Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Kartazion on 09/10/2022 02:37:44
-
Hi.
I would like to publish here a pre-review online paper from the MDPI encyclopedia. Can I?
Thanks.
-
I know there is some kind of rule about not posting something that you've posted elsewhere, but I'm not sure how strictly that should be enforced. I think as long as you post it here as text instead of a link, that might be fine. The other moderators may want to chime in if they thing differently.
-
You have got to be kidding me, I say "dark matter" and they hate me for it and now "dark matter" allows for both matter and anti-matter? And that's not an issue when there is an equal but opposite effect for observed physical phenomena?
p.s., I've been drinking and am glad of it. A cosmological model basis has just been shown utilizing 2 different quanta of matter. What we observe and its anti-behavior which allows for it. That's like saying there is an equal but opposite effect. Who'd be stupid enough to say something like that?
To be a total shїthed, all physical behavior is grounded. If you notice I use the Ukrainian ї, that's like "yi". Russian has no "ї" but is has a "ё" which is similar. Yo instead of yi.
But what is the inverse of F'(x) = quanta? Does dark matter allow for the inverse function of matter?
Math does allow for that but does science allow for what language has shown us?
p.s., the inverse of matter would be F'(x) = quanta. The inverse function of matter would be the negative state of dark matter below absolute 0. Think a sprite above thunderstorm.
https://earthsky.org/earth/definition-what-are-lightning-sprites/
-
You have got to be kidding me, I say "dark matter" and they hate me for it and now "dark matter" allows for both matter and anti-matter?
It's not like anyone has replied to Kartazion yet. If he is claiming somewhere that dark matter is matter and antimatter, then he is wrong.
-
You have got to be kidding me, I say "dark matter" and they hate me for it and now "dark matter" allows for both matter and anti-matter?
It's part of antiuniverse.
And that's not an issue when there is an equal but opposite effect for observed physical phenomena?
The behavior of matter through its fluctuation works asymmetrically. What physicists confirm.
p.s., I've been drinking and am glad of it. A cosmological model basis has just been shown utilizing 2 different quanta of matter. What we observe and its anti-behavior which allows for it. That's like saying there is an equal but opposite effect. Who'd be stupid enough to say something like that?
The asymmetry between matter and antimatter precisely allows this vibration and not an annihilation.
-
It's not like anyone has replied to Kartazion yet. If he is claiming somewhere that dark matter is matter and antimatter, then he is wrong.
What he meant is that through antimatter I demonstrate anti-dark matter. Antimatter and dark matter are two distinct things.
-
What he meant is that through antimatter I demonstrate anti-dark matter.
That isn't necessarily true. Dark matter could be its own antiparticle in the same way that photons are.
-
That isn't necessarily true. Dark matter could be its own antiparticle in the same way that photons are.
Right.
-
I know there is some kind of rule about not posting something that you've posted elsewhere, but I'm not sure how strictly that should be enforced. I think as long as you post it here as text instead of a link, that might be fine. The other moderators may want to chime in if they thing differently.
Strictly speaking it should not have been published elsewhere in any form. Can we discuss in mod forum.
-
It's been a long running speculation topic (many threads) at science forums (.net).
e.g. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127558-the-universe-in-pictures-as-youve-never-seen-it-before/
-
I know there is some kind of rule about not posting something that you've posted elsewhere, but I'm not sure how strictly that should be enforced. I think as long as you post it here as text instead of a link, that might be fine. The other moderators may want to chime in if they thing differently.
Strictly speaking it should not have been published elsewhere in any form. Can we discuss in mod forum.
Welp, looks like I was wrong.
Close it if you have to.
-
Breaking off dialogue like the USA .net forum has done is a declaration of war.
-
Breaking off dialogue like the USA .net forum has done is a declaration of war.
That's just silly.
Is USA.net a country?
Does it have armed forces?
If not, how can it declare war?
-
Is USA.net a country?
This forum is managed by Simon Foundation (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fondation_Simons). So yes this forum is American from US.
Does it have armed forces?
If not, how can it declare war?
The expression war is a polysemic concept. Economic warfare, informational warfare. But yes the weapons are there. You must bow to this theory of physics described above to avoid all of this.
