Modern and Theoretical Physics

Could we imagine what life could be like in some higher dimension or other? I know about the two-dimensional flatland man supposed dimension, we can imagine that dimension because we look at it from a three dimensional point of view. Imagining what a higher dimension is like to those who exist in one is more difficult.

TIME AND EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE NOTHING ISABSOLUTE Is there any absolute in the universe? Nothing is as it seems to be and all things are subjective realities to theobserver. Everything is relative to each person from the viewpoint of the onlyultimate reality. Every fundamental particle is like a tinyclock of its own each with its own subjective and relative time frame There is no absolute time, time moves differently from one object to the nextand in one location to the next. For example, time moves slower on massiveobjects like the Sun or Jupiter and faster on smaller objects like our Earth.It moves even minutely faster in space. This is no lon…

If gravity is described as a force between two masses, then how exactly can light be effected by it? From my understanding, from what I have been taught, gravity would effect the photons of light which have no mass. Please correct me if I am wrong. Any responses would be much appreciated!

Hello. IM here to ask how to convert this Km\hr to Miles\seconds yeah i know you will refer me to google but i already did that but i cant find articles that can answer me clearly thanks guys! so all in all HOw to convert compound units? thanks

If we could use a signal of very few quantity of energy eg.: EM wave of very large wavelegnth (>10 ^+8 meters )? ... or neutrinos (10^-24meters)? It would not have enough quantity of energy to deflect the particle (10 ^ -18 to 10 ^ -24 meters), so it could determine its position and velocity at the same time. could this be right?...then the problem only could be of having the adecuate thecnology.

Hello everyone, I'm writing an essay on the properties of the photon and how these are reflected in modern theories in physics. Now I have already written loads about relativity, electrodynamics and basic quantum mechanics, but I seem to get stuck on QED and QFT. In particular, I would like to know precisely how it follows that the photon has spin 1 and is electrically neutral. On wikipedia I read that 'The quanta of an abelian gauge field must be massless, uncharged bosons, as long as the symmetry is not broken; hence, the photon is predicted to be massless, and to have zero electric charge and integer spin', click , but it turns out to be quite difficult fin…

This is my first post on this site. If I am way off base please let me know. Has anyone ever considered that perhaps space itself IS dark matter? Is this not essentialy what the possible discovery of the Higgs boson is? I have been thinking about this a lot lately and it seems logical. As theoretical physics and astronomy are hobbies for me and I lack the mathematical skills to understand alot about them, I could be way off base. Just wanted to see what others thought about this. Thanks

What I'm thinking is that the universe was created in a quantum fluctuation, like photon/anti-photon being created below the energies of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (I think that's right not sure), but could the universe be created in a similar way? Like I think the sum of the energies of the universe is 0, so could the universe just be created by a quantum fluctuation? I feel like some1 has done the maths and it's wrong, but I don't know the details, just wondering if any 1 could let me know Thanks

Is there someone capable enough of telling in laymen's terms how particles interact with the Higgs field which causes them to acquire the property we call mass? As we know how inertia works and from relativity, we know that no forces act on a mass when not in a gravity field and uniform, linear motion. Only the change of motion requires a force. Does the existence of the Higgs field somehow means that there is some absolute frame of reference? (could we in theory measure our speed relative to the higgsfield?). In what way is the Higgs field not an ether theorie, since that was ruled out by the Michelson-Morely experiment. EDIT: in some communications the H…

Please forgive me if this is stupid/common sense/been asked a million times before, I'm an amateur. I've recently seen an explanation for why time travel wouldn't be possible which is roughly this: If you travelled from Point A to Point B at the speed of light for 1 year from the perspective of people remaining at point A then no time would have elapsed as per the traveller's perspective. If on arrival you look at Point A then you would see it as the same as when you left. Then by travelling back for 1 year then you simply would have caught up with those at Point A (Presumably because light coming towards you along with the traveller's speed of return would balance out. …

It is theorized that, if you can travel faster than light, you can go back in time. Some credence is lent to this theory by the fact that an incredibly small amount of time dilation has been detected in high-speed aircraft. Although traveling faster than light by conventional means is impossible, it is theorized that you might could travel "faster than light" by going through wormholes. Scientists like to describe wormholes as, essentially, "holes" in the space time continuum, essentially shortcuts across the universe. However, taking a shortcut does not amount to faster travel. It may result in reduced travel time, but that is due to reduced distance, not incr…

This may be me being ignorant, but why is it that a black hole seems to have more mass than the star that created it. Light can escape from the star, but because all the stars mass is concentrated to a point, suddenly an event horizon forms. Where does this extra ability come from?

