Re: Seattle: policija napustila centar grada, proglašena autonomna narodna republika, Trump prijeti intervencijom

by Guest 16/6/2020, 14:54

Legendovich wrote:
michaellcmacha wrote:
Ringo10 wrote:
michaellcmacha wrote:
tre wrote:
e vidiš sad kako ti nama ispadaš smješan sa svojim glupostima
ma ko ga jebe.... nek crkne u rudniku... i nek mu se kinez nalomi kičme...
Tupane, vidiš, ja mogu u rudniku raditi ali samo kao inženjer

Kineza ima naravno i prilično su školovani ... ali ne lome kičme osim u tvojoj blesavoj glavurdi
Budu čekaj dok vas okupiraju... Spavača su nakalemili sasvim doviljno... Ali neka, da i ti sroljo osjetiš što je prava komunistička palija...

BUUUUUUU...Kinezi ce okupirati cijeli svijet...bUUUUUUUU....

Mamlaze, ne ''budu'' nego već jesu.

Pogle si kaj kupuješ? 90% Made in PRC.

Ja kad najdem Made in Vietnam skačem od sreće.

by crvenkasti 16/6/2020, 15:40

Što ovaj Šejker uopće pokušava?
Dokazati da razumije kvantnu fiziku i teoriju relativnosti?
I zašto?

I ja smo glup.
Iznervirao me kad je napisao da Isak Asimov ne zna fiziku. Trebao sam zašutjeti još onda kad je napisao da gravitacija i masa nemaju veze jedno s drugim... Gluplji sam od njega.

by **Hektorović** 16/6/2020, 16:14

Raz Simone hands out AR-15´s to people that look like minors in CHAZ

by Guest 16/6/2020, 16:21

crvenkasti wrote:
Iznervirao me kad je napisao da Isak Asimov ne zna fiziku. Trebao sam zašutjeti još onda kad je napisao da gravitacija i masa nemaju veze jedno s drugim... Gluplji sam od njega.

Definitivno.

Mada, ne samo od mene, ali nebitno.
Dalje, ja nisam rekao da Asimov ne zna fiziku. Jebo te Asimov, usput rečeno. On nije nikakav znanstvenik a kamoli znanstveni autoritet nego samo običan, makar ekstremno uspješan i jako dobar, književnik.
Ja sam samo rekao da ju ja bolje znam od njega, što je i logično, jer su njegova znanja očito zastarjela, za razliku od mojih.
Gravitacija i masa naravno imajuu itekakve veze jedno s drugim, po i dalje aktualnom Newtonovom modelu, ali gravitacija ne ovisi samo o masi tijela nego i njegovom tlaku.
To je otkriće koje izlazi iz Einsteinove OTR i kojim je nadopunio Newtonovo razumjevanje prirode gravitacije.

by Guest 16/6/2020, 16:34

I ne pokušavam ja ništa dokazati.

Ja sam i dokazao to što sam htio dokazati.

by Guest 16/6/2020, 19:12

Does the Higgs-boson exist?

What do scientists mean when they say that something exists?

Every time I give a public lecture, someone will come and inform me that black holes don’t exist, or quarks don’t exist, or time doesn’t exist.
Last time someone asked me “Do you really believe that gravitational waves exist?”
So, do I believe that gravitational waves exist? Let me ask you in return: Why do you care what I believe? What does it matter for anything?
Look, I am a scientist. Scientists don’t deal with beliefs. They deal with data and hypotheses. Science is about knowledge and facts, not about beliefs.

And what I know is that Einstein’s theory of general relativity is a mathematical framework from which we can derive predictions that are in excellent agreement with observation.

We have given names to the mathematical structures in this theory. One of them is called gravitational waves, another one is called black holes.
These are the mathematical structures from which we can calculate the observational consequences that have now been measured by the LIGO and VIRGO gravitational wave interferometers.

When we say that these experiments measured “gravitational waves emitted in a black hole merger”, we really mean that specific equations led to correct predictions.

It is a similar story for the Higgs-boson and for quarks. The Higgs-boson and quarks are names that we have given to mathematical structures.
In this case the structures are part of what is called the standard model of particle physics.
We use this mathematics to make predictions.

The predictions agree with measurements.

That is what we mean when we say “quarks exist”: We mean that the predictions obtained with the hypothesis agrees with observations.

Same story for time. In General Relativity, time is a coordinate, much like space. It is part of the mathematical framework. We use it to make predictions. The predictions agree with observations. And that’s that.

Now, you may complain that this is not what you mean by “existence”. You may insist that you want to know whether it is “real” or “true”. I do not know what it means for something to be “real” or “true.” You will have to consult a philosopher on that. They will offer you a variety of options, that you may or may not find plausible.