-
You must bow to this theory of physics described above to avoid all of this.
What do you mean by that, exactly?
-
What do you mean by that, exactly?
Avoid war. You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war. Instead of defaulting the theory you avoid the OP. Does that suit you as an answer?
-
Does that suit you as an answer?
No. Are you talking about literal war or what? A war started by who?
-
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war
The most likely cause of war at the minute is that maniac Putin.
My recognition of some crackpot idea here isn't going to influence him, is it?
-
No. Are you talking about literal war or what? A war started by who?
The expression war is a polysemic concept. My main weapon is intelligence even if it is not very developed. And I understood that a long time ago that now according to some other like some nations, refutes the idea of a "democracy" type model which is not. Thereby the mechanical war of weapons is predictable because of the model imposed by Westerners who are only colonists who took people as slaves back then. For example our president in France prefers to do weird party rather than worrying about the people. In our ads to sell you articles they put women to strip you. This is the model that Westerners want to impose on the world as a land of freedom.
My recognition of some crackpot idea here isn't going to influence him, is it?
Influence him? Who? I influence him?
The most likely cause of war at the minute is that maniac Putin.
Bis. The expression war is a polysemic concept. My main weapon is intelligence even if it is not very developed.
-
The expression war is a polysemic concept.
https://xkcd.com/169/
My main weapon is intelligence
Whose?
Influence him? Who? I influence him?
Putin, clearly.
-
Whose?
Simply I have the idea of making a trip to the university of cambridge to be able to expose my theory before the UK is razed by a nuclear bomb. Who knows?
Putin, clearly.
This implies that you consider me quite influential. I know the cause of its action and that I have described above, but to be honest to avoid it would be to recognize that the world is rotten like a worm in the apple and to change its attitude radically.
-
What he meant is that through antimatter I demonstrate anti-dark matter.
That isn't necessarily true. Dark matter could be its own antiparticle in the same way that photons are.
And in math they say the inverse is always true. When it comes to states of matter, what would prevent dark matter from having the inverse potential? When Einstein said that dense matter warps space, is it because of the inverse function of matter? And that gravity when reduced to the universal constant G it shows this?
Basically the field matter occupies is distorted because of the inverse effect which matter is. It's not dark matter, right? We have photons/light. We have matter which is observed. And what is the inverse function? Nothing?
-
And in math they say the inverse is always true.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
When it comes to states of matter, what would prevent dark matter from having the inverse potential?
What is an inverse potential?
When Einstein said that dense matter warps space, is it because of the inverse function of matter?
Again, I don't know what an "inverse function of matter" is.
-
When Einstein said that dense matter warps space, is it because of the inverse function of matter?
You need to be more explicit. Deformation is not anti-matter.
Basically the field matter occupies is distorted because of the inverse effect which matter is. It's not dark matter, right?
For example calculations shows that dark matter makes the galaxy coherent with its supermassive black hole. Dark matter is transparent and is not atoms unlike antimatter which are only antiparticles.
-
When Einstein said that dense matter warps space, is it because of the inverse function of matter?
You need to be more explicit. Deformation is not anti-matter.
Basically the field matter occupies is distorted because of the inverse effect which matter is. It's not dark matter, right?
For example calculations shows that dark matter makes the galaxy coherent with its supermassive black hole. Dark matter is transparent and is not atoms unlike antimatter which are only antiparticles.
And what is the inverse function of a black hole? Light does not escape a black hole yet light can be observed on the other side of a black hole. Please don't tell me that a black hole is just a vortex in space where all "matter" is rotating around it.
-
And what is the inverse function of a black hole? Light does not escape a black hole yet light can be observed on the other side of a black hole. Please don't tell me that a black hole is just a vortex in space where all "matter" is rotating around it.
There's not just space in this vortex. But time is also "distorted". Unbelievable! But in relation to the symmetry with the example of the mirror, you have its exact copy but in inverted value. That it.
-
And what is the inverse function of a black hole? Light does not escape a black hole yet light can be observed on the other side of a black hole. Please don't tell me that a black hole is just a vortex in space where all "matter" is rotating around it.
