Ask a physicist anything. (5)

[Steffenfield]

Yeah. I'm sorry 1611AV, but Penicillin, for just a sore throat.

Kinda weird bro. *lol*

Oh and hey, I believe in Creation that evolved into today.

Isn't this the real answer we all want to hear?

 

[Lillen]

How do you reverse the yesting process in vinaer acid so that it becomes ethanol again?

In sweden we have 24proof vineagar in grocerystores!!

 

[TerranceL]

Sorry. He does. There's some PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence for you!

My inner nerd hope someones made a real die that looks like that.

Srsly I would squeal like a 8 year old girl.

 

[TheReasoner]

My inner nerd hope someones made a real die that looks like that.

Srsly I would squeal like a 8 year old girl.

As would I. I've been looking for someone to make it. The photo is of my own make. And I know many would squeel like 8 year old girls upon such a die. Myself included. But I have not found anyone who can do it. Ideas?
I could try to make a mold, and do it myself. But as for artsy skills I have none. So I'd be left with a ruined blob of resin I think.

 

[Maxwell511]

Electricity will always take the route of least resistance.

That's not true. Electricity will take all closed paths.

That is why, for example, if a power line falls down near you, you must stand on one foot and start hoping your way away from there. If you stand on two feet or try and walk normally, you would form a closed path and probably get a really bad shock. The path of least resistance in this case is for the charge to go to ground, however electricity does not take the route of least resistance.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

At what scale is the universe expanding? The distance between the atoms in my body is not increasing right now yet the distance between galaxies is increasing? Where is the line where things stop expanding? Are the forces of nature (gravity, weak force, strong force) the only things stopping the expansion from occurring at any given location in the universe?

 

[Maxwell511]

So my question is, is there a field of science that works on connecting all the dots and filling in the blanks from one theory to the next?

Sort answer, yes.

 

[Maxwell511]

I see.
Thanks for the info.
Hm I suppose its even more complicated then I thought.

There is always a formula. The problem is that you may have to derive it yourself and the formula could be about several hundred pages long.

Your problem "seems" simple but it might not actually be. I suggest starting here. As you will see there are lots of formulas there. I think that is the best way.

 

[Maxwell511]

Nothing+Nothing=Nothing 0+0=0 every time

You understand that your reasoning is base on the idea that certain axioms are universally true for reality.

0+0=0 is a conditional truth. Not a necessary truth.

Something can not come from nothing.

If I have a set of two null sets, is that set also a null set?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Have you had seen and Brian Cox shows on physics?

 

[mzungu]

Nothing+Nothing=Nothing 0+0=0 every time. Something can not come from nothing.

Since you have not defined "Nothing" then your point is mute.

First you have to define what you mean by nothing? Be extremely specific here otherwise there will always be "something" left over.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I like to hear what others have to say on certain things. Im not against science, I took antibiotics (penicillin) for a sore throat a few weeks ago, it worked great! I thank science for that. But, I thank God first, for mold.

I wonder, do you also thank God for the bacterium that caused your sore throat?

Would you rather I not ask questions here?

Everyone's welcome in my thread. No ifs, no buts.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Have you had seen and Brian Cox shows on physics?

Brian Cox is incredible, a modern day Sagan

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How is that different from saying a stick of dynamite has ceased to exist after it's exploded?

Because the components of dynamite are still there, you're just physically split them apart. Electrons and positrons, however, physically cease to exist.

No I can't, but if the mechanics don't exist then QM physicists are actually just studying their own minds, no?

Science is descriptive, not prescriptive. For whatever reason, things obey QM. May there are great golden equations in the sky, maybe particles do what they do because it's in their nature. Either way, physicists study what they do and describe it.

 

[Chesterton]

Electrons and positrons, however, physically cease to exist.

Is this known through observation/measurement?

 

[TheReasoner]

Nothing+Nothing=Nothing 0+0=0 every time. Something can not come from nothing.

Ah. Another creationist mantra. Too bad it is wrong:

Virtual particle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that's not even including the bible wherein God creates everything ex nihilo. Apart from us, whom he created from dirt. According to the literal interpretation which insists it is to be read one way and one way only.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Is this known through observation/measurement?

Yes. We can physically detect both electrons and positrons through a number of independent techniques (my favourite is the bubble chamber). When they collide, we no longer see those particles. Conservation of energy and momentum requires that these original particles turn into other particles - generally massless photons, but sometimes heavy particles like bosons. But, ultimately, those particles cease to be.

You can physically gather up and rebuild a stick of dynamite, but particle annihilation is truly annihilation.

 

[Chesterton]

Yes. We can physically detect both electrons and positrons through a number of independent techniques (my favourite is the bubble chamber). When they collide, we no longer see those particles. Conservation of energy and momentum requires that these original particles turn into other particles - generally massless photons, but sometimes heavy particles like bosons. But, ultimately, those particles cease to be.

You can physically gather up and rebuild a stick of dynamite, but particle annihilation is truly annihilation.

YouTube - What Is Object Permanence? (Baby Health Guru)

 

[Wiccan_Child]

YouTube - What Is Object Permanence? (Baby Health Guru)

If it really was a case of object permanence - that both particles still exist outside of our ability to perceive them - we'd need a radical alteration/extension of the laws of physics and the universe itself. Not impossible, but quite improbable. But then, people go to all sorts of lengths to maintain their intuition Einstein rejected QM because he refused to accept true randomness in the universe - God playing dice, and all that.

 

[Chesterton]

If it really was a case of object permanence - that both particles still exist outside of our ability to perceive them - we'd need a radical alteration/extension of the laws of physics and the universe itself.

Why would you need to change the law (conservation of energy and momentum) when it seems it can simply be ignored?