A lot of scientists, for example, subscribe knowingly or unknowingly to a philosophy called “realism” which means that they believe a successful theory is not merely a tool to obtain predictions, but that its elements have an additional property that you can call “true” or “real”. I am loosely speaking here, because there several variants of realism. But they have in common that the elements of the theory are more than just tools.

And this is all well and fine, but realism is a philosophy. It’s a belief system, and science does not tell you whether it is correct.

So here is the thing.
If you want to claim that the Higgs-boson does not exist, you have to demonstrate that the theory which contains the mathematical structure called “Higgs-boson” does not fit the data.
Whether or not Higgs-bosons ever arrive in a detector is totally irrelevant.

Here is a homework assignment: Do you think that I exist? And what do you even mean by that?

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/05/does-higgs-boson-exist.html

by marcellus 16/6/2020, 22:40

Stanojko wrote:Auuuu... pa vi ste sve ludji ovde... :)

je, čak nam vi više ne trebate...

by immortal 16/6/2020, 22:46

narodna republika
da su to uveli američki crvenokožci prihvvatljivo i odobravajuće
pošto su u pitanju kojekakva strana doseljena govna
Trump bi zaista trebao reagirati fašistički!

by **Hektorović** 17/6/2020, 19:36

by Counter-Strike 18/6/2020, 00:21

by Counter-Strike 18/6/2020, 00:21

by Leviathan2 18/6/2020, 03:05

jebo vas tucker da vas jebo
u sietlu su napravili hipie komunu bez policije,
i nema nasilja
prosipate hrpu budalestina s meinstrim medija ko da su sveto pismo

by Leviathan2 18/6/2020, 03:06

a fox njuz je isto govno ko i cnn
propagandno smece samo za drugu stranu u politickom prepucavanju

by Guest 18/6/2020, 18:11

crvenkasti wrote:
AssadNaPodmornici wrote:
crvenkasti wrote:
Speare Shaker wrote:Tamna energija su kvantne fluktuacije koje se prirodno događaju u vakuumu.

Infantilnim blebetavi ignorantu. Kako ti nije neugodno toliko blebetati o nečemu o čemu nemaš blage veze? Srami se.

NITKO NE ZNA ŠTO JE TAMNA ENERGIJA. Nitko ju nikad nije vidio, ni opazio, a kamo li objasnio.

Izmislili su je zato što ne znaju objasniti zašto se u svemiru događa to što se događa.
Iz istog razloga je izmišljen i tamna tvar, iako se nju indirektno vide, tipa efekt gravitacijske leće, ili rotacije galaktike, nisu mogu objasniti zašto se galaksije pri tim brzinama ne raspadnu, pa eto postoji nevidljiva materija. Koja je zapravo velika većina materije. A nije uhvaćena niti jedna čestica.
Aj ti budi pametan.
Jedan je znanstvenik rekao da je to "gravity which is leaking from other dimensions

Točno.
Ne znaju objasniti zašto se zvijezde galaksije ne razlete po svemiru jer masa zvijezda nije dovoljna da ih drži na okupu.

Onda izmisle "tamnu tvar". Mogli su izmisliti i starca s bradom koji maše žezlom i raspoređuje zvijezde naokolo, isti kurac,

Are dark energy and dark matter scientific?

I have noticed that each time I talk or write about dark energy or dark matter, I get a lot of comments from people saying, oh that stuff doesn’t exist, you can’t just invent something invisible each time there’s an inconvenient measurement. Physicists have totally lost it. This is such a common misunderstanding that.

I thought I will dedicate a video to sorting this out.
Dark energy and dark matter are entirely normal, and perfectly scientific hypotheses.

They may turn out to be wrong, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to consider them in the first place.

Before I say anything else, here is a brief reminder what dark energy and dark matter are.
Dark energy is what speeds up the expansion of the universe; it does not behave like normal energy.
Dark matter has a gravitational pull like normal matter, but you can’t see it. Dark energy and dark matter are two different things. They may be related, but currently we have no good reason to think that they are related.

Why have physicists come up with this dark stuff?
Well, we have two theories to describe the behavior of matter.
The one is the standard model of particle physics, which describes the elementary particles and the forces between them, except gravity.
The other is Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which describes the gravitational force that is generated by all types of matter and energy.
The problem is, if you use Einstein’s theory for the matter that is in the standard model only, this does not describe what we see.
The predictions you get from combining those two theories do not fit to the observations.

It’s not only one prediction that does not fit to observations, it’s many different ones.
For dark matter it’s that galaxies rotate too fast, galaxies in clusters move too fast, gravitational lenses bend light too strongly, and neither the cosmic microwave background nor galactic filaments would look like we observe them without dark matter. I explained this in detail in an earlier video.

For dark energy the shooting gun signature is that the expansion of the universe is getting faster, which you can find out by observing how fast supernova in other galaxies speed away from us.
The evidence for dark energy is not quite as solid as for dark matter. I explained this too in an earlier video.

So, what’s the scientist to do when they are faced with such a discrepancy between theory and observation?
They look for new regularities in the observation and try to find a simple way to explain them.
And that’s what dark energy and dark matter are. They are extremely simple terms to add to Einstein’s theory, that explain observed regularities, and make the theory agrees with the data again.

This is easy to see when it comes to dark energy because the presently accepted version of dark energy is just a constant, the so-called cosmological constant.
This cosmological constant is just a constant of nature and it’s a free parameter in General Relativity.
Indeed, it was introduced already by Einstein himself. And what explanation for an observation could possibly be simpler than a constant of nature?

For dark matter it’s not quite as simple as that.
I frequently hear the criticism that dark matter explains nothing because it can be distributed in arbitrary amounts wherever needed, and therefore can fit any observation.
But that’s just wrong. It’s wrong for two reasons.

First, the word “matter” in “dark matter” doesn’t just vaguely mean “stuff”. It’s a technical term that means “stuff with a very specific behavior”.
Dark matter behaves like normal matter, except that, for all we currently know, it doesn’t have internal pressure.
You cannot explain any arbitrary observation by attributing it to matter. It just happens to be the case that the observations we do have can be explained this way. That’s a non-trivial fact.

Let me emphasize that dark matter in cosmology is a kind of fluid. It does not have any substructure. Particle physicists, needless to say, like the idea that dark matter is made of a particle. This may or may not be case. We currently do not have any observation that tells us dark matter must have a microscopic substructure.

The other reason why it’s wrong to say that dark matter can fit anything is that you cannot distribute it as you wish.
Dark matter starts with a random distribution in the early universe. As the universe expands, and matter in it cools, dark matter starts to clump and it forms structures. Normal matter then collects in the gravitational potentials generated by the dark matter.
So, you do not get to distribute matter as you wish. It has to fit with the dynamical evolution of the universe.

This is why dark matter and dark energy are good scientific explanations. They are simple and yet explain a lot of data.

Now, to be clear, this is the standard story. If you look into the details it is, as usual, more complicated. That’s because the galactic structures that form with dark matter actually do not fit the data all that well, and they do not explain some regularities that astronomers have observed.
So, there are good reasons for being skeptical that dark matter is ultimately the right story, but it isn’t as simple as just saying “it’s unscientific”.

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2020/03/are-dark-energy-and-dark-matter.html

by n_razbojnik 18/6/2020, 18:50

Leviathan2 wrote:jebo vas tucker da vas jebo
u sietlu su napravili hipie komunu bez policije,
i nema nasilja
prosipate hrpu budalestina s meinstrim medija ko da su sveto pismo

by Guest 19/6/2020, 17:59

Is faster-than-light travel possible?

Einstein said that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. You have probably heard something like that.
But is this really correct? This is what we will talk about today.

To get the obvious out of the way, no one currently knows how to travel faster than light, so in this sense it’s not possible.
But you already knew that and it’s not what I want to talk about.
Instead, I want to talk about whether it is possible in principle.
Like, is there anything actually preventing us from ever developing a technology for faster than light travel?

To find out let us first have a look at what Einstein really said.
Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity contains a speed that all observers will measure to be the same.
One can show that this is the speed of massless particles.
And since the particles of light are, for all we currently know, massless, we usually identify this invariant speed with the speed of light.
But if it turned out one day that the particles of light have a small, nonzero mass, then we would still have this invariant speed in Einstein’s theory, it just would not be the speed of light any more.

Next, Einstein also showed that if you have any particle which moves slower than the speed of light, then you cannot accelerate it to faster than the speed of light.
You cannot do that because it would take an infinite amount of energy. And this is why you often hear that the speed of light is an upper limit.

However, there is nothing in Einstein’s theory that forbids a particle to move faster than light.
You just don’t know how to accelerate anything to such a speed.
So really Einstein did not rule out faster than light motion, he just said, no idea how to get there.
However, there is a problem with particles that go faster than light, which is that for some observers they look like they go backwards in time. Really, that’s what the mathematics says.

And that, so the argument goes, is a big problem because once you can travel back in time, you can create causal paradoxes, the so-called “grandfather paradoxes”.
The idea is, that you could go back in time, kill your own grandfather – accidentally, we hope – so that you would never be born and could not have travelled back in time to kill him, which does not make any sense whatsoever.
So, faster than light travel is a problem because it can lead to causal inconsistencies.
At least that’s what most physicists will tell you or maybe have already told you. I will now explain why this is complete nonsense.

It’s not even hard to see what’s wrong with this argument. Imagine you have a particle that goes right to left backwards in time, what would it look like?
It would look like a particle going left to right forward in time. These two descriptions are mathematically just entirely identical.
A particle does not know which direction of time is forward.

*Our observation that forward in time is different than backward in time comes from entropy increase.
It arises from the behavior of large numbers of particles together. If you have many particles together, you can still in principle reverse any particular process in time, but the reversed process will usually be extremely unlikely.
Take the example of mixing dough. It’s very easy to get it mixed up and very difficult to unmix, though that is in principle possible.

In any case, you probably don’t need convincing that we do have an arrow of time and that arrow of time points towards more wrinkles. One direction is forward, the other one is not. That’s pretty obvious.
Now the reason for the grandfather paradox is not faster than light travel, but it’s that these stories screw up the direction of the arrow of time. You are going back in time, yet you are getting older.

*That is the inconsistency. But as long as you have a consistent arrow of time, there is nothing physically wrong with faster-than-light travel.

So, really, the argument from causal paradoxes is rubbish, they are easy to prevent, you just have to demand a consistent arrow of time.
But there is another problem with faster-than-light travel and that comes from quantum mechanics.
If you take into account quantum mechanics, then a particle that travels faster than light will destroy the universe, basically, which would be unfortunate. Also, it should already have happened, so the existence of faster-than-light particles seems to not agree with what we observe.

The reason is that particles which move faster than light can have negative energy.
And in quantum mechanics you can create pairs of new particles provided you conserve the total energy.
Now, if you have particles with negative energy, you can pair them with particles of positive energy, and then you can create arbitrarily many of these pairs from nothing.
Physicists then say that the vacuum is unstable. Btw, since it is a common confusion, let me mention that anti-particles do NOT have negative energy. But faster than light particles can have negative energy.

This is clearly something to worry about. However, the conclusion depends on how seriously you take quantum theory.
Personally I think quantum theory is not itself fundamental, but it is only an approximation to a better theory that has not yet been developed.
The best evidence for this is the measurement problem which I talked about in an earlier video. So I think that this supposed problem with the vacuum instability comes from taking quantum mechanics too seriously.

Also, you can circumvent the problem with the negative energies if you travel faster than light by using wormholes because in this case you can use entirely normal particles.
Wormholes are basically shortcuts in space.
Instead of taking the long way from here to Andromeda, you could hop into one end of a wormhole and just reappear at the other end.
Unfortunately, there are good reasons to think that wormholes don’t exist which I talked about in an earlier video.

In summary, there is no reason in principle why faster than light travel or faster than light communication is impossible. Maybe we just have not figured out how to do it.

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2020/05/is-faster-than-light-travel-possible.html

by Sora 19/6/2020, 18:05

mortal wrote:narodna republika
da su to uveli američki crvenokožci prihvvatljivo i odobravajuće
pošto su u pitanju kojekakva strana doseljena govna
Trump bi zaista trebao reagirati fašistički!

bogte mazo
čak niti navodnike nisi stavila ..?
:fuck

eto, ista ta se poziva na savjest vjernika itd
i naravno protivi se pobačaju
ali je za fašizam ..

by omni 19/6/2020, 18:33

n_razbojnik wrote:
Leviathan2 wrote:jebo vas tucker da vas jebo
u sietlu su napravili hipie komunu bez policije,
i nema nasilja
prosipate hrpu budalestina s meinstrim medija ko da su sveto pismo

Obecano drustvo, skupi se par i svakom sonjavom liberalu uzmu telefon i natrljaju njusku bez da se nekakva tamo policija mijesa. Raj na zemlji. Ovaj glupan da se spremio kako treba za republiku povukao bi Uzi i napravio klanicu, postao general sa 4 zvjezdice u republickome klanu pa zapalio cigaretu i otisao na rucak, besplatan naravno.

by omni 19/6/2020, 19:00

Sve mi se vise svidjaju, da nisu otpad i niskorist bili bi pravi fasisti, ovako su samo tupi lijevi liberali, losi pokusaj kopiranja fasizma, ali nema veze, bar nesto.

by Counter-Strike 19/6/2020, 23:57

ovo je veliki farmaceutski dogadjaj

by Sponsored content