1
Just Chat! / Re: What to do if your question is too long to fit in the title bar?
« on: 17/05/2024 22:53:51 »
Write it in a reply to the question you just asked.
The following users thanked this post: paul cotter
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Now, say we have a pair of entangled particles. Observing one immediately changes the other.This is a misconception. Quantum theory does not say this. It simply says that if both are observed in the same way, the two measurements, when compared, will be found to be correlated.
what happens if ewe observe both the particles at the exact same time ??Simultaneity is relative, which means that in one frame, one measurement takes place first, and in another frame, the other does. In some frames the two will be simultaneous. Nothing special happens. Same as before is all. The two measurements, when compared, will be found to be correlated.
Do all vending machines dispense goods for free ?They've always been free. Ewe've just naively been stuffing money into the things, thinking it will help. It hastens the process maybe, but that's all.
That's the first step of any scientific research. Without any research gap, there will be no job for researchers.Research is the penultimate tactic for solving a problem, prayer being the last. Career researchers are not parasites like priests, but scavengers among the debris of ignorance.
Expect an experiment of a mass moving at v=c.
That's what Einstein was thinking according to Susskind.
Susskind specifically talks about railroad carriage moving with the speed of light in Einstein's thought experiment.
The conclusion in your thread is that frame is undefined under the Lorentz transformation.
Special relativity has been supported with large amounts of experimental evidence.
Fully populated 1s shell.Do you think that electrons shared by H2 don't fully populated 1s shell?
but neither function appears to activate the rear brake lights...
In Ireland when changing down in a manual the recommended method is to lightly touch the brakesAs far as I know that's not written in the "highway code" booklet (for the mainland UK) or generally expected - but I have once had such advice from my driving instructor.
covalently bonded to a central carbon atom.If you had stayed awake at school, you would have learned the difference between covalent and ionic bonding.
This is New Theories. You, I am guessing, would have advised Einstein simarly when he proposed his Theory of RElativity.Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right.
I would have thought real science begins where mathemtics ends and computer science starts.The sane people think science was around centuries before computers.
This is the definition of insanity.You said it...
I had been under the assumption that time is frozen for light because it travels at the speed of light.This is usually a result people obtain or propose just by extrapolating the Lorentz Transformation with v→c. So it can be useful to have as many ways as possible to guard against it or see where it might fail. It's especially helpful to go along with their line of reasoning and identify some potential flaws in it, which is what I'll try to do first (below). It's also possible to go straight against the line of reasoning but then people will wander around trying to figure out why their line of reasoing wasn't right and whether you might just be wrong or trying to brush a potential flaw in physics under the carpet.
This was inspired a bit by something I had been corrected about earlier. There was a discussion in another thread about black holes where I stated that black hole singularities had infinite density.That is not correct of course. The exact nature of a black hole singularity depends on the type of black hole it is (charged, rotating, etc), and of course depends on a unified theory which is lacking. In the simplest case, a Schwarzschild black hole is a vacuum solution, so there is no material at all in it at any density. Time simply ends at the singularity, and anything that gets there has no future light cone at all, so it cannot persist as compressed anything.
I had been under the assumption that time is frozen for light because it travels at the speed of light.Time is not frozen for it. Time and distance is just not meaningful for light since there is no meaningful reference frame for it.
Likewise, I had assumed that the entire universe was also length contracted to zero along the light's direction of movement, meaning that it was simultaneously at its starting and ending pointsWhich I suppose is one way to show the absurdities that result from attempting to define a frame where light is both stationary and also by definition moving at c.
So would it be more correct to say that special relativity doesn't predict the length contraction or time dilation for light?It is not meaningful for a coordinate system in which light (or anything) has an undefined local speed. Length contraction is something meaningful between a pair of inertial frames where things like distance and simultaneity are meaningful.