Einstein's theory of relativity explains fundamental properties of gold

October 30, 2015
gold
Native gold nugget. Credit: public domain

Some fundamental properties of the coinage metal elements gold, silver and copper, such as chemical behaviour or colours, are already predetermined in their atoms. The unique properties of gold can be largely explained by Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. Chemists from Heidelberg University have been able to demonstrate this through their investigations of gold, silver and copper carbenes. They examined only single atoms of each metal in order to compare the three elements. The results of this research, led by Prof. Dr. Bernd Straub, were published in both the German and international editions of the journal Angewandte Chemie for applied and fundamental chemistry.

The properties of chemical elements are recurring periodically, since related elements possess the same number of electrons in the relevant outer shell and differ only due to additional inner electron shells. Copper, silver and gold belong to such a group of related elements. "Comparing , silver metal and gold metal with their numerous neighbouring metal atoms has never been a problem, as pure metals have been around for millennia," explains Prof. Straub, a lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Organic Chemistry. However, he and his team were able to ascertain the differences of single atoms – in an otherwise identical molecule with which the metal atoms interact very strongly with a carbon atom via double bonds.

The Heidelberg scientists started their investigations with gold carbenes, which comprise a usually unstable – because highly reactive – double bond between carbon and gold. However, using a chemical "trick", Prof. Straub and his team found a way to obtain and to isolate a stable gold carbene complex for research purposes. In further steps they managed to prepare and characterise a copper carbene and a silver carbene with otherwise identical structure, even though both these compounds were much more sensitive and unstable than the gold carbene. Nevertheless, these complexes enabled the scientists to make a detailed comparison of the three elements of the coinage metal group – copper, silver and gold – on the scale of a molecule. Through the crystallisation of the particularly unstable silver carbene, they were able to determine the bond length between silver and the doubly-bonded carbon via an x-ray structural analysis. They then compared this with the shorter, stronger bonding between gold and carbon.

From their observations the researchers conclude that the properties of gold are fundamentally determined by "". These effects come into play in physics when a phenomenon can no longer be described as "classical". In chemistry this applies to the properties of certain elements. The relativistic effects derive from Albert Einstein's theory of relativity with the well-known formula E = mc2 by which Einstein established a connection between energy, mass and speed of light. "Of the stable elements, the predicted relativistic effects are most noticeable with gold," says Prof. Straub. A well-known example is the striking difference in colour between yellow gold metal and colorless silver metal.

Bernd Straub explains that, due to the attraction of the 79-fold positively charged gold nucleus, negatively charged gold electrons achieve such high velocities close to the speed of light (c) that additional motion energy (E) cannot substantially increase their speed. Instead, these electrons increase their mass (m). This effect is seen in the outermost electron shell, which is active and thus responsible for chemical behaviour, colours and properties of coinage metals. In the case of gold, this leads to a strengthening of its bonds. Gold compounds thereby have a better chance, for example, of activating a triple bond between two carbon atoms. The comparison between the coinage metal gold, silver and copper with the double-bond carbon in each case showed that the atomic behaviour of is more similar to copper than to silver, although is its direct neighbour in the periodic system.

The research findings of the Heidelberg chemists confirm that Einstein's theory of relativity does not just play a crucial role in astronomy and space travel with their huge distances. Prof. Straub also emphasises its significance in the world of electrons, atoms and molecules.

Explore further: Chemists succeed in isolating carbon-gold compound of "amazing stability"

More information: Matthias W. Hussong et al. Copper and Silver Carbene Complexes without Heteroatom-Stabilization: Structure, Spectroscopy, and Relativistic Effects, Angewandte Chemie International Edition (2015). DOI: 10.1002/anie.201504117

Related Stories

'Golden' silver nanoparticle looks and behaves like gold

September 22, 2015

(Phys.org)—In an act of "nano-alchemy," scientists have synthesized a silver (Ag) nanocluster that is virtually identical to a gold (Au) nanocluster. On the outside, the silver nanocluster has a golden yellow color, and ...

Acetic acid as a proton shuttle in gold chemistry

July 24, 2015

A recently published study gives a vivid example of unusual chemical reactivity associated with organogold complexes. Using modern physical methods and computational studies, the authors propose a reaction mechanism in which ...

For 2-D boron, it's all about that base

September 2, 2015

Rice University scientists have theoretically determined that the properties of atom-thick sheets of boron depend on where those atoms land.

How many gold atoms make gold metal?

April 10, 2015

Researchers at the Nanoscience Center at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland, have shown that dramatic changes in the electronic properties of nanometre-sized chunks of gold occur in well-defined size range. Small gold ...

Recommended for you

Sea sponges stay put with anchors that bend but don't break

June 22, 2017

Sea sponges known as Venus' flower baskets remain fixed to the sea floor with nothing more than an array of thin, hair-like anchors made essentially of glass. It's an important job, and new research suggests that it's the ...

Custom-built molecule shows promise as anti-cancer therapy

June 22, 2017

Scientists at the University of Bath funded by Cancer Research UK have custom-built a molecule which stops breast cancer cells from multiplying in laboratory trials, and hope it will eventually lead to a treatment for the ...

88 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

RealityCheck
2.7 / 5 (16) Oct 30, 2015
From the second-last paragraph in the article:
...negatively charged gold electrons achieve such high velocities close to the speed of light (c) that additional motion energy (E) cannot substantially increase their speed. Instead, these electrons increase their mass (m).
How can this be anything but spurious assumptions trying to connect relativity with quantum theory?

Quantum theory tells us that BOUND electrons do NOT "orbit" a nucleus as in classical planetary motions around the sun...hence they have NO "velocities"-----let alone "...high velocities close to the speed of light" as claimed by Bernd Straub when 'explaining' gold's electronic properties/effects re bond lengths/strengths/color etc.

Good 'exploration/experiment' but bad 'interpretation/claims'.

Anyone else see this attempt to connect Relativity with this Quantum effect as yet another sneaky/dishonest try at 'authority/credibility-by-association-to-Einstein' of otherwise unfounded 'explanation'?
thermodynamics
4.7 / 5 (12) Oct 30, 2015
RC: That is the same thought I had. Then I thought about it a little more. We know that the wave particle-duality tells us that particles can behave as waves and waves can behave as particles when we are in the microscopic realm. As such, considering a particle to have a position and momentum is uncertain. If you look at the old Bohr description of the atom he considered electrons to have a wavelength that is equal to the circumference of a sphere for each shell. It was wrong but it worked.

I have seen other interpretations that look at the electron as a cloud. All macroscopic interpretations we make are going to be wrong because we don't deal with the microscopic and it is difficult to make it something we can understand. Having said that, my interpretation is that the positive nucleus is exerting enough force on the inner shell to distort it and add mass (as energy) to the electron which is similar to their saying it adds mass through velocity. Cont
thermodynamics
4.7 / 5 (12) Oct 30, 2015
RC Cont: Mass and energy are equivalent (special relativity) mass increases with velocity (which increases energy). But mass also increases with energy (binding of quarks through gluons which add to the mass of a proton or neutron). Based on that, I would not claim there is anything "sneaky of dishonest" about the paper, just an interpretation that narrows the definition of energy increase to velocity when it is more complicated than that.

