A_A

joined 1 year ago
[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Anthropologically speaking this is the best answer. Our brain needs a certain span of time to establish perceived reality.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

No physical mechanisms predefines future events (or is there one ?).

So, I could state that the future does not exist yet and the past as ceased to exist.

in that statement I have a problem with the definition of existence. Does the definition of existence exist itself ? This is (is it ?) more a problem of terminology than philosophy or physics.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

i made this post (one month ago) :
How to browse ipfs:// ?
Bottom line : it went nowhere.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Humanity is so stupid when it comes to "territory" and we are not the only species that acts like beasts about it.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

I read through these and try to understand them but mostly I don't like those theories, because (in part) more and more there are disparities between them and observations.

So I came up with some ideas myself, one of which I wrote in here :
"New physical cosmological model : is it coherent ?"

But it may take a few years or a few thousand before we have a good cosmology.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

bad bot
reposting this thing four times. bad.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At sea level air is about 1.25 kg/m³, so for one cubic kilometer cloud that is :
1 250 000 tons.

I put your result into table ~~to show a problem at 51 km and above... since density decreases monotically with altitude.~~

mass (tons) altitude (km)
1 250 000 0
364 000 11
88 000 20
860 51
64 71

Clouds can be easily 10 cubic km.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

~~I did make~~ I have made many mistakes, much worse than this one and on many occasions. I would say : don't be so hard on yourself since it's important to forgive ourselves.

I do believe the following correction should be made again to your text though :

Gravity is an [edit: inverse squared] function, so it gets weaker at ~~an exponential~~ a squared rate as you move away from the source.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I believe in this community you have to write the word "rule" in the title, like so :
Banana? Banana rules !
(you can edit the title even after posting, that is, if you want so)

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hey @Jeredin@lemm.ee

This one, @FlowVoid@midwest.social, has the correct answer...

So, don't believe in the crackpot idea that it would be exponential

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

I need some rest now. I will try to be back some other time.

[–] A_A@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe this is what would falsify my proposal… unless maybe that fluke local radiation could start at the maximum energy of the black body curve ? I will try to look into this.

 

The following mechanism, by continually creating matter in the universe, if self coherent, would solve many unsolved physical problems : this cosmology would do without a big bang.

3d interference pattern of gravitational waves would create rogue waves at specific points in SpaceTime that would create matter and the CMB.

Creation of matter and gravity fields, at net zero energy would increase the expansion of the universe.

The perfect black body curve of the CMB would result from the exponential expansion of the universe.

view more: next ›