0 Members and 15 Guests are viewing this topic.
Most people are ignorant about almost everything, and there's a lot of rubbish on the internet. Thanks to AI, there's an infinite amount of recycled rubbish too. But there's a lot of knowledge and understanding in good science textbooks.
Good textbooks give you equations that predict what you actually observe.
I have textbooks that explain why the concept is an oxymoron. I think we discussed it at least a year ago.
Edges diffract. The diffracted intensity downstream of a "permeable edge" is likely to be weak and probably swamped by refraction.
This concept falls under the umbrella of the problem of induction. Here's why:We might see many white swans and conclude "all swans are white." This is based on observing multiple instances.But logic doesn't allow us to guarantee a universal truth from specific examples. There could always be a black swan we haven't encountered yet.The discovery of black swans in Australia in the 17th century famously disproved the idea that all swans are white. This highlights the importance of considering the possibility of exceptions when making generalizations.There isn't a single, universally agreed-upon name for this specific fallacy, but some terms that might be relevant include:Affirming the consequent: This fallacy occurs when you assume because something follows from a hypothesis, the hypothesis must be true. In this case, seeing only white swans might lead you to believe all swans are white, which isn't necessarily true.False dichotomy: This fallacy presents a situation as having only two options, when there might be more. In this case, it might lead someone to think swans are either white or not swans (black), excluding the possibility of swans having other colors.So, while the statement itself isn't a fallacy, it demonstrates an important concept in logic: don't mistake limited observations for absolute truths.
Typical bunkum from a chatbot.You need to distinguish between an edge and a planar interface.
the edge of a simple aluminum plate also shows non-diffractive behavior in microwave transmission.
I have uploaded new video showing diffraction in microwave frequency.//www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NEsb8J9DroBasically, the experiment result leads us to conclude that diffraction comes from the material blocking the microwave path. When the obstruction is opaque enough, we find no diffraction. It's similar to my experiment using laser showing non-diffractive obstruction.This result is not widely known yet.
Please remind me of the original experimental videohttps://www.nikhef.nl/~h73/kn1c/praktikum/phywe/LEP/Experim/4_5_05.pdf suggests otherwise
What do you think was happening at 1:24?
Doesn't matter. It has been replaced by Quantum Computing.
You need to distinguish between an edge and a planar interface.
Chemistry text books say molecules like glucose store energy in bonds. Are they wrong? What even is chemical energy anyway? And what ARE chemical bonds? And are they JUST abstract concepts? Are Derek Muller and Nick Lucid correct when they say bonds don?t store energy? We look at the science and chemistry of molecular energy and answer the question: Where do molecules store their energy?
What IS activation energy, really?