1

Just Chat! / Re: Energy and healthwise, what is the best thing to eat for breakfast?

« Last post by Deecart on Today at 18:41:26 »

I eat nothing at breakfeast.
When you need food without starving your muscular strength naturaly grows up (evolutionary capacity, so around 30% i would say) so as to be more able to get food.
Eating after awakening will make you weak (digestion need energy at first place).

2

Marine Science / Re: Can whales eat when they are in fresh water ?

« Last post by Deecart on Today at 18:31:28 »

Did you mean anecdotal?
Why do you say that? This research was based on observation using trackers, previous research was only done using surface observation and so was limited and appears to have been wrong..

Because they are feeding very shortly.

I also noticed the ulcer problem. It seems salt water may aid healing.

I suspect a combination of factors for non-feeeding, exhaustion, confusion, illness etc

So the fresh water is doing some ulcer and whales avoid eating if the water around them is not salty enough.
Perhaps.
And this is the question we want here to solve.

3

Marine Science / Re: Can whales eat when they are in fresh water ?

« Last post by Colin2B on Today at 18:19:43 »

Interestingly, I found this report on humpbacks which suggests that the mothers do forage while nursing
“ researchers observed nursing events that averaged 23 seconds in duration, often interspersed between the mothers’ foraging forays.

Yes i know that, but it is anecdoctic.

Did you mean anecdotal?
Why do you say that? This research was based on observation using trackers, previous research was only done using surface observation and so was limited and appears to have been wrong..

I have found that if whales stay in fresh water they will get ulcer.
So perhaps they dont like to feed because they are already ill.

I also noticed the ulcer problem. It seems salt water may aid healing.

I suspect a combination of factors for non-feeeding, exhaustion, confusion, illness etc

4

New Theories / Re: What is the "NOW" Moment in Special Relativity?

« Last post by Deecart on Today at 18:12:34 »

The reason we can't agree it is an illusion is because it isn't an illusion.

Are you what whe could name a sophist ?
"I am great because i am great. kneel before the king !!"
Lol.

I am sorry, but your "demonstration" (lol) can not be accepted by any scientist.

Please explain what you mean by this statement.

If only one quanta of "change" stay localy, so the relativity theory (sorry, not "the theory", but "the interpretation" of the theory of many peoples) shut down.
Why cant you understand this obvious fact ?
Light is not the only thing involved in phenomenons, and many of the light never reach any distant observer
So what ?
And if you finaly understand that the gravitational effect not reach the light speed (i dont speak of gravitational waves that is some other phenomenon)... how can you accept the block univers ?

5

New Theories / Re: What is the "NOW" Moment in Special Relativity?

« Last post by Origin on Today at 18:00:03 »

It is still an illusion.
i dont understand why you (and many others) cant agree with this obvious thing.

First of all, it is important to note that "and many others" is actually all of the scientific community.
The reason we can't agree it is an illusion is because it isn't an illusion.

Why is it an "illusion" ?
I repeat : Because the full phenomenon is not available at distant observers.

Please explain what you mean by this statement.

So the mathematical proof can not be a physical proof.

What do you mean by this, AFAIK the mathematical explanation matches the physical observations

6

New Theories / Re: What is the "NOW" Moment in Special Relativity?

« Last post by Deecart on Today at 17:34:26 »

There isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

You dident contradict what i said.

It's not an illusion. Events literally happen at different times for different observers. The train thought experiments outlined in the link above demonstrate that it is a direct consequence of a frame-invariant speed of light.

Since the events are placed along the axis of train movement, their time coordinates become projected to different time coordinates in the moving train's inertial frame. Events which occurred at space coordinates in the direction of train movement happen earlier than events at coordinates opposite to the direction of train movement. In the moving train's inertial frame, this means that lightning will strike the front of the train car before the two observers align (face each other).

It is still an illusion.
i dont understand why you (and many others) cant agree with this obvious thing.
The phenomenon appears localy, and yes when you start with the UNIQUE phenomenon you will have some different points of view of the phenomenon.
Why is it an "illusion" ?
I repeat : Because the full phenomenon is not available at distant observers. (so the mathematical proof can not be a physical proof).

Just to give you some insigth : Do you think the sound of the thunder is "nothing" ? And do you think you should think that "the reality" (local phenomenon) of this sound should be linked to the "cone of light" ? So linked to the same speed limit as the speed of light ?

 

7

New Theories / Re: What is the "NOW" Moment in Special Relativity?

« Last post by Kryptid on Today at 16:37:08 »

Is there a universal now ?

I think that yes,"everywherewhen" (a new word that should exist if we really understand relativity), there is a "now" that is unambiguous for every point of view.

There isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

Saying this, the "now" we talk about in special realivity, is only "some illusion" (yes, an illusion has some real visual effect onto the far away observer)  of what happens localy.

It's not an illusion. Events literally happen at different times for different observers. The train thought experiments outlined in the link above demonstrate that it is a direct consequence of a frame-invariant speed of light.

8

Just Chat! / Re: Energy and healthwise, what is the best thing to eat for breakfast?

« Last post by Bored chemist on Today at 16:11:28 »

Energy-wise probably fried bread.
Health-wise probably anything but fried bread.

I'd love to get this right.

We would also like you to get it right, but you can't even frame a sensible question.

9

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« Last post by Bored chemist on Today at 16:09:52 »

Do laser cutters decrease entropy?

no.

So, they don't have negative temperature.

I already explained that there's nothing magical about lasers.
You can use a focused beam of sunlight to cut stuff with.
No laser required; no negative temperature required.

There's also nothing special about lasers for cooling.

10

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« Last post by Bored chemist on Today at 16:07:54 »

In a HeNe laser the electronic temperature is negative.

What's the magnitude, in Kelvin?

I'd have to do lots of complicated maths but, for the sake of discussion, let's pretend that I have done it and the answer is minus 5000K.

What use are you going to make of that information?
Because, if you don't have a good answer, I'm going to take it as further proof that you are a troll.
It will prove that you were just trying to trick me into doing lots of pointless work.