BTW, this is not the first time I have seen the application of relativity to atoms and the applications seem to work well. Only the light atoms can be simulated without relativistic effects and the effect seems to be consistent with the changes to the shell due to the lack of shielding between the positive charge and the inner electron shells. You can't do high energy QED without applying relativity. Why do you see this as subterfuge instead of good experimental effort?
viko_mx
2.1 / 5 (15) Oct 31, 2015

Why silver is colorless? Silver color is a combination of primary colors of light in certain prorportions that its surface reflects. As all the other physical objects which are not 100% transparent.
Relativity is not a physical concept and does not occur in nature. It reflects the ability of the human mind to compare different objects, features and concepts. In a world without absolutes the order is impossible because can not be defined physical laws and constants. There is no absolut point of reference.
In fact, the idea of ​​such theories is to justify moral relativism by representing it as something natural which we can find allegedly in nature. It is convenient for myopic criminals at first glance, but in reality introduces chaos in society. But life is impossible without order and the chaos leads to slef destruction of society. Society without high moral standard can not survive for long time. It destroys its own living environment while indulging its lusts and passions.
Mike_Massen
2.7 / 5 (23) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx ask
Why silver is colorless?
Sea of electrons reflect all visible light hence its a mirror & is used to "mirror finish" glass sheets very effectively, works !

Physics of the sea of loosely bound electrons in metals are consistent at so Many levels, it is studied at uni courses in Engineering, Chemistry & Physics !

viko_mx your are so quick to show your immense continued ignorance, learn Physics !

viko_mx claims
Relativity is not a physical concept and does not occur in nature
Wrong & a LIAR & very badly so at all levels !

You show immense anti-science ignorance of the most primitive basal type trying to ingratiate yourself before a claimed deity.

viko_mx, you've been advised often over many months to get a simple *basic* Physics education, your continued refusal to do so proves you are ill from emotional hypnosis for a god that acts exactly like a devil punishing everyone !

Learn GPS re Relativity, it relies upon relativity & works !
viko_mx
Oct 31, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (17) Oct 31, 2015
The different materials with polished surface can be used as mirror and there is nothing common with the fictional relativity. The more smooth is the surface, the more effective reflect the rays of light, because the roughness is smaller and less distract the light flux. You can use even a smooth water surface as a mirror.

GPS system do not use the relativity, because you can not use something that does not exist. It is only announced in society that this system use relativity, but it does not The idea is to fabricate another "proof" for another unrealistic theory. Those who wrote the software of GPS system know better which real correction GPS system use actually.
viko_mx
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 31, 2015
And which are sophisticated luxury;)
jsdarkdestruction
4.2 / 5 (10) Oct 31, 2015
This is a sick consumer society that has lost higher goals in life and ability to think.

You are sinning again. Its not your place to pass judgment on others and make such claims. Your god is the only one who can do so. You are going against your gods will. Quite a serious offense IMO...
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (13) Oct 31, 2015
Judgment? How you born this idea? If nobody notices irregularities in the society and do not share it with the others, what is chance for redemption for at least part of it? This means that it is tolerant to lawlessness and is actually its accomplice. Because wicked wants to make everyone in society like him to be able spiritual devaluation to devalue the sin in the eyes of the people.
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (13) Oct 31, 2015
And to make them tolerant to its lawlessness.
Mike_Massen
2.5 / 5 (19) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx claims
This is a sick consumer society that has lost higher goals in life and ability to think
You're LAIR/CHEAT refusing education in essential Physics !

Tell WHY your deity appears as angry Devil makes ALL suffer ?

Learn GPS, you are digging an immensely deep hole for yourself & as you REFUSE to gain ANY (Physics) education for MANY months it can only be inferred you are immensely Stupid !

Learn GPS, or get god to explain why it works so very well - not in bibles ?

Special Relativity confirmed
https://en.wikipe...periment

GPS - Relativity, WHY its essential !!!
http://www.astron...gps.html
http://physicscen...will.cfm
http://physics.st...lativity
http://www.metare...vity.asp
https://www.uam.e...vity.pdf

viko_mx dimwit, LEARN Physics !
mrbeardy13
3.3 / 5 (12) Oct 31, 2015
GPS system do not use the relativity, because you can not use something that does not exist. It is only announced in society that this system use relativity, but it does not The idea is to fabricate another "proof" for another unrealistic theory. Those who wrote the software of GPS system know better which real correction GPS system use actually.


Pathetic attempt. Your idea of "proof" seems clouded by your fairy stories.
Mike_Massen
2.6 / 5 (22) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx claims
GPS system do not use the relativity, because you can not use something that does not exist
PROVE it !

You viko_mx are a Complete Stupid LIAR & CHEAT !

viko_mx claims
It is only announced in society that this system use relativity, but it does not The idea is to fabricate another "proof" for another unrealistic theory
PROVE it !

viko_mx claims
Those who wrote the software of GPS system know better which real correction GPS system use actually
PROVE it !

viko_mx you're claiming worldwide conspiracy to put Relativity against your idea of a god !

viko_mx you're suffering immense emotional hypnosis and still REFUSE to get a Physics education !

viko_mx tell why ALL universities worldwide use precise clocks confirm relativity works ?

viko_mx do you claim all atomic clocks worldwide are false to fake Relativity ?

viko_mx explain WHY relativity is missing from ALL religions ?

viko_mx Physics not Devil worship dressed as dumb religion !
viko_mx
Oct 31, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
mrbeardy13
3.8 / 5 (16) Oct 31, 2015
@viko_mx

Off topic much? Theres much to be said about the negative aspects of a capitalist society, but this is not the place. Certainly not on a story about the properties of a metal.

Theology is not a science.
viko_mx
1.8 / 5 (13) Oct 31, 2015
You must prove that GPS system needs correction related to fictional relativism added for the emotional comfort of the proponents of GR to many others useful corrections.
Can you say what percentage of error must compensate GR correction to understand is there a real use of it for the effective operation of the GPS system?
mrbeardy13
3.9 / 5 (15) Oct 31, 2015
All over the internet here are a multitiude of explainations of how GPS works, as complicated as you like, if you could actually be bothered to look for them or read them.
Mike_Massen
2.8 / 5 (20) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx claims
You must prove that GPS system needs correction related to fictional relativism added for the emotional comfort of the proponents of GR to many others useful corrections
No !

I have provide you links MANY times over MANY months, you have REFUSED to read or learn !

You have no place here, your claims are irrational, stupid & IGNORE decades of practice !

Speak to a university lecturer anywhere in the world that has used atomic clocks ?

viko_mx asked
Can you say what percentage of error must compensate GR correction to understand is there a real use of it for the effective operation of the GPS system?
Yes !

