Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do subatomic particles actually make up matter or are created in interactions?« Last post by PmbPhy on Today at 21:54:26 »
Quote from: McKay
Do subatomic particles actually make up matter or they are created in interactions?
All matter is composed of atoms and molecules. See:
A definition of "matter" more fine-scale than the atoms and molecules definition is: matter is made up of what atoms and molecules are made of, meaning anything made of positively charged protons, neutral neutrons, and negatively charged electrons. This definition goes beyond atoms and molecules, however, to include substances made from these building blocks that are not simply atoms or molecules, for example white dwarf matter—typically, carbon and oxygen nuclei in a sea of degenerate electrons. At a microscopic level, the constituent "particles" of matter such as protons, neutrons, and electrons obey the laws of quantum mechanics and exhibit wave–particle duality. At an even deeper level, protons and neutrons are made up of quarks and the force fields (gluons) that bind them together (see Quarks and leptons definition below).
« Last post by alancalverd on Today at 21:49:25 »
I understood every word. It is incorrect, illogical, and based on a narrow interpretation of "observation" which Heisenberg used to mean "interaction". It would be unwise to base even a philosophy, let alone a science, on an anthropic arrogation of an entirely sensible axiom: when things interact, they change.
« Last post by Expectant_Philosopher on Today at 21:41:23 »
Can you shift your presence on the Internet in time to create a process firewall against hacking? For a company the company would never put its current web pages on the Internet. The master copy would always update the public copy. The public copy could be a day old, a week, or a month. The company would have a periodic update scheme to destroy the current public copy, open a Virtual machine and copy the master to the virtual machine, from a non-Internet connected server. Use the virtual machine to replace the destroyed public copy. Then destroy the virtual machine. This would drastically reduce the damage to web pages. Then users could have a similar scheme to protect themselves from online malware and spam. Users could have a public face and a private face. The private face could only be accessed by strict authentication protocols. A user could filter 99% of all unwanted email. The authentication process could utilize Skype to begin the trusted relationship. Using a Skype session between two users they could transfer authentication schemes in the secure video session, with authentication passed in a background communications scheme imbedded in the Skype session. Without being authorized by the user a website or email could not penetrate to the users accounts.
« Last post by iamwhiteman on Today at 21:24:12 »
RD: You seem correct on those two, thanks for help.
Anyone else got a idea on the other 3
« Last post by JohnDuffield on Today at 20:54:13 »
Just for the record, I'm with Einstein on this. I'm not fond of spooky action at a distance, or any kind of quantum mysticism. And I can't explain Bohr's theory.
Good stuff evan.
« Last post by demografx on Today at 20:42:38 »
Blood Type A means the presence of protein "A" on the red blood cells. It may be present or absent.
Blood Type B means the presence of protein "B" on the red blood cells. It may be present or absent.
Blood Type O means the absence of both proteins "A" and "B" on the red blood cells (ie none).
You inherit a gene from each of your parents, resulting in 4 possible combinations:
In your case:
The child born to these parents can have the following combinations of the parents genes:
For the baby to have blood type O (ie none+none), both parents would need to have a "none" gene present, ie blood types A=A+none, B=B+none or O=none+none (but not A=A+A or B=B+B).
However, in this case, one parent has AB, so there is no "none" gene from that parent.
But it is possible to have grandchildren with blood type O (if that makes you feel any better...).
For more, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABO_blood_group_system
The number of combinations increases again when you add in the Rh factor...
« Last post by DonQuichotte on Today at 20:21:03 »
See the following from Nature scientific magazine :
Simulations back up theory that Universe is a hologram :
And this one from New Scientist :
Experiment tests whether universe is a hologram :
The "physical reality " might be an elaborate and persistent illusion that looks, feels , tastes , sounds ...real to all of us, who wknow ?
Read the following carefully : from New Scientist :
Quantum weirdness, the battle for the basis of reality :
Use your mind ,Cheryl, don't leave your mind to neither dlorde nor to materialism , like Descartes who left (his ) the mind to the medieval Church, metaphorically speaking then . lol
« Last post by evan_au on Today at 20:16:49 »
Quote from: PmbPhy
A photon cannot be split into two, period.
Nonlinear optical materials can do some odd things when the electric field intensity gets up around 108 V/m (eg from an intense laser). These effects were not discovered until after the invention of the laser.
One of those things is to turn a single photon into two photons, each having:
« Last post by ResistETIntervention on Today at 20:12:50 »
When you study a theory for which you find no algebraic or logical flaw, you start by investigating the statement of the theory. The problem with Einstein's theory is in the statement - in the assumptions that are labeled as postulates which people erroneously presumed as an irrefutable, absolute, universal fact.
The definition of the word "postulate" is
The time dilation theory in the website you suggested begins with the following statement:
The phenomena of time dilation can be derived from the two postulates of special relativity, namely,
This would be the "if" statement that you presume in order to derive the "then" statement in the theory. What has been misconstrued is that those postulates are absolute, universal truth that no one should question. Unlike mathematical theorems in which certain results are derived under certain assumptions without violating any physical phenomena or raising questions about them, however, due to the nature of the statement regarding the physical universe, the postulates of Einstein's theory forces us to either accept the "if" statement along with the "then" statement of the theory as absolute truth or dispose the postulates along with the conclusion and corollaries of the theory as false - the results, and thus, the postulates, which the human technology at the time (and perhaps even now...at least, to the extent that the general public is led to believe) did not evolve enough to dispute its veracity by achieving the luminal or a superluminal speed. In case you are one of the people who assert that the veracity of the postulates has been verified, I'd ask whether you validated its accuracy yourself, or you're taking someone else's word for granted.
You have two choices here:
What is necessary in considering the theory is
If we all practiced the above (humility, compassion, objectivity, and open-mindedness) in all situations in life, the human race would be that much closer in recognizing all global issues and uniting to resolve them collectively in facing the greatest challenge of human history.
© 2000–2013 The Naked Scientists®
The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.