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.
Is the process of eugenics actually feasible, or is it likely to do more harm than good?That is not an either/or prospect. Eugenics can be both feasible and harmful.
The tidal effect of the Moon on the Earth is roughly twice that of the Sun's, Tidal forces fall off by the cube of the distance, so even with its great mass disadvantage, the much closer distance to the Moon more than compensates.[slaps forehead] Of course. Since the tides are due to the moon (primarily) that should have been a hint to me that I was incorrect...
In my theory the expansion of the earth is linked to the expansion of the universe.You keep making statements but do not back them up with any compelling evidence. It would be helpful if you picked one of your ideas and spent some time showing the evidence for that idea.
Bacteria are made up of endless combinations of viruses.This is not true.
Living cells, on the other hand, consist of an infinite combination of bacteria and viruses.This is not true.
The first living things were formed in this way as a result of biological combinations, each separatelyThis makes no sense at all. How can the first living things be a combination of viruses and bacteria when bacteria are already alive? The first life was made up of things already alive?? Huh?
The theory of evolution is also invalid in this respect.Well, since this is mostly nonsense, I think evolution is not going to be overturned anytime soon.
Coronavirus is the most primitive, oldest and unknown virus.Not true.
If it is not known how a virus originated and how it first got infected, it is very difficult to find the vaccine and control the virus. For this reason, scientists should consider The Biological Combination Theory to find the vaccine and control the corona virus.Apparently you haven't heard that there is already a vaccine.
Biological Combination Theory is a great advance in science.This also is untrue.
They remotely raped me, followed me, sold me to someone for electronic harassment 24/7, have been mentally (and later physically) destroying me.You should discuss this with your doctor if you have not already done so. Good luck.
And you shall not be receiving an answer. This poster was just advertising his site and posting the same stuff on several other forums and social media sites.I guess he got banned because he didn't visualize not getting banned well enough?
Nikola Tesla, the prominent 20th century inventor, stated in his book "My Inventions" that all human movements appear to come from the will but are are actually generated from the outside.Tesla was very smart and an excellent inventor, but let's not forget that he was a bit of a lunatic and came up with many crazy ideas.
So, we can ignore Einstein of 1916 without having to show his erroneous thought.Yes, ignore Einstein. You would be a fool however to ignore SR and GR, since they are extremely robust theories that give a great insight into our universe.
There is multiple reasoning that the early universe started off in a low temperature , low density , sparse state .Do you have a source for this idea or any evidence for this?
The BB magically manifests a high temperature , dense state , would be my main objection .I'm not sure what your objection is. There are multiple lines of reasoning to indicate the early universe was in a very hot and dense state. If your objection is that we don't know why the universe started off that way, then you are moving out of the realm of science into philosophy. For instance the science of general relativity tells us that mass warps space time. Why does mass warp space time? That is not a science question that is a philosophical question.
Descartes has got a big doubt, how these magnets identify a like and unlike poles. He assumed that there is an invisible field with which these magnets are interacting and identifying it.This is all just a bunch of conjectures that is counter to all evidence and experimentation. Making stuff up that is not supported by the evidence is not science, it is pseudoscience.
This is not a feature or quality of magnets.
Space is not empty and it is completely filled with particles. It is completely wrong to say that magnet creates its field.
As assumed by Descartes, there is no place for magnet, like ordinary matter, it has to create its own. It pushes ether particles in the space. Due to attraction, more particles are attracted towards the magnet. So, it results in magnetic field.
Magnet = magnetic field (draws particles from space).
So, it clearly tells us that, ether or Luminiferous ether or light bearing ether is not hardest substance like steel. Further it also clearly tells us that there is direct relationship between magnet and aether.
Attraction of particles towards magnet clearly tells us that ether is spread every where in the space. It also gives us an idea that ether is not a separate substance or medium.
Magnetic field clearly tells us that ether consists of particles only.
As assumed by Lorentz, the condition of this aether at a place can be described by the electric field E and the magnetic field H, where these fields represent the "states" of the aether, with no further specification, related to the charges of the electrons.
Ok, if we move the magnet, its field is not lost. It clearly tells us that ether is so dense that it is very difficult to separate them.
However if we move the magnet at the speed of light, its field is lost. At that speed, it is very difficult for particles in the space to join magnet.
I do use this kind of service all the time, without them I`d have wasted so much timeUsing your own brain is a waste of time?
Ok, the speed of light in vacuum is 299,792,458 metres per second. By creating vacuum, we are taking away different particles, that are present in the air. Basic idea of aether is that, light waves needs a medium to propagate.Correct.
Since light travels with maximum speed in vacuum, we came to a conclusion that light needs no medium.That is incorrect. The idea was that a luminous ether exists in a vacuum. Subsequent theory and experimentation have shown that there is no ether and that EM wave do not propagate through a medium, so the idea of an ether was abandoned.
Does this particles present in air aiding light.That sentence does not make any sense.
Actually, an atom absorbs a photon and releases electrons.That is not correct as a general statement. Typically if light is absorbed by an electron in an atom the electron will jump to a higher energy state - it will not be ejected from the atom. If the incident photon has a high enough energy and is absorbed by an electron, the electron can be ejected from the atom.
In other words we are only removing obstacles. Naturally, light travels with maximum speed as there are no obstacles.Correct light moves at the max speed, c, in a vacuum.
It is incorrect, if we say that, by creating vacuum, we are taking away or removing the aether or the medium that is aiding or helping in propagation of light.That is correct, it would be wrong to talk about a medium or ether when talking about the propagation of EM radiation.
In specific terms, we don't know what exactly this aether is?We know exactly what the aether is. It is a hypothesized medium that light propagates through. The aether was hypothesized to have the properties of being incredibly dense and rigid and at the same time being undetectable. We also know that this hypothesis is wrong since it has been falsified.
Moral standards are supposed to distinguish between good and bad moral rules, and specify what conditions are required to apply or reject them.There is the rub. Good and evil are subjective. One persons good is another persons evil.
THANKSDo you fully confirm that this simulation shows that using our current theories a stream of stars between interacting galaxies is not a surprise?
So you fully confirm that one spiral arm which is connected to the other galaxy is due to gravitational attraction.
What is the origin of this "black Friday" nonsense? I know what the purpose is, namely to relieve customers of their hard earned cash.Black Friday was originally around the time of year that retailers would begin to go from red (no yearly profit) to black (a profitable year).
Will I post a link for some new Feynman videos here?Yes.