Jump to content

Hawking is on a Roll - Black Holes to Power the Earth! (And a Nobel~!)


Jim Naseum

Recommended Posts

We have a pretty anemic ozone layer, which has a hard time protecting us from the scant solar radiation and UV. What kind of skin cream will they develop to keep us all from becoming barbecued by the 1e+13 watts of X-Rays and gamma rays?

 

I'm only joking, because I am sure Hawking thought of this first. He's a hell of a lot smarter than me, and that's the first thing that came to mind when they quoted him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

and if it's a guess nobody can test, I will go back to my analogy of "beating one's meat."

 

 

 

Yeah, that was Einstein, endlessly beating his meat until he died of it.

 

 

I should not be astonished, and yet I am.

 

 

Well, if you're trying to compare blogging on the Klipsch forum to Einstein's pursuits, then there is greatness in all of us I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about

 

 

 

I will go back to my analogy of "beating one's meat."

 

Well, don't over do it. You might end up blind. 

 

 

I'd rather be blind than dead.

 

afraid of death?

 

Yes, I exercise caution on a daily basis.  I don't speed very much anymore, and I stopped flipping people off a long time ago.  Either of those two things can get you killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and if it's a guess nobody can test, I will go back to my analogy of "beating one's meat."

Yeah, that was Einstein, endlessly beating his meat until he died of it.

I should not be astonished, and yet I am.

Well, if you're trying to compare blogging on the Klipsch forum to Einstein's pursuits, then there is greatness in all of us I suppose.

You didn't understand. Let me explain it to you. You said an untestable hypothesis was just beating the meat. I pointed out that Einstein's hypotheses were untestable until recently, and therefore, by your standards, he was just beating his meat. I obviously don't agree.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion would be to inquire with Catholics, Jews, Hindi, Shintos, Buddhists, Humanists, or Protestants you may run into in daily life and see if any of them have a use for understanding the universe.

No more or less than anyone else, best I can tell.

Dave

Hint: Where do the suppose their dead relations go? Why do some of them meditate? Who is it that many of them are confessing to? From whence come the ideas of nihilism? Pantheism? The Trinity? Manifest Destiny?

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way the ozone layer prevents the water from the Earth evaporating into outer space as was the case with Mars. That's why they were concerned, not because of sunburns.

JJK

Huh? 

 

The Ozone layer protects Earthings from UV-B. That's what I'm talking about, and that is a fact!

 

edit: On the brighter side, the Ozon holes are getting smaller.  :)

 

https://weather.com/science/environment/news/ozone-hole-closing-nasa

Edited by mustang guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the actual paper related to the gravitational wave measurements? I'd like to learn more about their sensor configuration and all that.....the super nitty details, not the high level stuff.

 

Back to Hawking - I have always found a stark contrast between Hawking and Einstein....in that Hawking is very much sensationalized and focuses on the fanciful. Einstein seemed way more grounded in reality. Perhaps that's the way Hawking is portrayed by the media, but I simply don't consider the two anywhere close to being in the same category. Has Hawking presented us with anything practical? I honestly don't know (that wasn't a rhetorical question). A quick glance through Wikipedia makes it sounds like all of his ideas have been contradicted by others? And lots of debates and challenges about things?

 

Btw, don't forget that Einstein introduced us to the idea of "space-time" - which is to say the dimensions and time are one and the same (or intrinsically related). I've been meaning to sit down and run the special relativity mathematics to see what idea we can derive about how "fast" things were moving during a "Big Bang" or "Creation Event". The thing that surprises me is how similar the two mechanisms would manifest themselves. Why couldn't they be the same thing? I want to see what the different relativistic observation points would observe in terms of time elapsed. Perhaps someone has already conducted that analysis?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Does anyone have the actual paper related to the gravitational wave measurements? I'd like to learn more about their sensor configuration and all that.....the super nitty details, not the high level stuff.

 

Back to Hawking - I have always found a stark contrast between Hawking and Einstein....in that Hawking is very much sensationalized and focuses on the fanciful. Einstein seemed way more grounded in reality. Perhaps that's the way Hawking is portrayed by the media, but I simply don't consider the two anywhere close to being in the same category. Has Hawking presented us with anything practical? I honestly don't know (that wasn't a rhetorical question). A quick glance through Wikipedia makes it sounds like all of his ideas have been contradicted by others? And lots of debates and challenges about things?

 

Btw, don't forget that Einstein introduced us to the idea of "space-time" - which is to say the dimensions and time are one and the same (or intrinsically related). I've been meaning to sit down and run the special relativity mathematics to see what idea we can derive about how "fast" things were moving during a "Big Bang" or "Creation Event". The thing that surprises me is how similar the two mechanisms would manifest themselves. Why couldn't they be the same thing? I want to see what the different relativistic observation points would observe in terms of time elapsed. Perhaps someone has already conducted that analysis?

Dr. Who...I love you! Hope to see you in May in Hope!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hint: Where do the suppose their dead relations go? Why do some of them meditate? Who is it that many of them are confessing to? From whence come the ideas of nihilism? Pantheism? The Trinity? Manifest Destiny?

 

Metaphysics, not physics.  Irrelevant to this thread and would simply result in a lock anyway.

 

Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the actual paper related to the gravitational wave measurements? I'd like to learn more about their sensor configuration and all that.....the super nitty details, not the high level stuff.

Back to Hawking - I have always found a stark contrast between Hawking and Einstein....in that Hawking is very much sensationalized and focuses on the fanciful. Einstein seemed way more grounded in reality. Perhaps that's the way Hawking is portrayed by the media, but I simply don't consider the two anywhere close to being in the same category. Has Hawking presented us with anything practical? I honestly don't know (that wasn't a rhetorical question). A quick glance through Wikipedia makes it sounds like all of his ideas have been contradicted by others? And lots of debates and challenges about things?

Btw, don't forget that Einstein introduced us to the idea of "space-time" - which is to say the dimensions and time are one and the same (or intrinsically related). I've been meaning to sit down and run the special relativity mathematics to see what idea we can derive about how "fast" things were moving during a "Big Bang" or "Creation Event". The thing that surprises me is how similar the two mechanisms would manifest themselves. Why couldn't they be the same thing? I want to see what the different relativistic observation points would observe in terms of time elapsed. Perhaps someone has already conducted that analysis?

What is practical about relativity? Einstein was very playful, and Hawking can't even speak. It's hard to imagine how 'fanciful' and 'sensational' are being applied here. I realize those at subjective, but I've never heard anyone inside or outside of science use those words for Hawking.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...