Modern and Theoretical Physics

Note* I'm not a professional, I'm a high school student with an interest in physics. There seems to have been some debate within the world of modern physics about recent discoveries making it even more unlikely that the universe would be built to support life. They amount of dark matter and energy is balanced perfectly to allow for the universe to support life. There's been many proposed solutions, including there being multiple universes, therefore allowing it to just be a product of probability. However, I'm personally confused about the problem. If there is absolutely no significance to life, no God, no purpose, then why does it matter? While the universe may…

Math: For the atom, of mass m, emitting a photon of energy E = h f, w.h.t.: [math]a = \frac{F}{m} \approx \frac{p}{\Delta t} = \frac{ h f }{c \, \Delta t}[/math] [math]\therefore a \approx \lambda_{C} \frac{f}{\Delta t}[/math] For a hydrogen atom [math]( \lambda_{C} \approx 1.5 fm )[/math], emitting a 3 eV photon, the acceleration is about 108 Gs (terran standard). is this correct ?

"Conduction of electrons through a vacuum". Explain.... I'm only looking for about a paragraph to fit in to an atomic physics assignment for college nothing too fancy. As physics is probably my weakest subject all and any help is greatly welcome!

This universe is simple by nature. There is nothing that I cannot explain using my model of the universe. All these problems you guys are presented with can be solved in a matter of moments with some simple understandings. When you consider the model of physics we have now, don't you find that there are too many problems with it? There are too many unanswerable questions with the mathematics physics is using. And what is up with Quantum Theory? This science has done more damage then it will ever repair. How can we understand our Universe when we are fed garbage like what quantum theory presents? If you want a better understanding of the universe and the atom then you nee…

Is everything logical? Can some system and combinations of different systems of logic completely describe everything in the universe? Even if you say "that walls looks blue", thats the atomic propositions and the recognition that the wall to you is blue because you can't see it any other way you see it. So what isn't logical if logic doesn't actually describe everything? It seems like the universe is completely logical in one way or multiple ways, but I can't say for sure.

Anyone know what the average speed of an electron? For example, the speed of electrons in the atoms of some common solids, liquids, and gases at room temperature?

E= MC2 This might not be possible, but I was hoping that someone could explain to me what the speed of light has to do with the amount of energy contained within a given chunk of mass. Please bear in mind that I have no schooling (past high school), and must use all my fingers to count up to ten. I may need a definition of mass; I tend to think of mass as weight. Is that wrong within the context of this equation? If not, then say a clot of mass on earth weighs 3.2kg, then its energy = 3.2 times 300000 squared (90000000000) which comes to... E=288000000000 (if I've figured that correctly - it takes a lot of finger counting) Anyway, 288000000000 what? Ho…

As the topic says I was wondering if there are any microscopic applications of logarithmic spirals in theoretical physics, or any attempts to incorporate them, or any data to support them? I was thinking that since quantum phenomena only has real significance at the quantum scale and yet is still applicable at the macro scale it might be possible that the prevalence of logarithmic spirals in nature might not be so coincidental that they would be confined to only living, macro scale objects/phenomena? To clarify: we obviously don't understand the reason for the existence of logarithmic spirals in nature, but could there be physical significance inherent to some underlying …

The Einstein page on facebook has been opened,It's a wonderful platform for people who are interested in theoretical physics and relativity to communicate each other. And this page has much content about relativity in many style such as: video,essay,etc. This page has opened not a long time, it needs many relativity enthusiast to construct. Then, I put the link below: and it was removed by the moderators Welcome visit My goal is simplest ,to collect all the relativity enthusiast together to share resource and investigate relativity. 0

I was wondering if the 2nd law of thermodynamics still works in a vacuum? I was always told that if there was no friction then something that started spinning would always spin but the 2nd law states that everything will eventually die out. Does this run true with this theory and if so how?

I was wondering how a particle could be massless, such as the photon. Because its energy isn't it and wouldn't that violate special relativity by means of the energy-mass relationship.. because since energy and mass are interconnected, doesn't that mean that any particle would have to have mass regardless wether or not its physically energy or mass.. and by the way how i a photons physical particle topology held together (if thats the right wording), since its only energy..

Hey, you guys! :DDD ~ Well, all you guys know that every human being has a certain electromagnetic field, right? Thus, we are able to produce static electricity. But my question is, do you think it's possible to amplify our own EM field, or maybe even multiply the density and magnitude of the field, and concentrate all the energy onto a single medium (i.e. a steel rod) and then have some kind of a propelling mechanism to, in a sense, "shoot electricity bolts out of our hands"? Srry if my physics is totally off, I'm just curious, cause ever since third grade, I've been trying (on paper of course) different methods of engineering such a mechanism, and i dont wanna wa…

Hello everyone. Having read many different explanations as to why the quantum universe behaves the way it does, I am most drawn to the Many Worlds interpretation. It seems to me to best answer the largest range of experimental phenomena. However, I am still a bit hazy on how antimatter fits into it. The main reason I ask is because of the recent CERN breakthrough where they managed to isolate antimatter(!) Any light on the subject would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

What divides the dimensions? What defines them ? I can understand length, width, depth, and time, and these are all just a matter of perspective and relativeity. How are these extra dimensions linked together?

