- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,260
- 52,668
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
And what do they say you're supposed to do?I do not share the beliefs of Zen-buddhists
And with electric fields one can increase or decrease the force of gravity by changing the voltage in any area of space, over what already exists.
Oil Drop Experiment
But back to your question - what is the electromagnetic property of rubber - since it is clear it can be charged relative to its surroundings - as shown by actual experiments - experiments you can perform yourself with a balloon - as long as you have hair. So what is the EM property of hair too?
Here is an interesting video demonstration of that effect.Gravity continues to exert its force without change, but electric fields can act in an alternate direction for any given body; that is the way it should be described. The body in question will act as a result of the total combination of forces.
Can't say as I blame you for not wanting to even look up the answer.I'm not sure, perhaps you should ask a Zen Buddhist!
I'm not sure why you would ask a non-Zen Buddhist a Zen Buddhist questionCan't say as I blame you for not wanting to even look up the answer.
I'd rather not share personal details here, but I can say yes, I am in a scientific field which requires me to use the scientific method on a daily basis.None of my business, but are you a scientist?
If so, what is your area of expertise?
If not, what is your area of expertise?
Because I'm not afraid to do that.I'm not sure why you would ask a non-Zen Buddhist a Zen Buddhist question
I understand.ananda said:I'd rather not share personal details here, but I can say yes, I am in a scientific field which requires me to use the scientific method on a daily basis.
You used the term in a scientific way. I explained I could not find that term used in a scientific way. Now you suggest that I should look up its roots. OK. I did. I googled "Phasma latin roots" and found nothing.
That was a silly goose chase and I fell for it.
Henceforth, I'll ignore your posts.
but they often little training in science. Do you also think it is "ridiculous" that our moon is the product of such a collision? Care to explain what you mean and on what your concepts are based?
One site claims this
"
4.54 billion years ago, our Solar System formed within a cloud of hydrogen not unlike the Orion Nebula, or the Eagle Nebula, with its awesome pillars of creation.
Then, it took some kick, like from the shockwave from a nearby supernova, and this set a region of the cold gas falling inward through its mutual gravity. As it collapsed, the cloud began to spin.
But why?
It’s the conservation of angular momentum.
Think about the individual atoms in the cloud of hydrogen. Each particle has its own momentum as it drifts through the void. As these atoms glom onto one another with gravity, they need to average out their momentum. It might be possible to average out perfectly to zero, but it’s really really unlikely.
Which means, there will be some left over. Like a figure skater pulling in her arms to spin more rapidly, the collapsing proto-Solar System with its averaged out particle momentum began to spin faster and faster."
http://www.universetoday.com/14491/why-does-the-earth-rotate/
Some people apparently take this fable seriously and even call it science. Total 100% fable and story telling of course.
Evidence for what? The clear undeniable evidence is that science cannot prove a same state past or any other state. Nothing else needs 'proving'!And where's your evidence?
(Let me guess, it's going to be different state past, or "you weren't there so you don't know what happened" or something like that.)
Godless baseless thoughts.Indeed, what are these scientists thinking?
..
Nope. The so called simulations start off with assumptions and beliefs that are utterly unproven airbag dreams. Unless time existed and existed as we know it here near earth, there are no light years! That would require a year! That means that no true distances therefore no actual sizes of stars or so called planets or galaxies is known. Appearances can be deceiving!Oh, OK. However, observations made of extra-solar systems and galaxies are consistent with them following the same principles, and simulations using those physical principles give results consistent with what we observe, so it seems reasonable, despite your belief to the contrary, to suppose that they are. If it quacks like a duck...
Yes it does. Jesus is the reality of the universe and he cares.The reality of the universe doesn't really care what you believe.
Because they ignore what 99% of the universe is - plasma - and the forces that work in plasma.
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Marklund_convection
Ignore that electrical forces naturally cause rotation.
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Electric_currents_in_space_plasmas
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Galaxy_formation
Instead they hypothesize some Fairie Dust process because they choose to ignore what 99% of the universe is - and the forces involved - all to keep up their belief in that Fairie Dust.
Ignore those laboratory experiments - one and all.
Even now some mainstream believer in Fairie Dust will protest, even when they have no data to back up anything they claim.
Because they ignore what 99% of the universe is - plasma - and the forces that work in plasma.
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Marklund_convection
Ignore that electrical forces naturally cause rotation.
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Electric_currents_in_space_plasmas
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Galaxy_formation
Instead they hypothesize some Fairie Dust process because they choose to ignore what 99% of the universe is - and the forces involved - all to keep up their belief in that Fairie Dust.
Ignore those laboratory experiments - one and all.
Even now some mainstream believer in Fairie Dust will protest, even when they have no data to back up anything they claim.
Appearances can be deceiving!
"This might look like a distant web of galaxies captured by a powerful telescope, but it’s actually a microscopic image of a newborn nerve cell."
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/154037249727054828/
What's this a picture of?I'll bet if you, or 90% of the "general public" were shown this picture, you and they would not have known with absolute certainty what it was.
I'll bet if this picture were shown to astronomers and neurologists 90% would have given the correct answer.
That's one reason to take the knowledge of scientists over the "knowledge" of the general public. Especially in things like science.
That is just one picture. Yet you claim 10% of astronomers would not even know it was not in deep space?? Hilarious.I'll bet if you, or 90% of the "general public" were shown this picture, you and they would not have known with absolute certainty what it was.
I'll bet if this picture were shown to astronomers and neurologists 90% would have given the correct answer.
That's one reason to take the knowledge of scientists over the "knowledge" of the general public. Especially in things like science.
You don't have any proof of that.Evidence for what? The clear undeniable evidence is that science cannot prove a same state past or any other state. Nothing else needs 'proving'!
Reminds me of Lake Phlogiston.Obviously - Crystal Lake Cubes.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?