1
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: If you throw a mouse or elephant at someone in space, which will move them more?
« on: 05/01/2020 18:12:41 »
don't bother sending a letter, I just delete them! lol.
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.
Interesting side question. I throw the elephant at Dewey and he catches it and throws it back with the same energy. The elephant never gets to me. If we do it with the mouse, I can catch the mouse.
Question is: What's the least massive object (assuming 100 kg people) that can't be tossed back to the original person with an equal energy throw? It's somewhere between the elephant and mouse.
I'd give a hint but I follow a golden rule to not give them.
At a molecular level the slit edges can be thought of as a thin film and highly porous. Like a series of meshes. And light passing through a series of meshes produces a pattern that is similar to interference. Like in this office chair for example: https://n3.sdlcdn.com/imgs/a/q/r/Nice-Black-Metallic-Office-Chair-SDL721354557-1-5fa0c.jpg
Is it plausible the slit edges due to their porous nature are producing the interference (or diffraction) patterns?
Is the Universe's initial rapid expansion an exception to the uncertainity principle? Backwards engineering the Universe's age for locality and expansion velocity, says it is.
Was the initial expansion of the Universe, faster then the speed of light?
Is the Universe's initial rapid expansion an exception to the uncertainity principle? Backwards engineering the Universe's age for locality and expansion velocity, says it is.
a gravitational wave is no longer a force field vector, it is a gravitational wave. its spin value as a gravitational wave still dominants the photonic gamma light wave. however the tensor stress of gravity loses its 2 to 1 spin ratio over the gamma photonic light spin value. what accounts for this? this possibility comes to mind, the gamma burst strength weakens the gravitational field vector, by pushing it outward beyond where the previous gravitational field concentration existed. the concussive nature of gamma burst compresses the gravitational field; i.e.: higgs fields compressing into higgs fields, via the concussive driven higgs boson experiments. this concussion of the gravity field causes gravity to condense into a condensate, approximately equivalent to a light wave. the condensate gravity adopts a wave/particle like feature.
Quote from: yor_onThere should be a possibility of just changing the header Chris? But I didn't find it.Just edit your original post, and the title is editable to change the title of the thread.Quote from: esquirefermion matter adopts a 1/2 spin as a measure instrument. it is a tool to gauge mass traveling at the speed of light.Electrons are spin=1/2 fermions, but they can never be accelerated up to the speed of light, as that would require infinite energy.
Scientists know this, because the LEP (a predecessor to the LHC, in the same tunnel) managed to accelerate electrons and positrons very close to the speed of light, but could not reach c.
What I said was whole number bosons have a spin motion of light speed. fermions have a half spin motion to light speed. that in no way implies that fermion travels at the speed of light.Quotegravitational force has a spin factor of 2, it is also not subject to velocity. its spin 2 motion factor exceeds that of a spin 1 motion.How do you account for the detection of a neutron star merger, where the gamma rays and gravitational waves arrives almost simultaneously (<2s apart) over a travel time of around 130 million years.
This shows that photons and (hypothetical) gravitons travel at (almost) exactly the same speed.
Note that the alignment here is between the "ringdown" phase of the gravitational waves and the start of the gamma-ray burst.
- The fact that gravitational waves were detected for 100 seconds prior to the merger reflects the fact that these two neutron stars had been circling closer and closer for millions of years.
- It is only in the last 100s before merger that the gravitational wave signal was intense enough for us to detect with current equipment
- It is only in the first 2 seconds after the merger that the gamma ray signal was intense enough for us to detect with current equipment
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817
the closer to the gravitational source the stronger the gravity. the further away form the source the weaker the gravity.Quite right, but gravity is force, which is not energy.
energy seeks it lowest state. the bottom of the gravity well is at it's highest energy state.Low in a gravity well is lower energy, not higher. For example, a 1kg mass at the top of a building can perform more work than one at the bottom of the building. The one on the ground has less gravitational potential energy, all else being the same.
So that mass sort of seeks that lower energy state deeper in the well, which is why water runs downhill.
We all know that if you would translate the spin of a electron to a 'spinning top' then it would have to spin faster than light, which is a limit for anythings speed. Then we come to this " In the not-so-recent past we delved into some of the nitty-gritty of vector bosons such as the force particles of the Standard Model. We saw that relativity forces us to describe these particles with four-component mathematical objects. But alas, such objects are redundant because they encode more polarization states than are physically present. For example, a photon can’t spin in the direction of motion (longitudinal polarization) since this would mean part of the field is traveling faster than the speed of light. " https://motls.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-ate-higgs.html
Isn't that argument flawed? That ' a photon can’t spin in the direction of motion (longitudinal polarization) since this would mean part of the field is traveling faster than the speed of light. '
I agree to that a 'spin' can't be ftl, but I find it harder to agree to that a quantum mechanical spin can't take any 'direction/polarization' it want. As this argument seems to state. A quantum mechanical spin has no classical counterpart, as far as I know?
Actually I've been wondering about that before too.
Agreed. Par for the course for this poster.Quote from: esquirethis creates a qausi photonic wave capacitance.This creates a quasi nonsensical word salad.
Again, reading between the lines...Quote from: esquirea new universe manifested from within a preexisting universe, creating a bifurcated timeline.This sounds like the "Many Worlds" interpretation of Quantum Theory.
This view suggests that whenever a quantum binary decision is made, there is one reality where the event happened, and another universe where that event did not happen.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation
entanglement deals with a separation of locality, not perspective.Quotewould the manufacture of the higgs boson particle, a new fractalI see no reason to view the Higgs Boson as a fractal.
is a photon a fractal? a fractal retains the same properties at all levels. if so consider...
iop.org/resources/topic/archive/higgs/index.html
"The Higgs particle is a quantum of the Higgs field in the way a photon of light is a quantum of an electromagnetic field."
if photons are quanta force carriers for the electromagnetic field, why wouldn't the higgs boson also be a force carrier and not a "particle"?
Quotethe higgs boson particle ... assuming that it existence was indeed a speed of light breaking eventThe Higgs Boson has quite a high mass, 125GeV/c2.
This means that it cannot travel at the speed of light, let alone faster than light.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson