0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Heisenberg's relation: ΔxΔp ≥ h/2where Δx = indetermination of particle's position; Δp = indetermination of particle's momentum.If motion stopped completely, than Δp would become zero (if the particle is still, it has a precise value of its momentum: zero) --> Δx would become infinite so the particle could be everywhere. Of course the two things together are inconsistent.
Nice Lightarrow, do you mean that both those seems to be fulfilled inside a 'ideal vacuum:)I definitely should try to understand more of what physics see as 'radiation' inside a 'nothing'(ideal vacuum).This might be of interest for you?It's a 'reinterpretation' of Bell's Theorem?In it he argues that Einstein was right after all about 'quantum non-locality.'Read it, I got to admit that the math is lightyears beyond me But maybe not you.And SC and Steve and Madidus and Mr. S and....And then you can explain it )...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGIN
(I should never have opened that ***ed.pdf:)
I'm reading about Bose-Einstyein Condensates (something I know absolutely zilch about) and the zero point motion of superfluid helium is mentioned. Can someone explain ZPM in idiot language for me, please?
Even Einstein once postulated from his mathematical assertions, "Before relativity, we thought that if you removed all the matter and energy from the vacuum, spacetime would continue to exist. We now know this not to be true"
QuoteEven Einstein once postulated from his mathematical assertions, "Before relativity, we thought that if you removed all the matter and energy from the vacuum, spacetime would continue to exist. We now know this not to be true"I'd go along with the idea that energy creates it's own space to exist within but I haven't been able to formulate a logical argument to support it. And sort of related to this is; how can space expand if space (vacuum) consists of nothing? That is, how can space expand when there is nothing to expand?Of course, I'm not saying that it doesn't, just that there would appear to be more to space than meets the eye (or telescope/spectrograph etc)
Do you really want my scientific opinion...
...whilst superfluously invalidating the science behind the pipe works.
nor am i **** in giving the work for other people to learn