The detail is in the links provided and have done so MANY times over MANY months !

Why cannot viko_mx read ?

What prevents viko_mx reading ?

What prevents viko_mx having basic comprehension of high school physics ?

What the hell is wrong with viko_mx, why cannot he even start to get a basic Physics education ?
Mike_Massen
2.8 / 5 (20) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx claims
People suffers because many of them lose their connection with the source of life - the Creator. Where a man's treasure is, there is his heart. In today's world the pagans are worshiping the money. They have turned them into an idol to which they warship and which takes their freedom. Therefore they suffer. Thеsе people have replaced the love of people with the love of money with which buy imitation of happiness and shiny packages without content
Where is your god providing ANY sort of clear guide with ANY sort of good communication ?

Where viko_mx ?

Prove it ?

viko_mx has made VERY stupid claims that GPS s/w writers have lied ?

Prove it ?

You claim some creator, how does it communicate viko_mx, anything better than lazy humans ?

Why viko_mx are ALL claimed deities very BAD communicators - exactly same as mere claim ?

Where is there ANY communication with ANY claimed creator - how ?

email address perhaps ?

viko_mx Learn physics !
viko_mx
1.9 / 5 (14) Oct 31, 2015
I know physics very well. Not speculative physics, but real physics that is relying ot facts.
Your knowedge is misticism. Not real sicence.

The Creator si very good comunicator to those who have pure heart not marred by selfish thoughts. Those who are observant and are able to think independently.

Why you gave me links? You must explain how works this system to become obvious in what you are believing actualy.
Mike_Massen
2.9 / 5 (19) Oct 31, 2015
viko_mx claims
I know physics very well
PROVE it !

Where did you study Physics & WHY does it NOT include Special & General relativity ?

viko_mx claims
Not speculative physics, but real physics that is relying ot facts
Really ?

Why did viko_mx NOT learn "measurement methodology" & quantitative methods ?

viko_mx claims
Your knowedge is misticism. Not real sicence
I directed you to
Science details yet you STILL refuse to read or try to understand the Physics AND the Maths !

viko_mx claims
The Creator si very good comunicator to those who have pure heart not marred by selfish thoughts
PROVE it !

Where is a creator's most recent update on Medicine, Psychology, Maths, Physics ?

viko_mx claims
Those who are observant and are able to think independently
Liar !

Experimental Methods re Physics PROVES Relativity works

viko_mx asks
Why you gave me links?
Doh - so you would READ & be intelligent to try to refute, why can't you do that ?
bluehigh
3 / 5 (8) Oct 31, 2015
MIke, once again you write as an enraged zealot. Settle mate, there's no need to get so verbally vicious, unless you want it returned.

It's Halloween and your desire to destroy the All Hallows' fun may well have been successful (a year later matey and we're still here). In my locality there's a lot less trick or treats from the local kids and no glowing pumpkins on doorsteps in my street. The commercialisation seems less rabid. You should be pleased.

Even haters have some success, sadly.
Mike_Massen
2.2 / 5 (17) Oct 31, 2015
bluehigh claims
MIke, once again you write as an enraged zealot
mate you have a bad memory. I have been polite with viko-mx when he 1st made 'god' claims, he ignored ALL queries !

Then he makes more claims - never proven, ever !

He obviously has an agenda & duped you !

bluehigh shows himself
Settle mate, there's no need to get so verbally vicious, unless you want it returned
Ah, so you ignore facts re arbitrary claims & retaliate vindictively - prove I am wrong re all my questions & evidence re relativity, sensible ?

bluehigh claims
It's Halloween and your desire to destroy the All Hallows' fun may well have been successful (a year later matey and we're still here)
Not copying US folk holiday - ugh !

viko-max is duping you by being anti-science then adding false witness re a 'creator' - the only evidence we have is the god claimed by moses & his cohorts acts as a Devil !

Why would anyone WANT to associate with a Devil worshipper ?

Are you ok ?
bluehigh
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 31, 2015
Who gives a flying fuck what Viko says? You've got some obsession there matey.

Just a friendly reminder not to get yourself worked up over petty stuff. I don't give a shit what Viko has said.

Just a reaching out mate but as I said .. You wanna play in the gutter, that's fine.
Noumenon
2.6 / 5 (15) Oct 31, 2015
Mike_Massen's mannerisms wrt responding to posts is Very similar to CaptainStumpy's. Coincidence? :)

Good response to RC, thermodynamics,.... for a liberal bed-wetter anyway.
Mike_Massen
2 / 5 (16) Oct 31, 2015
bluehigh forgets
Who gives a flying fuck what Viko says? You've got some obsession there matey
No, you are not only wrong you are false, because others read; the young, naive & lacking in experience read the claims of the stupid & are often misled

bluehigh you should know this, have you no experience of how people are lied to & misled ?

bluehigh claims with immense contradiction
Just a friendly reminder not to get yourself worked up over petty stuff. I don't give a shit what Viko has said
Then why bother at all ?

Why waste your time - you just contradicted yourself again, you have done this before, are you ill, suffering from comprehension - what ?

bluehigh said
Just a reaching out mate but as I said.. You wanna play in the gutter, that's fine
You betray yourself, so why would you bother replying, try to get a grip on Science communication & ugly effect that idiots like viko_mx have pushing anti-science !

Be smart, counter instead of distract
baudrunner
3 / 5 (4) Oct 31, 2015
Viko understands classical physics - maybe (??) - but is agnostic about quantum and relativistic physics because he is from a stupid place where there is no understanding of those esoteric concepts.

The conclusions drawn by the researchers support the notion that the idea of a particle conferring mass on another particle (ie the Higgs boson) is just inane. I have repeatedly stated that mass is the result of motion, angular momentum, etc. as supported by Einstein's ToR, that an object increases in mass as it increases in velocity.

RealityCheck
2.9 / 5 (15) Oct 31, 2015
Hi viko_mx. :)
The Creator si very good communicator to those who have pure heart not marred by selfish thoughts.
Mate, why bring your religious beliefs into a science discussion? Just address the science; leave the religious beliefs for the theology discussions/sites. Thanks.

PS: Anyway, your 'creator' cannot be much of a communicator if there are so many 'schisms' among 'the faithful'. And why would such a 'creator' ignore the 'NON-faithful' in preference for 'the faithful' if he/she/it is trying to be such a 'good communicator'? Communicating to 'the faithful' is a no-brainer; it's to 'NON-faithful' where his/her/its 'communication' is most warranted, isn't it? And, by the way, are you claiming to be one of those humans who "have pure heart not marred by selfish thoughts" etc? If so, you are going against 'scripture' which says 'jesus christ' was the only one such; which is 'why' he was crucified to save you/all 'sinners'....which you must be if you 'believe'. :)
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (13) Oct 31, 2015
I am interested of reality. In reality I can see complex physical structures and life forms which contain and rely ot highly organized information. Almost every inteligent sicentist knows that information is not product of randomness and natural proceses which we observe in nature. These processes rely of information but not produce new information. It does not exist natural mechanism which can increase information in one physical system and no one scientist is able to demonstrate the oposite. This is the reason why for the person which believe in the Creator like me, is natural to be engaged in science. This is most natural thing in real science at all.
After the inteligent super natural being is created the universe and high order in it, its denial does not comply with reality and is not a scientific approach.

