0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
an atom is comprised of empty space
a wave is essentially empty
does an exploding super nova create holes in the space/time fabric?
Does (a supernova) separate gravity?
what if a neutrino ...was moving at the speed of light
It behaves like a particle. It has energy, spin, momentum and interacts via the weak nuclear force.
Neutrinos don't travel at the speed of light as the do not have zero rest mass. They have 1/2 spin and interact via the weak sub-atomic force. They also come in three varieties, Electron, muon and tau. All of these characteristics point to it being a particle and not a "hole in the space/time fabric".
Why have you also posted the same question in New Theories?
Some of the terminology here is rather unconventional, but I'll try to read between the lines...Quote from: esquirean atom is comprised of empty spaceAn atom has mass. So it is not entirely empty space.99.9% of this mass is concentrated in the very small nucleus, so you could almost say that the atom is mostly empty space (as some introductory science books state).Except that the atom is surrounded by electrons, and the electrons take up the entire volume of the atom (but at a much lower density than the nucleus). This model of the atom was the conclusion of a landmark experiment in Rutherford's laboratory:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger%E2%80%93Marsden_experimentQuotea wave is essentially emptyAn electron has mass, so its not empty. - But it also has some properties of a wave.- So I think this statement is vacuousthank you. I do respect your opinion as a moderator, more so then your compatriots. I understand your adherence to a certain vernacular. introductory science states that in perspective, a hydrogen atom and its single electron if viewed in the contrast of scale, the 99% nucleus mass would be viewed as a point in the middle of a football field and its 1% electron mass would located in outmost reaches of the stadium. I understand the concept of the aether like cloud surrounding the electron in its valance energy shell. however when viewing the scale of the atom in the terms described above, the atom is essentially empty space in a larger energy container. density is antithetical to motion of a wave, this why rocks don't flow. Quotedoes an exploding super nova create holes in the space/time fabric?A supernova with mass more than about 3 times the mass of the Sun will collapse into a black hole.- Some introductions to astronomy might try to explain a black hole as a "hole in the space/time fabric".- But I expect that it would take an extraordinary set of circumstances to produce more than one black hole from a supernova explosionso, tell me what are your thoughts about wormholes and how they are created? please do so in any terms of complexity you feel comfortable in explaining . if worm"holes" exist they require a means of creation. if they exist, they represent holes in the spacetime fabric. if wormholes exist, they must have a fractal property. a neutrino could represent that fractal property. Quote Does (a supernova) separate gravity?When measured at a distance, the gravitational field of a star is unchanged before, during and after the supernova. So this does not "separate gravity".However, there is an exception if the supernova is asymmetric - the gravitational field does not entirely cancel out, and part of the gravitational field travels away as a disturbance at the speed of light. In a sense, this "gravitational wave" has separated from the source.so does a gravitional wave exist in perpretuiy or does it decay? neutrinos are not subject to gravity. matter is fundamental to gravity, neutrinos are unaffected by matter. is science 101 incorrect? if a gravitional wave a field? if its a field that exists without matter, it is extremely vaccous and can function as an empty wave or hole. if it oscillate it can produce light. Quote from: OPwhat if a neutrino ...was moving at the speed of lightNeutrinos move very close to the speed of light - in fact, it's so close than no-one has managed to measure the difference in speed (yet).However, neutrino oscillation was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2015. This immediately meant that neutrinos had to travel at less than the speed of light; if they travelled at the speed of light, neutrino oscillation would not be possible.yes, if the neutrino was a particle, not so if its a hole. energy is motion, oscillation is light, is the latter restricted to a single form? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation - introductory science 102?
what are your thoughts about wormholes and how they are created?
so does a gravitional wave exist in perpretuiy or does it decay?
neutrinos are not subject to gravity.
matter is fundamental to gravity
In theory, neutrinos would slow down as they rose out of Earth's gravitational field. But they would still be travelling so close to the speed of light that you can't measure it with today's techniques.neutrinos are only lefthanded chiral, a neutrino will not couple to a higgs field because of this. gravity couples anything with mass together.
a particle is unable to alter its state.
neutrinos annihilation ends abruptly, it flashes a light.
Quote from: esquire on 12/06/2019 03:04:13In theory, neutrinos would slow down as they rose out of Earth's gravitational field. But they would still be travelling so close to the speed of light that you can't measure it with today's techniques.neutrinos are only lefthanded chiral, a neutrino will not couple to a higgs field because of this. gravity couples anything with mass together. Neutrinos have energy. Anything with energy also generates a gravitational field (and therefore responds to a gravitational field) as required by relativity's E=mc2. So yes, neutrinos are subject to gravity.you only have too refute 3 things to make the above true.neutrinos are only lefthanded chirala neutrino will not couple to a higgs fieldgravity couples anything with mass together. what's your evidence? Quote from: esquire on 11/06/2019 17:10:55a particle is unable to alter its state.What is your evidence for this? How are you defining the word "state"?Can turn iron into gold? I don't think so! can a particle alter it's basic structure? if you have evidence for this please present it. A neutrino can alter its basic structure depending on the environment it's traversing. Quote from: esquire on 11/06/2019 17:10:55neutrinos annihilation ends abruptly, it flashes a light.As far as I am aware, neutrinos have never been observed annihilating (in the sense of the normal definition of "annihilation", where interaction with anti-neutrinos would be needed). Do you have a link to support this?
you only have too refute 3 things to make the above true.neutrinos are only lefthanded chirala neutrino will not couple to a higgs fieldgravity couples anything with mass together. what's your evidence?
Can turn iron into gold? I don't think so!
can a particle alter it's basic structure? if you have evidence for this please present it. A neutrino can alter its basic structure depending on the environment it's traversing.
it the ice box, neutrinos are infrequently observed. neutrinos like proton are their own antiparticle
as such they don't decay but they annihilate.
the ice box in antarctica observes blue light flashes when a neutrino annihilates.
does any energy expel light in a decaying process?
Quote from: esquire on 12/06/2019 21:55:28you only have too refute 3 things to make the above true.neutrinos are only lefthanded chirala neutrino will not couple to a higgs fieldgravity couples anything with mass together. what's your evidence? The Higgs mechanism is not the source of all mass: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ztc6QPNUqlsThe Higgs field doesn't couple to photons either, but photons are still affected by gravity. This is demonstrated by both gravitational lensing and gravitational redshift. Relativity states that energy and mass are equivalent, so anything with energy generates a gravitational field as well. Since neutrinos have energy, we know that they must respond to gravity.a photon, has the helicity of it momentum, this can be righthanded or lefthanded. a neutrino is strictly lefthanded. a photon cannot transverse matter in the same way a neutrino transverses matter, basically unobstructed. the effect of matter on a photon is different then the effect of matter (energy'momentum} on a neutrino, where matter, energy and momentum, have no effect on neutrinos. the fact that a higgs field also doesn't couple with a massless photon is not pertinent to a discussion about neutrinos. please explain how neutrinos transverses the earth unaffected if they are under gravity's auspices. "gravity couples anything with mass {energy'momentum) together".photons have a wave property. i have not heard of neutrinos demonstrating a wave property. photons and neutrinos are apples and oranges. would you conduct an experiment on one element and declare the results pertinent for other elements? I will acquiesces the remainder of my points as being flawed in their presentation. although the transmutations of neutrinos donot take place as nuclear transmutation, requiring excessive amounts of energy but rather they transmute Innocuously, depending on the local matter environment.