Actually I read an article in some magazine where there is some point in a black hole where if you hit it (and you'll be going really fast when you do, because of the high gravity) you will be blown into a million pieces. It's been a while, so I could be wrong. The thing is, space and time are so distorted in a black hole that if you throw something into one, it'll be ripped apart anyway because the gravity will stretch and eventually break whatever it was you tossed in. That's my two cents on that subject.

well the immense forces in play in a black hole do tend to do funny things like create time dilations, rip things apart and toy around with the laws of physics.

on another subject, i really want to know more about the relation between electromagnetism and gravity. if some ichigo-er knows a bit about that, any information will be much appreciated.

on another subject, i really want to know more about the relation between electromagnetism and gravity. if some ichigo-er knows a bit about that, any information will be much appreciated.
What exactly do you mean? The unification of the elemental forces at extremely high temperatures? Or something string theory related? ;)

no i was just thinking about the gravity beam emitter in "BLAME!". now i know that EM interacts with gravity from school or even Heim's theories - "In Heim's six-dimensional world, the forces of gravity and electromagnetism are coupled together. Even in our familiar four-dimensional world, we can see a link between the two forces through the behavior of fundamental particles such as the electron. An electron has both mass and charge. When an electron falls under the pull of gravity its moving electric charge creates a magnetic field. And if you use an electromagnetic field to accelerate an electron you move the gravitational field associated with its mass."

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200-take-a-leap-into-hyperspace.html

I'm just trying to learn more about this crazy correlation between EM and gravity that might one day become directed energy weapons or methods of transportation.

"The unification of the elemental forces at extremely high temperatures?" - MORE OF THIS. any source on that? thats really cool.

Scanning over the last few posts, it seems that if humans will harness and produce EM to make weapons, they would obviously explode. It almost looks like that this would be the next SOMETHING-bomb (A-bomb, H-bomb for ex) but this could also be useful for not only exploding the selected target, but good for taking out electrical communications of that area.

Could be very useful for furture warfare actually; since everything is getting computerized. (Remember, I'm not a big scientist, but I always like to get myself into Physics and Science; weither or not I know all the basics.) :heh:

ummm... what?

that was like... completely off topic.

no i was just thinking about the gravity beam emitter in "BLAME!". now i know that EM interacts with gravity from school or even Heim's theories - "In Heim's six-dimensional world, the forces of gravity and electromagnetism are coupled together. Even in our familiar four-dimensional world, we can see a link between the two forces through the behavior of fundamental particles such as the electron. An electron has both mass and charge. When an electron falls under the pull of gravity its moving electric charge creates a magnetic field. And if you use an electromagnetic field to accelerate an electron you move the gravitational field associated with its mass."

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200-take-a-leap-into-hyperspace.html

I'm just trying to learn more about this crazy correlation between EM and gravity that might one day become directed energy weapons or methods of transportation.
I'm rather sceptic of Heim's theory to be honest. It's highly speculative and has absolutely no experimental data backing it up. There's no experiment that indicates a correlation between EM and gravity. I admit that it would be really cool if it were possible to reduce gravity with EM though. ;)


"The unification of the elemental forces at extremely high temperatures?" - MORE OF THIS. any source on that? thats really cool.
The electromagnetic, the weak and strong force, unify into one force at very high temperatures (10^14 GeV I think) and some theories say that gravity will unify with them at even higher energies (10^15 GeV).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_theory
http://www.answers.com/topic/grand-unification-theory?cat=technology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_energy


Scanning over the last few posts, it seems that if humans will harness and produce EM to make weapons, they would obviously explode. It almost looks like that this would be the next SOMETHING-bomb (A-bomb, H-bomb for ex) but this could also be useful for not only exploding the selected target, but good for taking out electrical communications of that area.

Could be very useful for furture warfare actually; since everything is getting computerized. (Remember, I'm not a big scientist, but I always like to get myself into Physics and Science; weither or not I know all the basics.) :heh:
I'm a pacifist, lol ;) but of course the military would love to have sci-fi weapons, however, I doubt they would be more effective than "normal" ones.
I agree that EMPs would be useful for the military, still... I hate it when scientific discoveries are used by the military, actually I dislike all kinds of weapons and warfare. :)

There's no experiment that indicates a correlation between EM and gravity.


what the hell are you talking about??? It's a proven FACT that EM *can't* exit a black hole. if a black hole was between a 2 people with radios, they could never hear each other.

EM does interact with gravity and vice versa.

what the hell are you talking about??? It's a proven FACT that EM *can't* exit a black hole. if a black hole was between a 2 people with radios, they could never hear each other.
Of course EM radiation "*can't* exit a black hole". Nothing can. It's a proven fact indeed, but it doesn't help your argument.
No information can leave black holes, that naturally also includes EM radiation. I think you misunderstood something here, the gravity of the black hole interacts with the (relativistic) mass of the particles, not with their charge. Your example is somewhat misleading, depending on the distance of the 2 people with radios, the size of the black hole and the angle in which they send their communication signals it is possible to transfer a signal from one side of the black hole to the other, because of the curvature of space-time.... but that aside:
There have been experiments with superconducting materials and rotating magnetic fields and up to now they all failed to effect the gravitational pull that is being exerted on the superconductor. Some scientist claim that they succeeded, others failed to reproduce their empiric data which basically renders them unreliable and useless.

Scanning over the last few posts, it seems that if humans will harness and produce EM to make weapons, they would obviously explode.e.g. G.E.N.E.S.I.S. (http://www.gundamofficial.com/worlds/ce/background/glossary_technology.html#genesis) ?

Graphic screenshots of G.E.N.E.S.I.S. in action are freely available on the intarbutts internet.

well a more realistic view would be if EM is more harnessed in the future, plasma weapons would be more possible since the big trouble with plasma is it needs to be contained so it doesn't dissolve right after exiting the "barrel".

A plasma weapon always seemed pointless to me....It would be nothing more than a big-kids' super soaker. EM weapons seem far more effective.

say that again when a 10 million degree bolt of EM encased gas punches a clean, cauterized hole through bullet proof glass, vests, bunkers and other fun things at a quarter of the speed of light.

wort wort wort!

EM encased gas? I'm intrigued....

10 million degree sounds a bit unrealistic, there IS plasma that's 15 million degree hot... but, that's like, uhm, the core of the sun? I daresay there won't be fusion powered weapons in the near future.

P.S: ... did I mention that weapons are worthless? :/

P.S: ... did I mention that weapons are worthless? :/I'm thinking of C&C: Red Alert for some reasons. =/

EM encased gas? I'm intrigued....


10 million degree sounds a bit unrealistic, there IS plasma that's 15 million degree hot... but, that's like, uhm, the core of the sun? I daresay there won't be fusion powered weapons in the near future.

P.S: ... did I mention that weapons are worthless? :/

@Ripple: well any gas in a state of plasma has to be encased in some sort of magnetic field or it just goes literally "poof" like smoke in the wind. the tricky part is plasma interacts with the EM field itself, and that results in it being pretty incontrollable, to the point of it going "poof". scientists have already can be verified) created plasma in excess of 10 million degrees centigrade for 0.5 seconds. with the new fusion program in Europe, new ways of starting and containing the plasma from the fusion reaction are begin developed. like the donut shaped chamber and all.

