Recent content by Sirandar

That definition fits

The self propagating term uses the word self to try to explain something that hasn't been explained properly. A wave has no self. They travel though a vacuum because they do. You could easily say that an EM has two functions that interconvert and this makes it self propagating, but seems to...

Correct

Both Wikipedia and my educators called electromagnetic radiation a self propagating wave. I would suggest that the word self be removed from wikipedia at least. There is no self in a wave. Even the word "coupled" or "causally related" are risky WRT the grav and mag components as I don't...

Actually contrasting how and why make for facinating discussion in biology but little else because it ends up like GR ... beautiful elegant but hard to test. A good example would be the related questions "How do we die?" and "why do we die?" How we die seems pretty well understood except...

Actually, this isn't really meant to be a conclusion ... perhaps the bio version would be "it just does or we wouldn't be discussing this" ;) How and why ? two very different questions BUT maybe the same question looked at from a different "frame" of reference. Try that one on a grant...

How very true, turns out genes weren't quite as illuminating as first thought. Otherwise we would be chimpanzees. I pulled out a bunch of different types of antibody gene from the Rhesus monkey and they didn't look much different from our own. Actually some of the things you mentioned are...

Doesn't it not change trajectory by force because at any point in that frame space is actually straight? Seems to me part of the elegance of this theory is due to the warping causing straightness.

Shape probably would depend on your frame of reference. I am interested in more localized phenomena.

You forced me to get off my lazy butt and refresh my basic relativity OK, I think I can get my head around this: Isaac M. McPhee wrote: "The moon, to use this example again, is continually orbiting the Earth, and from the perspective of Earth appears to “curve” as it does so. In reality, the...

Inertia as the ability to move slower than the speed of light ... I have never looked at it that way before. But it seems to me we could could subsitiute mass for inertia in your statement and the meaning wouldn't change. In relativity is mass and inertia different or are they the same thing...

I fully understand how difficult it is and I was hoping for an answer not expecting one. For me this is a quick and somewhat lazy way of getting insight into a question I have previously fantacised about addressing, but quickly realized that it about as likely as being a superhero. I can and...

Surely you are joking Mr Feynman ... I loved that book. He provides a very honest answer that I respect and understand more or less, but he eludes to deeper understandings with regard to even Aunt Edna's fall, much like DNA provides a much much deeper understanding to how we work, but not...

You have never heard them? "Sceince must be wrong because it can't understand how Bumble bees fly" "even if you shake watch parts for a billion years, you will never get a working watch" I was trying to empathise with person who took exception to my original comment by pointing out comments...

I vividly remember my high school physics teacher working this one out on the board. An equation is our perception of reality and the above one is exceptionally good but says nothing about how it works. A very rough analogy from biology would be inheritance of a trait like blue eyes in man...