The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Time traveling
« Last post by Mikey11 on Today at 22:45:10 »
It has been said to travel faster then light would be to travel through time so besides the obvious 2 problems I came up with (throwing off earths gravity and not strong enough building materials) would it not be possible to build a pole from the equator however far then the top will be moving faster than light? Are there any real or theoretical problems with this plan.
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: What is space made of?
« Last post by petm1 on Today at 22:08:02 »
The average amount of space between earth and the moon is about 238,900 miles or about 1.28 light seconds via a photon.  This same trip took Apollo 8 about 57 hours, the same distance, about, but with a difference in the duration for the trip.  I will never make this trip and with this in mind I would say that space may be boundless but it is limited in time. 
Considering the long history of colliers unloading, especially at power stations, along the banks of the Thames, I think it would be surprising if there were not quite a lot of coal in the river.

Perhaps future generations will see dredging for coal in the Thames and rivers where colliers were loaded.
New Theories / Re: Is mass a field?
« Last post by Bill S on Today at 21:45:09 »
SS, you mentioned spinning a superfluid.  How would that be done?  My (very limited) understanding is that a superfluid does not react to friction as other fluids do. 

When, for example, you stir your tea, the liquid in the cup quickly picks up the momentum of the stirring action and swirls round.  Superfluid, I understand, does not do this.   If you were able to stir a container of superfluid, all that would happen would be that a succession of vortices would form along the path of the stirring instrument; the body of the liquid would remain motionless.  More vigorous stirring would just lead to more, and perhaps larger, vortices.  The super fluidity would break down locally within each vortex, but would be retained by the liquid everywhere else. 

If this is the case, wouldn’t spinning a container of superfluid just cause vortices to form around the edge, if it had any effect at all?
Interesting ..... hundreds of forums and no one is able to make a single logic analyse ... 

People pretend they dont see or understand subject :  D

(below 2d standard model vs 3d frozen )
In your interpretations, like I am understanding, Socrates model of the world haven't  this quality called spin. Although in academic physics is spin an important parameter. I think that by this defect is a whole  Socrates model of world debased and untrustworthy.
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: the inverse square law
« Last post by evan_au on Today at 21:30:20 »
the force of gravity and [electric charge] varies inversely by the square of the distance of separation D squared
A classical description is to consider "lines of force" which come out from a source (a mass or a charge). A small test object placed in this force field will experience a force which is proportional to the density of these lines of force.

These lines of force will spread out radially from an isolated source in space. Since the area of a sphere increases as D2, the density of these lines decreases as 1/D2: the inverse square law.

why if the factor is EXACTLY  D squared, does the force not become infinite at source
The source object rarely approaches zero radius.
Familiar matter has a density of 1-15 grams/cm2. This makes a measurable mass into a definitely non-zero radius.
  • Imposing a large charge on a small-radius sphere is likely to cause corona discharge, which loses the charge. That's why high-voltage sources use large spheres for the electrodes.
  • Concentrating a high mass into a small volume will collapse into a black hole, which has a non-zero radius.

Perhaps the most familiar almost-point charge is the proton, which plays a powerful role in chemistry. I have not yet seen reports of production of micro-black holes (although they are theoretical possibility).

say magnetism
Magnetism does not follow an inverse square law, because it always comes in opposing pairs (North and South)*. The "lines of force" join the North and South poles. This means that there is a degree of cancellation within any sphere, and the strength of a magnetic field decays much faster than 1/D2.

*If you ignore the hypothetical "magnetic monopole".

why if the factor is EXACTLY  D squared, does the force not become infinite at source
In the far-field, gravity and electric charge follow an inverse-square law.

However, in the near-field, local differences in the density of matter or shape of the electrode can cause changes which do not follow an inverse square law. In particular:
  • If you test the electric field inside a spherical metal electrode, the electric field is zero, due to Faraday Shielding
  • If you test the gravitational field inside a spherical mass, the gravitational field is lower than immediately outside the sphere, declining to zero at the center.

So rather than increasing to infinity when D=0, the force declines to 0 when D=0.

This has been a classical explanation. Of course, in a quantum world, the concept of zero distance is a bit vague, due to the wave-like properties of all subatomic particles (and even atomic particles).
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: What is space made of?
« Last post by Ethos_ on Today at 21:25:14 »
Quote from: Ethos_
I never claimed that space and space/time were the same.
Then what did you mean when you wrote
Quote from: Ethos_
Firstly, space can't be considered as a single entity. Mainstream science defines it more concisely as Space/Time.

Quote from: Ethos_
And if true, the space he's referring to should be termed; Space/Time.

Quote from: Ethos_
And Space/Time cannot exist devoid of field.
Why not?

Quote from: Ethos_
When people refer to space, never assume that they are speaking about the universe.
I never do. I don't know anybody that does in fact.
Please refer back to post #35 of this thread. I hadn't finished editing before you began asking your questions. If this doesn't explain my position and leave us with some common ground, then I believe we will just have to disagree...................
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: the inverse square law
« Last post by Bill S on Today at 21:11:33 »
Quote from: Pete
However if the field isn't exactly a 1/r^2 force then the mass of the photon wouldn't be zero.

Lost!  Could you explain that, please.
The Environment / Cleneast Air, Soil and Water in the world!?
« Last post by ErnieBanks512 on Today at 21:01:52 »
What part of this planet has the most pristine soil air and water (not counting Antarctica).   

I one day want to move to the cleanest place in the world and grow my own food and set up my own self sufficient lifestyle
I have come into a large amount of money that allows me to do this and I have not been able to get any clear answers.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
SMF 2.0 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Login with username, password and session length