There's not just space in this vortex. But time is also "distorted". Unbelievable! But in relation to the symmetry with the example of the mirror, you have its exact copy but in inverted value. That it.
Am glad you understand the difference between something "mirrored" and a black hole does not emit light.
I think everyone else is trying to understand negative space.
-
Hawking was able to demonstrate that thermodynamic black bodies such as black holes can emit photons, among other things. The Hawking radiation highlights the emission of radiation by the black hole.
-
PS: Do not confuse the photon emission at the beginning of the singularity where at this point laws of physics ceases to exist.
-
PS: Do not confuse the photon emission at the beginning of the singularity where at this point laws of physics ceases to exist.
I hope you're not trying to confuse a black hole with an event horizon. This is a science forum. Should we be discussing actual science?
-
It's called Black Hole Evaporation which reduces the black hole's energy and mass.
-
It's called Black Hole Evaporation which reduces the black hole's energy and mass.
We're in a forum. Accept their rules. A black hole becomes a neutron star. Energy becomes denser.
Today the event happening doesn't allow for a quasar.
-
A black hole becomes a neutron star.
I don't think that can happen.
-
A black hole becomes a neutron star.
I don't think that can happen.
This a science forum. Faith is not allowed. How can a black hole mirror a physical occurrence? That
does not happen. Black holes absorb all energy while emitting none. A black hole can never mirror energy.
If a mirror doesn't reflect it, it's not reflected.
-
How can a black hole mirror a physical occurrence?
I never said it could.
Black holes absorb all energy while emitting none.
Stephen Hawking would have said otherwise.
A black hole can never mirror energy.
What do you mean by that? Black holes have energy, but I don't recall anyone saying that they reflect it.
-
@JLindgaard says that because he asks for the inverse function of the black hole. I took the example of the mirror as it is used in physics (reflection) at the LHCb antimatter expert.
And what is the inverse function of a black hole?
-
How can a black hole mirror a physical occurrence?
I never said it could.
Black holes absorb all energy while emitting none.
Stephen Hawking would have said otherwise.
A black hole can never mirror energy.
What do you mean by that? Black holes have energy, but I don't recall anyone saying that they reflect it.
Maybe you and Kartazion will find this answer satisfactory.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/07/210712122120.htm
-
Maybe you and Kartazion will find this answer satisfactory.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/07/210712122120.htm
Technically what is being "mirrored" is light. Light has energy as one of its properties, but isn't energy itself.
-
Maybe you and Kartazion will find this answer satisfactory.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/07/210712122120.htm
Technically what is being "mirrored" is light. Light has energy as one of its properties, but isn't energy itself.
This is an easy one. What do you see on the other side of a black hole? Black holes emit no light. What does? A vacuum?
-
What do you see on the other side of a black hole?
Depends on what you mean by "other side". Black holes probably look just about the same from all outside angles (except for the quickly spinning ones, which would be oblate spheroids instead of spheres). If you are asking about inside a black hole, then you probably wouldn't see anything.
Black holes emit no light.
If they are small enough, the Hawking radiation they emit should contain visible light.
-
Supermassive black hole can also emit not visible gamma photons by its jets or streams.
-
What do you see on the other side of a black hole?
Depends on what you mean by "other side". Black holes probably look just about the same from all outside angles (except for the quickly spinning ones, which would be oblate spheroids instead of spheres). If you are asking about inside a black hole, then you probably wouldn't see anything.
Black holes emit no light.
If they are small enough, the Hawking radiation they emit should contain visible light.
Maybe we can start here? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249963778_Distorted_Five-dimensional_Electrically_Charged_Black_Holes
-
This implies that you consider me quite influential.
No. It implies that you are deluded.
You said
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war.
It doesn't matter what I or my knees do. It's not going to affect whether or not there's a war.
But you claim there is some way it will.
-
This implies that you consider me quite influential.
No. It implies that you are deluded.
You said
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war.
It doesn't matter what I or my knees do. It's not going to affect whether or not there's a war.
But you claim there is some way it will.
So if I talk about war between you and me then you think it's Putin's war? I wonder why you made this connection.
-
So if I talk about war between you and me...
If you talk about something that doesn't exist , you look stupid.
