How big are Honorverse Asteroid Belts?

What do you mean by EFE?

SWM wrote:What do you mean by EFE?

I am fairly certain it means; electrical field effect.

Relax wrote:

SWM wrote:What do you mean by EFE?

I am fairly certain it means; electrical field effect.

Okay. I'm being pranked right? Again?

So many doors in *[1]current physics have been opened because of GTR. Because of it mankind is able to more fully understand elusive phenomenon hinging on GTR. For instance the explanation of black holes (which I'm deeply invested in at the moment with my pending paper on the Schwarzschild radius encompassing the Schwarzschild metric.) Gravitational lensing became quite clear with GTR. The explanation of these once elusive phenomena can be found within the prodigious power of Einstein Field Equations. (EFE) The prodigious power and explanations are all wrapped within the purview of EFE. EFE is the core of GTR.

My last post assumes much of readers. My reference to wave-particle duality and the like, in my last post, are all prerequisites of Einsteins works, culminating into the GTR. (My reference to him standing on the backs of others, as all great minds do). For me, at least, these concepts are even more fully...elucidated within the bowels of EFE. There is much instruction, explanation and suggestion permeating throughout the *[2]EFE, the implications and inferences, I continually wonder, if we've yet even scratched the surface.

I'm going to stop right here. Since long before the euphemism thread I've felt I've had to tread lightly. The euphemism thread has forever solidified that feeling. Just being truthful.

I was attacked (brutally I feel) for positing that 'sex slave' was a euphemism for prostitute. I am still dumbfounded by it, as is everyone around me. Not a single poster has apologized even after I posted this...

More recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently upset Japan, a key U.S. ally, by demanding that all official documents refer to women drafted as prostitutes for the Japanese military during World War II as "enforced sex slaves" rather than by the euphemism "comfort women," the term preferred by the Japanese government.

That's fine, Tester knows I do not wish to dredge that up again. Please, do understand my bringing it up to explain my reluctance to argue, what to me, is obvious. I do not wish to be accused, or attacked for...accidentally(?) casting aspersions. And my spider senses are tingling.

—————————————————————————

*[1] I am uncomfortable in using the term 'modern physics,' though many do, of course. I rather prefer a much more suitable term, 'current' physics. The former comes too close to belittling the great minds that came before us. Minds that had little tools to work with, save for an apple falling on the head. Yet these great minds have handed us many tools; pliers, vise grips, fulcrums, in which to manipulate the Spacely sprockets of the Universe. The GTR is our pipe wrench, at least. I've always deemed the term, 'modern physics,' to be just a bit...disrespectful and egotistical. Compared to those preceding minds, considering the enormous discoveries done before us, representing tools given unto us, complementing our super computers, observatories, satellites, particle colliders...we have not shown to be worthy. Yet. IMHO.

*[2] My niece keeps an ongoing journal. The volumes are stacking up. Leather bound journals began with a suggestion to my sister as an 8-yr-old birthday gift. At around $150 a piece she's filled 23 of them to date. They are simply compendiums of her projects, plans, thoughts, musings, formulas...

One weekend at my sister's home, I came inside and my niece was crying, being held by my sister. Tierney was so upset I couldn't get any thing out of her. Upon asking my sister "I don't know. She keeps pointing to that!"

Her journal featured equations, the bulk of which were EFE, applied to her formulations regarding the existence of God. The particular equation...infers unimaginable evil (in the context of her work, work which is extraordinary). As it stood, it was...frightening. My niece then saw realization in my face validating what she saw. That distressed her even more. Now I'm holding her, and she is begging me to explain it away. It took a while to realize...that the simple reciprocal of it...suggests overwhelming 'good.' It was very soothing. Yet a reminder of the power of EFE in conjunction with GTR, applied to the most...benignly unexpected.

Einstein's work has implications beyond that of which it is generally applied. I have a long going side project of proving the existence of a Deity. EFE and GTR, along with the many prerequisites are tantalizing pieces of the puzzle. My niece, being close to me, is aware of all of my theories and much of my work, which led her to her unsettling...discovery.

I quite wonder if Einstein didn't accomplish more, but decided to withhold such frightening, disturbing, dangerous revelations, because mankind isn't ready. Were we ready for E=MC2. Many died because of it.

Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity in conjunction with the General Theory of Relativity, keeping all of the prerequisite works culminating with the fruition of Einsteins works have far reaching applications and implications outside of its perceived scope, to the imaginative and adventurous minds. My niece likes to refer to these as the descendants of GTR.

Once, my sister was reading one of my nieces journals. Vol. III. I watched her countenance morph from intense interest to abject fear. Oftentimes, I wonder if I am being irresponsible not to burn them all.

Volume 8 begins with "Einstein Field Equations are a bowl of Lucky Charms. Add a little perception and conception and it becomes magically delicious."

Please forgive typos, etc. In much of a hurry. Saturday, shool is out, my sister and niece are here and the destination is the beach!

And some people think it´s strange that i don´t like using maths to figure something out rather than merely as a way of description...

Trying to use maths for good/evil/god etc, that´s an example of fail.

