petemcewan

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-22/u-s-commerce-department-to-put-256-tariff-on-chinese-steel

Waldo, I'll leave Mr Bloke to tell you about positive sign and negative sign numbers. Imaginary numbers are not imaginary. They just do not belong with the group of numbers that we name "the real number set." The video link was great.

SgtKate, I hazard a guess that SJC is altogether used to being described as a "gardener" and "amateur scientist". I think it is SJC for real-so that is cool. It will be interesting if he bothers to come back onto the Forum.

SJC, Thanks for the reply. It satisfies me that you are SJC. Thanks for posting on the Sheffield Forum. I shall track down that paper of yours. If you are familiar with the work of Thomas Kuhn-The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions. You will appreciate that you and your colleagues are in it "for the long run". ---------- Post added 29-03-2016 at 13:20 ---------- Mr Bloke, That must have been Sainsburys in Queensland. My god, you go a long way to do your shopping. By the way, were those chicken thighs (Schroedinger's thighs ) dead and alive at the same time ? LOL. Your post was a good laugh. Mr PeteMorris. I went to a lecture given by a young astro at Sheffield University (about a year ago). He said, that if alien life -similar in kind to us- wanted to contact us. They would probably send a probe of some kind; rather than traveling to earth. He explained that the vast distances involved, made it a much more practical choice , than arriving on earth in a similar fashion to the alien in, The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Mr P Morris. I've tried to introduce a little bit of humour into this thread,"Spike Milligan" and "Pussycats". Just so you know. I'm an average mathematician , but with good skills in specialised electrical engineering maths. Now some of electrical engineering maths looks like rocket science. I'm not pretending to be clever, clever, but there are some parts of SJC's work that I can follow-with a lot of head scratching and hard work. A previous poster said that our (astro's) maths may be limited when it comes to explaining and supporting real phenomena . That may well be true. But maths is supposed to be the "queen" of the sciences. Maths is supposed to underpin ,and make more certain the conclusions we draw from theorising, and experimenting. For instance, Clerk Maxwell put a lot of the maths to much of the early experimenting with electricity. After he'd done that, electrical science was taken seriously. Any scientific study must have its supporting maths ,or it won't -and never will- be taken seriously. A lot of popular sciences programmes on telly,avoid any maths like the plague. The reason being ,is that the programme makers consider their target audience to be dumb.

PeteMorris. It's not one -upmanship on my behalf. I find it interesting. Nobody is forced to read anything of this thread. Let me reassure you. I don't need a Forum to bolster up my self worth or massage my ego . Of course PM, some threads are bound only to stimulate the interest of a few. It appears that the Sheffield Forum has attracted the attention of a real astrophysicist . I'm pleased for the forum about that. How S.J Crothers became aware of us , completely baffles me. And , yes, the weather is foul-for the time being .

I can reassure everybody. It is not me. I raised it because some bright spark would be bound to suggest it. I don't know enough maths to pass myself off as SJC. I'm absolutely gobsmacked by the fact that SJC even knows about the Sheffield Forum. In addition. I wouldn't dream of passing myself off as someone else, just to make a point on a Forum. I have asked SJC to authenticate himself- just in case it's some wag is having a laugh. I've asked him one final question (that I do understand). I'm interested in how he responds.

SJC, Thank you for replying so quickly. I do hope people do not think it is me pretending to be you. Just one more thing. The term ' r ' in the Schwarzschild solution does not directly determine any distance at all. It's not a distance in spacetime at all.. It's the inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature of any spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the spacetime manifold. That's what you say-is it not ?

You could have just said,"Don't be preposterous" , and left it at that.