Do you know how people understand that behind the existing of one thing stay inteligent being?

RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 31, 2015
Hi thermo. Thanks for polite/thoughtful response. :)

Using relativity to 'explain' observed quantum behavior is like using epicycles to 'explain' observed solar system orbital dynamics. Both misleading mathematical construct 'stand-ins' for actual explanations in real energy-space terms.

I didn't have any argument with energy/mass/velocity aspects per se; only unnecessary/gratuitous 'invocation' of relativity theory/maths 'concepts' resulting in patently 'unreal' so-called 'explanations' for what can be perfectly explained using real quantum energy-space concepts.

Consider the ultimate 'source' of all physical entities/processes observed: they arise from a fundamental quantum energy-space which manifests reality at all scales. Cycling up/down those scales, energy-space 'objects/features' constantly arise/evolve/subside. In various scales/contexts, the 'content' of quantum 'energy' is labeled energy/mass/matter/velocity' depending on observational/analytical construct. :)
viko_mx
2.1 / 5 (14) Oct 31, 2015
Learn the microbiological mechanisms and machines operating in the living cells. Will be very usefull for you.
You believe in fundamental quantum energy-space that are doing miracles.
But do not permit for your self the idea the inteligent being create and suport high order in th universe.
The porblem is always about the moral laws. Because quantum miracles have not high moral standart and expectations for the humans.
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (12) Oct 31, 2015
Hi viko_mx. Thanks for polite response. :)

However, you still insist on invoking your personal supernatural beliefs when you should only address the strictly natural (not supernatural) aspects observed/discussed. It is that which leads you to making errors/affronts against not only the science but also other persons. For example, when you say:
Almost every intelligent scientist knows that information is not product of randomness and natural proceses which we observe in nature.
You're effectively implying I myself am NOT an "intelligent scientists" because I do NOT subscribe to your supernatural belief.

And I do not subscribe to same because my ToE explains, to my own exacting independent, objective intellectual/scientific standards, what the universe is and why it behaves so without 'needing' a 'supernatural conductor' of its eternal/infinite interactive processes/features at all scales.

Your 'supernaturally driven mysteries' I can explain 'naturally'. Cheers. :)
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (13) Oct 31, 2015
People who do not have the ability to extract the truth from the facts, would hardly call them reasonable.
Iredusable copmplexity? Structures and machines (incuding micro biological machines) which can work only when they are fully assembled from tens of different hughly specific parts? An the existanse for which make sence if they are only opperational?
You can not give me example of natural process that can increse information in the system. The rest is eyewash.
RealityCheck
1.3 / 5 (12) Oct 31, 2015
Hi again viko_mx. :)
Learn the microbiological mechanisms and machines operating in the living cells.
No need; been there; done that; long ago.

FYI, viko_mx, many years ago (on other forum) I explained some of my own observations as to the initiating NATURAL (no need for supernatural) chemistry/processes) in both natural BIOLOGY and BIOGENESIS aspects to a couple of posters (if I recall correctly, S.Bildersback and Gary Gaulin?). I didn't explain in full at the time since I am also going to publish my complete ToE of BIOGENESIS as well as my PHYSICAL UNIVERSAL ToE. But I did give them some clues: it's all about 'partial/full charge transport' in naturally occurring nanotubes/vesicles and such like (graphite sheets, fullerines, buckeyballs etc) which accumulate/incorporate/process etc 'impurities' from the environment to create fundamental 'structures/processes' which eventually can become complex 'living' things which only need to 'survive/evolve'. No 'supernatural'. :)
jsdarkdestruction
4.7 / 5 (12) Nov 01, 2015
Viko, stop claiming everyone who's science you don't understand or you believe is wrong for religious reasons or doesnt have the exact same religious views is some evil rotten sinner against god who wants to turn everyone else away from him and your narrow interpretation of christianity is held by all or even most Christians.. You are making yourself awful judgemental and egotistical and vain again. Your god is not going to be happy with you.
jsdarkdestruction
4.6 / 5 (11) Nov 01, 2015
Viko, did we start with the advanced systems and machines and technologies we have now or have they undergone revisions and additions over time and gotten more and more complex?
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (9) Nov 01, 2015
It does not exist natural mechanism which can increase information in one physical system and no one scientist is able to demonstrate the oposite.


Is your belief system contingent upon misapprehension of scientific understanding? Perhaps that's why there is a seeming incompatibility. Wouldn't it be absurd for an otherwise omnipotent god to Create highly ordered life which has an observable physical basis, but yet that physical basis could not in principal allow for that emergent life. Will science discover this "seam" of incompatibility between the discoverable laws of nature and the will of god? Wouldn't this be an absurd state and be indicative of imperfection in your god instead?

....
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (11) Nov 01, 2015
....

Your misapprehension is this,... the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems only. There is nothing in physical understanding that prohibits organization,... biological or otherwise, ...as long as that organization creates more disorder to compensate the entire system (which you ignore),.... such that statistical probability is likely.

There is nothing in the laws of physics, as known so far, which prevent self organizing systems to become emergent from those laws, ...nor that such systems can not be governed by emergent-laws which are epiphenomenal rather than fundamental.....

"In biology, the possible laws that govern biological phenomenon emerge with those phenomenon" – Smolin/Unger

Your mind is just such a system that operates on account of its own epiphenomenal laws,..... it's why it's possible to be wrong after all.
tear88
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 01, 2015
Bernd Straub explains that, due to the attraction of the 79-fold positively charged gold nucleus,

If there are relativistic effects in gold, shouldn't there be similar effects in all heavier elements? (Someone else may have brought this up, but I couldn't find it in the mass of off-topic stuff).
Mike_Massen
1.9 / 5 (13) Nov 01, 2015
tear88 with a great question
If there are relativistic effects in gold, shouldn't there be similar effects in all heavier elements? ..
Interactions between the orbitals are extremely complex & only recently calculated Eg re Mercury & relativity, here is some discussion and also touches on the issue as to why Gold is much less reactive than say Cesium...
https://www.fourm...en_glow/

Also touches on sea of electrons later in the article
http://physics.st...y-silver

Other relativistic effects, Eg Why mercury is liquid (& other effects) & Eg Why Gold density >> Lead
https://en.wikipe...hemistry

And a fairly new article re mercury why it melts at -39 C (Not 82 C if relativity didnt exist)
http://www.rsc.or...evidence

Take note viko_mx, who claims to "know physics" - oh really

viko_mx Learn Physics !
viko_mx
2.2 / 5 (10) Nov 01, 2015
"Viko, did we start with the advanced systems and machines and technologies we have now or have they undergone revisions and additions over time and gotten more and more complex?"

No. When we create things we begin from the simplest and after sucsesfull test add new functionality and structural complexity. But people are intelligent being and this explain naturaly the increasing complexity of things that we create. Because we are created by the image and likeness of the Creator and we have creative spirit as Him. In the creative process people very often copy the ideas that they see in natute created by the Creator.

But natural processes in nature can not create anything. These processes only maintain the originally established order in the universe for a certain time.
Mike_Massen
2.1 / 5 (14) Nov 01, 2015
viko_mx Fails again with immense ignorance & inability to LEARN Physics & Chemistry claimed
But natural processes in nature can not create anything
Wrong. Only a very stupid dogmatic religious zealot of the worst kind ignores Physics & Chemistry especially so facts re "Activation Energy" & the bonding mechanisms which produce *naturally* our own DNA bases !

Eg From early earth atmosphere & replicated in labs nature self-assembles Formamide
https://en.wikipe...ormamide

Which given heat & time (& not much) produces Guanine
https://en.wikipe.../Guanine

So there you have direct evidence that viko_mx is completely ignorant of Science, especially Physics re relativity & Chemistry regarding self assembly

viko_mx also ignorant of Probability & Permutations, this is how combinatorial complexity of a multitude of permutations allow complexity to increase in a thermodynamically open system.

Learn Physics viko_mx, drop religious dogma !
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 01, 2015
"But I did give them some clues: it's all about 'partial/full charge transport' in naturally occurring nanotubes/vesicles and such like (graphite sheets, fullerines, buckeyballs etc) which accumulate/incorporate/process etc 'impurities' from the environment to create fundamental 'structures/processes' which eventually can become complex 'living' things which only need to 'survive/evolve'"

When you demonstrate the result of your theory then it makes sense to discuss it. But I wonder what is the reason the scientific community not to pay attention to your theory after the majority of it try so hard to find evidence for the evolution almost one century? Why not save them from desperation?
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 01, 2015
Yes. These chemical reactions obey the physical laws. But do not add new information in the system.

"RNA base creation
Formamide has been shown to create guanine at 130 °C in the presence of ultra violet light"

Ops, problem.
RNA or DNA is highly unstable in external environment with the presence of UV light.

But even the random events to create all needed from RNA or DNA base pairs in the same place and physical conditions by miracle, this mean nothing for the living organisms.
Even by miracle these bases to connect in RNA or DNA fragment this is nothing for the living organism. Their random sequence will be meaningless. There is no information. It is like to fill the computer's memory with random numbers. It will never perform meaningful action in this way. This will cause an exception and will restart the processor . But if intelligent programmer create a program, it will do something meaningful, according to the implemented algorithm
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 01, 2015
Do you know that the intelligent educated scientist can not create DNA from its bulding blocks in modern equipped laboratories, where they can maintain controled environment? So how random events can succeed?
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (11) Nov 01, 2015
Hi viko_mx. :)
When you demonstrate the result of your theory then it makes sense to discuss it. But I wonder what is the reason the scientific community not to pay attention to your theory after the majority of it try so hard to find evidence for the evolution almost one century?
If you read my post again, you'll see that I gave some 'clues' only, not all necessary info, re my biogenesis ToE. I will publish it all complete once I finish with my Climate Change solutions publication and then my universal physics/maths ToE. I don't publish 'piecemeal' because I am not driven by the usual 'publish or perish' mercenary/reputational/status etc motives which infest the scientific literature in all areas. Re your challenge to "demonstrate" these necessary naturally occurring factors/processes, it should be obvious that these already ARE 'demonstrated' by Nature itself, observed all around us all the time...beginning with the forms/manner which I alluded to in my 'clues'. :)
TechnoCreed
4.7 / 5 (12) Nov 01, 2015
Do you know that the intelligent educated scientist can not create DNA from its bulding blocks in modern equipped laboratories, where they can maintain controled environment? So how random events can succeed?

Welcome to the modern world viko. Dr Craig Venter totally acheive this feat over 5 years ago. http://www.thegua...ife-form
javjav
3.3 / 5 (12) Nov 01, 2015
How can this be anything but spurious assumptions trying to connect relativity with quantum theory?
...BOUND electrons do NOT "orbit" a nucleus as in classical planetary motions around the sun...hence they have NO "velocities"-----let alone "...high velocities close to the speed of light"

The Einstein relation between mass and Energy was fully demonstrated to apply to subatomic particles. If not, what do you think that happened at Hiroshima?
And the article makes sense, although it would be better if the journalist used the term "kinetic energy" rather than "speed".
jsdarkdestruction
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 01, 2015
Do you know that the intelligent educated scientist can not create DNA from its bulding blocks in modern equipped laboratories, where they can maintain controled environment? So how random events can succeed?

Assuming that is true, so? Do you have any idea how far this has all come in the last 50-100 years? The last 10 years? Just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean it never will or can be done. That kind of thinking makes no sense. 100 years ago cell phones and computers and all that had never been created yet but here we are and so are they.
I say assuming because technocreeds link seems to prove you wrong.
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
""The new organism is based on an existing bacterium that causes mastitis in goats, but at its core is an entirely synthetic genome that was constructed from chemicals in the laboratory."

Give me scientific but not popular science articles because they hide the details that interest me. So these teem of 20 researchers are succeeded for 5 years to create semi synthetic organisms organism with rearrangement of genetic information of parent bacteria by chemicals in controlled environment in laboratory by intelligent approach.

What would be the chance for success for these researchers, if they did not draw the ideas from the Creator and do not know the basic mechanisms in the living cells?

Give me more details. I am interested in science. Not in sensationalism.
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
"If you read my post again, you'll see that I gave some 'clues' only, not all necessary info, re my biogenesis ToE".

OK, when you are ready with your theory and check if correspond to reality by experiments, then we can discus it. My focus is not on a fantasies but on reality.
Mike_Massen
2.3 / 5 (15) Nov 02, 2015
viko_mx claims
... if they did not draw the ideas from the Creator and do not know the basic mechanisms in the living cells?
Tells us fr a change just HOW your silent 'creator' (who acts as a Devil and kills children) communicated biochemistry of syntehtic bacteria to flourish if it isnt made from common chemicals available everywhere - even on comets ?

viko_mx asks
.. more details. I am interested in science
LIAR !

Get education in Physics ie Bonding ie Chemistry, especially "Activation Energy" & STOP telling us lies you "Know physics well" when you obviously don't & FAIL to understand Probability & Statistics which is NECESSARY pre-requisite in Physics ?

viko_mx, why do you waste (more) time ?

You've been here for many months ignoring advice AND go to a lot of trouble to show us by your repeated immature questions how completely uneducated & STUPID you remain !

Why ?

You are adult yes ? can't you educate yourself ?

