[yor_on]

Most of the things proposed will be stuff that promise profits. And I mean profits, and GDP. Think of Norway, presented as one of the greenest country's in the world, selling oil and gas leases. Sweden with its old nuclear plants, that we still seem to want to get rid off, and our preparations for a increased amount of 'natural gas' in form of harbors etc. There are no real infra structures prepared anywhere as long as we still play this game.

[yor_on]

It will definitely hurt your wallet to change this game. Which is why you need a democracy to do it, and to make sure that we will share the costs. It's a real transition you need, not a make believe.

[yor_on]

Then again, not doing anything won't even leave you a wallet.

[yor_on]

This is just one of the aspects of creating a new discipline, as climate science and modeling it. I'm surprised that no one looked it over before, it's sort of embarrassing to me reading about it, and to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which apparently assumed that the melt of a iceberg became a uniform phenomena in ocean currents. I would naively list that under things that can't be true.

https://phys.org/news/2021-02-icebergs-meltand-climate.html

[yor_on]

And from that to the Planck Length. Or if you like Plank units. There is a reason why we call it the smallest length. Or maybe we should call it the smallest 'meaningful' length.

https://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive/archive_2013/today13-11-01_NutshellReadMore.html

what made me react was physics forum informing a guy that it had no importance. That there was no knowledge about what would consist of a smallest length.

[yor_on]

I wrote this ' There is no 'acceleration' to light, only a propagation at a set speed. You have emission and absorption, red and blueshifts, but no acceleration ' but forgot one thing.


Even though light doesn't 'accelerate' it still has a recoil. Now you need to think about it. How can there be a recoil if there is nothing accelerating, creating it?

[yor_on]

It connects to Planck lengths. Well, in my mind.

[yor_on]

It's about a balance. The recoil needs to be there, it balances out the energy lost.

[yor_on]

The universe may be ever so 'small', or 'big', or as I think 'infinite'. It still has a balance.

[yor_on]

That is very different from our original ideas of what a recoil came from.

[yor_on]

So we have something we call a universe. We don't know its magnitude. We do know that there must be a balance to it though, some sort of logic keeping it together.

[yor_on]

And the connection from this to Planck Scales?  " The simple summary of Mead's answer is that it is impossible, using the known laws of quantum mechanics and the known behavior of gravity, to determine a position to a precision smaller than the Planck length."

we have all the reasons for how it works, with our original ideas of it still being wrong. That a recoil need a acceleration and considering Plank scale, that it breaks down, the physics we know of, under it. It doesn't state that there is nothing under it that could be 'smaller'. It just state that it becomes meaningless to define a length to it as you can't probe it.

[yor_on]

If you can't probe it, how do you know it's there? And how does the universe get 'dimensions'? If you think about in terms of some scale, from what can't be probed to that which can. You have to assume that this must be true everywhere in this universe.

[yor_on]

It's very different from our original ideas of a universe.

[yor_on]

" The role of symmetry in fundamental physics " (and conservation laws)

https://www.pnas.org/content/93/25/14256

[yor_on]

so what happens under Planck scale? Does dimensions still exist? That's what we use to define a length. The dimensions we exist in. Here's another take on Plank units. https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module6_Planck.htm

[yor_on]

Then read this  https://licollider.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/physics-below-the-planck-scale/

[yor_on]

Is it even meaningful to define a magnitude to this universe? Think of yourself as something under Plank scale, trying to prove a macroscopic universe. Does it exist?

[yor_on]

I will probably come back to this, but not today. Found this though which I find interesting. Communication and reasons why it breaks down you might call it. And the disconnection that exist today, between politicians and their constituents. https://news.mit.edu/2021/ceasar-mcdowell-public-conversation-0224

[yor_on]

as I started linking Chinese anime. If this one doesn't make you laugh you're more pessimistic than me.

https://animekisa.tv/feng-yu-zhou-episode-1

addbl0ckers on please.