Modern and Theoretical Physics

The direction on magnetism either flows around its current or with it. Both can be measured; both can accommodate quantization. Only the latter provides logical reasons for forces on conductors, induction and more, whereas the former was, is, and must remain abstract to help prevent the embodiment of Space. NEITHER CAN BE DISPROVED therefore there is now a fundamental fork on science road, indeed a schism point.

Alright, so, my partner and I are well under way with our science fair project (thanks guys), and we still have some questions. How should we test/replicate/simulate our prior conclusion? Should we equate it? We were thinking of making a graph yet we still need some help. Also, after the fact I realized that no matter where, gravity will always be present. Is this correct? If so, I hear everything creates gravity so it would affect our equations ever so slightly, and fuel requirements would differ based off of that. The question we're tackling is: "How much fuel would it take to sustain standard Earth-like gravity (excluding gradient and launch) for 1000 days in space. It…

The force of gravity on Earth is roughly 9.81 m/s, yes? Okay, theoretically, we should be able to either accelerate at that 9.81 m/s for however long we want and it would feel like real gravity. Would this be correct? I understand we could use centrifugal force for the same thing but I'm just brainstorming for a science fair project.

Hey guys, I need to identify what particle this is. It was ejected from the nucleus of an oxygen atom with a mass of 3.8x10-25 kg and the particle itself has a mass of 6.6x10-27 kg. Any ideas? Thanks!

Recently I really got into Michio Kaku and the string theory and a question popped up in my mind that he didn't really explain or talk about. If the 11 dimensional hyperspace is truly as the "arena" of universe that have their own dimensions, does the hyperspace itself have the same property of a space and therefore has it's own dimension too ? And by those standards if a hyperspace is still "just" a space ,is there anything beyond it ? P.S.:I am not a scientist nor a student of science, so please try to respond in simpler terms. Also I'm just very superficially knowledgeable in this subject, so sorry beforehand for any errors in thought.

What if we were able to build mini-Earths and have them orbit around our planet Earth... How could we achieve this? All ideas, any ideas would be very helpful. Thank you.

Could a state of electromagnetic Super symmetry encapsulation occur that allows for equal exchange of force? A state of energy that exists where space bubbles/leaks into it instead of the opposite way around. When space opens/dilates the state of electromagnetic energy converges in the dilation. A “warp” vector occurs where no energy is transferred but “attained.” Sorry, can’t seem to explain this thought so well... in short any information on s-t foam would be great....

Original Thread being hijacked, why isn't the color field conserved in QCD on P+ , P- collisions, which I brushed on in this topic of why it should be 3 neutral pions. that decay into 6 Photons. The Color field has symmetry so why isn't this used at low energies, p+ + p− → π0 + π0 + π0 Then π0 → γ + γ https://webific.ific.uv.es/web/en/content/lattice-qcd-numerical-approach-strong-force https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-physics/chapter/33-5-quarks-is-that-all-there-is/

We constantly see things like atomic nuclei and protons being smashed against each other from opposite directions to see what results but what happens if two electrons are smashed together at near light speed?

I googled for "define: entropy" and came up with this: "A measure of the disorder in a system." I also entered "entropy" into http://www.dictionary.com and found, among other definitions: "The tendency for all matter and energy in the universe to evolve toward a state of inert uniformity." So if I understand this correctly, entropy is the phenomenon observed when, for instance, an elastic band goes from stretched to slack or a building going from erect to rubble when demolished by means of explosives. Is this correct? If so, what do we call the opposite phenomenon - that is, the building up of physical systems from something simple with uniformly distr…

The charge radius of an atoms nucleus is given as rms, does the nucleus oscillate?

Mordred posted this simulation quite recently. Can I ask whether this melding of objects occurs whenever the separation between them becomes small enough? In particular ,would we find this behaviour in Black Holes? Finally, once this melding happens has there been created a no gravity zone (within). The object created can presumably re differentiate if the temperature rises. What are the forces that cause this re differentiation?