Could anybody please explain how light is effected by speed? Why is it that the closer something gets to the speed of light, time begins to slow? What causes this? Thank you in advance.

Newton's laws are true for some extent only. I have read in book that these laws don't hold good at subatomic levels and levels of very high speeds. Here (at subatomic and high speeds) Quantum mechanics and Relativistic mechanics hold good. Why? Why, is it that newton's laws fail at these levels ? There are some examples which are confusing. Our physics teacher says, there's no reality in quantum physics, it's only based on prediction, and nothing has been proved till now. He gives the example of the discharge tube experiment, in which the electrons move the light paddle wheel. Isn't it Newton's second law F=ma ? (There are some more examples he gave.) This is what tha…

I was thinking about general relativity and its affect on time and realized just how relative time itself is to everything in the universe. As mortal beings we give time a value as we only have so much of it, but to an object like a planet time is plentiful and a week to a planet may seem like an instant whereas that week would seem much longer to a being who only survives for 80 or so years. But thats silly, why would a non-living object feel the effects of time passing, that's when i thought about photons, why would a photon care about slowing down or having mass. With the discovery of the higgs its now evident that a photon does not cause an excitation in the higgs fi…

The original atomic theory introduced the idea that the 'stuff of the universe' is made up from different arrangements of a small number of 'indivisible particles' . Each different such aprticle was identified with a particular element, from whence we obtain the modern term 'elementary particles' , which we still regard as indivisible. The original particles were subsequently found to be actually divisible into a smaller number of sub atomic particles which carried or mediated their observable properties and could be arranged diferently to form the original atoms of the theory. More recently (some of) these sub atomic particles have again been divided into par…

Is the electromagnetic (field) a field or a dimension or neither? And what is the difference between a field and a dimension? Does QCD say that photons are like ripples in the electromagnetic dimension/field?

If an anti photon and a photon collide do they release one or two photons? I'm guessing one right?

I've been spinning a sci-fi universe up for sometime. So naturally I'll be tapping the power of the Matter-AntiMatter reaction for its massive power. I'd like to know if the mechanical concept of how I've envisioned it would seem plausible. Matter and Anti-matter are injected into a reaction chamber. The matter entering the chamber far out numbers the antimatter. The purpose is two fold, the reactor generates electrical power from "energy collectors" in the main reaction chamber. What matter isn't immediately annihilated is put into a high energy plasma state. The plasma can be ducted to engines and used for directional thrust. The reaction can be leaned or enr…

I suppose my first thread should be a problem I've been looking for the longest, and found a minimal of information on. First a little background, I've been writing Sci-Fi for years, but recently I want to make sure the content featured is plausible. While Matter/Anti-matter reactions have been a popular trope of Sci-fi for years there's always some "black magic" involved to make it work, in such anything in it I find suspect. In a pure M/AM reaction I know it is a pure release of energy, but what happens when it's two different elements of matter and anti-matter contacting. Do the similar components eradicate one another but leave behind the matter "leftovers" a…

Why gravity is proportional to mass? Graviton?

Hello friends, Everyone knows relativity.But it is really hard to understand relativity. Can you friends help me in understanding relativity???

Can you explain to me, in your own words, the reason for a gravitional 3-force. I see it in your paper, but you define mass as the gravitational charge - this is not the same kind of charge I think of or another author... can you elaborate on your christoffel symbol and its use, thank you. Regards.

It occurred to me a week past how to variate the energy of a Schwarzschild metric. The Energy changing in a Schwartzschild Metric It is not obvious how to integrate an energy in the Schwartzschild metric unless you derive it correctly. The way this following metric will be presented will be: [math] c^2 d\tau^2 = (1 - 2\frac{GM}{\Delta E} \frac{M}{r_s} c^2 dt^{2}) - \frac{dt}{(1-2\frac{GM}{\Delta E} \frac{M}{r_s})} - r^2 d \phi dt[/math] This will be interpeted as [math] c^2 d\tau^2 = (1 - 2\frac{GM}{E - E'} \frac{M}{r_s} c^2 dt^{2}) - \frac{dt}{(1-2\frac{GM}{E - E'} \frac{M}{r_s})} - r^2 d \phi dt[/math] And this metric is dimensionally-consi…

I have been exploring a possibility and wanted to know what others thoughts were here. I have been trying to mathematically compose a theory which treats the very beginning of space (which according to current belief would involve a time dimension) as being highly unstable due to the uncertainty regarding to matter and space between particles. In short, there was little to no space at all in the beginning, meaning that particles where literally stacked up on top of each. This completely violates the uncertainty principle and I conjecture it caused ''space to grow exponentially'' between particles to allow them degrees of freedom and to bring a halt to the violation of the…