Darnok

So I was not misunderstood... I am fully agree with what you wrote, I think science should work like you said, but from my observations it does not work in that way. That is why you can see from me, so many negative comments to some of the methods and ways of thinking. How patent office worker is more qualified in science than actual inventors and scientists from his time? beliefs - How Higgs boson was found? prejudices - some people in here got problems with that, just because I write things that disagree with them and their beliefs I would like science to be consistent in first place, then all other rules you accept can be added. I like how EmDrive is going, because first someone made observation and invention, then he is trying to use science to explain that. I dislike how some people are trying to make science in opposite direction... they first write something on paper and then trying to convince others they are right, without single evidence! Also is there any summary about all hypothesis about EmDrive? I wouldn't want to read all 80+ pages to find few links EDIT: True, but what if EmDrive inventor is that above average smart guy and those who are saying "it is not working" are only those average smart scientists? Not every experiment, observation and hypothesis is studied by super intelligent beings and I am sure that those super smart people is much fewer than those average, so if you have to convince majority of scientific community to push your claims from hypothesis to theory... then we are not going into good direction

I know my English is bad, but... every other "regular" person isn't same as "anyone else"? If it is then I am sorry I mistranslated that one. My point was that some non-scientists, "regular" people, are as smart of even smarter than some (doesn't mean all) scientists.

My answer was for hypothetical measurement of Earth. If scientist is narrow minded it doesn't really matter how many equations and books he memorized, he is as smart as average person. Also I dislike your way of thinking, scientists are not some elite class super smart humans that are never wrong, they are not even smarter than every other "regular" person. Scientists are also humans like you and me... just spending lots of time on their studies and checking measurements and observations with work of other people (also called scientists).

Hundreds of years of interpretations based on previous interpretations, don't forget that... and now what if someone in that chain made wrong interpretation? It has happen few times Laws and theories based on fundamentally wrong interpretation and equations are going to be also fundamentally wrong. If you are looking in very narrow way then of course science is going in good direction and everything is working, but if you change perspective and take a wider look you will notice how many theories should be still called hypothesis because they are working only in very very narrow range. And you missed something huge... the Moon and tides... your super precise measurements are incorrect! That is my point we are going into small, tiny things and people rave about the precision while their narrow minded way of looking at things is leading them to very wrong interpretations. Yet scientists are forcing others to continue their work in that direction, because it would be waste of resources, from my perspective it is more likely it would destroy their authority. What if small change in interpretation can make things simpler and save lots of resources, why people are so afraid to change their mind set and take a little wider picture? Are you afraid of loosing authority?

It isn't science if you allow only solutions you accept

Look at image posted by @SuperFastJellyfish and now if gravity from Kepler star or planet would pull only single particle of your body (A and greatest distance) then of course you wouldn't even felt that. And of course every other body in universe would be pulling some other particle of your body, while Earth, being so close, should pull every particle of your body... that is why you don't hover over Earth Answer to OP would be... no gravity is not getting weaker over distance just the closer studied objects is to the other object then more gravitational wave/particles is "hitting" more particles of object. If you increase distance between two bodies then less gravity waves is pulling those bodies, but they are not weaker, they have same strength as those send from very close object. If we would allow photons from Kepler star to hit particles inside LHCE then energy from single collision should be same as energy from collision of photon send from Sun, of course it would be less collisions from photons from Kepler star. Same thing should work with gravity, if we would be able to shield particles in LHCE in way that only Earth garvity and Kepler star is affecting them, then those particles trajectories should be shifted by Kepler star. Of course we can't shield objects from gravity wave and every particle is being pulled by every object in space from every possible angle, yet those far forces are as strong as Earth gravity, but they are at balance and they are affecting only small portion of particles compare to Earth that is affecting all of our particles. At least this is how I understand gravity taking assumptions made by Newton and Einstein (I think they both were wrong, but explaining that would be much more complicated ).

