaust gases.
Subsonic airliners are optimised for a different mission: long efficient cruises at Mach 0.9 or thereabouts, so you can use a multi-blade bypass fan with short blades and a very coarse pitch, and tolerate the extra fuel burn needed to get off the deck as it's a small part of the mission. The "jet" bit is mostly there to drive the fan rather than the other way around!
Not sure about your sooty RB211s. There are all sorts of resonances happening in the cruise and it wouldn't surprise me if this leads to occasional pulsatile overrichness and a bit of smoke - jet fuel is like diesel but cheaper! I recall as a passenger of Ryanair (my favorite airline) being intercepted by a couple of French jets who left impressive smoke trails like old tractors as they climbed towards us at full thrust: the smoke gradually thinned as they accelerated and the mixture optimised around 20,000 ft and 600 kt.
The compressor fan of a pure jet isn't required to produce thrust but to stuff lots of subsonic air into the combustion chamber. Interceptors like the Lightning have prominent passive nose cones to slow down the airflow, and the intakes of the Concorde Olympus engines are still something of a trade secret. Thrust mainly comes from the exhaust gases.
Subsonic airliners are optimised for a different mission: long efficient cruises at Mach 0.9 or thereabouts, so you can use a multi-blade bypass fan with short blades and a very coarse pitch, and tolerate the extra fuel burn needed to get off the deck as it's a small part of the mission. The "jet" bit is mostly there to drive the fan rather than the other way around!
Not sure about your sooty RB211s. There are all sorts of resonances happening in the cruise and it wouldn't surprise me if this leads to occasional pulsatile overrichness and a bit of smoke - jet fuel is like diesel but cheaper! I recall as a passenger of Ryanair (my favorite airline) being intercepted by a couple of French jets who left impressive smoke trails like old tractors as they climbed towards us at full thrust: the smoke gradually thinned as they accelerated and the mixture optimised around 20,000 ft and 600 kt.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
10
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 05/05/2023 09:34:46 »And, is the universe an entity? If it is, what kind of bottle does it go in?A really big one. Or, if you are of a mathematical turn of mind, a Klein bottle, which resolves the dispute between Big Bang and Continuous Creation.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
11
Just Chat! / Re: A question for our paragon of aeronautical erudition, Alancalverd
« on: 03/05/2023 20:02:51 »
Dunno about paragon, but it's certainly a subject I take seriously - the alternative being a fiery death. The Wisdom of the Aeronauts says:
After 100 hours, you know everything
After 1000 hours, you realise you don't know everything
After 10,000 hours you know you will never know everything.
Currently hovering around the 1000 hour mark, so on the steep part of the learning curve.
After 100 hours, you know everything
After 1000 hours, you realise you don't know everything
After 10,000 hours you know you will never know everything.
Currently hovering around the 1000 hour mark, so on the steep part of the learning curve.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
12
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 02/05/2023 09:25:12 »
Interesting that the Wikipedia article, when discussing sequential S-G systems, talks about "measuring" when a particle passes through a nonhomogeneous magnetic field. When we use magnetic fields to select regions for analysis by spin resonance (e.g. MRI) we talk about polarising or forcing, not measuring*. Wikipedia partially redeems itself with
which is much more reasonable, and also makes sense if applied to the 45 degree optical polariser.
I may be a bit pedantic in distinguishing between segregating (black sheep to the left, white to the right) and measuring (counting the sheep in each pen after segregation) but that's the residual chemist in me: qualitative and quantitative analysis are not the same thing. The "triple S-G" experiment simply selects white sheep then arbitrarily paints them red or blue.
*the measurement phase of MRI comes later: we listen to the radiofrequency emission as the selected spins relax and realign to the primary field.
Quote
Given that the input to the second S-G apparatus consisted only of z+, it can be inferred that a S-G apparatus must be altering the states of the particles that pass through it.(my italics)
which is much more reasonable, and also makes sense if applied to the 45 degree optical polariser.
I may be a bit pedantic in distinguishing between segregating (black sheep to the left, white to the right) and measuring (counting the sheep in each pen after segregation) but that's the residual chemist in me: qualitative and quantitative analysis are not the same thing. The "triple S-G" experiment simply selects white sheep then arbitrarily paints them red or blue.
*the measurement phase of MRI comes later: we listen to the radiofrequency emission as the selected spins relax and realign to the primary field.
The following users thanked this post: Eternal Student
13
Just Chat! / Re: Return of Baal/Marduk. The Requirement to Kill Your Child, Teach your Children..
« on: 30/04/2023 12:19:36 »
Euthanasia is a Good Thing. Ask anyone suffering from God-given incurable pain but lacking the physical capacity to take his own life.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
14
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 29/04/2023 23:21:19 »Then Energy seems to be a Calculable entity.It is a quantity, not an entity. See reply #7 above.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
15
New Theories / Re: Universal Utopia? What's The Universal Terminal Goal?
« on: 29/04/2023 12:09:12 »What do you think about heart transplant? Would it change someone's personality?Weirdly, there is at least one documented case where it did. A diet-conscious teenage girl received a heart from an anonymous donor and developed an uncharacteristic craving for chicken nuggets and beer. She tracked down the donor and met his mum who said that he was an enthusiastic biker who lived on - guess what?
