-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Ask a physicist anything. (7)
- Thread starter Maxwell511
- Start date
- Status
Capacitors can be scaled up to any size you want so there is no fixed limit on the total energy stored in a single capacitor. Dropping them on a city wouldn't do very much. The damage done would be about the same as dropping uncharged capacitors. If they happened to land in bodies of water where people we swimming they could kill if the people were close enough, and someone could die from accidentally connecting the circuit through their body. If the capacitors were rigged to discharge upon impact then they would either pop open or burst into flame or both, depending on the design, which would in theory be a way to make incendiary devices, but they wouldn't perform very well compared to a napalm-type material.
Upvote
0
mzungu
INVICTUS
possibly at the plank level in the quantum foam where quantum wormholes may exist. But I would say that the answer is No and each universe has but one time dimension where relativistic effects are allowed but not reversal of the direction!
If one were to reverse time then I suspect one would be ejected from this universe and end up in another parallel one. Paradoxes are not allowed and can only exist in the plank scale wormholes.
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Is there such a thing as an entropy curve for the universe, going from low to high over time? If so is it straight or curved?
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Ty all!
What happens it we try and cut Planck length sized object in two, or divide a Plank time in half?
Also what is the relationship between a Planck time and a Planck length - is the Planck length the distance travelled by a photon in over a planck time or something? If so, how did it travel if there is no time shorter than a Planck time for it to travel in?
What happens it we try and cut Planck length sized object in two, or divide a Plank time in half?
Also what is the relationship between a Planck time and a Planck length - is the Planck length the distance travelled by a photon in over a planck time or something? If so, how did it travel if there is no time shorter than a Planck time for it to travel in?
Upvote
0
mzungu
INVICTUS
Consider this: If an atom was the size of the universe then a plank unit would be the size of a tree in comparison. There is no way we can physically measure a single plank unit. Such scales are only measured theoretically.Ty all!
What happens it we try and cut Planck length sized object in two, or divide a Plank time in half?
Also what is the relationship between a Planck time and a Planck length - is the Planck length the distance travelled by a photon in over a planck time or something? If so, how did it travel if there is no time shorter than a Planck time for it to travel in?
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
Ok without a google what religion is this quote from:
"Knowledge is not stripped from the people, but the knowledgeable ones are taken. When the knowledgable ones are no longer among the people, the ignorant ones, then, will be betaken as leaders and they will issue verdicts ignorantly. Then they will deviate and mislead the others."
"Knowledge is not stripped from the people, but the knowledgeable ones are taken. When the knowledgable ones are no longer among the people, the ignorant ones, then, will be betaken as leaders and they will issue verdicts ignorantly. Then they will deviate and mislead the others."
Upvote
0
GrowingSmaller
Muslm Humanist
At CERN would we have expected to find sparticles yet, or are we still waiting on the tests to be done?
BTW was the Roman hero "Spartacus" the first proponent of supersymmetry?
BTW was the Roman hero "Spartacus" the first proponent of supersymmetry?
Upvote
0
Ty all!
What happens it we try and cut Planck length sized object in two, or divide a Plank time in half?
Also what is the relationship between a Planck time and a Planck length - is the Planck length the distance travelled by a photon in over a planck time or something? If so, how did it travel if there is no time shorter than a Planck time for it to travel in?
Planck units are special because they are made up of only universal physical constants, unlike SI, for example, which is based on the semi-arbitrarily defined meter along with the properties of water. A unit of Planck space is defined using only the Planck constant, gravitational constant, and the speed of light. One unit of Planck time is the time needed to cover one Planck unit of space at the speed of light.
Some theories say Planck space is the smallest unit of space and that it is quantized in a grid, in which case light moves discretely, existing in one Planck space location for a time then appearing in an adjacent one. Others say that Planck space has no special significance and that space is continuous, so the light travels smoothly from one location to another.
This reminded me of the paradox of the tortoise and the hare: They are going to race each other, but to make things more fair the tortoise is allowed a one minute head start. The race begins and the tortoise runs for a minute getting to distance X from the starting line. Now the hare runs to distance X, but in the time it took him to run there, the tortoise has run to distance X + Y, so is still ahead. To catch up, the hare now runs to distance X + Y, but in the time it took him to do that the tortoise has run to distance X + Y + Z, so is still ahead. Every time hare reaches the tortoises previous distance, the tortoise has time to advance beyond it, so the hare can never win, right?
Upvote
0
Chalnoth
Senior Contributor
I think the expectation right now is that we would have had to be very lucky to see any supersymmetric partners at the LHC just yet. But apparently the LHC is going to be shut down for 2012 for retrofitting so that it can reach its design potential in 2013, so we should have a lot more information in a couple of years, and even then it may take a lot of collisions to see definite evidence of new physics.
Why, of course!
Upvote
0
If I were on a planet, say 67 light years away, and had a tricked out, nifty little telescope...
Is it possible in theory to point that at Earth and watch, in real time, the end of World War II?
Is it possible in theory to point that at Earth and watch, in real time, the end of World War II?
Upvote
0
Wiccan_Child
Contributor
- Mar 21, 2005
- 19,419
- 673
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
In theory, yes. In practice, the atmosphere would severely degrade any image, and the intensity of light would be virtually zero after 67 lightyears of spreading out (whole planets can be imaged, but not the paltry daylight on the armour of a tank in Berlin, 1945).
Upvote
0
^ Thanks!
Hey, one other question.
If there are virtually as many stars in the heavens as there are grains of sand on the Earth, why doesn't the night light up like a Christmas tree?
It would seem like the night sky should be a glowing heaven of pure, white light from everywhere if there are almost an infinite amount of stars in the universe.
Hey, one other question.
If there are virtually as many stars in the heavens as there are grains of sand on the Earth, why doesn't the night light up like a Christmas tree?
It would seem like the night sky should be a glowing heaven of pure, white light from everywhere if there are almost an infinite amount of stars in the universe.
Upvote
0
Chalnoth
Senior Contributor
Actually, there's more than a hundred stars that we can see for every grain of sand on Earth.
But the reason the night sky is dark is that the universe is expanding and stars are very, very far from one another. Now, if our universe were infinite and static, then even though stars are very far away from one another there would be a star at some distance in every direction, so that the entire sky would always be as bright as the surface of the Sun. The expansion prevents this in two ways. First, the expansion of the universe limits how far we can see, so that even if our universe is infinite, we can't see the whole thing. The second thing it does is the redshifting of far-away stars dims them, so that we actually only see the stars that are closer to us.
In fact, with the naked eye there is only one galaxy that we can see outside our own Milky Way: our nearest neighbor Andromeda. All other galaxies are too dim to be seen without a telescope. And even within the Milky Way, we can only see with our eyes a few thousand of the brightest and/or nearest stars, of the few hundred billion stars that are in our galaxy.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