Shhh or they will break them in next update!

Actually nature likes simple solutions, science should do same thing... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor Hmm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_%28disambiguation%29 see "Building code, set of rules that specify the minimum standards for constructed objects" in very general way DNA is building code for your cells? Your building blocks are cells and DNA is plan how to use them? Maybe you should write your definition of code

I know, but now IF gravity works same way just in opposite direction that would means every particle on Earth can be pulled by "gravity wave" send by planet discovered last week and being 1400ly away. Maybe that is source of "randomness" in quantum physics?

So past Jupiter (like @Ralathon mentioned) each photon is carrying less energy? That would means for me it is getting weaker.

No idea about mass constraints, but there are some laws to predict orbits of moons and planets, maybe this will help you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermott%27s_law http://esoads.eso.org/cgi-bin/nph-abs_connect?db_key=AST&db_key=PRE&qform=AST&arxiv_sel=astro-ph&arxiv_sel=cond-mat&arxiv_sel=cs&arxiv_sel=gr-qc&arxiv_sel=hep-ex&arxiv_sel=hep-lat&arxiv_sel=hep-ph&arxiv_sel=hep-th&arxiv_sel=math&arxiv_sel=math-ph&arxiv_sel=nlin&arxiv_sel=nucl-ex&arxiv_sel=nucl-th&arxiv_sel=physics&arxiv_sel=quant-ph&arxiv_sel=q-bio&sim_query=YES&ned_query=YES&adsobj_query=YES&aut_logic=OR&obj_logic=OR&author=&object=&start_mon=&start_year=&end_mon=&end_year=&ttl_logic=AND&title=bode+law&txt_logic=OR&text=&nr_to_return=200&start_nr=1&jou_pick=NO&ref_stems=&data_and=ALL&group_and=ALL&start_entry_day=&start_entry_mon=&start_entry_year=&end_entry_day=&end_entry_mon=&end_entry_year=&min_score=&sort=SCORE&data_type=SHORT&aut_syn=YES&ttl_syn=YES&txt_syn=YES&aut_wt=1.0&obj_wt=1.0&ttl_wt=0.3&txt_wt=3.0&aut_wgt=YES&obj_wgt=YES&ttl_wgt=YES&txt_wgt=YES&ttl_sco=YES&txt_sco=YES&version=1 Yet some people in here thinks it is pseudo-science, so be careful

More interesting news, than just one more Kepler-planet http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1529/

Greed is not human nature, we didn't get this evolving, we created greed trading with each other and by putting great value on items made of paper, but far lesser value on knowledge. Social democracy is socialism, and just look how this is working very well all over the world So it is NOT FREE if price is hidden in taxes. So why you think it is fair for example for 20 years old guy to pay taxes for free studies of very rich people? You don't understand human motivation. If you work as teacher and you are paid for results and for inventions of new and better methods of teaching, you will be motivated to do so. But if you get 100 teachers and pay them for how many hours they spend teaching, they will be motivated to work longer, but not better. As for education system, your free third-level education is not free, because someone have to pay tax for that! Explain this chart please. No, you don't have only 0 and 1 as option, don't put all people into boxes like that. You can't force people to do what you think is best for them, that kind of ideology is unethical and it was "tested" in Europe some time ago. It doesn't matter what you think about vaccine or any other issue, free will of other person is something you can't break because you have different views. You can educate them, but you can't order them to do as you want, just because that will make you feel more comfortable. Each one of us has right to decide on our own future and faith, anyone who is forcing you to do something you don't want to is committing a crime! And doesn't matter how much scientific experiments and knowledge he can show. You also can't predict what will be result of your experiment on such large scale and how it will change our brains. Just like we didn't predicted what invention of fire will do with fossil fuels, how you can predict what will happen after genetic engineering of our IQ? How this will alter our evolution? You should care about your evolution same as you care about global warming. IMO we even should care about our bodies more than about trees Yet people panic about global warming and have opposite views on genetic modifications... why? and how this is logical? You still have to leave "control group" in society, you can't use any medicine on all people and claim it is science and it will be ok!!! You have to somehow have ability to measure results of your experiment. It doesn't matter if you think it will put "control group" in danger if they are willing to take it. There is low-quality and harmful healthcare just in countries that have lower development level than Canada or UK. Did anyone thought what would it be if we actually do this and all people on Earth would have IQ 200? For normal society IQ or grades in schools can be presented by Gaussian function, but you want to make flat line chart with value 200 It is very interesting who would woke up at 5-6am and take my garbage? Who would like to put products on markets shelves? Or do other things right now are done by those who have lower social status and had lower grades? I bet your first thought was machines... ok, but we don't need 10 billions of office workers and office workers are not making our race go any further... designers, developers, scientists, we don't even need 200 millions of plane constructors do we? If everyone of us would have few robots to do boring work for us, we would waste millions of tons of resources, not mentioning energy usage. How this would make us go anyway further than we are today?