You still claim relativity's fake ?
Mike_Massen
2.3 / 5 (15) Nov 02, 2015
viko_mx claims - AGAIN
... My focus is not on a fantasies but on reality
LIAR !

Tell us the foundation & basis for your claimed creator and why he makes sure children die before they can decide whether or not to follow or read a book that is more than 2000 years old ?

viko_mx, you claimed its a choice to follow the creator or not ?

How can a 1 week old baby dying of a hole in the heart & genetic failures decide ?

Wouldn't a loving god make sure children didn't die until they get indestructible bible with their name on it at puberty so they could decide independently of (any) pressure to 'follow the creator' freely ?

Why can't your god stop children suffering & dying as they have done just like all other life for millennia ?

Why does your creator WANT to appear in PRACTICE as a Devil yet claim it loves ?

All claims of a creator are only emotional claims !

You still claim DNA can't be made, heard of sequencers, look & find, companies sell sequence producers ?
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
"Tells us fr a change just HOW your silent 'creator' (who acts as a Devil and kills children) communicated"

You do not understand. The sin and lawlessness is the reason for the people death.
And the devil who stay behind this. The Creator support the people who love Him, which is a matter of personal choice. He does not intervenes in the life of those who do not want Him in their life, because it can not violate His own principles and the right of free choice of the people.Here for example, you choose to be a slave, because you do not know how to be free person. So you do not like the freedom and God's laws which guarantee it. The freedom requires responsibility and love.
Mike_Massen
2.1 / 5 (14) Nov 02, 2015
viko_mx claims
You do not understand
HOW does creator communicate ?

viko_mx claims
The sin and lawlessness is the reason for the people death
HOW is a 1 wk baby lawless ?

viko_mx claims
And the devil who stay behind this
HOW does creator makes sure it happens & WHY ?

viko_mx claims
The Creator support the people who love Him, which is a matter of personal choice
HOW does a 1 wk baby make choice ?

viko_mx claims
He does not intervenes in the life of those who do not want Him in their life, because it can not violate His own principles and the right of free choice of the people
HOW does a 1 wk baby do that ?

viko_mx claims
Here for example, you choose to be a slave, because you do not know how to be free person
HOW does a 1 wk old baby get free ?

viko_mx claims
So you do not like the freedom and God's laws which guarantee it
Where is that guarantee please ?

viko_mx claims
The freedom requires responsibility and love
Prove it ?
del2
3 / 5 (6) Nov 02, 2015
@viko_mx & @Mike_Massen
Drop it, you two, this is not the place for amateur theologians to bicker. Let's keep this thread for relevant discussion of the article.
viko_mx
2.3 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
I do not write posts which filled the whole screen because of fear of not notice me.
Mike_Massen
2 / 5 (16) Nov 02, 2015
del2 asked
@viko_mx & @Mike_Massen
Drop it, you two, this is not the place for amateur theologians to bicker. Let's keep this thread for relevant discussion of the article
Perhaps, this is not bickering, viko_mx makes irrational claims and I ask details, this is debate but, indeed demand viko_mx to not bring up the subject of a creator in the first place and NOT try to weave it into Physics. Yet all the direct questions I have asked viko_mx go ignored & especially so when someone interjects as it gives him a way out - del2 :-(

viko_mx, I have supplied you with a host of links as to evidence of relativity & is confirmed, in response to your claim relativity is a fake and that the GPS programmers are lying !

For viko_mx, I have asked you often to prove your claim that you "know Physics well" but, you have failed to explain why you imagine relativity is faked - what possible reason could there be and why has it been confirmed worldwide and is consistent ?
Eoprime
4.1 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
[q... Let's keep this thread for relevant discussion of the article.

oh, you are new to the site?
Welcome, lean back and enjoy the show, i only wait for zephyr to chim in with some ducks and waterripples. :)
jsdarkdestruction
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 02, 2015
Mike, viko means god makes everyone suffer and die(oftentimes horrifically) for our communal "lawlessness" and the "original sin" of "eve" including babies and other innocents and even his most devout followers.
Yet more evidence his god is a petty demon playing god to gullible humans, if he truly existed.
my2cts
2.5 / 5 (11) Nov 02, 2015
This is terribly old news. For decades, quantum chemists use the Dirac equation to describe heavy atoms. Putting Einstein in the title of course always attracts a crowd. Click bait.
my2cts
3.1 / 5 (15) Nov 02, 2015
I am interested of reality.

You are interested in religion. Do not confuse.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (11) Nov 02, 2015
Hi viko_mx. Am very busy again today, so have to be brief. :)

OK, when you are ready with your theory and check if correspond to reality by experiments, then we can discus it
Agreed! So, it's a deal, viko_mx? You won't bring in 'supernatural fantasies' for abiogenesis, and I won't mention my natural abiogenesis ToE in reply, yes?

Good. I look forward to you discussing the natural science involved in the science topics and refraining from invoking 'supernatural' entities in physics topics. Thanks!

Good luck in future (natural, not supernatural) science discourse here and elsewhere, viko_mx. :)

PS: By the way, my natural abiogenesis is based on observed natural reality inorganic/organic chemistry processes already occurring all around us all the time. So my abiogenesis ToE already "corresponds to reality by [nature's] experiments". Cheers.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (15) Nov 02, 2015
@ Really-Skippy. How you are Cher? Oh yeah, I am fine and dandy as usual me, thanks for asking.

PS: By the way, my natural abiogenesis is based on observed natural reality inorganic/organic chemistry processes already occurring all around us all the time. So my abiogenesis ToE already "corresponds to reality by [nature's] experiments". Cheers.


So does that mean you finished up on your other toes you been telling us about for 10 or 9 years? Or is this the same one? Cher, don't you think you are spreading your self a little thin? I mean first you spend your whole life working up the first toes, then you take on the climatic conference with the paper the whole is going to be talking about calling it the Really-Skippy-Cavalry and now you are starting on your abiota natural toes. Are you going to live long enough to finish all that? Or maybe I should ask different me. Are any of us going to live long enough to get the chance to read one of them?
Mike_Massen
2.3 / 5 (18) Nov 02, 2015
jsdarkdestruction offered
...for our communal "lawlessness" and the "original sin" of "eve" including babies and other innocents and even his most devout followers. Yet more evidence his god is a petty demon playing god to gullible humans, if he truly existed
Indeed & spot on, was leading viko_mx to that point even by exasperation he would finally admit ugly piece of genesis' "logic" - ie that his god can punish as a Devil because he got those rights making us but, del2 got in the way !

viko_mx waffled off yet Again failing to make ANY case. For ~40 yrs been challenging many to view essential of why bulk religions are so very banal/common, all rely on: Status, Authority & Punishment, worst can be so called 'born again' who can't accept Golden Rule arose during Greek period ~ 800yrs before jesus & also practised by Bonobo monkeys etc

However,
re Physics, I want to know why viko_mx claims SR/GR Relativity's fake, immense evidence against him, yet again :P
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (8) Nov 03, 2015
I want to know why viko_mx claims SR/GR Relativity's fake, immense evidence against him, yet again :P


They're models, ....so they ARE fake. But since he doesn't know better, yes, he means to say 'they're wrong', (probably). The answer to your question is the same for way religion has plagued the human mind since time immemorial,.... it's much easier to believe than to know, and actually quite difficult, even for science, to be unaffected by bias, either intrinsic or subjective.

