1

Just Chat! / Re: Copout 29 on the way, what do you think?

« on: Today at 17:00:57 »

Fossil fuel will eventually disappear anyway, and in the short term will become uneconomic. It is already politically undesirable. The sensible thing to do is to work on alternatives, not attend fatuous conferences about the inevitable.

2

Just Chat! / Re: Where do I get my confidence to challenge established theories?

« on: Today at 16:45:07 »

As usual, CHATGPT gives you the useless, childish answer it thinks you want. Just to pick up a small point: "debate" has no place in science. All scientific hypotheses are subject to mathematical or experimental disproof, and all scientific data is open for review.

Likewise the "theory of evolution" is a meaningless term coined by religious parasites and used by those who do not understand the business of science. Evolution is an observed phenomenon, not a theory.  If there  is no evidence of the existence of species A  prior to  a given date X, it must have either been created spontaneously at X or evolved from something else.

Lots of what politicians, journalists and civilians called "established science" has been proved wrong over time. No big deal - it just means the term has no value.

3

New Theories / Re: How close are we from building a virtual universe?

« on: Today at 16:32:06 »

Because they can be better, safer, faster, cheaper alternative to perform tasks usually done by humans.

We already have robots that can do this, but they are not humanoid. The problem with humans, and humanoids in general, is that bipedal locomotion, or even standing still on two feet,  requires an awful lot of energy and computing power. It's pretty good for covering rough ground, though quadrupeds are much more efficient, but a complete waste of effort on a flat surface. So the ultimate robot would either have wheels or tracks, or be more canine than humanoid.

4

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: Today at 16:24:44 »

So you allege that a photon knows in advance what it is going to encounter. That really changes all we know about physics. 

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Are Atoms Perpetual Motion Machines ?

« on: Today at 16:20:17 »

Is it not the case that, where the source is receding from the receiver,  the photon red shift equals the increase in gravitational potential  of the transmitter?

6

New Theories / Re: How close are we from building a virtual universe?

« on: 08/11/2024 20:53:27 »

New AI Humanoid Robot - IRON - Is Made to Replace Humans

We already have too many humans. Why make a replacement?

7

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: 08/11/2024 20:51:52 »

It is I think obvious that a detector cannot resolve detail smaller than its granularity. So what?

8

Question of the Week / Re: QotW - 24.11.15 - Why do geese honk?

« on: 08/11/2024 15:47:01 »

Formation flying is difficult enough when all the aircraft are similar and flying well below their limits, but birds have differing strengths, so the lead changes frequently and the weaker ones want to fly around halfway along each arm of the V so they get the advantage of the leaders' slipstream but don't get left behind, as might happen at the end of the V. And just because the strongest or freshest is in the lead, it doesn't follow that he actually knows the way, or where the best rest stops might be - the older and weaker guys may be better navigators. 

Hence although human pilots generally maintain radio silence during a formation cruise, geese and their ilk do a lot of chatting. 

9

Just Chat! / Re: Where do I get my confidence to challenge established theories?

« on: 08/11/2024 13:16:03 »

I don't think there is such a thing as "established science".

There are books of established data, and these are continually refined to meet the needs of the folk who use them.

There is a body of scientific knowledge, which consists of explanatory and predictive hypotheses that have not yet been disproved. A few of these hypotheses have proved so robust that they are called "laws"  but it is always accepted that they may only be valid as approximations over a given range of variables.

So what is the problem? I smell philosophy!   

10

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: 08/11/2024 13:07:34 »

I repeat the underlying question: the observed far field diffraction pattern is the same (allowing for geometrical magnification) regardless of the distance between the slit and the detector, so how does the photon know when or even whether it is going to meet a detector?

I think we can assume the laws of physics apply even in the absence of a detector.

11

Science Experiments / Re: Investigation on diffraction of light

« on: 07/11/2024 16:50:27 »

Do you have an example that can't be analysed by Huygens and he usual superposition equations?  Excluding, of course, your hybrid diffraction-reflection-refraction pattern from a thick transparent "edge", or diffraction of a polychromatic beam.

12

New Theories / Re: Universal Utopia? What's The Universal Terminal Goal?

« on: 07/11/2024 14:30:44 »

So the "limit" only applies to silicon. Fair enough.

13

Just Chat! / Re: A query on Trump's tactics

« on: 07/11/2024 14:24:25 »

Trump won because the good guys lost. No program, no memorable slogan, no razzmatazz, no failed assassination, no mention of Jesus, no "enemy within"....no chance. 

If you stand in a debate against an incompetent, incontinent, incoherent, bankrupt criminal who owes money to the President of Russia, and don't remind the people of those facts, you are throwing away your best cards before the game starts.

14

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: 07/11/2024 14:15:29 »

What the detector shows is irrelevant. The elephant stays in the room and so do its fleas, whether I wear my spectacles (so I can see them) or not.

15

Question of the Week / Re: QotW - 24.11.08 - How effective are cancer screening tests?

« on: 06/11/2024 14:10:15 »

Good point! Screening may be indicative, but symptoms are definitive.

16

New Theories / Re: Universal Utopia? What's The Universal Terminal Goal?

« on: 05/11/2024 16:53:43 »

What "limit"? Are they claiming >100% efficiency?

17

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: 05/11/2024 16:51:19 »

What we know is that the diffraction of photons depends on the associated wavelength of the photons and the spatial frequency of the diffraction grating, not on the area of any subsequent detector.

18

New Theories / Re: Where does quantization of energy of electromagnetic radiation come from?

« on: 04/11/2024 09:31:45 »

So your photon knows in advance how big the receiving sensor is going to be?

A small child might argue that an elephant ceases to exist if he shuts his eyes, but the elephant thinks otherwise.

19

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« on: 04/11/2024 09:26:41 »

This issue is interesting physiology; it is not physics.

Beg to differ slightly on this quite complex issue.

We sense temperature differences quite well, with sensitivity 0.5K or less, either between hands (the most frequently used sensor) or between body and ambient, but sensation depends on the rate of heat transfer as well as its direction. Whilst cold metal may give a stronger immediate touch sensation than cold wood, the same is also true of hot metal and hot wood.

If the sample is small and thermally isolated, both metal and wood will equilibrate to your skin temperature  and the sensation will disappear, but if they are large and maintained at constant temperature, the thermal gradient across your skin will depend on the conductivity of the material. The epidermis is effectively dead, and the active sensors are in the dermis, so if the object's conductivity is low the sensor will gradually return towards body temperature as the blood flow tries to regulate and nullify the sensation (which is why we have the sensors in the first place)  but if the object conductivity is high you won't be able to compensate for the heat loss. 

In summary: yes, we do sense temperature, but even before we get to  neurophysiology, the physics is  more complicated and dynamic than an ideal thermometer.

20

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Theoretical information

« on: 04/11/2024 08:59:36 »

Say this theory has a basis of ODE "polynomials" whose form is an invariant of the theory.

But it doesn't have anything to do with polynomials! The underlying mathematics of harmonic motion is precisely continuous and analytic. sinωt is an exact statement, even if any calculated value (other than at t = 0) is necessarily an approximation.

Maybe an apology is needed here - this discussion is running rather close to another thread on the nature of mathematics!