Math doesn´t work at all if all you add into an equation is indeterminable variables.

cthia wrote:

Relax wrote:I am fairly certain it means; electrical field effect.

Okay. I'm being pranked right?

Well duh. Electrical field effect has zippo, nada, zilch to do with gravity that we can understand anyways.
It did fit "EFE" though

SWM wrote:What do you mean by EFE?

Relax wrote:I am fairly certain it means; electrical field effect.

cthia wrote:Okay. I'm being pranked right? Again?

So many doors in *[1]current physics have been opened because of GTR.

It's usually regarded as polite to spell out your acronyms the first time you use them in a writing that someone can come upon unawares. In a forum like this, that means every post for unusual acronyms. Even usual acronyms, like the abbreviations we use for books, tend to trip up new members. Not doing that gives the general impression that you're [redacted].

I apologize to posters for my...overzealous use of acronyms. I wanted to quickly get the post out and I was in a pickle of a rush. As I stated at the end of the post, I have company. My niece and a couple of her friends along with my sister and her friends. Our destination was the beach and all of a sudden, I was the holdup. "Come on Uncle!" "You said no work!" "We're going to miss the bands!"

I have mentioned many times that I post from a seven inch tablet, hunt-n-peck style. It does not encourage or lend itself well to writing out long hand for every formal definition of readily available acronyms. But that's okay, because the word processor I use allows search and replace. Time failed to permit even that. Also, I assumed that anyone discussing the General Theory of Relativity would easily recognize the acronym for Einstein Field Equations. How can one not be familiar with the heart of the General Theory of Relativity if one is poised to discuss it? At any rate, a repost...


So many doors in *[1]current physics have been opened because of the General Theory of Relativity. Because of it mankind is able to more fully understand elusive phenomenon hinging on the General Theory of Relativity. For instance the explanation of black holes (which I'm deeply invested in at the moment with my pending paper on the Schwarzschild radius encompassing the Schwarzschild metric.) Gravitational lensing became quite clear with the General Theory of Relativity. The explanation of these once elusive phenomena can be found within the prodigious power of Einstein Field Equations. (EFE) The prodigious power and explanations are all wrapped within the purview of Einstein Field Equations. Einstein Field Equations are the core of the General Theory of Relativity.

My last post assumes much of readers. My reference to wave-particle duality and the like, in my last post, are all prerequisites of Einsteins works, culminating into the General Theory of Relativity. (My reference to him standing on the backs of others, as all great minds do). For me, at least, these concepts are even more fully...elucidated within the bowels of Einstein Field Equations. There is much instruction, explanation and suggestion permeating throughout the *[2]Einstein Field Equations, the implications and inferences, I continually wonder, if we've yet even scratched the surface.

I'm going to stop right here. Since long before the euphemism thread I've felt I've had to tread lightly. The euphemism thread has forever solidified that feeling. Just being truthful.

I was attacked (brutally I feel) for positing that 'sex slave' was a euphemism for prostitute. I am still dumbfounded by it, as is everyone around me. Not a single poster has apologized even after I posted this...

More recently, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently upset Japan, a key U.S. ally, by demanding that all official documents refer to women drafted as prostitutes for the Japanese military during World War II as "enforced sex slaves" rather than by the euphemism "comfort women," the term preferred by the Japanese government.

That's fine, Tester knows I do not wish to dredge that up again. Please, do understand my bringing it up to explain my reluctance to argue, what to me, is obvious. I do not wish to be accused, or attacked for...accidentally(?) casting aspersions. And my spider senses are tingling.

—————————————————————————

*[1] I am uncomfortable in using the term 'modern physics,' though many do, of course. I rather prefer a much more suitable term, 'current' physics. The former comes too close to belittling the great minds that came before us. Minds that had little tools to work with, save for an apple falling on the head. Yet these great minds have handed us many tools; pliers, vise grips, fulcrums, in which to manipulate the Spacely sprockets of the Universe. The General Theory of Relativity is our pipe wrench, at least. I've always deemed the term, 'modern physics,' to be just a bit...disrespectful and egotistical. Compared to those preceding minds, considering the enormous discoveries done before us, representing tools given unto us, complementing our super computers, observatories, satellites, particle colliders...we have not shown to be worthy. Yet. IMHO.

*[2] My niece keeps an ongoing journal. The volumes are stacking up. Leather bound journals began with a suggestion to my sister as an 8-yr-old birthday gift. At around $150 a piece she's filled 23 of them to date. They are simply compendiums of her projects, plans, thoughts, musings, formulas...

One weekend at my sister's home, I came inside and my niece was crying, being held by my sister. Tierney was so upset I couldn't get any thing out of her. Upon asking my sister "I don't know. She keeps pointing to that!"

Her journal featured equations, the bulk of which were Einstein Field Equations, applied to her formulations regarding the existence of God. The particular equation...infers unimaginable evil (in the context of her work, work which is extraordinary). As it stood, it was...frightening. My niece then saw realization in my face validating what she saw. That distressed her even more. Now I'm holding her, and she is begging me to explain it away. It took a while to realize...that the simple reciprocal of it...suggests overwhelming 'good.' It was very soothing. Yet a reminder of the power of Einstein Field Equations in conjunction with the General Theory of Relativity, applied to the most...benignly unexpected.