He didn't answer my above question either (actually a non-answer is an answer).....

Wouldn't it be absurd for an otherwise omnipotent god to have Created highly ordered life which has an observable physical basis, but yet at the same time that physical basis could not in principal allow for that life to become emergent given gods own physical laws?
Mike_Massen
2.1 / 5 (14) Nov 03, 2015
Noumenon tangentially claims
They're models,...so they ARE fake
Inappropriate, there you go again obtuse & disingenuous, drive car ? model works !

Maths & the implementations Eg equipment ie GPS or car computer calcs are obviously NOT the same as reality doh !

Calling fake as implementations function extremely well is wildly off target in any sense

viko_mx says GPS programmers wrote s/w to fake relativity implying there's huge conspiracy to lie about experiments which tally closely with evidence is wrong & betrays his lie he "knows physics well', obviously doesn't !

Noumenon added .. means to say 'they're wrong' No

SR/GR are confirmed experimentally many times, not just at macro but at micro & lower eg Neutron half life in colliders, atomic properties; colour & density of gold, melting point of mercury, crystalline property of lead etc.

See links I posted 31 Oct here, whats wrong with ANY of them please, eg GPS ?

Do u misinterpret evidence re fakery ?
baudrunner
5 / 5 (4) Nov 03, 2015
You can not give me example of natural process that can increse information in the system.
Baloney! The emergence of life itself yielded and continues to yield new information. But, oh yeah, Viko doesn't believe in the emergence of life the way intelligent people do, because some magician who was present before anything else was created it instantly using wizardry. Sounds blasphemous to me. Have some respect for the truth, Viko.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (6) Nov 04, 2015
They're models,...so they ARE fake [...] he means to say 'they're wrong', (probably).

Inappropriate, there you go again obtuse & disingenuous ! [...] Do u misinterpret evidence re fakery ?

You are the one who used the word "fake" which is de facto a truism wrt models, and inappropriate wrt the question you were asking. Do you mean to ask "why does viko think GR/SR is wrong so that it's necessity is faked in GPS".

I had originally thought viko said GR is "fake" which didn't make logical sense to me, so that the distinction may have been appropriate to make for someone like him (not you).

I know all about GR/QM down to the mathematical formulations,... and have to questioned them anywhere.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (6) Nov 04, 2015
.... have not questioned them anywhere.

Noumenon added .. means to say 'they're wrong'
No

No? So, you're saying viko Didn't mean to say SR/GR is wrong?
Mike_Massen
2.1 / 5 (14) Nov 04, 2015
@Noumenon
Please comprehend intent of viko-mx's claim. His grammar isnt best read again his 3 sentences quoted, notice intent ?

On 31 Oct 2015
It is only announced in society that this system use relativity, but it does not The idea is to fabricate another "proof" for another unrealistic theory. Those who wrote the software of GPS system know better which real correction GPS system use actually
To fabricate IS to fake, so obviously I'm contextually correct as contraction & save space

Then YOU claim they ARE fake !

Your most post appears back-peddaling, if not then please make it clear what you were trying to claim "They're models, ....so they ARE fake" ie Implying false ie doesn't show relativity ?

GPS s/w maths works re relativity just as engine ECU's re maths

Noumenon said
.. originally thought viko said GR is "fake" which didn't make logical sense..
Note: "to fabricate" ie to fake, you were correct he Doesn't make sense !

No fabrication at all !
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 04, 2015
please make it clear what you were trying to claim "They're models, ....so they ARE fake"


I'm not trying to "claim" anything. I'm stating a truism,.... that models generally are an artificial construction of reality,.... not that they are not accurately representational for that purpose.

As you stated,...
Maths & the implementations [...] are obviously NOT the same as reality doh !


viko_mx
3 / 5 (6) Nov 05, 2015
"Baloney! The emergence of life itself yielded and continues to yield new information. "

it seems that you have not slept well and have entered into a circular logic.
Evolutionists trying to prove that the evolution is possible, but can not give example for the natural process in nature, which do not involve intelligent being and that leads to increasing of information in the system. But you use this which they must prove to be possible as a prove for itself. Sleep well and try again next time

A believe in intelligence and purpose behind the order in the universe.
You believe in chaos which can create order without idea and purpose because you probably deny God's moral laws defend and support the life in the universe.
Noumenon
3.9 / 5 (7) Nov 05, 2015
I corrected you above that biological organization and emergent laws is fully compatible with thermodynamic laws, and that the notion of Creationism actually refutes the omnipotence of god.

Why not just believe that god created life through his emergent evolutionary laws on the basis of physics? Scientists are obligated by intellectual integrity to let observation lead them to conclusions even if doing so conflicts with their prior beliefs.

Why accept a religion that requires you to lie to yourself?
viko_mx
2.7 / 5 (7) Nov 05, 2015
""Why not just believe that god created life through his emergent evolutionary laws on the basis of physics?""

Why to believe in this unsupported by scientific facts reality? There is no such thing as evolutionary laws because in this reality in which we are living, with this physical laws which support the order in the universe, the evolution is impassible.
In fact we have the reverse process of deevolution because of one way entropy. We can see that every material thing lose its shape, structure and functionality with time. The matter is very fragile thing. To maintain for long time material things is necessary intelligent support. And a intelligent approach for their creation.
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (8) Nov 05, 2015
There seems to be a misconception that just because a scientific theory is not 100% correct that it therefore is useless.
There are scientific theories that are provably wrong that any sane person would still bet their lives on without a second's worth of doubt.
(E.g. when it comes to Newtonian gravity. I would confidently put my nose to a 1 ton pendulum and let it go - knowing full well that Newtonina laws predict it will not swing back further than the deflection I initially gave it - even though Relativity is clearly a better theory - i.e. Newton was clearly 'wrong' - when it comes to anything relatied to gravity.

the evolution is impassible

Yet it is observed. If someone says 'impossible' but experiment disagrees, then the one saying 'impossible' is wrong. Reality trumps opinion. Every time.
Mike_Massen
2.3 / 5 (15) Nov 05, 2015
viko_mx with immense hypocrisy asks
Why to believe in this unsupported by scientific facts reality?
All words in all religious books that claim a deity spoke to them are unsupported !
1. Hadn't you noticed ?
2. Besides please address the Science, you claim the GPS programmers faked the s/w, on what basis do you arrive at that claim ?
3. Especially so as relativity has been confirmed many times over many decades with high accuracy, so tell us viko_mx, how your particular deity drove you to a dumb belief relativity is faked ?
4. viko_mx, heard of GPS and that if functions well ONLY if relativity is taken into account ?
5. Is it rational to avoid and ignore evidence viko_mx ?
6. Is it rational to ONLY believe claim of > 2000 yrs old and never have it ever qualified ?
7. viko_mx, why do you make so many unsupported claims & still Fail to answer questions ?
8. Why are you even here viko_mx, as you have not offered ANY Science ?
Mike_Massen
1.9 / 5 (13) Nov 05, 2015
Noumenon claimed
I'm not trying to "claim" anything. I'm stating a truism
No
There's a lot re language & Science communication you aren't aware of