Ricky, I share your concerns viz-a-viz about the consequences of austerity . But I do think that SJC will not be asking the government for any money. "Understanding The Universe " is the name of this tread ,and no the name of a project being undertaken by SJC. S.J. Crothers. It's a bit of a surprise to find you following a thread on the Sheffield Forum. As a precaution-in these days of identity theft- I'd like you to authenticate yourself. Please write something very brief on Ric= 0. If you do write, I think I'll be able to se that it is S. J. C and not Billy Blogs from down the Sheath public house. The following is not about academic honesty or dishonesty. It's about how science is conducted and how hypotheses come and go. There are always competing paradigms in science that’s what makes it intereting.Karl Popper came up with an interesting notion called the Black Swan Principle.It went something like this . It doesn’t matter how many white swans you count to support your hypothesis ,that all swans are white. It only takes one black one to come along and you have to rethink your hypothesis. Consequently , it is possible in science to build a whole edifice of evidence supporting a theory-but at some time in the future ,a significant number of contradictions pop up and it all has to be rethought. The orthodoxy will fight to the bitter end to maintain it’s position. As Thomas Kuhn points out in his work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, competing paradigms can run besides each other for quite awhile-eventually the old paradigm is replaced. I'd like to be directed to where I can find your latest paper.

Mr Bloke, I'm glad you had a restful night. As far as I'm aware, none of us on this thread are astrophysicists .It's just a discussion topic-with a bit of maths thrown in. I'm curious that no one has taken up the "multiverse". That's a grand topic for flights of fancy. Schrodinger's pussy cat ? It is a thought experiment. No actual pussy cat was : injured , mistreated, killed and brought back to life again, split in half, kept in a box for too long,poked with sticks,made to be in two places at once, or subjected to any kind of cruelty whatsoever. (Got to have a laugh ).

I do agree with you that is disconcerting when a person starts off as you describe. Whatever one thinks of the EU- Crothers is no lightweight . What disturbs me about his maths, is that he points to errors in the equations and disassembles the whole construct. I think you will appreciate the following. It's like calculating the resistance of a length of cable using Rho x length in metres divided by csa in square metres; and being told that the resistivity constant isn't what it is suppose to be. Maths is maths, there's no two ways about it. Walter Thornhill (I think he's called that) is another bod on the same trail as Crothers. Once a group of mavericks ,start taking the maths apart that support a branch of accepted science -it causes me to want to know why. I've no idea what he has to say on gravitational waves. But it is worth following what the rest of the community of astro's have to say about the discovery. I've no doubt it's true. But, I'm aware that some announcements are made a little prematurely and then have to be modified or withdrawn. I'm going to watch that space (no pun intended) for a couple of years.

I appreciate that it is difficult to post math symbols when your device doesn't facilitate it. I just need to get clear from you about the symbols and quantities you've used. So E is the Electric field strength and E = V/d (V is volts and d is distance in metre). Sometime E is used to denote electromotive force the unit of which is the volt). Q is the quantity of electricity the unit being columbs . The 200 Giga joules (10^9) . Is that just a "ball park" figure. Where does it come from ? One more clarification. The energy stored in a capacitor is W = 1/2CV^2. In the very first equation "1/2" where does it come from ? (not how it is derived in electrostatics, but how it's got in your equation ). I do see that W =1/2QV=1/2CV^2. Am I seeing seeing 1/2QV^2, and reading it as 1/2CV^2 . It also appears in the calculation that we have Joules of energy divided by Farads of capacitance and not, Joules divided by coulombs. The neutrino anomaly wobbles the EU just a little more effectively than the potential gradients of asteroids. I follow your arithmetic and transposition of formula . I see how you get from the first equations by transposition to the second. Stephen . J Crothers is the bod who takes the maths of Schwarzschild solution to pieces. . I'll take a look at Sag A once more. ---------- Post added 23-03-2016 at 18:25 ---------- For PeteMoris. Remember I'm not an advocate of EU. But I'm sorry, but there's a bit more to the EU view than asteroids and neutrinos. If you have the inclination and the time. Take a look at the work by Stephen J. Crothers. Especially the video of his lecturer on the maths of black holes.