Einstein's work has implications beyond that of which it is generally applied. I have a long going side project of proving the existence of a Deity. Einstein Field Equations and General Theory of Relativity, along with the many prerequisites are tantalizing pieces of the puzzle. My niece, being close to me, is aware of all of my theories and much of my work, which led her to her unsettling...discovery.

I quite wonder if Einstein didn't accomplish more, but decided to withhold such frightening, disturbing, dangerous revelations, because mankind isn't ready. Were we ready for E=MC2? Many died because of it.

Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity in conjunction with the General Theory of Relativity, keeping all of the prerequisite works culminating with the fruition of Einsteins works have far reaching applications and implications outside of its perceived scope, to the imaginative and adventurous minds. My niece likes to refer to these as the descendants of the General Theory of Relativity.

Once, my sister was reading one of my nieces journals. Vol. III. I watched her countenance morph from intense interest to abject fear. Oftentimes, I wonder if I am being irresponsible not to burn them all.

Volume 8 begins with "Einstein Field Equations are a bowl of Lucky Charms. Add a little perception and conception and it becomes magically delicious."

Tenshinai wrote:
And some people think it´s strange that i don´t like using maths to figure something out rather than merely as a way of description...

Try and imagine using both, to complement each other.

Trying to use maths for good/evil/god etc, that´s an example of fail.

I understand your sentiment. And many share it. You are in the company of the majority. However, breakthroughs in science are rarely the joys of the 'majority' thinkers.

You guys keep thinking that proof facts laws and the like are set in stone never to change. Were as a fact is a true knowledgeable belief. True means it is testable not to be false. Knowledgeable means there is some consideration that it can be known by oneself and others. Belief is something we hold to be valid personally. The Big Bang theory is a belief, it is something that can be widely known, but it can't be considered true. Gravity can be all of these, of course it doesn't mean it always will be. It maybe that it will join the notions of elemental attraction of Aristotle. Previous facts which are now considered wrong. Not even considered a theory any longer.

Like the theory of time. It is not a fact not a law ... It is a belief.

cthia wrote:I understand your sentiment. And many share it. You are in the company of the majority.

That would probably be a first ever for me.

Though i doubt i would be in that company for the same reasons. And i´m actually not sure if you´re correct either, as nowadays, people in general have been so ingrained with the idea( i consider it a delusion ) that "math can represent anything" that the majority could very well be those that believe it can be.

And if you want to force me to play with maths on the subject, consider this one then, if god exists, then by mathematical evidence, there cannot be one god.

If you find yourself with a few years of free time, try to figure the math out for that one(or try to disprove it if you can, and good luck with that!).

Then tell me when you give up and officially join the "majority" as you called it.

I came up with it a few decades ago when someone was trying to use math to prove the existence of god. They were not amused.
I was much amused, as they had previously annoyed me.



However, the basic problem with this, as i already mentioned, if you start introducing variables that can´t be defined or are specifically indeterminable, then your math is essentially completely and utterly pointless anyway.

A+B=10 is pointless/useless if for example A or B or both is an infinite value.

To take an example from a "nearby" problem, math makes it look like time is a dimension (with positive numbers in the future and negative in the past, for simplicities sake), yet you will NEVER be able to have something actually move backwards in time, as time isn´t a dimension.


And working out anything about good or evil? That´s even beyond pointless, because then you add a subjective definition of what is good or what is evil, and even worse, you give some sort of numerical or pseudonumerical values to those subjective definitions.

This is when using math for something, is specifically WRONG.

Infinite evil/infinite good=Lemon

Try to disprove the above equation. You can´t.


So to recap, no, you most definitely did not "understand my sentiment".

You wrongly dismissed my rejection as flippant, when it is a matter of >30 years of experience.

I reject the idea of using math like that because i already figured out that it doesn´t work.

cthia wrote:However, breakthroughs in science are rarely the joys of the 'majority' thinkers.

Incorrect. Breakthroughs in science that are revolutionary compared to earlier tend to not come from the "common". Most breakthroughs though are a matter of hard work by a lot of people. (or random chance even)

But it is the revolutionary work that gets all the headlines of course.


It is also a very dangerous trap of thought.

The same fallacy that leads to thinking in the category of "wow, it´s amazing how my group of people have so many talented and smart persons!".

cthia wrote:Try and imagine using both, to complement each other.

Math is far too confining, and most of all, it would slow me down drastically.

Especially due to how i do math, i can never recall rules and formulas and stuff for math(way too boring to memorise that kind of things), so i effectively work out HOW to calculate any math "on the fly" while i calculate it.

Which wasn´t really a good way to do it once i started hitting university level math.

So no, my advantage in regards to physics is that i am exceedingly good at throwing around totally abstract ideas, concepts and "items" in my mind, utterly unbound by any limits, like those math enforces...

Sure, the absence of math means it is problematic to get across to someone else (especially someone used to defining physics as math), but i don´t do that very well regardless if it is something that has nothing to do with math at all anyway.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8yjNbc ... be&t=1m58s