Claiming "ALL models are fake"; yimplies they lie/cheat, are useless & part of a conspiracy

Clearly millions of control systems sold ea yr perform useful functions & re Physics/Chem/Maths Evidence - ie They are tools, there is no deceit unless they are programmed to lfake & that is easily confirmed Eg VW re NOx

GPS s/w uses maths/Physics models & very well confirmed, or it would add Kms errors each few hrs !

Noumenon stating
.. models generally are an artificial construction of reality
Non-sequitor, everything man made is artificial - so what ?

You Missed context Totally !

Claiming "fake" you imply untrue, you totally cut across the debate with viko_mx & he has gone to ground on the issue & Fails again, your 'input' counter-productive & implied GPS' output is therefore fake.

Appropriate to claim a car fake ?
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 05, 2015
GPS s/w uses maths/Physics models & very well confirmed, or it would add Kms errors each few hrs !

It would also be a pretty nifty conspiracy - since GPS, GLONASS, and Galileo systems would all have to be in on it. (And I'm pretty sure the Russkies and the Americans aren't exchanging code on a regular basis...especially since the development of GLONASS falls well within the cold war years)
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 05, 2015
please make it clear what you were trying to claim "They're models, ....so they ARE fake"

...that models generally are an artificial construction of reality,.... NOT that they are not accurately representational for that purpose.

Non-sequitor, everything man made is artificial - so what ?

How is that an non-sequitur when I was answering your own request for clarification?

Claiming "ALL models are fake"; yimplies they lie/cheat, are useless & part of a conspiracy

Only if you deliberately ignore the context, refuse to accept clarification when asked, and not if the one stating that had went out of their way to make the distinction between "fake" and "wrong" clear, as was the entire original point....

They're models, ....so they ARE fake. But since he doesn't know better, yes, he means to say 'they're wrong - Noumenon

Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 05, 2015
It seems that the length of phys.org threads are inversely proportionate to the effort placed in maintaining continuity in lines of discussion.

viko_mx
1.7 / 5 (6) Nov 06, 2015
So I am waiting for example of natural process in nature, which without the help of the ideas, will and action of intelligent being, can lead to the increase of information (order) in the system. Again silence in the sector of believers in evolution. I am sure that we never will heard of such a example because there is no where to see it in this physical world. I am also wait someone ti try to define physical laws without absolute reference point.
Mike_Massen
1.7 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2015
viko_mx Fails to understand
..am waiting for example of natural process in nature, which without the help of the ideas, will and action of intelligent being, can lead to the increase of information (order) in the system
Get an education in open/closed thermodynamic systems.

You claim "I Know physics well" but, don't know ! Only conclusion is you DONT know physics so NEED an education desperately, don't lie !

viko_mx claims
Again silence in the sector of believers in evolution
Get an education first, start with Chemistry re "Activation Energy" in relation to Probability & Statistics !

viko_mx cant read
I am sure that we never will heard of such a example because there is no where to see it in this physical world
Wrong. shown before !

viko_mx claims
I am also wait someone ti try to define physical laws without absolute reference point
Why wait ?
Learn relativity, ie. read links supplied for your education, so DO IT !

Or go away - please !
Mike_Massen
1.7 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2015
Noumenon claims
How is that an non-sequitur when I was answering your own request for clarification?
No. You only compounded your misfire across the bows of debate with viko_mx

Noumenon claims
...Only if you deliberately ignore the context, refuse to accept clarification when asked, and not if the one stating that had went out of their way to make the distinction between "fake" and "wrong" clear, as was the entire original point
YOU ignored the context. YOU mis-characterised which killed the debate, you have done this often, you butt in with twisted language that obfuscates, please don't drink & write (especially when driving) !

Noumenon claims
They're models, ....so they ARE fake. But since he doesn't know better, yes, he means to say 'they're wrong - Noumenon
No !

Models are NOT fake - thats Wrong (technical) language, you mislead & obfuscate

Models eg GPS etc implement observed operation of reality & are valid IF not they "fail" ie NOT "fake"
Mike_Massen
1.7 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2015
Noumenon correctly stated
It seems that the length of phys.org threads are inversely proportionate to the effort placed in maintaining continuity in lines of discussion
Indeed. Its why its a good idea to first observe existing continuity of discussions & if needed steer it back to essential Science & where possible topic of the article & any necessary divergence - expecting to come back to the essentials where possible

When viko_mx makes arbitrary ugly claims to distract, he should be challenged so don't get away with obfuscation & why its helpful to moderate that process to avoid tangential generalities which can mislead intent

So need to be cognisant of general issue of Science communication.

ie To claim Eg. "All models are fake" Noumenon isn't a valid position because although all human endeavours are by some definition artificial doesn't mean "ALL" models do not validly reflect reality or aren't useful

Failing an error bar is a "fail" only NOT "fake" !
viko_mx
3 / 5 (6) Nov 07, 2015
@Mike_Massen

Your emotional mantras are boring.
Will you give me example for natural process in nature, which without the help of the ideas, will and action of intelligent being, can lead to the increase of information in one physical system? And for a definition of physical laws without absolute reference point?
I am waiting. Take a responsibility. Demonstrate your knowledge in physics.

Who want to try this? It makes more sense than to constant discussion of vain philosophical theories that have no connection with reality. The only drawback is that it is not more profitable from a financial point of view.

Mike_Massen
1.6 / 5 (12) Nov 07, 2015
viko_mx with obvious distate Demanded
I am waiting. Take a responsibility. Demonstrate your knowledge in physics
Already have, often have advised you to learn "Activation Energy" & Learn universe is built on Physics rules constantly offering "self-assembly", for umpteenth time viko_mx explained to you already !

1 Formamide arise from simple chemistry
2 Becomes Guanine (DNA base) with only heat & short period

You claim UV destroys Guanine but, *only* true if not in water below depth UV can reaches, been found >5Kms down - doh !

Water (Oceans) is great medium for millions of reactions (& great protection) easily allows increase in complexity BECAUSE viko_mx, the system (Earth) is thermo-dynamically OPEN - capisce' ?

Yet viko_mx doesn't know Physics, never studied, nil education Eg probability/permutations despite his claim he Can't prove
I know physics very well
viko_mx caught as false witness !

If you "know" physics explain Equivalence re GR ?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.