What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Interesting archaeological find in Israel.

The archaeologists conducting the salvage exploration before the whole thing is built over suspect that at its peak in the Early Bronze Age, the site at En Esur had as many as 6,000 people, a huge population for the time. It would have dwarfed sites like Jericho and Megiddo, two famous examples of early urbanization in the Southern Levant, archaeologists say.

En Esur was smaller than the cities that arose contemporaneously in Mesopotamia and Egypt in the Early Bronze Age, but was apparently unique in size for its time in the Southern Levant, the region that includes modern Israel, Jordan and southern Syria, the archaeologists explain.

En Esur had apparently grown to be a significantly large settlement already in the Early Chalcolithic period, roughly 7,000 years ago, leading some of its discoverers to suspect that prehistoric people in the Southern Levant began building cities much earlier than previously thought.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

This is the best thing I read all year.

The author's voice reminds me of Dr. Mrs. If this person was in my grad department I would want to be her friend. If she applied for a job I would hire her. If she was single and I was following an alternate timeline I would want to date her. 10/10
 
Last edited:
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Got my flu shot today, and they gave me a My Little Pony band aid.

Vaccines are magic!
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

MissThundercat said:
Got my flu shot today, and they gave me a My Little Pony band aid.

Vaccines are magic!
Click to expand...

Got mine along with a shingles shot last week. I've never experienced any reaction before, but I felt like I was thrown out of a moving car days later. It only lasted a day, but I don't think the reaction, when you get it, happens that quickly, so I must have had a bug of some kind going in.
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

MissThundercat said:
Got my flu shot today, and they gave me a My Little Pony band aid.

Vaccines are magic!
Click to expand...

The Minute Clinic within Target used a new kind of band-aid for me, kind of weird but really cool. It had gauze and adhesive along the edges, and only adhesive in the middle. They placed the band-aid onto my arm first, and then poked the needle through the center. I didn't have to hold a cotton ball over the puncture point, and just took off the band-aid an hour or so later. I really hope those have become the most common bandage for vaccinations now.
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

9 feet tall and 1300 pounds. We should have descended from this f-cker, AMIRITE?
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” -- George Carlin

He has a few things he wants to make clear to a flat earth novice. Firstly, and most importantly -- "none of us believe that we're a flying pancake in space." The community merely believes that space does not exist, the world sits still and the moon landing was faked. The jury is out on gravity -- but as Davidson notes, no one has ever seen it.
Secondly -- no, you won't fall off the edge. While flat earthers' views of the world vary, most believe the planet is a circular disk with Antarctica acting as an ice wall barrier around the edge.
Click to expand...


But flat earthers don't pretend to have all the answers. "People don't really know 100% what (the earth) is, we're just questioning what we're being told it is," Davidson explains.
Click to expand...
Yet, earlier in the article...
For Davidson, a born-again Christian, the most logical explanation for the conspiracy of the millennium goes like this: "Let's just say there is an adversary, there is a devil, there is a Satan. His whole job would be to try to convince the world that God doesn't exist. He's done an incredible job convincing people with the idea that we're just on a random speck in an infinite universe."
Click to expand...

So... he's never seen God, or the Devil. Yet, on faith alone, he is 100% believing of a theory, because he's never witnessed the curvature of the Earth?


"You want to grab [them] by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, 'Look at that, you son of a *****.'" -- Edgar Mitchell
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

aparch said:
"You want to grab [them] by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, 'Look at that, you son of a *****.'" -- Edgar Mitchell
Click to expand...

"The tolerant left, ladies and gentlemen." :D
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

If this pans out, it’s one of the biggest discoveries in physics of my lifetime.
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

dxmnkd316 said:
If this pans out, it’s one of the biggest discoveries in physics of my lifetime.
Click to expand...

These guys have been at it for a long time. I can't evaluate the physics but they have made claims, had problems pointed out, and then retracted at least 3 times before.