@Matt&Ripple: what i would imagine that a plasma "cannon" would simply be a fusion generator with a hole in it. the hole would be "closed" most of the time because of the containment EM field, and firing the thing would simply be a "breech" in the field many kilometers long, yet millimeters in diameter.

@Matt: i agree that weapons are useless, childish, selfish and disgusting things.

but I'm sure that you would like one of these cannons say, if a meteor is about to this the earth. I'm not going to go into the details of how to safely repel a meteor or its debris from hitting the earth by using plasma, but i mean COME ON. we as a race have not advanced enough to be able to survive without tools to help us live.

when we can freely influence these things or even not need to, by means of, most likely, quantum physics and dynamics, i will say that weapons are useless since that level of advancement will be far after humans will have stopped killing each other at all.

for your intelligence, your naivety is surprising, although its nice to have a idealist in this board.

Any kind of portable plasma weapon will be years upon years in the future, as fusion reactors are not yet perfected.

is 100 years so unrealistic?

the Europe fusion projects successful results by 2016.

portable, i agree it would take a bit more.

But I'm sure that you would like one of these cannons say, if a meteor is about to hit the earth.Logical fallacy detected. Logical fallacy identified. See Misleading Vividness (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/misleading-vividness.html). What is the statistical probability of a metor hitting Earth? What is the statistical probability of these cannons being by humans on humans?


We as a race have not advanced enough to be able to survive without tools to help us live.We as a race have not advanced enough to be able to choose the right tools for the right job, too.


For your intelligence, your naivety is surprising, although its nice to have a idealist in this board.This is uncalled for.

What is the statistical probability of a metor hitting Earth?


very very very low.

but if it happens, you would be swearing at yourself for days.

better be safe then sorry i say.

and stop it with th pseudo intellectual vocabulary, you can just say "i think you are wrong and this is why"

Very very very low.

But if it happens, you would be swearing at yourself for days.

Better be safe then sorry I say.Your argument is illogical, statistically unlikely, and sensationalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensationalism).


and stop it with th pseudo intellectual vocabulary, you can just say "i think you are wrong and this is why"I like to play at being superior, too.

bah, sure is fun kicking up a shitstorm once in a while, eh?

gotta admit... plinking cans with a fusion plasma cannon would be worlds of fun.

Gotta admit... plinking cans with a fusion plasma cannon would be worlds of fun.Agreed.


Gotta admit... plinking cans worlds with a fusion plasma cannon would be worlds of fun. Alternate version.

lmao

I've thought for a while now that a mini particle accelerator would be a pretty good weapon. The energy released when a proton slams into another is amazing.

it would be feared by atoms throughout the galaxy.

i think its so small scale the amount of particles needed to actually do something would just make it a coilgun.

@Matt: i agree that weapons are useless, childish, selfish and disgusting things.
That's good :)


@Matt&Ripple: what i would imagine that a plasma "cannon" would simply be a fusion generator with a hole in it. the hole would be "closed" most of the time because of the containment EM field, and firing the thing would simply be a "breech" in the field many kilometers long, yet millimeters in diameter.
That wouldn't work, with the hole in the reactor there wouldn't be enough pressure to start and keep the fusion going and it would be almost impossible to weaken the magnetic field that is needed only at this particular place


for your intelligence, your naivety is surprising, although its nice to have a idealist in this board.
Oh believe me, I have a very very analytical mind. If I were naive I'd be hanging out with my friends from Scientology and measure my brain-size (they actually do that kind of cool stuff, the longer you're member the more your brain grows!).
I've always liked to question everything. For example superfluous talk about plasma cannons and portable fusion reactors (you'd probably carry those on your back?). :)


But I'm sure that you would like one of these cannons say, if a meteor is about to hit the earth.
Logical fallacy detected. Logical fallacy identified. See Misleading Vividness. What is the statistical probability of a metor hitting Earth? What is the statistical probability of these cannons being by humans on humans?
Be careful that you don't commit the argumentum ad logicam ;) No really, even though you did not in this case, I'm not a friend of formal/informal logic-terminology on non-philosophical forums. (I have to admit that it's fun to use those, but one gotta resist...!)

I've thought for a while now that a mini particle accelerator would be a pretty good weapon. The energy released when a proton slams into another is amazing.

it would be feared by atoms throughout the galaxy.

i think its so small scale the amount of particles needed to actually do something would just make it a coilgun.
Lol! Don't you have any feelings? The poor atoms....

That wouldn't work, with the hole in the reactor there wouldn't be enough pressure to start and keep the fusion going and it would be almost impossible to weaken the magnetic field that is needed only at this particular place


the "hole" is a theoretical concept of a chamber leading to a barrel. in the chamber would be a fusion reaction. upon firing, a small hole would be created, yet the "barrel" would be a magnetic tube kilometers long and mere millimeters wide.

i know that making such "shapes" with EM is practically impossible, but when we will be able to sustain fusion when the fusion is a mass of plasma, ever changing and interacting with the EM field containing it, even having its own EM field, we will be able to fathom a system that would make plasma weapons theoretically possible.

basically imagine smoke. if its not contained in a box, it dissipates practically instantly. now you have to get this smoke to a destination. you would have to poke a hole in the box and stick a tube from the box to the destination.

thats pretty much what a plasma weapon is.

I don't know why anyone would go through the trouble to build such a thing, I doubt it would be very practicable or even effective in a fight. Why don't you just use the fusion to power a big ass laser? Or use the friggin' billions such a thing would cost to fight cancer.

US MILITARY BUDGET : 316 BILLION.

say that "cancer treatment funding" thing again.

US MILITARY BUDGET : 316 BILLION.

say that "cancer treatment funding" thing again.

Ugh, such a depressing waste of money. > <
Damnit, America!

I'll be president someday. But instead of scaring people with terrorists, I'll scare people with new diseases. Then I'll rack up a 316 billion dollar debt saving the planet. X3


I don't know why anyone would go through the trouble to build such a thing, I doubt it would be very practicable or even effective in a fight. Why don't you just use the fusion to power a big ass laser? Or use the friggin' billions such a thing would cost to fight cancer.
Because plasma cannons sound cool. "Curing cancer" sounds nice, but girly. America is an international super cowboy - one who loves to get drunk, spend obscene amounts of money, and get into huge bar fights resulting in billions of dollars worth of property damage and huge numbers of civilian casualties. America! Fuck yeah!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get back to eating my hotdog, drinking my beer, and kicking women and girly-men in the face with my SUV. I'm an American, after all.

Heheh. ;)

hopeless, i just love those metaphors. fucking genius. *claps*.

but yeah man, plasma cannon = F*CKING AWESOME!!!!


now for something important -


http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/39

DISCUSS!!! personally i think we should give him EVERY SINGLE CENT THAT IS POSSIBLE WITHOUT SENDING US ALL IN A BANKRUPTCY. he doesn't even ask for much! he just wants like 3 hours of Iraq budget! 3 hours! thats like asking the troops to take a nap, diverting the funds for 3 hours and VOILA!!!

its just so stupid...

hopeless, i just love those metaphors. fucking genius. *claps*.
lol, thanks thanks.

DISCUSS!!! personally i think we should give him EVERY SINGLE CENT THAT IS POSSIBLE WITHOUT SENDING US ALL IN A BANKRUPTCY.
Yeah, I saw this a little while ago, and I agree. This man deserves his research money, without a doubt. It's sad that it's going to be a total pain in the ass for him getting it. I'm sure he'll scrounge it up somehow though.