Like you can't add anymore existence to existence. Existence acts like change stuff. One display of this is energy, how it is active, hot, lit up, etc, and how it needs to be physically active to be so. This means it must literally be realized activity-stuff. As activity-stuff gains the like change instead of stuff property, this makes stuff more like a velocity of the overall material. This means instead of being like stuff you could place more of, it's a change to the shared object. Since individual separate physicalities are only change-like-material within the shared object, they only exist as changes to the shared object. Since all the changes exist, al…

One of our number having been banned for sockpuppetry I was wondering about the interpretation(?) introduced into his recent kinetic energy/classical vs quantum spin thread by Mordred . He seems to have come down very firmly on the interpretation of reality (that 7 letter word ) being made up of fields and solidity being the great illusion (if I paraphrase correctly) Can we put more meat on the bone perhaps? (esp the idea that fields trump particles and knock them out of the park) Are there thought to be whole families of fields? Can they all interact with each other ? Is the gravitational field a very special kind of field (a field of …

what if mars's atmosphere was identical to that of earth but was much more dense (62% of the total weight of the earth.) what do yall think it would be like and do you think it would be habitable?

What is the lowdown on this area of physics? These characteristics are not supposed to make any sense to the layman and especially not to mean what they sound like. Is there any point for this wannabe layman to want to have an inkling(another fine word;-) ) of what these properties might actually represent or perhaps how they are measured? Not chapter and verse , just a minimal outline perhaps.

If I could place myself in lights point of view, as I moved through the universe than atmosphere then a body of water would I in a sense see each medium like a guy on an imaginary ship traveling at c Would view his travels? As normal? Whiile an observer might see some differences in the ships movement that might relate to relativity? Could a body of water be viewed as a distortion of spacetime? As an outside observer refraction presents a direction change, yet from the photons point of view there is no direction change its still going straight as an arrow? Could this also also apply to gravatational lensing. We see the light as bending yet from the photons, or imagin…

I've seen the drawing of a hole dug through the center of earth, from one side to the other. The guy jumps in (it's always a guy?) shoots down to the center then up to the surface, then reverses. Okay, maybe it is too simple to be a worm hole, but assuming that a black hole is round, wouldn't it sort of kind of have to work the same way meaning that this distant part of the universe to be reached would have to be just on the other side of the black hole? The nature of the black hole says you don't get out the other side. Doesn't the nature of the black hole pretty much make it so you don't make it past the center? Do you need two black holes to have one wormhole? St…

Can time exist as a particle ? Or can a particle give rise to time ?

If i were to jump off a very high cliff i would assume a steady increase in kinetic energy. If instead of jumping I pointed a flash light down and turned it on, being clueless I would assume the gravatational acceleration would be too small to effect a photons kinetic energy to any measurable degree. But, what if I pointed the flash light at a black hole. what then? If gravity causes a change in a photons direction of travel, implying that gravity does effect the photon what happens to the photons energy? C is th speed of light in a vacuum. What is a black hole to the photon? If all direction is a oneway street, is that the same as a vacuum? Do I need to put the word true…

I was watching a video where it was said that if the Sun were to suddenly cease to exist it would be a little over 8 minutes before we would see the light go out and feel the shock waves etc. Does this mean that a shock wave in space would travel at c, did I misunderstand the statement, or maybe is it that what I assume a shock wave to be, is not the same as would be deemed a shock wave on earth? If I see two enteracting galaxies millions of light years away should I expect to have to waite for the shockwave, much like lightning then thunder here on earth, or should I expect to detect the wave now? Or do we detect the wave then look for the cause?

what would happen to a gravity wave traveling through space and passing the region of a black hole? In considering the part of the wave which intersects the hole, does the hole swallow that part of the wave like any physical object ? If so, does the wave energy add mass to the hole? Thanks.

I have a tube (placed horizontally) . Ions are traveling through it. They exit at various angles to the axis of the tube and in different planes. Can I use a magnetic field so that the ions all exit parallel to the axis of the tube, i.e. the horizontal.

Hi Guys, I wrote research (actually just a bit completed it, since it is based on enormous previous scientific research) which I call 'Knowledge of Everything', what means that it represents complete basic physical knowledge about the Universe, which was just released to public several days ago. Unfortunately the book is written not in English but there's short introduction in English which explains core stuff and one/several evenings by reading short several pages description should be enough to basically understand it. It includes: - Explanation of gravitation and notes about its unification with other forces (with more complete description at the full…

The justification for the LHC was it could recreate the conditions and produce all the particles present just after the BB. Here is the problem. Dark mater. If you believe like I do that everything in our universe was created during the BB (what ever that was) then it also created Dark matter. With the current detectors in the LHC we won't detect Dark matter. How can you detect something you don't know exists. Of course you detect the gravity. However, with the enormous abundance of Dark matter in the universe one would surly think the Dark matter particle (if that's what it is) would have been detected by now. But it hasn't. It also hasn't detected mini black holes …