To become freinds - Science Club

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Light that travells backwards?! well it is just an observation. similar to a black holes gravity on mass but in this case the lightsource "gravity" on fotons! I am not certain how to explain this phenomenon. But it is in connection with dark matter, making the dark matter dark, transparant. So that the particles of dark matter makes photons to travell to the lightsource! The general theory is that dark matter do not interact with light according to these scientists. But i done another observation. It still needs to be varified by others. There are many theories that speaks against this!

How would you know if light travels backwards... and not forwards in the opposite direction?

Cabal · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Burning down heaven is something for you right?

It's kinda hard to burn anything with matter that has a temperature of only a few microkelvin.

Maybe our half-watt laser at a pinch, but even then it'd be tough.

pgp_protector · Nov 4, 2010

Cabal said:
Our light amplifier settings are controlled by Telnet. That's just WEIRD to me.

You should try GPIB communication it's a pain at times, and the timing can be ugly

Cabal said:
Well, if you're ever in London....

So probably never

Cabal said:
It's not really "vibrational" in the atomic physics sense - atoms don't have a vibrational spectrum as they're single particles (I'm assuming you mean thermal motion when you said vibration?). Molecules do, as well as a rotational spectrum, which makes them much harder to laser cool as there are wayyyy more energy states you can lose atoms to, at which point they stop seeing the lasers and warm up again.

I've only read popular science on laser cooling, so I'm sure my explanation is wrong

How far below 1 Kelvin are you going? (strike that I see you answered it in the above post )

Cabal · Nov 4, 2010

pgp_protector said:
So probably never

Shucks. Cool city, and not just because of my university

So it's not really computer-focused, but this chap on scienceblogs did a great explanation of the average set of kit for a cold atoms experiment. The link is to the first of three parts.

What Do You Need to Make Cold Atoms? Part 1: Vacuum Hardware : Uncertain Principles

I've only read popular science on laser cooling, so I'm sure my explanation is wrong

Eh, it's not wrong, if you meant the thermal motion of the atoms, vibration isn't totally incorrect, but in atomic physics there'd be a clash of terminology

How far below 1 Kelvin are you going?

Lowest we got was 35uK, but to be honest we're not really going for as cold as possible, just sufficiently cold to do further measurements on them. Record for coldest is something like 100nK.

Delphiki · Nov 4, 2010

Cabal, those aren't very ambitious goals you've set for yourself. You should try to get below 0 Kelvin... I'm sure with a bit of prayer....

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

How would you know if light travels backwards... and not forwards in the opposite direction?

Because dark matter do not interact with light. The hypothesis assumes in agreement of my previous statement that photons generate either from dark matter to get to the source of light making your indication correct, or that photons generate from nothing to the lightsource!

Cabal · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Because dark matter do not interact with light!

Regardless of the direction of travel of the light, you are still describing an interaction between dark matter and light.

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

you are still describing an interaction between dark matter and light

I am? parhaps I were?! The best way to describe what I observed, is by looking at a negative periodical function, or by looking at the curve on the negative quadrants of your calculator. Thats they best way to descibe it. I hope you can visualize what I observed.

Cabal · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
I am? parhaps I were?!

I only meant in the sense that regardless of the direction, the light meets the dark matter at some point - and regardless of the precise origin of the light, it's still corellated to the dark matter, so there must be some interaction going on, just not one which produces easily measurable effects, seeing as the dark matter will still seem dark.

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Because dark matter do not interact with light. The hypothesis assumes in agreement of my previous statement that photons generate either from dark matter to get to the source of light making your indication correct, or that photons generate from nothing to the lightsource!

Err.... no.

You use three objects in your description. One is the "dark matter", the second the "photon".... and the third is the "light source".

You have the photon travelling towards the light source.

So how do you know that this object is the source of the light?

The source of light is the object where the photon originated from, else the designation as "light source" has no meaning. But the photon was never observed to have originated from this object.

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

I only meant in the sense that regardless of the direction, the light meets the dark matter at some point - and regardless of the precise origin of the light, it's still corellated to the dark matter, so there must be some interaction going on, just not one which produces easily measurable effects, seeing as the dark matter will still seem dark.

I am ignorant in my undestanding of what you meant here. What??? if it is a negative curve it do not interact with it, or does it?

You have the photon travelling towards the light source

I already covered this! There is another way to look at these observations; a negative periodic curve, or looking at a periodic curve from the negative quadrants at your calculater... Which of it... i cannot tell, I droped out from trignometry class when we started to derivive sine and cosine!!

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

Ok! The photons moonwalked the source of light... Better!!?

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
I am ignorant in my undestanding of what you meant here. What??? if it is a negative curve it do not interact with it, or does it?

I already covered this! There is another way to look at these observations; a negative periodic curve, or looking at a periodic curve from the negative quadrants at your calculater... Which of it... i cannot tell, I droped out from trignometry class when we started to derivive sine and cosine!!

Err.... no, third time.

It is only the direction of the light that has changed... the distance traveled is always positive.

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

Describe hawking radiation in words so i undestand it... It could have been this I observed!!?

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Describe hawking radiation in words so i undestand it... It could have been this I observed!!?

Perhaps you should first consider the most simple explanation: you didn´t observe a Black Hole at all.

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

Well there was weeping and gnashing with teeth there!

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
Well there was weeping and gnashing with teeth there!

And weeping and gnashing of teeth happens only within Black Holes, right?

And of course weeping and gnashing of teeth can be clearly observed coming from an object that we have just established nothing can be observed from, right?

And of course weeping and gnashing of teeth, even if theoretically unobserable from a Black Hole, can reasonably happen within an object whose gravity is big enough to prevent the escape of light, right?

Lillen · Nov 4, 2010

You think hawking radiation will make you able to escape the black hole!?

You wrong.. But i gonna reveal something to you, Jesus can!! I believe that!

Freodin · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
You think hawking radiation will make you able to escape the black hole!?

You wrong.. But i gonna reveal something to you, Jesus can!!

And here´s the "I give up and quit" from the second thread.

Thanks for playing... more luck next time!

Cabal · Nov 4, 2010

Lillen said:
You think hawking radiation will make you able to escape the black hole!?

You wrong.. But i gonna reveal something to you, Jesus can!!

No, the issue is that you haven't even shown that black holes are significant regarding wailing and gnashing of teeth. One subjective experience (obtained when your mind was in goodness-knows-what state given that you were near death) is not evidence of this.

You do realise that sound can't escape from a black hole either, right? Firstly because you'd need to overcome the gravitational potential of the black hole, which is not possible, and secondly because there's no way for sound to propagate in space.

To become freinds - Science Club

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Well-Known Member

Noted strange person

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Lillen

Guest

Well-Known Member

Lillen

Guest

Well-Known Member

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Lillen

Guest

Lillen

Guest

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Lillen

Guest

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Lillen

Guest

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Lillen

Guest

Devout believer in a theologically different God

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency