TIZER'S SCIENCE NEWS

[Tizer]

I'm glad to hear that some people think the same as me! A couple of years ago I emailed Prof Brian Cox (but never got a reply) to propose that what we call time is only our perception of movement. My thinking had proceeded like yours, Ian, from the fact that our Earth time is all down to movement of planets but the more you delve into the idea the better it gets. An atomic clock is based on oscillation. Heat is movement of atomic particles. If nothing moved the universe would be at absolute zero and there would be nothing we could identify as time. But once a particle or wave moves from A to B we would say time has passed. No movement, no time.

Now it's `time' for my cup of tea and a cake!

[plaques]

If nothing moved the universe would be at absolute zero and there would be nothing we could identify as time. But once a particle or wave moves from A to B we would say time has passed. No movement, no time.

But didn't Einstein show that 'time' was a function of 'space time' which was dependent on gravity and speed. It would then appear that for there to be no 'time' both gravity and speed would have to be zero. Don't profess to understand it myself but that's nothing new.

PS. what kind of cake did you have.

[Tripps]

Don't profess to understand it myself but that's nothing new.

Seconded. . . .

I thought for some time I was the only one who thought we live in a perpetual 'present' and that time was just a human invention. Still do to some extent. Still not fully convinced about the moon - all a bit too good to be true.

On the tree falling in the forest - if no one hears it, does it exist? There are two parts to a sound. On the transmit side it does, as that is compressions and rarefactions of the air, so if anyone was there it would be 'heard'. If no one was present then it wouldn't. However it would still exist as a sort of 'potential sound'. On the receive side, the ear turns the changes of pressure into electrical signals to the brain - or would do if and when you all get the olive oil out of your lugs! So if no one hears it, there is no sound registered in a brain, but if anyone was - then they would.

Are you keeping up? Feel free to ignore, and I wouldn't argue with another view -

As Cathy very wisely says "I know I'm in my own little world, but it's OK... they know me here".

[plaques]

I already have a difference of opinion to Professor Brian Cox. The problem is basically why there is a simultaneous high tide at the opposite sides of the Earth. Simple logic would suggest that if the moon causes a high tide at one side then it must cause a low tide at the opposite side. The given explanation is that gravity acts on the sides (somehow) squeezing a bulge at both ends.

I won't bore OG readers with my theory since it may ultimately involve men in white coats.

[Tripps]

Brian Cox

Cox was born in the Royal Oldham Hospital, later living in nearby Chadderton.
He performed poorly on his maths A-level exam: "I got a D ... I was really not very good" . . .

All the above we have in common. In fact that's the sum total of what we have in common.

[Stanley]

I never think about the nature of time, just its effects. I have spent most of my life ruled by the clock and when I was driving I had a calculation going on in my head that involved time and distance. Nothing ever happened to disturb my perception of what was happening. The only time I got close to that was the first time I flew over the Pacific West to East and had the interesting experience of landing in LA an hour before I left Sydney. A well meaning lady tried to explain it to me but I declined the offer. It was sufficient for me that it happened.
(Yes, you're quite right, I'm a simple minded bugger.)

[Tizer]

The problem is basically why there is a simultaneous high tide at the opposite sides of the Earth.

Tides and Water Levels: Gravity, Inertia, and the Two Bulges

[plaques]

Tides and Water Levels: Gravity, Inertia, and the Two Bulges

I'm familiar with most of the explanations on YouTube etc: none of them make sense to me. I'm a bit like Cathy. "I know I'm in my own little world, but it's OK... they know me here."

[Stanley]

When I see a puzzle like that I think of a Bible quotation... "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof".

[Whyperion]

Brian Cox

Cox was born in the Royal Oldham Hospital, later living in nearby Chadderton.
He performed poorly on his maths A-level exam: "I got a D ... I was really not very good" . . .

All the above we have in common. In fact that's the sum total of what we have in common.

Thats Odd , I got a D too. I got a C in Further Maths. Go Figure, as they say

[Tizer]

Don't bother with gold or diamonds, buy nickel!... (By the way, the word comes from the German for `devil'!)
`The perfect storm increasing the cost of a crucial metal' LINK

[Tripps]

Do I believe it because it's from Princeton, or ignore it because it's in the 'Mail' ?

Shrinking Universe

Despite them saying it will happen 'remarkably soon' - everything is relative, and I think I'll try not to worry about it.

[Stanley]

Peter... Re. nickel. That is going to become a common story in future as all the metals we use are finite natural resources we exploit mercilessly and they will start to fail, the rarer ones first. We see the start of this now but it will get worse.
David, the latter, anything like that in the Mail needs external verification so ignore it until you are satisfied it's a pressing matter.

[Tizer]

I'm not worried about what's going to happen 65 million years in the future, I'm more concerned about what happens on 9th May when Putin celebrates `Victory Day'!

