1

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Were Michelson and Morley wrong in their predictions?

« on: 20/09/2017 02:38:34 »

Here. http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/michelson.html

Read it carefully and I think you will see how it worked. It's detailed and rather nice.

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Why is the structure of an atom depicted as spherical?

« on: 19/08/2017 08:55:54 »

Spheres are interesting. For example, is a 'point' spherical? And it is a very special figure of geometry in that you can't define a 'start', nor an 'end' to it. At a quantum level they lose their definitions though.
=

Actually it might have to do with classical thoughts of existence and geometry. We always stand on others shoulders

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How could we measure speed in deep space?

« on: 29/07/2017 20:03:47 »

You might presume that the universe has a common uniform motion, without defining that as a 'speed'. That won't tell you your own 'speed' though as the universe is expanding at the same time. The best thing might be to use your own sun as some standard of being 'still', and measure your new relative motion relative that.

I've been wondering about that one too Jeffrey, and the point seems to be that it's accelerating that change your motion, and there 'c' can't be reached. It's like you have two states, one is uniform motion the other is acceleration.  There is no real definition of what 'speed' is in a uniform motion, and neither would I say, in a acceleration.

There is a trick some use though. Picking a very distant star that 'doesn't move' as some reference of being 'still' and define it from there.

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Does Newton's shell theorem account for tidal forces?

« on: 02/01/2017 09:21:25 »

Heh, should have read the whole link I gave there. But it seemed quite obvious to me that Newton wouldn't have considered tidal forces. But I was wrooonnng The mathematics was good enough to allow for tidal forces too it seems.
=

II shall hereby atone for my mistake with a humble offering to the Gods, and anyone interested

Isaac Newton and the Laws of Motion and Gravitation 1 
Isaac Newton and the Laws of Motion and Gravitation 2 

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Was the very early Universe massless?

« on: 16/12/2016 15:58:57 »

I think you got it Bill
You just want it put in black and white.

'c' may be a constant, observer dependent, but you can 'slow it down'. At least the way I see it, so 'matter' handle it 'differently', although it depends on definitions.

6

That CAN'T be true! / Re: Could a person write two different exam answers, one with each hand?

« on: 06/11/2016 20:56:45 »

Well zx16. the more complicated the question, the greater ones uncertainty of the answer being correct, you have to know how to formulate the question without ambiguity as I read it. Had a really nice link a couple of years ago to it, but that was then, not now.
=

Maybe this can give an idea?

"The concept of finding a good configuration of binary variables (switches) in this way lies at the heart of many problems that are encountered in everyday applications. A few are shown in figure below. Even the concept of scientific discovery itself is an optimization problem (you are trying to find the best 'configuration' of terms contributing to a scientific equation which match real world observations)."

http://www.dwavesys.com/tutorials/background-reading-series/quantum-computing-primer

===

And no, remember Feynman Paths zx16?  That's how I think of it any way, as if a quantum computer was supposed to 'take' all of those paths 'simultaneously' (another great example of where something are supposed to do 'several things' simultaneously, but not in a classical way) so arriving to the only way left, as the other takes themselves out. The fuzziness disappear, depending on the quality of the question.
==

what I really wonder about is if there couldn't be a theorem defining it? The relation between ones try for a stringent unambiguous question, relative a answers quality? Maybe also defining limits to it? Maybe there is and I've missed it though.

7

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How is the speed of light measured ?

« on: 06/11/2016 20:02:42 »

You need to take this one to 'new theories' I think.

8

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Are black holes shaped by the momentum of what falls into them?

« on: 04/11/2016 22:21:24 »

The point might be that I actually agree with Ethos. Not that I like 'dimensions' specifically, but I do like the idea of reducing the ones we measure. On the other tentacle a fifth 'dimension' could be seen as 'one dimension¨' too, depending on your mathematics. But it wasn't what I got frustrated on in this case. It was the idea of telling me that someone 'knew' what a Black hole 'means'.

9

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Did Time Happen First ?

« on: 24/10/2016 20:40:05 »

Ouch
give me more time please, I'm hungry

there are some ideas where you can read a Feynman diagram 'both ways' as I remember. Then again, up here at the macroscopic level I doubt anyone to dispute the direction of 'time'. Although I know of at least one guy waiting, until his death, for this illusion to fall. A really clever guy working at the same university as Einstein.

If you look at it 'relativistically' then SpaceTime is a whole concept, so I'm not sure one can say what came 'first'?

10

General Science / How safe is the wax on apples?

« on: 02/02/2010 19:01:55 »

"If you walked out into an orchard, picked an apple from the tree and rubbed that apple on your shirt, you would notice that it shined – you've just polished the natural wax that an apple produces to protect its high water content. Without wax, fruits and vegetables like apples would lose their vital crispness and moisture through normal respiration and transpiration – eventually leaving them soft and dry (yuck!).

After harvest, apples are washed and brushed to remove leaves and field dirt before they are packed in cartons for shipping to your local market. This cleaning process removes the fruit's original wax coating, so to protect the fruit many apple packers will re-apply a commercial grade wax. One pound of wax may cover as many as 160,000 pieces of fruit; perhaps two drops is the most wax covering each apple.

Waxes have been used on fruits and vegetables since the 1920s. They are all made from natural ingredients, and are certified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be safe to eat. They come from natural sources including carnauba wax, from the leaves of a Brazilian palm; candellia wax, derived from reed-like desert plants of the genus Euphorbia; and food-grade shellac, which comes from a secretion of the lac bug found in India and Pakistan. These waxes are also approved for use as food additives for candy and pastries. (Now you know why your chocolate bars melt in your mouth but not in your hand…)

The commercial waxes do not easily wash off because they adhere to any natural wax remaining on the fruit after cleaning. Waxed produce can be scrubbed with a vegetable brush briefly in lukewarm water and rinsed before eating to remove wax and surface dirt. (Using detergents on porous foods like apples is not recommended!) "