As a side note, I never planned on dying before I was around 500 years old. I'm glad some researcher has stepped forward and strengthened my belief that technology is going to save me from dying at a young 100 years of age. XD

And yes, the amount of money being wasted in Iraq is ridiculous. We could've cured cancer like 30 times over with the money spent so far. As well as solving world hunger, obliterating STDs, and making the average person mildly intelligent. Amazing concepts, all of them. And to think that they could all be reality right now! > <

He talks so awfully fast, it's annoying... But anyway, his claims are very vivid, I don't think something like this would work in today's society. Maybe if the earth was triple the size...

But anyway, his claims are very vivid, I don't think something like this would work in today's society. Maybe if the earth was triple the size...
What do you mean? His style of talking? Are you saying he's too sensationalist to get his money? I'd normally agree with you on that, except I think his idea is too irresistible to not be funded. I do think he needs to get a haircut and start wearing a suit though. It's hard to take someone seriously when they look like Moses in a t-shirt. XP

Edit: Never mind, I just watched the video again. He's funny and quick-witted, so he can look any way he damned well pleases because he can pull it off. :3

He talks so awfully fast, it's annoying... But anyway, his claims are very vivid, I don't think something like this would work in today's society. Maybe if the earth was triple the size...

he is speaking fast since he has 18 minutes to say everything he has to say.

i agree with hopeless. if this guy is for real, i would personally give him the money, in the event that i would come in possession of such a sum.

i agree with the guy on another term. if we are to make aging a thing of the past, and have a low death rate, the birthrate would be something for the people of THAT society to decide. ITS MORALLY AND ETHICALLY WRONG TO MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEM. its wrong to NOT make those treatments on a basis of "what of the births"

i would vote for a "baby permit"

ALSO


can you imagine how technology and society would advance? imagine people that, being alive for so long, would accumulate knowledge, wisdom, up to a point where society would change because the people would become so wise, so full of experience, so educated that everyone would become leading edge scientists, medical geniuses, etc. what else would they have to do? what else would they have to do but learn, work, start getting good at what they do. are you catching on? advancement is slow now because as soon as a scientist really starts making breakthroughs, he gets old and dies. then you need like 25 years just to replace him.

can you imagine how technology and society would advance? imagine people that, being alive for so long, would accumulate knowledge, wisdom, up to a point where society would change because the people would become so wise, so full of experience, so educated that everyone would become leading edge scientists, medical geniuses, etc. what else would they have to do? what else would they have to do but learn, work, start getting good at what they do. are you catching on? advancement is slow now because as soon as a scientist really starts making breakthroughs, he gets old and dies. then you need like 25 years just to replace him.

It's true. A 5,000 year old man would be incredible at just about everything you could imagine. As soon as people really start to become amazing at something, they grow old and have to quit, or grow old and die. It's kind of sad actually. And like you said, having to wait for new talent to emerge is a huge setback. If Newton, Einstein, Galileo, Mozart, Da Vinci, and all the other geniuses of the ages were still alive today, the world would be an amazing place. Hopefully, soon such a world will emerge, thanks to optimists like De Grey and modern technology. His methods may not pan out in the end (though I have faith they will), but at least he's courageous enough to think of and present to the public his unusual ideas. :3

I'd better live to at least a thousand, damnit. I have lots of crap to do! X3

f*cking signed.

:lol:

I was watching the discovery channel and they said there was around 95 other places humans could live. We could live on moons, how cool is that. One moon you'd be able to fly and others if you light a match the whole moon will explode. There was one moon that was most promising for life, Jupiters moon Europa. Under the Icy water there is an ocean. Nasa is designing a mini sub to go and explore Europa. I think there is probably life there under the water, because scientist found micro-organisms in the freezing baron noth pole. Does anybody else think there is life somewhere else?
Also why are we looking for other life and other places in the solar system that humans can live. Is there something going on w/ the earth that noone is telling us?

What are your views on this?

OMG I am not good with computars physics - are you around, Matt?


Imagine two space colonies, a lightyear apart. We have a rod stretching from one colony to the other. The rod is made of a material which does not flex, stretch or compress. If I want to send a message, I can send a simple morse code by pulling or pushing my end of the rod, and the receiver on the other end can see what I'm saying by observing his end of the rod.

Remember, the colonies are a lightyear apart. A message sent by radiowaves or laser or whatever you want takes a year to travel the distance.

By pushing and pulling the rod, am I sending information faster than the speed of light?:crybaby:



EDIT: http://content.imagesocket.com/images/emot_suicide76b.gif (http://imagesocket.com/view/emot_suicide76b.gif)



No. Even if the rod is incompressable, it's made of atoms, which "communicate" by repelling each other's electron shells. This is done at the speed of light. So when you pushed and pulled, the pulse would travel along the rod at the speed of light (actually the speed of sound, which is the same in a theoretical uncompressable substance but much lower if the rod is not incompressable).

Edit: Same thing with a lightyear long pair of scissors. Assuming it's made of an uncompressable material (but still atoms) the pulse would travel along at the speed of light, and you'd get to watch it travel along over the next 2 years. You can't have a truly uncompressable material if you use atoms. Stuff is made of atoms, atoms are connected by electromagnetism, and electromagnetism obeys the speed limit.

Aight, that RevSyd guy is completely right :) The method with the rod would be extremely slow in RL compared to light waves. If the rod was made of steel for example and it would be one light year long (9.5*10^12km!!), the speed of sound in steel is 4500m/s (something on the other end won't feel the force until the pressure wave propagates to the other end of the rod), so the other end of the rod would move after ~ 66942 years.

I prefer light waves :heh:

The universe needs something faster than light. It's too damned slow to be useful in space. <_<

yeah and mix in all those relativistic effects! What use is there in travelling with nearly the speed of light, when all your relatives/family/friends are dead when you come back?

you could communicate using quantum entanglement...


Einstein's 'spooky action' seen on a chip

* 18:00 11 January 2006
* NewScientist.com news service
* Amarendra Swarup


A simple semiconductor chip has been used to generate pairs of entangled photons, a vital step towards making quantum computers a reality.

Famously dubbed “spooky action at a distance” by Einstein, entanglement is the mysterious phenomenon of quantum particles whereby two particles such as photons behave as one regardless of how far apart they are. It is widely regarded as essential to the development of quantum computers and quantum cryptography.

To generate entangled photons, Andrew Shields at Toshiba Research Europe Limited in Cambridge, UK, and colleagues from TREL and the University of Cambridge manufactured a silicon chip containing a nanometre-sized quantum dot. A quantum dot is a semiconductor crystal that has discrete energy states like an atom and can be optically triggered to generate photons.

The team found that the precise shape of the dot dictates whether the emitted photons are entangled or not, and the shape can be controlled by how the quantum dot is grown or by applying an external magnetic field.

Entangled photons have been previously generated using laser beams, but this is bulky and complex. “Semiconductor devices are attractive as they are compact and robust,” says Shields. “Furthermore, since they can be produced using standard techniques, they could potentially be mass-manufactured for a fraction of the cost.”

Journal reference: Nature (vol 439, p 179)

i want my no-lag multi light year range phone

i want my no-lag multi light year range phone
Pick one up for me too, hahah.

it's a pity that quantum entanglement is so unstable :(

Was watching the news and they said a type a fish.. rainbow something. Sorry forgot the name, can heal its eyes. We humans have the same cells that let us heal our eyes but they are inactive. Science is developing so that we can use those cells and fix eye problems. Sounds great, but costly. But I'm looking forword to that since my eye sight sux.

GO STEM CELLS!!! if only the people would stop going OH NOES YAR KILLIN BABIES!!! we could get proper care for stuff like that, seeing as in how were working on making those cells without embryos, but we dont get funding because the ppls are still like DONT KILL BABYES!!!, but their too stupid to f**cking...f*cks.. ARG THEY PISS ME OFF!!!

umm the cells werent stem cells.

well stem cells would allow us to do everything in your post.

I knew stem cells would help but didnt know how much they would help. That's interesting.

"the way the gecko uses van der wall's, as i was shown on Découverte (this old discovery channel like show, french lol) is a matter that for some reason, has an imbalance in its electron cloud. the electron cloud of the individual atoms seem to synchronous arrange themselves so that more electrons are on one side then on the other, creating a electromagnetic attraction between the two matters. although this works on any substance, its much like a magnet sticking to a peice of steel. (IMO)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_der_Waals_force

now since this works with stickiness, cant it work with repulsion? it would be great in high-tension/temperature environments as well as high-precision situations because of the near-frictionless environment of the two substances never actually touching each other."

this is from one of my elder posts, as this post is related.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/06/nlevitate106.xml

"Physicists have 'solved' mystery of levitation"

i think we'll see more applications in high temperature, hight stress joints and bearings then flying cars.

Statement retracted due to my confusion earlier about the topic....please ignore this post.....sorry for the inconvenience.

anyways, anything new these days in the awesome realm of science and physics?

Tons, as always! Science never sleeps ;) For example: they try to produce an inverse Casimir-effect as, not to stick things together, but to levitate nano-sized objects. They'll soon test the probe for the underwater Europa (Jupiter's moon) mission in the Antarctic. There is also the thing with the pure crystals and the 33-tesla magnet (here (http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn12467-magnetic-gravity-trick-grows-perfect-crystals.html)) ;)

I've read about the first one already, and I believe someone mentioned earlier that they were hoping for that to come out. *Wish Granted*

GO STEM CELLS!!! if only the people would stop going OH NOES YAR KILLIN BABIES!!! we could get proper care for stuff like that, seeing as in how were working on making those cells without embryos, but we dont get funding because the ppls are still like DONT KILL BABYES!!!, but their too stupid to f**cking...f*cks.. ARG THEY PISS ME OFF!!!

There are different types of stem cells and embryonic stem cells are from the blastocyst. But such pluripotent stem cells can now be obtained from the amniotic fluid and even skin cells so I think there should be less people going Don't Kill the Babies and more Yay! Stem Cells.

aw yeah.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=475587&in_page_id=1965

uncertainty in certainty

thinking about it gravity still doesn't take quantum physics into acount.

Heres the full article

IT'S a speed record that is supposed to be impossible to break. Yet two physicists are now claiming they have propelled photons faster than the speed of light. This would be in direct violation of a key tenet of Einstein's special theory of relativity that states that nothing, under any circumstance, can exceed the speed of light.

Günter Nimtz and Alfons Stahlhofen of the University of Koblenz, Germany, have been exploring a phenomenon in quantum optics called photon tunnelling, which occurs when a particle slips across an apparently uncrossable barrier. The pair say they have now tunnelled photons "instantaneously" across a barrier of various sizes, from a few millimetres up to a metre. Their conclusion is that the photons traverse the barrier much faster than the speed of light.

To see how far they could make photons tunnel, Nimtz and Stahlhofen sandwiched two glass prisms together to make a cube 40 centimetres on its sides. Since photons tunnel most readily over distances comparable with their wavelength, the physicists used microwaves with a wavelength of 33 cm - long enough for large tunnelling distances yet still short enough that the photons' paths can be bent by the prism.

As expected, the microwaves shone straight through the cube, and when the prisms were separated, the first prism reflected the microwaves (see Diagram). However, in accordance with theory, a few microwave photons also tunnelled across the gap separating the two prisms, continuing as if the prisms were still sandwiched together.

Nimtz and Stahlhofen found that the reflected microwaves and the few microwaves that tunnelled through to the second prism both arrived at their respective photodetectors at the same time. This suggests an ultra-fast transit between the two prisms - so much faster than the speed of light that the experimenters couldn't measure it. Moreover, the pair found that the tunnelling time, if any, did not change as they pulled the prisms further apart. Because tunnelling efficiency also drops off with distance, however, Nimtz says that they could not observe the effect across distances greater than 1 metre (http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0681).

"For the time being," he says, "this is the only violation [of special relativity] that I know of."

How can this be explained? The Heisenberg uncertainty principle dictates that a particle's energy and the time it spends in any one place cannot both be known with absolute precision. This means particles can sometimes sneak over a barrier if the time they spend traversing that barrier is short enough. Bizarre as it may seem, quantum tunnelling is not only a commonplace phenomenon in the quantum world, it also lies at the core of many processes we take for granted.

"In my opinion, tunnelling is the most important physical process, because we have it in radioactivity and we have it in nuclear fusion," Nimtz says. "The temperature of the sun is not high enough to organise regular fusion of protons into helium [without tunnelling]. Some people are saying that the big bang happened because of tunnelling. Recently, many people have argued that processes in biology and in our brain are based on tunnelling."

Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of Toronto, Canada, doesn't dispute Nimtz and Stahlhofen's results. However, Einstein can rest easy, he says. The photons don't violate relativity: it's just a question of interpretation.

Steinberg explains Nimtz and Stahlhofen's observations by way of analogy with a 20-car bullet train departing Chicago for New York. The stopwatch starts when the centre of the train leaves the station, but the train leaves cars behind at each stop. So when the train arrives in New York, now comprising only two cars, its centre has moved ahead, although the train itself hasn't exceeded its reported speed.

"If you're standing at the two stations, looking at your watch, it seems to you these people have broken the speed limit," Steinberg says. "They've got there faster than they should have, but it just happens that the only ones you see arrive are in the front car. So they had that head start, but they were never travelling especially fast."

*plays the bad guy again* I dislike these kinds of sensationalist articles...
to say stuff like "Speed of light beaten: One of the key tenets of Einstein's theory of relativity is proved wrong" so easily, just to attract the attention of people who don't know much about physics.
Is it even correct to speak of speed when you're referring to instantaneous quantum teleportation? Not to mention that even Einstein knew of the "spooky action at a distance" so how does this prove one of "the key tenets of of Einstein's theory of relativity wrong"? It's not even in direct conflict with his theory. At least the second article includes the statement:
Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of Toronto, Canada, doesn't dispute Nimtz and Stahlhofen's results. However, Einstein can rest easy, he says. The photons don't violate relativity: it's just a question of interpretation.
That aside: GO SCIENCE! :D

i think the articles are mistitled as well.

the bottom line is, the weird shit doesn't break the rules, it just kinda goes around them.

Ok, seems like my intuition was right. ;)

Latest "faster than the speed of light" claims wrong (again) (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070816-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-no-i-dont-think-so.html)
By Chris Lee | Published: August 16, 2007 - 07:38PM CT

A paper submitted to the physics arXiv has been picked up by a number of major news outlets (e.g., the Daily Mail) because the paper suggests that its authors have measured something traveling faster than the speed of light. Unfortunately, the claim is worse than weak; it is silly. I'll talk about why that is after briefly discussing their research.

The paper in question has no data at all so; although it asserts that it has measured superluminal velocities, it offers nothing to back that up. It also has very little in the way of experimental detail, so we can't determine with certainty what they are measuring, making it very difficult to evaluate their claims. We'll take as close a look as we can, given these limitations.

The researchers make use of the property called total internal reflection (brief discussion). When light is above a certain angle of incidence on an interface between two materials—say, at the face of a prism—it can be totally reflected, provided it is arriving at this interface from the higher refractive index material. However, near the boundary, something called an evanescent wave forms that does not propagate like normal light (technically it does not propagate at all) and quickly decays away to nothing. If you take a second prism and place it very close to the interface where total internal reflection occurred, then some light from this evanescent wave will leak across the interface and exit the second prism. The prisms have to be no further than the wavelength of light involved for this to work.

Now the interesting questions are: where did the energy in this light come from? How fast did it travel across the boundary? The first question is interesting because the evanescent field has no energy in it. This is because the electric and magnetic fields that make up the field are phased in such a way that the product is always zero. The second question is interesting because the speed of light is not defined in a way that is intuitive to non-physicists. Suffice it to say that, for the evanescent wave, the speed of light is zero, and therefore any measurable speed is faster than the speed of light.

So, how are these authors measuring an excessive speed of light? In practical terms, most experiments measure light in terms of what is called the group velocity, which is how fast a pulse propagates along an underlying carrier frequency. This can, in some circumstances, lead to the pulses traveling faster than the speed of light in the medium they're in, but not faster than light in vacuum. Although the setup in the new paper is not entirely clear, they were measuring the arrival time of pulses, which means we're talking about group velocity rather than the actual speed of light.

Another problem that occurs in these experiments comes from determining when the pulse actually arrived. If you analyze a pulse of light, you find that it is made up of a huge number of frequencies that, as you move away from the fundamental frequency, get lower and lower in amplitude. Once you look at the experimental set up in detail, you find that it is triggering on the pre-pulse noise generated by these high frequency components.

Separate from the whole speed of light issue, the answer to the energy question in this experimental setup is interesting. Once the two prisms are close to each other, the evanescent wave is partially reflected from the second prism back to the first prism. When this happens, the total electric field and total magnetic field are no longer such that their product is always zero—there is energy in the field. Furthermore, if you analyze the components of the fields that contain the energy, you find that they do have a non-zero speed of light and it is—you guessed it—the same c that applies everywhere else in the universe.

So although this makes for an interesting physics lecture—or at least I thought it was interesting—it is not new physics and not a breakdown of special relativity.

nice

tbh, i don't see how quantum physics or quantum effect breaking relativity is a problem anyway. this level of quantum physics wasn't even considered in Einsteins equations. when(and if) quantum physics is understood to a greater extent I'm sure we will have equations reworked or bits like "to account for quantum effect" added in.

Completely unrelated to the current subject, but there is a Lunar Eclipse visible soon in the pacific region, Asia, and most of the Americas. It's going down at around 05:30 AM Central standard time, so that's 11:30 GMT, though it's not visible there because it's near noon... Check it out, it's supposed to be the longest in a while.

And on a related note: that "breaking the speed of light" deal got me annoyed because people hadn't examined the evidence well enough. Who knows though? Super-c speeds could open up all sorts of fun physics loopholes. Time would probably go backwards because vt+vs=c where vt is temporal velocity and vs is spacial velocity. I forget where I read that, so don't ask me for a source.

And on a related note: that "breaking the speed of light" deal got me annoyed because people hadn't examined the evidence well enough. Who knows though? Super-c speeds could open up all sorts of fun physics loopholes. Time would probably go backwards because vt+vs=c where vt is temporal velocity and vs is spacial velocity. I forget where I read that, so don't ask me for a source.
That's right, you can demonstrate that very well with an unit circle. The straight line connecting the origin with the circle is always c, the cathetus on the x-axis being the spacial, the one in y-axis direction being the temporal velocity.
vt+vs= c directly follows from Einstein's proposition that space and time can't be separated, hence he called it space-time. ;)

Wouldn't using the unit circle idea only be valid if the equation were vt^2+vs^2 =c^2? I see it as more of a straight line concept: if vs>c, vt must be negative(c-vs) or the equation is false.

You're right, it's basically a simplified way to demonstrate the principle, since the relations stay the same anyway.

What's the definition of light...

That *seems* simple enough that I can try to answer that without referring to a text book. OK, light is an electromagnetic wave with a frequency higher than that of microwaves yet less than that of x-rays. Most electromagnetic waves are characterized by their wavelength, which is inversely proportional to their frequency. All light and other electromagnetic waves travel at c(the speed of light) while in a vacuum. Light, like other electromagnetic waves, uses the photon as it's carrier particle. Did I miss anything?

Did I miss anything?It's the absence of darkness, durr. :rolleyes:

*gunshot*

It's the absence of darkness, durr. :rolleyes:

*gunshot*
haha :bleh:

Wrong, as according to scientist, there is no true definition of light, there were many nobel prizes awarded for solid accurate theories, yet every single one of them has been dispprove by research.

There has not been a solid def. for light.

Wrong, as according to scientist, there is no true definition of light, there were many nobel prizes awarded for solid accurate theories, yet every single one of them has been dispprove by research.

There has not been a solid def. for light.Source, please.

Source, please.
There ain't be one... :\

Aww, I was hoping for a comprehensive reading list of research papers that disproved the different theories of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light

Here's one link
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci1249929,00.html

Err, so how does this contradict the definition Ripple_in_Eternity gave you? The wave-particle duality that is shown with the double-slit experiment is well understood and probably one of the most popular experiment out there.

Edit: Although the wave-particle duality allows different interpretations of quantum theory, eg. many worlds interpretation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds_theory), it doesn't have any implication on the definition of light. It's defined as an electromagnetic wave with photons as carrier particles

I'm still looking for sources, a possible video if I'm lucky.

The alternative would be that you just explain what the hell you mean? :heh:

^ lol. X3

Who needs a plan B? Plan A till the very end!

This might help to clear up some misunderstandings:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/electromagnetic_spectrum.png

"potato"

aw man that killed me

*bump*

I actually liked the "cellphone cancer rays" more. :3

EDIT: Here is an interesting podcast (http://media.libsyn.com/media/astronomycast/AstroCast-061225.mp3) (AstronomyCast) episode about light

How come when you tear tape apart in the dark, it looks like there is a electric line? Sorry I can't realy explaine in a clear way. I just thought it was cool that the tape lights up in the dark when you pull it.

Either it's static energy or it just catches the small amount of light enough to twinkle/glimmer.

Oh, okay.

To mars in 7 days? (http://dialog.newsedge.com/newsedge.asp?site=2006121916143901110346&block=folderstory&briefs=off&action=XMLStoryResult&smd=true&storyid=p0906509.2rw&rtcrdata=off) That would be so awesome! :sweat:

The next step is Hyperdrive...

ok, i got a simple question. If the universe doubled in size in an instant, would one notice? and if you say no, what about the square-cube ratio?

This sounds familier. like when we talked about the sun going super nova or some topic like that. anyone?

@HanTony: yes, I think there was a topic called something like "What if everything doubled in size" or something. Imo there are a few too many "what ifs" out there. :3
@onitrof: The question doesn't make much sense as it is. Would you care to explain what you mean by universe? All the "objects" inside the universe? The vacuum? Everything?

things on the plank scale would get severely messed up. we would possibly break the laws of physics down.

on another topic -

TRANSHUMANISM

Transhumanism (sometimes symbolized by >H or H+) is an international intellectual and cultural movement supporting the use of new sciences and technologies to enhance human mental and physical abilities and aptitudes, and ameliorate what it regards as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition, such as stupidity, suffering, disease, aging and involuntary death. Transhumanist thinkers study the possibilities and consequences of developing and using human enhancement techniques and other emerging technologies for these purposes. Possible dangers, as well as benefits, of powerful new technologies that might radically change the conditions of human life are also of concern to the transhumanist movement.

I'm all for it. 100frikking%

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah24BkyUcZs&b

don't argue. If you know what they are talking about, why are you here?

I don't understand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah24BkyUcZs&b

don't argue. If you know what they are talking about, why are you here?

I don't understand.

im probably sure they are just putting words together and making it sound brainy. don't take my word for it, that level of depth in quantum physics is way beyond me. im just a layman's quantum beginner. they could have memorized the whole thing but im not convinced.

they just put word together, it's still funny though :heh:

@shade: The way I see it, the first thing on the list to be improved should be human nature. People are naturally bad. That's just the way it is, so none of those other things really matter if we're still just the same old us on the inside. With human nature, we would just use our newfound "perfection" to wreak havoc on the rest of the world, especially if the aforementioned "perfection" goes to our heads, which it likely will. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, that's just the way I see things.

@shade: The way I see it, the first thing on the list to be improved should be human nature. People are naturally bad.
How do you know? Modern psychology neither agrees with Hobbes nor with Rousseau completely.


That's just the way it is, so none of those other things really matter if we're still just the same old us on the inside. With human nature, we would just use our newfound "perfection" to wreak havoc on the rest of the world, especially if the aforementioned "perfection" goes to our heads, which it likely will. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, that's just the way I see things.
I kind of agree.

@shade: The way I see it, the first thing on the list to be improved should be human nature. People are naturally bad. That's just the way it is, so none of those other things really matter if we're still just the same old us on the inside. With human nature, we would just use our newfound "perfection" to wreak havoc on the rest of the world, especially if the aforementioned "perfection" goes to our heads, which it likely will. Sorry if I sound pessimistic, that's just the way I see things.
If people are "naturally bad," then why does civilization continue to advance? If we were more bad than good, society would regress, not move forward.

If people are "naturally bad," then why does civilization continue to advance? If we were more bad than good, society would regress, not move forward.

But, in a way, isn't society regressing? Look at all the crime in the world today. But, we are advancing technologically.

But, in a way, isn't society regressing? Look at all the crime in the world today. But, we are advancing technologically.
It is? I'm not so sure about that, can you link me to a study?

It is? I'm not so sure about that, can you link me to a study?

Well, I didn't mean overall. It just seems that crime rates have increased, which would be regressing.


along with economic recovery the murder rate climbed. The Minneapolis Police Department imported a computer system from New York City that sent officers to high crime areas despite accusations of racial profiling; the result was a drop in major crime. Since 1999 the number of homicides increased during four years, and to its highest in recent history in 2006

Whole Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minneapolis,_Minnesota#Government

However, this is just my point of view, it may be different for other parts of the word. We still are advancing in many ways.

However, this is just my point of view, it may be different for other parts of the word. We still are advancing in many ways.
Yeah, increasing crime rates in new york don't really show that the world is regressing, sorry. XD

More women's rights, less slavery, more racial tolerance, etc etc.
We've been around for...I don't even know the number of years, actually. The point is, if we had been regressing all this time, murder would be occurring on every street corner by now, and rape would be the most common thing in the world. Public lynchings would be broadcast on tv, for the entertainment of the demonic masses. Etc etc.

The fact that we haven't regressed to that point yet shows that we're not evil. In my opinion. (etc etc)

But, in a way, isn't society regressing? Look at all the crime in the world today. But, we are advancing technologically.

Today's civilization is much better off than most points in the history of mankind.



On another note, here's an interesting article (http://edge.org/q2007/q07_4.html#miller) about science and death by an evolutionary psychologist.

Yeah, increasing crime rates in new york don't really show that the world is regressing, sorry. XD

More women's rights, less slavery, more racial tolerance, etc etc.
We've been around for...I don't even know the number of years, actually. The point is, if we had been regressing all this time, murder would be occurring on every street corner by now, and rape would be the most common thing in the world. Public lynchings would be broadcast on tv, for the entertainment of the demonic masses. Etc etc.

The fact that we haven't regressed to that point yet shows that we're not evil. In my opinion. (etc etc)


Today's civilization is much better off than most points in the history of mankind.



On another note, here's an interesting article (http://edge.org/q2007/q07_4.html#miller) about science and death by an evolutionary psychologist.

I didn't mean that it meant society in its entirety is regressing:heh:... It just shows that even though the world is a better place (not disagreeing with anybody), there are parts (like crime rates) that are getting worse. it was just a point, I didn't mean that the crime rates in Minneapolis increasing means the world is regressing....it was just an example of some things that are getting worse...grant it, sure they probably were worse at one time, but now they are rising again. It's one of those things where the opposites are happening at the same time.
[/drone]

--edit--
My original post (and second) were at about 12:00 AM (0:00) my time when I was doing homework that I put off, so I was tired and probably being illogical :lol:

You guys are off-topic, get back to... sciencing.

Umm...

just, no.

Science is a very broad field - just because people aren't speaking about physics,
controlled-experiments or any other equally stereotypical topic doesn't mean it's not science.

but drifting towards sociology is a bit... well..

but drifting towards sociology is a bit... well..
A bit like talking about the human sciences?

...lol. XD

My fravorite form of science is mathamatics. Maybe i'll use this thread to get help on homeworks when teachers and google fail.

I only like maths in conjunction with physics, physics without maths is impossible. Maths without physics (or any other natural science) is pointless. ;)

BS

Counting numbers is maths. Thus maths is not pointless as a stand alone science.

BS

Counting numbers is maths. Thus maths is not pointless as a stand alone science.
What I meant is that you can't get inductive knowledge via maths, so for me it's rather uninteresting as a stand alone science. It won't tell you anything about the world.
Although counting numbers is a pretty neat thing (and is indeed part of maths!), I was thinking of something a little more complex. Really abstract mathematics.

LOL!
confusing topic
:[

now here I was checking out the thread after 2 weeks of absence, hoping for a nice response... I'm too naive. >_<

hey guys, i'm running seti@home.

how do i configure it to help out better? anything i should know? i set it at seti@home for the project thing and joined TeAm AnandTech.

i'm running 100% and i have 6% done of my current task, with a good 19 hours to go. :D

The only thing that makes seti@home run better, is to turn off the graphical front end, if you're using the front end.

The only thing that makes seti@home run better, is to turn off the graphical front end, if you're using the front end.

well im not running the graphic thing, im just on advanced settings. trying to use less processing for the actual program and more for what its trying to do. i cant actually make out anything from the graphic "seti@home multi beam" whatever.

http://www.jaxa.jp/countdown/f13/index_e.html
http://jda.jaxa.jp/jda/v3_e.php?time=N&mode=level&genre=4&category=4064&mission=4067
In true Japan style, there is a video out showing a HD Earth-rise. Is it real? I'm really curious to see how people respond to it.

Well as far as mathematics go... if you're not counting geometry and logic as types of math in this matter... well I guess you can say it doesn't matter. If that were the case, you could say Math is just a labeling system. What we use as substitutes wouldn't matter then. Nya. It is quite a definitive thing... math is it not? Because it has sound reason behind it. Math is our Base-2 =P

http://www.jaxa.jp/countdown/f13/index_e.html
http://jda.jaxa.jp/jda/v3_e.php?time=N&mode=level&genre=4&category=4064&mission=4067
In true Japan style, there is a video out showing a HD Earth-rise. Is it real? I'm really curious to see how people respond to it.
Yeah, it's real and a really stunning sight! :) JAXA is the Japanese equivalent to NASA or ESA, a trustworthy source.


Well as far as mathematics go... if you're not counting geometry and logic as types of math in this matter...
Geometry alone without applying it to real-world phenomena doesn't tell us anything (well... you can draw pretty pictures with it :shifty:). As far as logic is concerned, basically logic isn't a part of maths, but maths a part of logic. Maths is a closed system based on axioms (=basic truths) and from there on derived by logic. It's actually very very interesting to think about the nature of maths and how it is connected with our understanding of the universe. :)

I also like physics. I will ask one question . why the people is standing ?

It's meant to be like he's touching her while they're on a train...

I always thought geometry is the basis for our visual perception, not the other way around. Logic isn't math? Are you sure... I mean reason itself is based on statistics. To say that logic is not completely dependent on math or a part of math seems off to me. =/

My avatar got nothin' to do with it.. @_@

Geometry alone without applying it to real-world phenomena doesn't tell us anything (well... you can draw pretty pictures with it ). As far as logic is concerned, basically logic isn't a part of maths, but maths a part of logic. Maths is a closed system based on axioms (=basic truths) and from there on derived by logic. It's actually very very interesting to think about the nature of maths and how it is connected with our understanding of the universe.

I always thought geometry is the basis for our visual perception, not the other way around.
"Geometry (Greek γεωμετρία; geo = earth, metria = measure) is a part of mathematics concerned with questions of size, shape, and relative position of figures and with properties of space." (thanks wiki! :3)
Basically geometry is how humans try to put what we can see in a frame to describe them mathematically. There are often a lot of idealisations involved, you won't find a perfect circle in the real world for instance.

Logic isn't math? Are you sure... I mean reason itself is based on statistics. To say that logic is not completely dependent on math or a part of math seems off to me. =/
Yeah I'm sure. There are different kinds of logic, take the propositional logic for example: it's about whether the conclusion you draw from your premises is true. It's also important to distinguish between (formal) logic and reason. You could say "logic" is the set of rules which governs our language and our reasoning (it's the underlying principle). It offers the basic axioms such as the "rule of the excluded middle", which dictates that something either exists or it doesn't. An argument, for example, can follow logic and still be unreasonable when you're using a false premise.

I hope I could somewhat clear up the definitions... >_<

I was really just making a post to clear that guy up >_>;
So my arguments weren't so sound.
Well the thing is, from the definition given by wiki, we can still assume that mathematics can be used to perceive and react to the world. It's more the question as to which we are more familiar with, mathematics or the media it comes as. Yes you won't find a perfect circle made in nature, but by looking at a shape we can determine if at its base it is a circle. http://groups.csail.mit.edu/graphics/ibedit/ibedit_s2001_cameraReady.pdf
^ That'll help for the sake of proving mathematics as used to perceive images and act as a process in itself. If an image is broken down into simple shapes and the areas of focus, criteria of aesthetics are broken into statistics, it creates a more mechanical way of editing, but it is a way. As far as logic... The idea of a false premise does exist in mathematics. Under the idea of misinformation and different base numbers. Mathematics is also based under the assumptions of theories and rules that have yet to be proven, and are merely accepted for the sake of practicality. By assuming and proving, we do rather the same as your example of propositional logic. Simply by translating it into numbers does make it a mathematic equation. Albeit no one's brain works in a way where processing statistics and probabilities would be practical... Maybe a decent example is a computer playing chess? It makes assumptions that it bases its moves on and calculates the most probable outcome in its favor, acting on what it feels is the best move based on past games. >_> But I'm just grasping at straws here and I'm kind of sleepy... I should have slept hours ago.

As far as logic is concerned, basically logic isn't a part of maths, but maths a part of logic. Maths is a closed system based on axioms (=basic truths) and from there on derived by logic.I don't think maths is a subset of logic, though there are major intersections. I'll come back to you when I get more concrete material.

new topic of discussion - science experiments, for the intermediate do-not-do-this-at-home-if-you-do-do-it-and-get-hurt-i-told-you-not-to-do-it-you-can't-blame -it-on-me etc etc.

my favorite - the microwave plasmoid ball.

i personally cant do it right now, my microwave isn't powerful enough. that aside, lets keep it to a theoretical scenario. (if people are going to do this experiment, regardless of the warnings, i would be glad to know how it went.)

so what you do is http://youtube.com/watch?v=3_Ptrwzj10M&feature=related

and this is what i think happens (i'm meph648 btw)

personally i think that the carbon from the flame is the catalyst for the plasma, as it helps make the air interact with the microwaves up to a point where the air atoms become ionized enough to form plasma. that said, air normally doesn't interact with microwaves, and thats why plasma doesn't form in microwaves all the time. now what is probably going on is that the carbon molecules break down and stop the gas from ionizing so easily, and thats why the plasma ball looks smaller at the end of the vid. for more fun, i think you can try sticking strong magnets near your plasma ball since plasma reacts to magnetic fields. might see some fun stuff if the plasma starts interacting with your magnet's magnetic field.

post your thoughts and corrections as i do not have much experience in the matter of ionized gases, magnetic fields and microwaves.

Science is also my favorite subject. My question is The color of the leaves are green. What is the reason for that?

It's Chlorophyll (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorophyll) aarathi. It's also very important for photosynthesis.

Anyway, I stumbled across this very interesting channel: researchchannel (http://www.researchchannel.org/prog/)
They feature the latest research done by scientists and you can watch the programmes online as well :)

Hi, im 12 and i really love science and history and piano... even tho we never learn science but i read them from books...anyway my question is:" IF we travel faster than light speed, how many light years would take us to reach any milky way (or star)?

"Light years" is a unit of distance.
All I can say you is that in this case, you'll reach a star 100 light years far in less than 100 years ^^

To expound, a light year is the distance a beam of light travels in a vacuum over a period of one year. Traveling faster that light, if possible would have very profound effects on how the traveler would perceive time flow.

depending what method of travel he is using - it's postulated that bending space instead of moving through it would get you very far with little of the temporal side effects.

how long would it take for all the atoms in my hand to align with all the atoms in say, a chair? we had this question in my band class but we never did answer it...

how long would it take for all the atoms in my hand to align with all the atoms in say, a chair? we had this question in my band class but we never did answer it...

a long time... a very long time. :think:

You can't know because time is a mess in quantum physics, an atom can be in two places at once.

You can't know because time is a mess in quantum physics, an atom can be in two places at once.
Quantum physics is a mess and particles can be in two places at once, right. But for quantum effects to really kick in you need extreme conditions (ie. Bose-Einstein condensate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose%E2%80%93Einstein_condensate)). At the scale of atoms as they're in a chair, quantum effects won't be much of a problem. ^^

And according to yadayadayadayoda, or more simply the spiral theory of dimensions, there's apparently ten dimensions. (or so as much as human logic and concept can visualise and perceive)

According to this theory at around 6th dimension, I'm the same entity as you.
(as 5th dimension is a dimension that includes all the possibilities of 4th dimension, hence a 5th dimensional entity of me could be anything that "I" as an individual have a chance of being, including having a different past. 6th goes a step further and is where basically subjective world stops.)


Go now and show off either your brains or lack of it.

wtf? >.<

according to yadayadayadayoda, or more sim


yoda


I C WUT U DID THAR

ignore that.

back on topic, i think a few things will get cleared up when the Large Hadron (not hardon) Collider gets up an running.

who's rooting for string theory?

I'm rooting for it, because I have nothing else to root for.

My bad, I wrongly translated string theory as spiral. Being multilingual is a pain sometimes.


wtf? >.<

I'll skip the first three dimensions.

4th dimension is generally accepted as the concept of time yes?, travelling through that allows us to get to any another moment of our existence. i.e: time travel.

And so you could go to future, or back to past, etc.

So let's just say you're an American who's lived his entire life in New York.
50 years into future you'd still be living in New York, not Chicago or China.

And so the possibility of you ever having "lived in South Africa" doesn't exist, even in time travel.

But now 5th dimension is what incoporates all of those possibilities in 4th dimension. I.e parallel worlds. If time travel(movement in 4th dimension) changed the present 3rd dimension, then making changes to your timeline (movement in 5th dimension) would allow changes that were never possible before, like going back to the American model, say if you moved to England. Now any time travel to future would find you in England, not New York.

Upto that's simple. We're still dealing in terms of individuals.

Lemme go back to 4th dimension.

Imagine now the 3rd dimension as a dot. 4th dimension travels linearly through it, like a line. 5th dimension brings infinite parallel worlds to it, like a surface/area.

Naturally 6th dimension is "volume" in this case, or another being's such possibilities. Movement here would mean that now "I" invade into "You". And hence all of us would be one existence in such terms.


You follow? :mellow:

You gotta love theoretical physics, must be great to be able to test and falsify all these hypotheses. Oh I forgot, you can't. :\
Don't get me wrong, the implications of string theory are awesome and so is the maths. But for my taste there's just a hell lot of "maybe if, then"s in there. Let me summarize the history of string theory for you.

-------------------------------------------------

Geek A: "Hey, wouldn't it be awesome if particles were in fact strings?"

Geek B: "Hey, you're right! But wait, 4 dimensions aren't enough no more!"

Geek A: "Mhhh, apparently... wanna check out what happens if we add another couple of dimension? Should be possible with the Calabi-Yau manifolds!"

Geek B: "Ohhhhh, wait wait! Check this out! It's AWESOME, look at the 5th dimension! Doesn't this imply that TIME TRAVEL IS INDEED POSSIBLE! See that x in the equation? It's the parallel universes!"

Geek A: "Indeed, and now that we've added another 6th dimension, the maths doesn't even seem to contradict itself as much."

Geek C: "You're wrong, Stringtheory sucks. Try M-Theory, lol. OUR THEORY HAS MORE DIMENSIONS THAN YOURS!!"

-------------------------------------------------
That's what happens if you have no experimental data and bored theoretical physicists are together in ONE room.


Movement here (6. dimension) would mean that now "I" invade into "You". And hence all of us would be one existence in such terms.
That has got to be the best pick-up line I've heard in a while! :heh:


You follow? :mellow:
I'm sorry, you've lost me halfway through the 5th dimension.
I've read Brian Greene's "The elegant Universe" and it's very interesting (and he explains the basics of the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics as well in the book, a great summary), but without understand the complex maths that underlies string theory (and it's only a popular science book) it's almost impossible to evaluate how likely this theory is to succeed. Of course it'd be great if they were right ^_^

I'm rooting for it, because I have nothing else to root for.

I'm liking the looks of the E8 complex structure thing. The fellow that developed it named it "An Exceptionally simple theory of Everything".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml

Seems intriguing to say the least.

In physics, the fourth dimension is indeed, often concidered time, which is the most reasonable, as it can be used to explain the Non-Euclidean space-time laws used in Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity... or at least that's what it said on Wikipedia....

In my opinion, however, the fourth dimension must be something tangible, something that can be measured. Also, that means that a being from the fourth dimension could also fit in any other dimension, but can easily defy the laws that each one would support.

For example, assume something (I wanna call it Harold) in the first dimension, where everything is in a straight line, is surrounded, meaning that there would be two points on that line so that Harold cannot go anywhere, assuming he is from the first dimension. But now, what if Harold gets even the slightest nudge into the second dimension, in any other direction. Then, he is no longer surrounded, and should be no longer able to be affected by any sort of force originated from the first dimension.

The same applies for the second dimension, as being surrounded there, would be to be trapped in a flat circle upon the flat plane on which you would exsist upon. Thus we can assume that it is the same with the third dimension, where, if you are trapped in a sphere, you just need to move the slightest bit into a direction in the fourth dimension, and nothing can affect you. Then you can move back and forth into any point in the third dimension whilst you are in that void.

Tell me if any of you understood that. Hope this helps... :lol:

In my opinion, however, the fourth dimension must be something tangible, something that can be measured.
... like, with a stopwatch? ;)

seen that new report that time is two dimensional?

seen that new report that time is two dimensional?
So now we have 4Dx and 4Dy? :3

... like, with a stopwatch?
I lol'd at that, as that's exactly what I was thinking.

All this dimension thing is confusing me so much =.=

All this dimension thing is confusing me so much =.=I bet there isn't a single person, who isn't confused by theoretical physics. :P Our brain isn't able to visualize such abstract concepts in a satisfying way, since it was never advantageous for our survival, but fortunately we have mathematics to make up for it. The disadvantage is, however, that you have a hard time understanding it as a layperson. :\

PS: I guess you can somehow imagine how 4 dimensional space-time bends, when you have pretty pictures like Hubble's. Gravitational lenses are a good example :)http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0802/ngc2218_hst_big.jpg
But I agree, everything beyond 4 dimensional space-time is impossible to imagine.

Hehe the string theory... I watched a science documentary on it a while back, but have yet to read up on it. All I remember was that they used Cannon in D major to demonstrate a point that I forgot... Heh...

The whole time concept is interesting. Anyone ever read Einstein's Dreams by Alan Lightman?

Nope :O Though it sounds interesting... there are so many books I want to read and too little time t_t

if it sucks in, where does it come out?

It doesn't come out; it's just compressing at unimaginable levels of force.

if it sucks in, where does it come out?
You're talking about black holes? It would be quite useful if you specified the pronouns you use.

EDIT:
“CERN’s scientists, the fine people who brought us the W and Z particles, anti-hydrogen atoms and hyperlinked porn web pages, are now hard at work building the Large Hadron Collider to discover something even cooler: the Force. Yes, that Force. Or like physicists call it, the Higgs boson, a particle that carries a field which interacts with every living or inert matter.”

This is the funniest description of the search for Higgs I have so far heard.
xD