Here are two experiments. I know they are not much. Asteroid discharge experiment. How to trigger a Tunguska event. The second one seems a bit drastic ! I'll search for a few more. If my reading is correct. I think Quasars and Red shift knock the EU somewhat.

I did apologise. What do you want me to do. Just let you take the mick . ( "Water Wheels". When you know full well it was about turbines ). What with Google ,everybody is an expert. You've got an apology on here twice.

I apologise for being rude in my previous post. The Nucleus. My current understanding is that the nucleus is bound together by the strong nuclear force , which is responsibly for binding together the nucleus. The weak nuclear force is responsible for radioactive decay. The strong nuclear force is about 100 times stronger than the electromagnetic force. (The four forces are :electromagnetic , gravitational , and two nuclear forces ). The strong force is said to be "short ranged" and has a repulsive core. The repulsive element is called "asymptotic freedom".( Source, Electronics and Nuclear Physics. Pub, John Murray. . T Duncan). The strong force is carried by gluons . When two particles interact through the strong force they do so by exchanging gluons. If you go any further you end up in quarkville ( "strange". "Charm", "down" "up" ,"top" and " bottom" ). Again, I'm not an advocate for EU. I just think it has a certain degree of attraction- because of some of its simplicity. Like you indicate. On the micro level , it's the strong force. I do believe, that at the moment there is an ongoing piece of research to prove that black holes are more than just theoretical. I think the researchers are following some debris which will pass close to a black hole. If the black hole is there, then the debris will disappear into the black hole. I'll find that Aussie mathematician . He just destroys Einstein's maths. I do recall that Einstein was once turned down for a teaching job because of his flaky maths-astonishing.

Thanks for that. It's now a discussion. As an electrical engineer I understand the concepts you've described.

That debate wasn't about a water wheel. It was about engineering and science. Which presumably you don't know anything about(unless you Google it)-if you call it the "Water Wheel " If you followed any of the references-which I doubt you did. You'd see that: rootbooster , cyclone and others , were debating (heatedly ) sound engineering electrical principles - not Water Wheels. So go ahead and debunk the EU What you attribute to me ,is that if I post something for discussion, I'm automatically an advocate -it's for discussion. Then you set yourself up as some kind of all round knowall . I'd like to see you debunking any of the EU theories. I'll read it with interest.

Go ahead and debunk it- I'm interested. You might be interested in the work by an Australian mathematician who takes Einstein's gravitation field equations apart and shows the errors. I'll see if I can find his name-and put it on here. The competition between the Big Bang and the EU, I think ,hinges on which of two forces in the universe is the stronger; gravitational field or the electric field .

Copernicus didn't have many admirers at first. Eventually his observations proved true. His system solved the riddles thrown up by the Geocentric model. His book wasn't very popular at the time. After all, he was only gussing Copernicus stuck to his theories because they were simpler. Galileo confirmed by use of the telescope. Current cosmology is full of weird and wonderful untestable theories- it's like mysticism . Have a peruse at your leisure of the "unsupported" EU theories. It might grow on you. https://briankoberlein.com/2014/02/25/testing-electric-universe/

I think there's a discussion somewhere that there is possibly a limit to humankind's intelligence. Even if we evolve for a million years (if we don't erase ourselves from the planet) there will be things about the universe we will never understand. That's how the discussion went when I last read it ages ago. I think there are plant of books around laying claim to a "theory of everything".

If you are interested . Take a thorough look at the "Electric Universe" as a competing theory with the Big Bang. Don't reject it without attempting to compare theories. Amongst cosmologist there is a debate being held, as to the increasing "esoteric "(weird and wonderful ) nature of cosmology tied to the Big Bang. I think -certainly in my lifetime - some serious rethinking around the Big Bang and the Electric Universe.