-
I wonder why you made this connection.
Which part of this did you not understand?
The most likely cause of war at the minute is that maniac Putin.
-
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war
The most likely cause of war at the minute is that maniac Putin.
My recognition of some crackpot idea here isn't going to influence him, is it?
Do you think I can influence him then?
Why?
___________
PS: I choose b:
declare war (on somebody/something) (https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/declare-war-on-somebody-something)
a) to state officially that you are at war with another country
b) informal to say that something is wrong and that you will do everything you can to stop it
-
Do you think I can influence him then?
What I am saying is that my looking at your twaddle will not influence him and is thus very unlikely to influence the likelihood of war and thus you were wrong to say this.
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war.
-
So if I talk about war between you and me...
If you talk about something that doesn't exist , you look stupid.
-
b) informal to say that something is wrong and that you will do everything you can to stop it
I'm curious about what exactly you plan to do in regards to this. You're not threatening our forum, are you?
-
You're not threatening our forum, are you?
What? Threaten a forum? Already I don't see how. How can we threaten a website? Did you take me for a hacker or what?
-
What? Threaten a forum? Already I don't see how. How can we threaten a website? Did you take me for a hacker or what?
You tell me. You're the one saying you're going to war if your theory isn't accepted.
-
You have to get down on your knees and recognize the theory as such to avoid war
The most likely cause of war at the minute is that maniac Putin.
My recognition of some crackpot idea here isn't going to influence him, is it?
Do you think I can influence him then?
Why?
___________
PS: I choose b:
declare war (on somebody/something) (https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/declare-war-on-somebody-something)
a) to state officially that you are at war with another country
b) informal to say that something is wrong and that you will do everything you can to stop it
Are you talking about Ukraine? If so Putin should've learned from OPEC. OPEC did an oil embargo in 1973/74
to change America's attitude towards OPEC countries. And do you know what? It worked. And at the moment much worse than that is happening. Now it's more about economic warfare and even China knows this.
As for crackpot theories, is 700 watts/m^2 really enough to warm the Earth to 20º C.? When you consider that 1m^2 of surface area also has a depth equal to 1 second of velocity of solar radiation.
And if that's 300,000km/s then the actual energy from the Sun warming the Earth's atmosphere would be about 17/300,000 of the 700 watts/m^2. That's be the total energy in the atmosphere from the Sun per square meter of surface area.
If you consider using a solar panel to absorb energy, it is at one point/surface area that has minimal thickness.
-
As for crackpot theories, is 700 watts/m^2 really enough to warm the Earth to 20º C.?
No.
But nobody said it was.
-
When you consider that 1m^2 of surface area also has a depth equal to 1 second of velocity of solar radiation.
And if that's 300,000km/s then the actual energy from the Sun warming the Earth's atmosphere would be about 17/300,000 of the 700 watts/m^2. That's be the total energy in the atmosphere from the Sun per square meter of surface area.
That doesn't seem to mean anything.
The ground keeps the air warm.
If you consider using a solar panel to absorb energy, it is at one point/surface area that has minimal thickness.
That's also confused.
The thickness of a panel is typically fairly thin but the thickness isn't a particularly important design criterion.
Solar water heaters are about an inch thick. PV cells are about a mm or so.
-
If you consider using a solar panel to absorb energy, it is at one point/surface area that has minimal thickness.
That's also confused.
The thickness of a panel is typically fairly thin but the thickness isn't a particularly important design criterion.
Solar water heaters are about an inch thick. PV cells are about a mm or so.
You missed the point I was making. It shows that you've never studied Boltzmann's Ideal Gas Law or other science
that applies to earth science, geosciences or atmospheric chemistry. 17/300,000 = 0.000056667
Multiply that by 700 and you get 0.0396 w/m^2 for each km. If the ground is radiating heat, the same math applies.
And divide 0.0396 by 1,000 and you get 0.000039667 w/m^3.
And that's if you accept that solar radiation emitted by the Sun or refracted radiation from the ground travels at the speed of light. Isn't math and science fun?
-
It shows that you've never studied Boltzmann's Ideal Gas Law
Nor has anyone else.
