0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Is there any other form of matter that does not conduct/reflect/pass on or otherwise be affected by sound waves?
If the 'dark matter' out there is really 'matter' won't it have mass? And if it has mass why doesn't it conduct sound waves and so let us hear 'the music of the spheres"(probably loud explosions/mostly percussion etc.)
Thankyou for that reference it is useful I was wondering what effects the expansion of the universe (dark energy) might have on galaxies.
As to your own contraversial statement in the last line of your comment it adds up to nothing unless you explain clearly what you mean and show how it fits into the general scheme of observations.
Jul 11, 2008Binary AsteroidsWhat causes asteroids to split apart?Scientists have been studying small planetoids called Near Earth Objects (NEO) for the past thirty years. Some concerns have arisen about whether large space rocks could strike our planet since current theories suggest that one of them caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. The Earth has supposedly been struck many times by asteroids and comets, so astronomers have been tracking as many objects as they can find to see if any of them cross the plane of Earth's orbit.http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00current.htm
Bishadi is a Troll spouting rubbish...
In what way was Planck wrong?
Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 16/07/2008 19:00:52Eh?  then ask a question
because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.
Quote from: Bishadi on 17/07/2008 16:46:03Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 16/07/2008 19:00:52Eh?  then ask a questionI did ask a question. I asked how Planck was wrong.
http://www.astro.uu.se/~mizuno/DynProc/2003_virial.pdfThoughts on the Virial Theorem• What did we leave out?• How about different masses?• Collisions? Close encounters?• Timescales
Yes, I am aware of why QM was developed.
I am aware of why String Theory was developed. I am aware of why Quantum Loop Gravity was developed.
then i shared this truth...because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.and you respond with thisIf that means what I think it means, then it is totally wrong. Entropy following the "Arrow Of Time" is exactly how the environment is. We observe it around us all the time.
Are you referring to the Gibbs artifact?
That can be easily explained and reduced by using smoothing filters. I fail to grasp what it has to do with entropy.
You still haven't told me how Planck was wrong.
I most certainly will not remove the Doctor from my name. I earned my doctorate at Cambridge and I'm very proud of that fact.If you just want to trade insults rather than conduct a serious scientific discussion then you have very much picked on the wrong person.
Eh? In what way was Planck wrong? As for the rest of what you said, I haven't a clue what you mean.
I asked you to explain how Planck was wrong. I haven't yet seen you address that.
In what way was Planck wrong?
§1. Entropy depends on disorder and this disorder, according to the electromagnetic theory of radiation for the monochromatic vibrations of a resonator when situated in a permanent stationary radiation field, depends on the irregularity with which it constantly changes its amplitude and phase, provided one considers time intervals large compared to the time of one vibration but small compared to the duration of a measurement. If amplitude and phase both remained absolutely constant, which means completely homogeneous vibrations, no entropy could exist and the vibrational energy would have to be completely free to be converted into work. The constant energy U of a single stationary vibrating resonator accordingly is to be taken as time average, or what is the same thing, as a simultaneous average of the energies of a large number N of identical resonators, situated in the same stationary radiation field, and which are sufficiently separated so as not to influence each other directly. It is in this sense that we shall refer to the average energy U of a single resonator. Then to the total energy
As for the rest of what you said, I haven't a clue what you mean.
The only proof I've seen you offer so far is that your impudence is matched only by your arrogance.
it is probably why i prefer working alone
Precisely; what does this mean? "because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy"Are you suggesting that entropy must be bi- or multi-directional for the environment to be observed?
that entropy is biased and life or a living structure abuses entropy.
Quotethat entropy is biased and life or a living structure abuses entropy. Are you experimenting with LSD?
What I think you're trying to say about entropy (although your wording & spelling leads me to think English is not your first language)
applies only to closed systems.
or by I don't think you can call life a closed system.
Surely someone with your gargantuan intellect would not make such a basic, schoolboy error.
No it doesn't. There. I've answered a question which is more than you have managed to do.
So you're leaving without offering any proof? Why doesn't that surprise me!