What? So if you would stalking two packs of lions and take part of meat from the one pack that was successful at their hunting and give it to second one, that was unable to kill animals on their own. Is that fair or simple going against evolution? I do agree rich people abuse their status to become more powerful, but that should be solved on law making and society making level by teaching proper values - greed is not one of them. You just can't go and talk you got more money than I do, but I deserve to have same amount of money, now give it to me... isn't that what thieves do? Education can never be free, books can never be free, unless you want to become teacher and writer and work 24h/day FOR FREE! Both education and book have to cost, so all people would value educated people, that is proper value system for me. If something is for free we do not care about it and we wouldn't care about people that had good grades because they got it for free. Just because something is mainstream or because someone call it "safe" it doesn't mean it is safe! Look at cars, they are mainstream, but they aren't safer than those produced 80 years ago. Of course you can say, but today car can reach 2 or 3 time greater speed, sure and that is why driving it is 2 or 3 time more dangerous it was 80 years ago. Yet people are still using it, why? Calling idiots people that refuse share your views isn't very good example of how we should promote vaccines As for free vaccines, nope I am against it, it will just create market for low quality products that could become harmful.

Well looks like americans are evolving back... to no-farming-sapiens, they deceived evolution hunting for promotions in super markets http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120606-americans-heads-getting-bigger-science-health-skulls-evolution/

I remember this news, but it is gone.

Vote against genetic engineering is also on topic in topic about genetic engineering And this thread is about "ethical" aspects of genetic modifications, so first we should answer "do we need genetic modifications?" or "how genetic engineering would improve our IQ, without changes in educational system?".

You won't get less stupidity by genetic modifications, you get this by education of math and science and proper values. By proper values I mean those that do not cause societies of disputes, help maintain the freedom of the individual, an individual can possess his own views and further develop them at much as he or she wants to, even if they differ from the views of other members of society.

Wrong, that means there are no NEW alien civilizations who have done that in last... millions of years - 50 years Why would older civilizations, that were using waves as communication source, stop generating radio waves, their waves should still flow near or even pass the Earth?

