1

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« on: 22/01/2025 09:33:41 »

Why? It's pretty obvious that a conductor carrying a couple of amps at 50 - 60 Hz is going to radiate em. The question is whether that actually matters in the context of all the other current carriers in the  house.

LED lamps obviously emit less because they are DC-powered, but if you obtain that power from the mains, you are probably emitting 100 kHz  from the switch-mode power supply.

2

That CAN'T be true! / Re: What is Learning

« on: 22/01/2025 09:24:39 »

Ah, Gordon Ramsay, makes sense.

3

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

« on: 21/01/2025 14:28:12 »

According to Planck and Einstein, E = hf. Where does your "n" come from?

An electron moving at constant velocity does not emit emr.

4

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

« on: 21/01/2025 11:15:46 »

Those diversions are generally benign or even curative. Religion is evil.

5

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

« on: 20/01/2025 17:28:35 »

So in your opinion everything that evolves is conscious?

The effects of evolutionary process in an environment can be seen more clearly by contrasting with conditions without evolutionary process. The latter will be extremely less likely to cause improvements in survival.

Even if the environment doesn't change, and if the things that live in it are not the first living things ever, they must have evolved. I cannot imagine any environment in which evolution has not happened. With the possible exception of the United States presidency.

6

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

« on: 20/01/2025 14:30:13 »

If I ever said that the frequency of emr is always quantised, I apologise and would be grateful for a reference to my misdemeanour.

7

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

« on: 20/01/2025 14:27:05 »

In the perspective of the survivors, being better at survival is preferred. Their perspective is what matters.

Time doesn't flow backwards. Neither does evolution. The test of survival cannot precede the evolution of the object being tested. So evolution cannot have an objective.

8

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

« on: 20/01/2025 12:35:36 »

from: alancalverd on 13/01/2025 10:22:04
Same old question: if an autonomous vehicle kills someone, who is liable?

It depends on several factors.

So autonomous vehicles are good news for lawyers, but not for anyone inside or outside the vehicle.

9

That CAN'T be true! / Re: What is Learning

« on: 20/01/2025 12:27:21 »

I think teachers will agree that, interesting ideas are more fun to learn about, and, not all ideas are interesting but still need to be learned.

That's where the "practical demonstration followed by analysis" approach is very helpful.  If the teacher can't think of a practical application, ask why it's worth learning the idea at all.

I am actually visually impaired,

I wonder if that might be a root cause? When were you diagnosed, and did you get immediate assistance? I was lucky that a primary school teacher spotted my myopia at an early age.

10

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

« on: 18/01/2025 17:26:14 »

Wrong. There is no objective in evolution.

There is. It's to be better at survival.

An outcome is not an objective.

11

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« on: 18/01/2025 13:28:00 »

I am well aware of the absorption spectrum of water, as should be anyone with an interest in meterorology and climate change. Unfortunately the makers of infrared heat lamps do not share your profound knowledge!

Transparency does not imply zero attenuation at all frequencies, just usefully low values at important points on the spectrum.

12

That CAN'T be true! / Re: What is Learning

« on: 18/01/2025 10:52:07 »

I want to learn to love the smell of equations in the morning. I want to smell something when I read a paper on braided quantum groups.

The purpose of teaching is to short-circuit the process of learning the hard way.

What distinguishes humans from other animals is that we record anything that is too trivial to remember* so we have a huge amount of "possibly useful" knowledge to pass on to the next generation, an even greater amount of vaguely entertaining nonsense like philosophy and economics, and tons of really dangerous drivel like religion.

The process of learning really needs to begin with deciding what, from this great pile of information and opinion, might be useful or amusing. A national curriculum presents the consensus of potential employers and various parasites as to what they think it would benefit them for you to know, plus just enough intellectual bread and circuses to stop you questioning their authority and thank them for introducing you to art and music.

