Recent content by Max364

...but is it correct to say: Speed² (in space) + Time² (in space) = 1 ?? derived using Pythagorus (explained at 10-13 minutes in)....the trade off between Speed and Time, at maximum speed Time is zero and at max Time, Speed would be zero.

Hi, found this interesting article: Covid-19: politicisation, “corruption,” and suppression of science https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425 did not want to start a new thread - so thought it best applied here. Are politicians and govts etc cherry picking science? competing interests? etc

Thank you for that Peter and your further explanation of the Block Universe in that article. Would it be true to say that every point in space exists in a different time? (due to spacetime nature - ie, its own time for every point) - this is because in objects/mass causing warping of space must...

I should have added: Andromeda Paradox explained here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietdijk%E2%80%93Putnam_argument

By emerging , i mean each person/object experiences its own rate of time passage (hence, can not agree on simultaneity of events etc), my time is unique to me even though it is almost exactly the same as yours, as we occupy almost the same space (relatively) v+t=1, yes for wordlines or even...

Time may be an emerging quantity?, ie, arises from mental construct? also from another discussion elsewhere i commented: Taking the speed of light as a unity value of 1 then v + t = C = 1 ie the sum of total speed and time must always be 1. so for a photon (speed of light) v is at maximum so...

Thanks but i am well aware of the other Indices. Langeliar SI (and S&DI for seawaters) is specific to CaCO3 because it also depends upon bicarbonate speciation and pH. But most other SI only depend on the ionic concentrations etc. You may find more info here of interest...

We compare ionic product concentrations with Ksp so that we know whether a given solution is near saturation or not etc. If you read my original question again, i mention that excess Ca distorts the SI calc in this example etc...so i referred to concentrations throughout - no contradiction...

Yes but SI values are not plucked out of the air, they are calculated using concentrations, i am saying that if you were doing the calcs for SI using concentrations then you WILL be able to tell which is more scaling. But you are right that if one only had SI values that someone quoted then you...

I disagree, using only the SI information, both examples being 100 in this case, looking at the actual concentrations used in the calculation one can conclude that one water is more scaling than the other, ie, 400ppm Ca and 12ppm F is more scaling than 6% Ca and 1ppm F, simply because...

So what do you understand by the two examples above - both giving SI of 100? Are you saying that if you had to predict scaling of these two waters based on SI you would conclude that they are both equally scaling?

OK let's put it another way: In the above eg i had 400ppm Ca and 12ppm F to give me SI of 100 - so that water will scale. But if we had 6% Ca (60,000ppm) and only 1ppm F this will give me the same SI for CaF2, ie, 100, yet this water will not have any noticeable scale in terms of grams...

Yes that's correct, any value over 1 means ppt...SI is just a way to predict scaling. The point is does having excessive one species over another making the actual calc incorrect for prediction?

I have a question about calculating solubilities of sparingly soluble salts. Eg Ksp CaF2 = 4 x 10-11 So, Saturation Index of CaF2 is: SICaF2 = IP / Ksp Where IP = Ionic Product = [Ca2+] x [F-]2 [Ca2+] and [F-] are molar concentrations of each ion. Example: We have 400 ppm Ca and 12 ppm...