Sadly no, but if I would it would be "strong evidence" for me. If you compare how large part of Universe we observed using telescopes and any other equipment and think how many other civilizations should be out there and how many radio waves they should accidentally generate... you should come to a conclusion that we should hear alien radio signals just by turning on radio or TV or by opening smart fridge! And no argument how large is universe is not good enough, because if you say universe is soooo large that only means there is place for far more alien civilizations Argument I can agree with are "we are first" intelligent "aliens" in universe would be ok. Argument "we are last and other civilizations are dead" would be invalid because radio waves of dead civilization still can be heard (referring to equation of civilization time frame some scientist created), but we haven't heard anything for 50+ years in universe at least 13.400.000.000 years old, surrounded by billions of stars and millions of galaxies! Research is ok, but really 50+ years and nothing? Maybe we should take some conclusions from that "discovery", because failure of SETI is in fact discovery... advanced aliens are not using radio waves. Or another one we are only one who are using radio waves in dumb ways. Because aliens discovered more advanced ways of communication, so hostile races (like we) wouldn't found them. I was talking about hypothesis that before us on Earth there was other civilization, IF those are true we should put some more funds and search for evidence, and those studies didn't even get 1/10 funds of SETI over last 100 years! I am assuming that peace loving aliens would like to send message to all newly evolved intelligent forms of life... and that message would contain that they are out there and that they may help us if we only ask them. Of course if there are hostile aliens then they would also visit us to study if and when we will be potential threat to them. Or we are so lucky nobody has discovered us by now, but how that can be possible if we discovered so many stars similar to our Sun? You didn't understand my post, please reread it, I was talking about "signals accidentally send by aliens", if there were any in our time frame we would discovered them years ago. The only hope for SETI is hypothesis that other civilizations started to use radio waves in way we do millions of years ago. Otherwise that means if we assume that life is evolving at same rate on entire universe... all civilizations are at same level of development... SETI is waste of time and money, because they will get first signals in year 1502015+ But SETI is also getting signals of Earth satellites right now in real time, so they have very good understanding what is flying above our heads

Hahaha SETI started in 1959, still zero results yet they have 100.000.000$ for more research, and the only thing they can find is ALIEN civilization thousands or millions light years away and thousands or millions years old, possibly also dead civilization. Meanwhile... if anyone says he has idea how to study ancient artefacts in search of thousands years old, more advanced and possible based on alien knowledge civilization... he is crazy, pseudo-scientist If you believe you can find alien radio waves, send accidentally by alien advanced race, you should join UFO fans, because those aliens would locate Earth as habitable planet hundreds of years ago and would send probes or come to study it personally.

You learned about SRM 3 hours ago and now you pretend to know such things, I wish I could learn about things as fast as you do. Check few more links, there is lots of studies about this http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/what-is-geoengineering/what-is-geoengineering/? "9. D. W. Keith and H. Dowlatabadi. (1992). A Serious Look at Geoengineering. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 73: 289-293. " http://www.keith.seas.harvard.edu/srm-papers/ How do you know this? It is too early to say this, there are thousands of people who saw those clouds from ground, soon we will have some reports and studies online. How do you explain unnatural formations of clouds, square or line patterns of clouds few days in a row? Read some links I've posted, if you create artificial clouds then few days later, after experiment is done, nature will try to balance weather. My statement is logical, because if clouds reflects radiation/heat it is getting cooler in picked region and after clouds are gone... we have super fast changing weather and lots amount of heat and wind over artificially cooled region! Using scientific links from Oxford for example. You should notice few people (http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/people/who-are-we/) in there... they are doing pseudo-science You call pseudo-science every new branch of science you learn about?

Not in secret, if you have so many official documents and from many organizations?! Did you even read any of those links? SRM IS OFFICIAL, there is no secret conspiracy behind this, if you were unaware of geoengineering doesn't mean it is secret. If you generate artificial clouds to reflect radiation it is getting cooler in region and once experiment is done nature will try to balance things and we will see heat wave? If you want to give me good advices do it on PM and don't go personal just to break threads you disagree with.

http://www.srmgi.org/ What science man understands and conclude... Really I wonder what are other forms of geoengineering?

Wow you are fast reader (you read that 98 and 70+ page pfds so fast?) How do you know it wasn't been done? Side effects are: no rain for 6-7 weeks on part of that region on map. Smelly fog for few hours per day in June even at 11am. 8-9C in July in the morning even at 12am for few days. Very little rain in July, yet lots of storms wind+lightings, but almost no rain from them. I wonder if now we are going to get any additional dose of radiation? And how those aerosols are better than those that were destroying ozone layer few years ago?