The ideal gas law ".was first stated by Benoît Paul Émile Clapeyron in 1834 as a combination of the empirical Boyle's law, Charles's law, Avogadro's law, and Gay-Lussac's law.[1] The ideal gas law is often written in an empirical form:"
It seems you don't understand that a significant fraction of the earth's heat comes from radioactive decay of things like uranium and thorium.
And it seems that you don't understand that Boltzmann's law of radiation is only applicable to black bodies.
And I accept that I miss the point of this
17/300,000
and that's because you never said what the point was.
You never said what those numbers are, did you?
-
Isn't math and science fun?
Yes, you should try it some time.
-
You missed the point I was making. It shows that you've never studied Boltzmann's Ideal Gas Law or other science
that applies to earth science, geosciences or atmospheric chemistry. 17/300,000 = 0.000056667
Multiply that by 700 and you get 0.0396 w/m^2 for each km. If the ground is radiating heat, the same math applies.
And divide 0.0396 by 1,000 and you get 0.000039667 w/m^3.
And that's if you accept that solar radiation emitted by the Sun or refracted radiation from the ground travels at the speed of light. Isn't math and science fun?
Please open your own topic. Thanks.
-
Are you talking about Ukraine?
Of course not. Did you read the OP? It was the moderators and the experts who made the connection with the word war that I used.
-
You're the one saying you're going to war if your theory isn't accepted.
Absolutely. It will start with a flurry of flyers raining down on universities with the message of Kartazion and his theory written on it.
-
You're the one saying you're going to war if your theory isn't accepted.
Absolutely. It will start with a flurry of flyers raining down on universities with the message of Kartazion and his theory written on it.
So... petty vandalism, rather than a war.
There is a difference.
-
Vandalism? With flyers? I am neither a vandal nor a villain. I assure you. But the fight I'm going to lead will be tough for my opponents.
-
Vandalism? With flyers? I am neither a vandal nor a villain. I assure you. But the fight I'm going to lead will be tough for my opponents.
Littering is vandalism.
-
Littering is vandalism.
In crypto currency, of which Kartazion is a part, it is legal to make a massive distribution. This is called an airdrop. When I talk about rain it will not fall from the sky but will be delivered by hand with the mandatory mention "do not throw on the public road".
-
I will soon have a university amphitheater and rent private ones to be able to expose the theory with a youtube video of the speatch. The questions that I am asked in everyday life are ultimately nothing to do with the rhetoric of the forums. Knowing that the theory that I expose poses a problem for the guardians that you are, will come to you whether you like it or not. It is with kindness that I ask you to recognize the coherence of this theory that I have been expounding for two or three years; Later you will understand why you will kneel before these facts because:
The constitution of the physical laws as well as the result of this chaos of the universe until us suggests that it was premeditated.
This is not madness but simply because the functioning of our universe is obligatorily governed by a force upstream which is only our creator. This is why the discredit that we could touch is there.
-
Finally and now yes you can make the link between the nations having god as example and who want the stop of the Western model and by the war and me who thinks that our creator is above all things. The West having forgotten where it comes from with the separation from the church and state, laughs, and absolutely does not take seriously the evidence that is exposed to it by many initiated personalities.
-
You missed the point I was making. It shows that you've never studied Boltzmann's Ideal Gas Law or other science
that applies to earth science, geosciences or atmospheric chemistry. 17/300,000 = 0.000056667
Multiply that by 700 and you get 0.0396 w/m^2 for each km. If the ground is radiating heat, the same math applies.
And divide 0.0396 by 1,000 and you get 0.000039667 w/m^3.
And that's if you accept that solar radiation emitted by the Sun or refracted radiation from the ground travels at the speed of light. Isn't math and science fun?
Please open your own topic. Thanks.
I mistakenly thought the topic of the thread was quantum mechanics and cosmology relations.
And people are offended by saying perpetual motion is actually conservation of momentum?
When I opened my own topic they shut me down for not trying to justify a war.
-
the theory that I expose poses a problem for the guardians that you are
I don't see why it would.
-
And people are offended by saying perpetual motion is actually conservation of momentum?
