« on: Yesterday at 15:04:34 »
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.
@Colin2B I'm not certain what you're trying to say there.Sorry, I was in too much of a hurry to expand.
No, anything does not go.Why do we have to be subjected to such juvenile garbage on a science site???It's the "Just Chat" section of a science sight. Anything goes, as the description pretty much states.
Also, I do for some levity.Levity is one thing, but you often use this section for posts in bad taste and/or of a sexual or crude nature. Thatís not what this section (or any other) is for.
Also, if those videos are publically accessible, I'd be interested in seeing them.You might also be interested in the rest of the site https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/bh/schwp.html#geometry
Perhaps the moss I have been examining has been to dry.They can become dormant and difficult to see if too dry. Try soaking the moss overnight then look at it with a hand lens - best with top or side lighting (try both) against a dark background.
Hi.Chladni also saw this effect on very fine particles, Faraday thought it was due to air currents carrying the particles around.The patterns formed on Chladni plates are a result of the properties of the plates themselves, and has nothing to do with the sand/salt/sugar/dust/etc. placed on top for visualization purposes.Almost entirely true.
If you get silly and start using extremely fine grained powders you sometimes do get alternative patterns forming.
Is it better to air seal our food or simply put it in the freezer?Both
The patterns formed on Chladni plates are a result of the properties of the plates themselves, and has nothing to do with the sand/salt/sugar/dust/etc. placed on top for visualization purposes. ..... The pattern that the nodes make is a function of the frequency of the vibration and the size/shape of the plate.Fully agree, acid test is that the pattern changes with frequency, so there is no memory effect.
....we did all just step around the possibility that if you push the frequency of the gamma ray higher then we could get outside the range of energy that most of the current scientific theories work with.As this is informal, otherwise much would go into new theories, although the new theorists proposing these ideas are orders of magnitude brighter than the ones we get here. There is interesting work being done at CERN, some on photon/photon collisions which donít happen at low energies. Some work on questioning whether high energies might reveal extra dimensions via Kaluza-Klein states, or might reveal gravitons which wouldnít be detected, but could be lost into the extra dimension leaving an energy momentum imbalance.
Isaac Asimov says that the photon energy of a gamma ray cannot exceed to the total mass-energy of the universe.Great writer with lots of good ideas, but, although heís right in principle I think the limit is much lower than this.
Oh please, don't give me the wrong advice of explaining reality and don't use Darwin's invented criteria of falsification. To falsify ToE, you need to use this approach: ToE vs reality, and never, ever rely on Darwin's idea. Behe had done that. He was ashamed.You claim to have reviewed all ToE papers and falsified them. You have 24hrs to provide the list you claim or you posts will be locked until you provide that list.
Hi.As @evan_au says, these are emailed in. However, they are not from forum viewers but from podcast listeners, so the questioners are not usually from a formal scientific background. The site aims to generate an interest in science rather than present it as impenetrable, so many of the questions are from a very basic understanding of the topic, often from popsci articles (as @Halc pointed out), and the listener is unlikely to be versed in the subtleties of scientific terminology. So a good reply will try to answer the question at the level of the questioner with more details in any followup discussion.
Could someone clarify how these things work? Whenever the posts start of with "Donald presented this...." or "Donald wrote in to ask this.....", then we're never going to get any interactivity with Donald are we?
So am I right that if I asked Donald to clarify a few details, then I'd be wasting my time?
I help look after a Trust reserve where Hazel Dormice have been reintroduced. There is Hazel coppice, that is degrading as time goes on.Which group is running this reintroduction? I assume PTES who have been releasing. They ought to be aware of the importance of habitat management for dormice.
Soooo... fields, as I've described them in my question don't actually exist and are just an easy way to describe how something in the physical world works and behaves?They donít exist in the way you think about them, but what they measure and model are real enough.
Geeze!! I was testing how to download a picture. The test was a success, but I deleted the picture. Now move along and let this meaningless post move down the list of unread posts until it disappears into the aether.There is no aether
Ps - I did not quite understand the reference towards tryin to beIs it racist to mention a general characteristic of a nation or group? Not sure whether we do talk about the weather more than other nations, but we have a lot to talk about in the local weather:
" BRITISH " .
I Strongly Object Racism.
(Are you trying to be a Racist?)
You seem to me to be be saying or implying that ,if measurements were finer and more efficient that the position and the momentum of a particle could be determined separately and not as a pair that are joined at the hipNo, Iím not saying that, as Alan has explained very clearly.