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
16
Just Chat! / Re: If Religion Wants To Survive...
« on: 28/04/2023 22:38:07 »Begin portraying God as African-American or Black British.What do you mean "begin"? She was always black.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
17
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 26/04/2023 19:07:58 »
We physicists are a pedantic bunch. We talk about entities, quantities and units.
An entity is a distinct object - electron, motor car, whatever
A quantity is a dimension or combination of dimensions,such as mass M, length L, time T, energy ML2T-2, etc.
A unit is that by which we express the amount of a quantity: gram, meter, second, joule.....
So you can talk about the mass of a motor car (1500 kg) and the energy density of its fuel (40 MJ/kg) and so forth.
Energy is a physical quantity which, in classical mechanics, is conserved: that is, the amount of energy in the universe is the same before and after an event. The forensic excitement arises from trying to work out where some of it went, and in some cases we end up considering the relativistic possibility that it might have converted into mass, or vice versa.
An entity is a distinct object - electron, motor car, whatever
A quantity is a dimension or combination of dimensions,such as mass M, length L, time T, energy ML2T-2, etc.
A unit is that by which we express the amount of a quantity: gram, meter, second, joule.....
So you can talk about the mass of a motor car (1500 kg) and the energy density of its fuel (40 MJ/kg) and so forth.
Energy is a physical quantity which, in classical mechanics, is conserved: that is, the amount of energy in the universe is the same before and after an event. The forensic excitement arises from trying to work out where some of it went, and in some cases we end up considering the relativistic possibility that it might have converted into mass, or vice versa.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
18
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Talking about Physics
« on: 26/04/2023 11:09:37 »
My opinion is that physics is the business of building mathematical models of things that happen (or don't happen - see below*) in order to predict what will happen next or if we alter something.
We generally start with the simplest model and add sophistications to account for observed anomalies or discovered additional or limiting factors, hence for instance simple aerodynamics says that the bigger you make the wings of your wind turbine, the more efficient it gets, but the discovery of compressibility effects limits the tip speed (supersonic speeds are easily achievable but will reduce effficiency and/or break the blade) and therefore the range of wind speeds over which the machine can operate.
As for time, you can define it as the dimension that separates effect from cause. Then you apply the concept of entropy and discover that you can't decrease the entropy of the universe, so time is essentially irreversible.
As for momentum, a lot of physics is about conserved quantities and dimensions. Experimentally we observe that mass (up to a point), energy (likewise) and momentum (always) are conserved, which makes our modelling very robust and also tells us where to look to resolve some anomalies, e.g. in particle decay and planetary astronomy.
*neatly expressed by my engineering colleagues: mechanical engineers build things that move, civil engineers build things that don't move.
We generally start with the simplest model and add sophistications to account for observed anomalies or discovered additional or limiting factors, hence for instance simple aerodynamics says that the bigger you make the wings of your wind turbine, the more efficient it gets, but the discovery of compressibility effects limits the tip speed (supersonic speeds are easily achievable but will reduce effficiency and/or break the blade) and therefore the range of wind speeds over which the machine can operate.
As for time, you can define it as the dimension that separates effect from cause. Then you apply the concept of entropy and discover that you can't decrease the entropy of the universe, so time is essentially irreversible.
As for momentum, a lot of physics is about conserved quantities and dimensions. Experimentally we observe that mass (up to a point), energy (likewise) and momentum (always) are conserved, which makes our modelling very robust and also tells us where to look to resolve some anomalies, e.g. in particle decay and planetary astronomy.
*neatly expressed by my engineering colleagues: mechanical engineers build things that move, civil engineers build things that don't move.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
19
Just Chat! / Re: A question for our paragon of aeronautical erudition, Alancalverd
« on: 25/04/2023 17:25:46 »
Pretty much as you guessed. You are required to start the engines before being towed onto the taxiway (to save embarrassment if they don't start, or catch fire) , and to run the engines up to about 75% power at some point before beginning your takeoff run, but the intervening bit between the terminal and the designated runup point should be taxied at minimum necessary power to avoid all sorts of damage to buildings, vehicles, following aircraft, and any pedestrians who may be going about their lawful business.
I'm surprised that airline captains need reminding, but when flying from a small strip run by an aerobatic school I'm frequently dishevelled by young lads determined to scramble straight from the fuel pump to meet the incoming Hun at full throttle.
I'm surprised that airline captains need reminding, but when flying from a small strip run by an aerobatic school I'm frequently dishevelled by young lads determined to scramble straight from the fuel pump to meet the incoming Hun at full throttle.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
20
Just Chat! / Re: National Anthems and the Ode to Joy...
« on: 23/04/2023 22:16:33 »So alancalverd I'm curious. Why did the european Union adopt it as their anthem?I am unable to think of a logical reason why the EU ever did anything, apart from maintaining market prices. The Commissioners being devoid of any spark of originality, I assume they just took a tune that they had all heard at whatever dreary middle-of-the-road concert they once attended and assumed that it was "safe" and out of copyright.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter