Physics

We just learned what these are today in math. I get the concept of it, but im not sure of its application. Lets say you have a equation with a negative inside a square root. You turn it into an i. Im not sure how this would help you. I havn't taken calculas yet so maybe i'll learn it then?

How to Create/Make energy ?

I've got myself turned around apparently. I thought voltage was the potential difference between oppositely charged poles - that voltage is a measure of the difference in charge carriers. I'm envisioning ionized clouds of opposite charge and I thought that the amount of voltage between the two would depend on the amount of the difference in charge between the two - that the amount of voltage would depend on the number of charge carriers. But somewhere in that bit up there I'm apparently off. Because you can have high voltage with only a small amount of charge carriers, or a small voltage with a high quantity of charge carriers. I'm not getting that at all and i…

It is my understanding that nuclear fission (rather than fusion) is used for energy because it can release energy in a a stream of smaller packets, where fusion releases one big mass of it. However, research is still being conducted on the possibility of fusion energy. This leads me to wonder- what exactly are the restrictions in this situation? Are there just no reactors strong enough to withstand the forces produced? Would the way we use fission energy be substantially different from what we would do if we could use fusion? Also, does nuclear transmutation have any practical application whatsoever? Could it( I.e. To produce extremely rare or valuable elements)?

Please refer to the spinning skateboard wheel in the video below. Those of you with the patience to watch it to the end will notice the wheel does indeed stop spinning. Why question to you is why does the wheel stop spinning, more specifically how is the angular momentum be conserved if the wheel stops spinning? Saying friction causes the wheel to lose kinetic energy true, but does not explain how momentum is conserved. GL

First of all, I am trying to figure out what energy is, scientifically. Because my science textbook says PE=height*gravity. And KE=.5*m*sqr(v). But if KE is an exponential function of v...how then can PE be simply linear height and gravity.

I read that when Einstein first proposed in 1905 that light was quantized (i.e., that quanta were actually real, as opposed to the heuristic that Planck had considered them to be), the scientific community was "highly skeptical." Yet of course it turned out to be so and quantum theory "changed science." Relativity was a major change of outlook as well. Do we think the remaining things we don't fully understand will require such radical "retooling," or is it likely that those two were the big ones and the rest will involved less thoroughgoing alterations? I read that obtaining a quantum theory of gravity is one of the major remaining difficulties - are there any oth…

and what would a definition of a "clock" be? Any oscillation can be used as reference to define some kind of time. the neutrino oscillation is an active research topic that is not yet fully understood. as of now, assuming the neutrino having a mass is just as much speculation given our current experimental results. There are even some conflicting data which are partially at odds with invariant nature, though there may still be other explanations. there is a reason why Lorentz violation is considered, including experiments that could test for it.

Does light undestroyable? and it will just keep reflecting to different place? Or will it be absorbed by something? Or will light just dim out on its own?

Hi! Now, I heard a religious person tell that God exists outside time. Is this possible? I mean can something exist outside time? I'm a christian, and with low education, so I thought I ask peope that should know, ie, you. Just mentioned my christianity, so that you do not think me trying to disprove God or something. No. Just need to know the facts of it, ie can something exist beoynd time. thank you for your comments!

If something in subatomic particles is neutral direction whether if relative or fixed, it acts as centre of gravity so other subatomic(s) point to it (gravitational attraction)... could that be possible? "Thought experiment approaches have been suggested as a testing tool for quantum gravity theories.[9][10] In the field of quantum gravity there are several open questions – e.g., it is not known how the spin of elementary particles sources gravity, and thought experiments could provide a pathway to explore possible resolutions to these questions,[11] even in the absence of lab experiments or physical observations." From link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity

This is a question I could not get a clear answer yet. When you theoretically turn time backwards, the attractive force of gravitation becomes repulsive. (I hope it is evident) What happen to the 2 other interactions? (the electroweak & the strong).

An international team of researchers may, just may, have made a radical breakthrough that could rewrite physics and chemistry textbooks. They claim to have discovered a naturally occurring element with an atomic number (number of protons) of 122 — 30 notches on the periodic table ahead of uranium, long considered the heaviest naturally occurring element. For decades, physicists have been making artificial elements in supercolliders, only to see most of their creations disintegrate within a short time. Most elements above atomic number 100 are inherently unstable and get progressively more usntable as you travel upward. The highest discovered one, ununoctium or…

Is there a minimal "portion" of time? Or the time can be "divided" on infinite number of parts?

im not sure on where to put this but i was thinking of a way to make it or something halfway decent with magnets and whatnot bt i was curious can you have just a south pole on a magnet? and just a north? and how would i go about storing energy in a bettery from a revolving wheel with a copper coil?

It is stated that the speed of light has no mass and does not exist in this dimension. IE Statically known to exist in the known regions of time but not space.. Also the consideration of particle waves adds more speculation to the OP's question. If a person were standing in-front of a mirror and light rays were present, how can " information" from the light beams travel into the retina to the brain and project a virtual image for the observer upside down??--> again photons carry no information, are mass-less and do not exist in this dimension... This would also mean that depending on the person seeing themselves in the mirror that "distance" is an issue, I…

Consider the following thought experiment. Suppose we have two charges in an otherwise empty universe, stationed a distance d from each other. Suppose also that we have buttons we can press that will destroy one or simultaneously both charges. We can easily calculate the potential energy associated with this setup, but what happens to it if we press the 'nuke both' button? Further if the charges are in relative motion and we nuke only one, what happens in the relativistic time before light can reach the second one to 'tell it' there is no longer any potnetial energy?

[note: Hey moderators, I'm not sure whether to post this under here (homework help) or physics section.. which is exactly appropriate for this kind of post? I'm not student, but I'm self-teaching (non-formal education) to learn physics for time being.] Location of Atoms 1. "Everything is made of atoms" sentence was mentioned on the 11th paragraph, 1-4 chemical reactions. So does that mean the universe is 100% fully made of atoms which are evenly located and "distributed" in every directions (although not in a perfect matrix structure order).. there is no such as absolutely empty vacuum space, devoid of atoms? Shape Definitions on Atoms 2. Are all ki…

Why isn't microwaving the perfect way to cook? What is the down side?

Hello guys I had a question in mind and i wanted a pretty neat answer for it so thought i'd put it over to you guys Okay , i wanted to know what would be the perfect frame of reference that could be used as the origin for motion . Some say time IS the best frame of reference. But recently i read an article and ever since had this question in mind. Is time really the PERFECT Frame of reference for describing motion ? Or does even time lag behind in some aspect ? Fill in the details as much as possible Thanks xD

i decided i want to try to "understand" how a plane can fly. if thats even possible for a layman like me. so ive been watching a bunch of videos, but still so many questions. and you cant ask a video anything. so, i thought i would try here. because this is essentially a tricky subject, i thought i would break it up into mini subjects. so the first subject is Bernoulli's principle. now i know this is not the whole picture of why a plane can fly, but it is some of the picture. so, first up i thought it better to try to understand this. so, as i understand, Bernoulli's principle states that an increase in a fluids speed lowers its pressure. the thing i cant find on…

Help, please. I read somewhere recently (I've forgotten, unfortunately) that light was actually invisible. The reasoning was a thought-experiment. Imagine that you're on a spacecraft in deep space. You're in the cock-pit, looking out. There's a powerful search-light on top of the craft, currently off, pointing in the direction you're looking, You look out at the scene, and then you turn on the light. Does the scene change ? The book suggested that it wouldn't. The beam of light itself would be invisible, you wouldn't be able to see it, and in fact you wouldn't be able tell whether the light was actually operating. Is this correct ? If so, what do…

We believe that we measure time, we say that time “times” things, or events, and that there are “intervals” of time, there is a “time distance”. Indeed much of Physics is based on the singular concept of linear time. But we know that time doesn't really have “length”, or “width”, it doesn't occupy any space, like objects do, we can't “see” time. Time is dimensionless, in that sense. We also say things like “heat is transferred” or “heat is motion” which is like saying that “movement moves”, so why not say that time “times” things? Or space “distances” things or distance “spaces” things, or motion “moves” things? Isn't that, in fact all we ever really do when w…

I have a friend who is an experienced photographer. He said that an exposure with the "same bucketful of photons" at high or low level for a shorter or longer time with the same aperture, yields pictures of discernably different quality. The low-level exposure gives a clearer picture, and I am curious why.

could you have something like a fan, wich the propellers were connected to small generators, and theres also mini windmills on the blow-side wich take in energy from there too. would it make more than it used? it uses 2 energy supplies to make it, the mechanical energy of the fan blades moving, and the wind energy from the moving air. i think it might help if it was all in an airtight "shell" too. and if it could work then it could also be used in bigger curcamstances.