Perpetual motion indeed uses the conservation of energy. But the displacement of the particle by this conservation of energy and this in the VACUUM is not perpetual insofar as this conservation must belong to the same system having an inversion of energy (Kinetic Potential energy) other than a simple inertia. The mere fact of having a balance between two potentials constitutes a perpetual machine. No gain or production of energy is possible. Never.
_____________
The fight between the masons who have shaped our world and the rest of the impoverished and deceived people has already been a reality since the dawn of time. The kings should be worried whatever when you have God save the Queen/King as national anthem, we are already aware of what I am saying, where just as much to say at the time.
I don't see why it would.
Because of the proof or evidence of a creator for our universe. Besides, you have always refuted the idea of a creator to be able to previgilate the chance.
-
Besides, you have always refuted the idea of a creator to be able to previgilate the hazzard.
I know English isn't your first language, so I have to admit I don't know what you mean by that sentence. Can you quote me on where I have refuted what you claim I have?
-
I know English isn't your first language, so I have to admit I don't know what you mean by that sentence.
? The sentence is well written.
Besides, you have always refuted the idea of a creator to be able to previgilate the chance.
Can you quote me on where I have refuted what you claim I have?
Here. You made me understand it with all. https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=84146.20
-
? The sentence is well written.
I don't know what "previgilate" means (and Google won't tell me either).
Here. https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=84146.20
So now I'm even more confused about what you are talking about.
-
Oups... Yes ....
privileged
Sorry. Thanks.
-
Okay, so your sentence is, "Besides, you have always refuted the idea of a creator to be able to privilege the chance." I still don't understand. What does it mean to "privilege a chance"?
-
Special advantage given to chance rather than our God.
-
Special advantage given to chance rather than our God.
Is this about evolution or what?
-
Yep.
-
Yep.
So what does your theory have to do with evolution?
-
Evolution as we know it is our free will. The creation of the universe is made by a creator. To answer your question and what I'm trying to get across to you is that you would rather say that the universe works randomly rather than it was premeditated in its constitution.
-
what I'm trying to get across to you is that you would rather say that the universe works randomly rather than it was premeditated in its constitution.
I never said any such thing. The fact that I accept the reality of evolution does not mean that I think everything is random.
-
Ok.
-
Besides, you have always refuted the idea of a creator to be able to previgilate the hazzard.
I know English isn't your first language, so I have to admit I don't know what you mean by that sentence. Can you quote me on where I have refuted what you claim I have?
May the odds ever be in your favor. That is a quote from The Hunger Games.
And I will say conservation of 1/2mv^2 is possible. Science does allow for it.
Я могу играть? Я знаю склоды! Хадть, не теперь. That's all I ever hear.
russenorsk also used to be a language. That was back in the 19th century.
-
When I talk about rain it will not fall from the sky
So... rain that isn't rain.
Do you think that writing things like that is helpful?
-
is with kindness that I ask you to recognize the coherence of this theory that I have been expounding for two or three years; Later you will understand why you will kneel before these facts because:
Quote from: Kartazion on 09/10/2022 03:37:59
The constitution of the physical laws as well as the result of this chaos of the universe until us suggests that it was premeditated.
This is not madness but simply because the functioning of our universe is obligatorily governed by a force upstream which is only our creator. This is why the discredit that we could touch is there.
So, ...
You say we have to kneel because you are binging a message from God.
Well, God doesn't exist.
And you seem not to understand that this is a science forum.
If you have an idea which is based on the existence of God, then, for us to believe the theory, you have to prove the existence of God.
I predict that if you spam the universities, you will get ignored or laughed at.
And then we will see who "wins" what you think of as a war.
-
This forum is managed by Simon Foundation (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fondation_Simons). So yes this forum is American from US.
This is false information.
This forum is managed in the UK as part of the University of Cambridge educational outreach programme supporting the radio shows and podcasts.
When you joined this forum you agreed not to publish any false information, please take a short break to consider your position and responses on this forum.
Even though posting material which has been posted or published elsewhere is against the forum rules we gave you an opportunity to defend your paper. You have not taken up this opportunity, but have entered into a confusing tirade on war, god and other irrelevancies and we can only assume that your intention is only to advertise your paper. This thread is therefore locked, do not attempt to reopen it elsewhere.