[Sue]

Brian Cox

Cox was born in the Royal Oldham Hospital, later living in nearby Chadderton.
He performed poorly on his maths A-level exam: "I got a D ... I was really not very good" . . .

All the above we have in common. In fact that's the sum total of what we have in common.

I can’ t abide the man. I never watch his programmes particularly when he presents a biological programme as an expert when I believe he has no or few qualifications in it at all. I find him self centred and self obsessed, and find it difficult to listen to him with that silly, ‘I am wonderful’ smile. My non scientific female friends think he is wonderful...........

[Tripps]

Aye - we're a rum bunch from Chadderton. It features in Scott and Bailey. They mentioned 'Chaddy Baths'

I don't watch him as I have no interest in cosmology, and don't understand it. On a different time scale I still imagine the whole Milky Way is just someone lighting a cigarette in another giant slow zone. There are plenty who do get the immediate 'change channel' response though. Perhaps it's time to compile a list.

As Cathy very wisely says "I know I'm in my own little world, but it's OK... they know me here".

[Sue]

Aye - we're a rum bunch from Chadderton. It features in Scott and Bailey. They mentioned 'Chaddy Baths'

I don't watch him as I have no interest in cosmology, and don't understand it. On a different time scale I still imagine the whole Milky Way is just someone lighting a cigarette in another giant slow zone. There are plenty who do get the immediate 'change channel' response though. Perhaps it's time to compile a list.

See Cathy's sign off. . . .

Chaddy baths....our girls used to swim there in inter club galas when young

[plaques]

I can’ t abide the man. I never watch his programmes particularly when he presents a biological programme as an expert when I believe he has no or few qualifications in it at all. I find him self centred and self obsessed, and find it difficult to listen to him with that silly, ‘I am wonderful’ smile. My non scientific female friends think he is wonderful...........

I agree. I once watched him trying to explain entropy with respect to the gradual decaying of matter, not an easy subject but somehow made it so complicated that it made one wonder if he knew what he was talking about. Finished up with the usual Cheshire cat exit.

[Stanley]

I think we are building a consensus here! His style annoys me also.
"I'm more concerned about what happens on 9th May when Putin celebrates `Victory Day'! "
Peter, I think that's what the intensification of the assault on the steelworks at Mariupol is all about. He can't say he has opened the corridor to the Crimea until he has winkled the last resistance out of there. He is going to be so pissed off if he fails! Then it really does get dangerous.....

[Tizer]

US intelligence officials have been warning that Putin might mark Victory Day by using a `tactical' nuclear weapon in Ukraine or something else similarly dramatic. He's also angry now because Germany is sending its big self-propelled guns to Ukraine Panzerhaubitze 2000

[Stanley]

That's an impressive piece Peter and will be one of the reasons why Ukraine is reportedly having success driving Russian artillery units to retreat until their primary targets are out of range for them as the.Ukrainian artillery have greater reach. However, the problem with quick firing at that rate is ammunition supply. It's never simple!

[Tizer]

Anthony Loyd has an interesting article in The Times. He's been talking to Ukrainian fighter pilots. They're far outnumbered by the Russian aircraft and less advanced. A Russian fighter can lock on to them at up to 100 km but the Ukrainian aircraft are old and don't have that facility. Instead of being suicidal and trying to engage the Russians directly they draw them into the range of the Ukrainian missile defences and leave it to them to do the kills.

[Stanley]

Using their heads instead of sticking to the rule book! That's how the Battle of Britain was won..... Adapting tactics to the situation prevailing. Good luck to them.

[Tizer]

Farm machinery and dinosaurs!...
`Farm machinery exacting heavy toll on soil - study' LINK

[Stanley]

The scientists are quite right Peter but are stating the bleeding obvious, perhaps it was a slow news day.
70 years ago when I started my farm experience one of the big problems on the heavy clay lands of Warwickshire was 'plough pan' which was a consequence of the introduction of the Fordson tractor tractor to replace horses. The tractors ran two wheels in the furrow bottom and over the years as this was untouched by the standard ploughs in use a hard sub surface developed which stopped water penetrating the subsoil and upset natural drainage. Deep tined cultivators could break this up but needed more power than the normal tractors and only steam ploughing tackle was really effective. They were thin on the ground and Fowler of Leeds brought out a powered rotating cultivator, usually used on the back of a crawler tractor and called the Gyrotiller. (LINK)
Note that this damaging compaction was done with a relatively small tractor on narrow iron wheels. The modern Behemoths mentioned in the article are on enormous tyres and often tracks and probably don't exert the same ground pressure as the old Fordsons. I very much doubt if this is a serious problem.
Even in Barlick where we only have small fields I note the ever growing size of machinery used by our local contractor. They use bigger machinery in the pursuit of greater efficiency and seem to be getting away with it. However on our soils the greatest danger is breaking field drains not compaction.