So, maybe it's real, or maybe it's bullsh-t.

The Atomki group has produced three previous papers on their beryllium-8 experiments — conference proceedings in 2008, 2012 and 2015. The first paper claimed evidence of a new boson of mass 12 MeV, and the second described an anomaly corresponding to a 13.45-MeV boson. (The third was a preliminary version of the Physical Review Letters paper.) The first two bumps have disappeared in the latest data, collected with an improved experimental setup. “The new claim now is [a] boson with a mass of 16.7 MeV,” Naviliat-Cuncic said. “But they don’t say anything about what went wrong in their previous claims and why we should not take those claims seriously.” One naturally wonders, he said, “Is this value that they quote now going to change in the next four years?”

In their papers and in an email, the Hungarian group expressed gratitude to Fokke de Boer, a Dutch physicist who led their experiments from 2001 to 2005. Naviliat-Cuncic’s sleuthing revealed that de Boer had been reporting anomalies in nuclear transitions and attributing them to missing bosons for decades, seldom replicating his results from one experiment to the next. In his years at Atomki, de Boer detected multiple anomalies in beryllium, carbon and oxygen nuclear transitions — evidence, he claimed, of “a pandemonium of more than 10 candidate bosons.”

When the team upgraded their experimental apparatus, the boson pandemonium disappeared. “He was very unhappy that we could not confirm his previous results with our new spectrometer,” said Attila Krasznahorkay, the current leader of the Atomki group. De Boer’s bosons failed to reappear in the group’s subsequent findings, but as they tweaked their instruments, they continued to strike upon new possibilities. This time, Krasznahorkay said, “We are very much confident about our experimental results.” De Boer, who died in 2010, was not involved in the new work.

When pressed, Krasznahorkay did not fully explain the disappearance of the earlier anomalies. He did not mention the 12-MeV bump and claimed that the 13.45-MeV bump was actually the 16.7-MeV one, incorrectly measured — a possibility that Naviliat-Cuncic considers unlikely when comparing the two bumps. Martin Savage, a cross-disciplinary nuclear and particle physicist at the University of Washington, agrees that the explanation seems unlikely, but said that even if it is true the unstated assumptions in the faulty 13.45-MeV measurement raise concerns. “If a scientific collaboration is making a claim about discovering a new particle, they are obligated to understand and estimate the systematic uncertainties associated with their measurements,” he said. “As far as the 12-MeV signal is concerned, they need to be able to explain exactly where that came from and why it is no longer present in order to convincingly demonstrate that they understand their apparatus.”

What Naviliat-Cuncic finds most astonishing about Krasznahorkay’s account of the past decade is his group’s failure to report any of their results that did not indicate new bosons; instead, they seemed to view these experiments as failures. “Is it not a rather flagrant (and naive) admission of a bias?” he said. Thaler explained, “The gold standard in particle physics is blind analysis, where you first decide what you are going to measure, you perform all cross-checks without looking at the final result, and you report the results regardless of the outcome.” Not doing so “sounds like cherry-picking evidence,” he said, which “can be a way to manufacture false positives.”
Click to expand...
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

:(
 
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

dxmnkd316 said:
:(
Click to expand...

Well, the guy is certainly not a con man. He worked at CERN and he seems to have dozens of papers in respected journals. So there's no reason to be frowny, yet. With all the attention this is getting I'm sure there will be significant work now analyzing and replicating (or not) the results, and also on the theory end talking about the effect on the Standard Model.

There's nothing magic about the four forces. I know of no reason why there could not be an infinitude of irreducible forces. We've only been doing methodical, mathematical work in science for about 500 years (Da Vinci died in 1519; Descartes was born in 1596). Imagine what we'll know in 5,000. Or 50,000. The Standard Model and all our present scientific knowledge will look like Flatland.
 
Last edited:
Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Re: Science: Everything explained by PV=nRT, F=ma=Gm(1)•m(2)/r^2

Masting. Huh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top