Tiinfoil. If you have time you may find this link interest. Like a lot of work done by historians, you just have to take the historians word for it. http://www.imninalu.net/myths-pals.htm Have a look at the , "History and revisionism bit". Good luck with it. "The current myth is that these Arabs were long established in "Palestine", until the Jews came and "displaced" them. The fact is, that recent Arab immigration into the Land of Israel displaced the Jews. That the massive increase in Arab population was very recent is attested by the ruling of the United Nations: That any Arab who had lived in the Holy Land for two years and then left in 1948 qualifies as a "Palestinian refugee". (Taken from the above link). There's a lot of history referred to in this thread. Is he right in his description ? Note : some historians just cherry pick facts from other historians whose ideology fits their view -and recirculate the so called facts .

EA,Israel is fine. It's a shining light of modernity, democracy and civilisation surrounded by a cess pit of lawless medieval despotism that wants to wipe Israel off the map. If the rest of the Middle East was like Israel we wouldn't have all this terrorism and Brits coming home in body bags. Have a think about that for a moment. You slipped up matey by putting that post into the discussion. What I said stays.(unless a moderator removes it).What you put might of got past other poster. But it didn't get past me.

Sgtkate, You are right. This thread has now been deflected into Israel and the Palestinians and tainted by a touch of racism-eg, Israel ,shining example of modernism amongst a cesspit,etc. [/color]Sgtkate.Sgt Kate, You are right. Sgtkate, You are right. This thread has now been deflected into Israel and the Palestinians and tainted by a touch of racism-eg, Israel ,shining example of modernism and democracy surrounded by a cesspit ,etc,etc. For over a thousand years,until the turn of the century, Palestine was populated overwhelmingly by Arabs,mostly Muslim,some Christian. A few thousand Jews lived beside them in peace. This peace was shattered as a wave of anti-semitism swept through Europe in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Millions of Jewish people fled the pogroms-anti Jewish massacres, incited by the Tars in Russia . Most went to the USA and Canada. A small number 120000 went to Palestine. They adopted Zionism, the idea that anti-semitism would always exist and therfore it was necessary to set up an exclusively Jewish state. At the end of the First World War, British forces took control of Palestine from the Ottomans Empire. Palestine then had a population of over a million Arabs and 56,000 Jews. The British promised to grant independance to the Arabs,but secretly negotiated and promised support for " a national homeland for the Jews " in Palestine. A bitter and bloody conflict followed with the Palestinians facing an alliance of the British and the Zionists. Arab peasants were evicted from their land. They were not allowed to work as labourers on settlements or sells their produce at settlers markets. The palestinians staged a massive general strike in 1936 against the British for their betrayal of the promises of independance. It lasted 6 months and was followed by two years of uprisings and guerilla war. The British responded with brutal repression. One third of all the troops in the British Empire were deployed in Palestine. The RAF bombed village after villiage. In other villages the British army simple shot every tenth villager (learnt that from the Fascists of WW 2. ) . A shameful period in the history of the British army. My father who was a WW 2 infantry Vet, spat on that history of the British army. Palestine was finally partioned by the United Nations in 1947. They promised "justice" for both Arabs and Jews. Jewish settlers still owned 6 % of the land and made up 30 % of the population. Nevertheless, the UN gave the Jewish settlers 55 % of Palestine. This stillwasn't enough for the Zionists. They set about expanding the borders of the proposed state of Israel . They drove another 750 ,000 Palestinians from their homes and seized over 80% of the land. Their methods were savage .In 1948 the village of Deir Yasin was razed to the ground. Of 400 villagers only 50 survived. The Eyewitnesses from the Red Cross reported the bodies of children mutilated by hand grenades. (Generalised potted history of Israel and Palestinian conflict) I could go on. The rest is history as you quite rightly point out . Back to the OP. The West is financially not in position to embark on a wave of colonialism. The global economy is on a wobble , capitalist as an economic system is in crisis, and there as to be another way forward. (Source . Paul Masson. Postcapitalism . A Guide To Our Future ). NB, I'm not a communist.