So how can we inculcate instead a sense of wonder, exploration, and delight in knowing? In my case, it all happened by being taught backwards, or at least being introduced to practical applications at a very early stage in the learning process. The most spectacular was a 5-minute exposition of Bernouilli's Theorem followed by a 30 minute ride in a glider "to see if it actually works". From then on the classroom sessions on aerodynamics, thermodynamics, meteorology.....were unforgettable glimpses of how to make it work better, always backed up by practical demonstrations and a debrief to see if I had understood what we had done and apply the knowledge to a different circumstance.

Many if not most UK universities used to be technical colleges. Given the depressing rates of graduate unemployment and underemployment, I am now advocating that all undergraduates should spend at least the first six months of whatever course they have signed up for, learning a practical trade. At that point I suspect a fair number will opt to become plumbers or whatever and pursue a course that discusses hydraulics and metallurgy, with real enthusiasm, and those who choose to stick with Eng Lit will at least be able to  build decent scenery when they become assistant stage managers or band roadies (BA).

Anyone opting for Theology  or Politics in my new university will have to spend the foundation course working in refugee camps and field hospitals. 

*nobody forgets how to eat, breathe and defecate.

13

Just Chat! / Re: Is there a universal moral standard?

« on: 17/01/2025 23:54:32 »

Except in China, where coal consumption continues to increase, and probably in the USA for the next 4 years where the incoming Diktator is scrapping environmental protection in order to Make America Gay Again, or whatever his slogan might be.

Trains and ships burn oil because it is more efficient than coal (or wind!)  But that decision was made a century ago. Henson's coal-powered Aerial Steam Carriage flew in 1848, a century after the Montgolfier brothers demonstrated their wood-fired balloon.

And today's electric cars burn gas because there isn't enough wind (average of 7 GW in the UK this week) or solar (0.3GW) to keep the lights on. The new nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point will never repay the fossil energy cost of its construction.

14

New Theories / Re: what is temperature?

« on: 17/01/2025 23:47:37 »

These videos show that energy transfer by radiation can be passed through material as well as being absorbed.

Good heavens! Whatever will those crazy scientists discover next? Are air, water and glass transparent? Can x-rays pass through the human body?

Truly it is a privilege to live in the 21st century when, thanks to the miracle of the internet, we can be amazed by what our parents considered to be bloody obvious.

15

Just Chat! / Re: Is there a universal moral standard?

« on: 16/01/2025 11:01:00 »

And the last three are not.

16

New Theories / Re: How do we measure the energy of a photon?

« on: 16/01/2025 10:59:42 »

I sometimes think that "The Matrix" has done as much harm to rational thought as 2000 years of Papal authority.

17

Just Chat! / Re: Is there a universal moral standard?

« on: 15/01/2025 12:16:10 »

Spain (or Hawaii, or Norway, for that matter) is not China. China is opening new coal-fired stations every year. Trump is determined to support the US coal and oil industries.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/302233/china-power-generation-by-source/ is interesting and shows the huge dependence of China on coal.

210GW installed renewable capacity will supply about 5% of China's current demand for electricity. And if they replace ICEs with BEVs, that demand will more than double. Plus, of course, the energy (mostly coal and gas) required to build all those BEVs.

18

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Acclimating to temperature: how do we get used to the temperature?

« on: 15/01/2025 12:06:55 »

....up to a point!

I recall an exchange on another forum where a woman asked how long it would take for her to acclimatise to having moved from Florida to Maine. One reply was "Never. Look in the shop windows - are they selling bikinis or fur coats?"

19

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

« on: 15/01/2025 09:31:54 »

evolution's implicit optimization objective.

Wrong. There is no objective in evolution.

Evolution happens at random, and competition tends towards optimisation in any particular ecological (or economic)  niche, by elimination of the less successful.

20

Just Chat! / Re: Is there a universal moral standard?

« on: 14/01/2025 23:03:55 »

You don't seem to follow news that coal power plants are dying.

Not in China. And from now on, not in the USA either.