If there were a hydrogen atom sitting out in the middle of nowhere - nothing with which to interact - would it exist forever, or would it eventually wind down? Matter and energy cannot be destroyed, and perpetual motion supposedly does not exist, so what happens in this case? I am just a layperson; please keep answers simple. Thanks!

Hey, Over the past six years I have worked with Lucien Hardy at Perimeter in Waterloo and Prakash Panangaden at McGill. This paper is the culmination of thoughts on physics gleaned from that work. On Introducing into the Foundations of Physics the Notions of "The Probing of, Approximation to and Idealization of Structure" or try this link On Introducing into the Foundations of Physics the Notions of "The Probing of, Approximation to and Idealization of Structure" or this link On Introducing into the Foundations of Physics the Notions of "The Probing of, Approximation to and Idealization of Structure" Preamble: After completing the requirements…

I just wished to know how do we determine the speed of light accurately. An experimental concept would be helpful but a theoretical approximation would do too .

The outer parts of galaxies are moving at speeds beyond those fitting mathematical models. This increased speed is supposed to be caused by Dark Matter and its gravitational effect. If DM only has this effect at the outer reaches where the gravitational pull is at its weakest then it would seem that DM is the reciprocal of gravity. However, modeling has shown that DM clumps. This would allow for assumptions that it operates like a booster station on a Hot Wheels track. There is a problem with this model as well. The clumps of DM have been shown to deflect light due to its gravity. If there were clumps of DM at the edges of galaxies the outer clusters of stars would be cap…

I have a problem with the dimensions being ribbon-like structures. The Universe is supposed to be controlled by universal laws. The cyclonic systems on planets are as they are only due to the external influence of that planet's rotation. Since gravity bound objects all travel in a cyclonic manner, it seems natural that there is an external influence at work from the rotation of the Universe. This appears to mean that the model of flat, ribbon-like, Membranes is not our reality.

If something is spinning, it seems logical that the momentum of its spin could be transferred to something else and that work would have to be done to effect the transfer. So if magnetism is caused by electron spin, why can't that angular momentum be transferred to something else? Also, is there a way to calculate the amount of energy in the angular momentum of a magnet, like calculating the amount of energy in a given quantity of mass?

First of all, hello. On the new yesterday was published that scientist of the world are on the search of the so called H particle or Higgs`s particle. This particle is belived that it give mass to the bosons W and Z. In theory, to know about this particle, is needed to build a 30km lenght particle acelerator wich fire two oposite charges (dont remember correctly if there was a proton and electron) to colide, on such colition and anti-material phenomenon apear and there is presumed that the H particle will show itself. In short this is the Big Bang. This in theory, but in practice this can work?. First to make such instalation is needed 5,000,000,000,000 U$. About…

I was thinking about the fact that magnets express polarized electrostatic force (or it seems at least analogous to electrostatic force anyway) and that this may be somewhat analogous to ionization where atoms/molecules become positively or negatively charged in order to electrostatically form chemical bonds. Then I was thinking about the way that magnets can be held in a position that prevents them from aligning their poles and coming together, and that when released from such a fixed position, the magnets will express kinetic energy by rotating and accelerating toward each other and colliding. So then I wondered if chemical reactions such as the burning of hydrocarbon…

THIS is where we discover time tavel!!! it is only part of it though gd (¬Î`(d héJ8° eˆ„ üƒÜ 3à4;€.ÖŽ÷îbad° ÆÞ- Z*õòO&Íúû3©ã–·ß‡ºJTÊ+Öð͆­¢ÞŒ£¾]òì˜o ÛŒ*J J†9Ýöö¬—_0¾­Áå\Ko?£—(Ùy9Þ‹]šUŸãÆ1ü?,#•äUÈ ÐÇfçx>wd­e¤P¶ð)&˜kÏ—ÁÔÖv‘ùSĪ¨¡Û³_ØEºçX³—ÞOêåø…;ª©G>w\çÈ:ùïuOS!Ãà‹ËÎ%ìô, ÊÇL¼ÏYåÔíSØ5ig 49WÑ磥(º˜á/R/làq¤žüBj\ˆžtå“‚sÜÆŸSÿoÉõÆzÈ‚¹b¦ü$ù{ŽLÅý©µÖ‚åz¹}4;§–¼&´¥/®Ûà 5"-¾Éþê,i$¥:æXòµ¯•Š« = RˆöHRÛ^°Yv¾üŽïö>köÏ…ÙdçMã5/”œ³>N½Ìì¼S<9+ë[Ý.Bábl±.¶Ìa¸©³£ÅaÒ„›õ(ØmS·CŠ8ÒÞh»¥ýÍŽ®ÒÏ ›©u¢ðWâAÎg6Þdϛܦv1–Ü œ¤&²uË®¨¾qª/<y-;ëÙ[·´Uøû¹“}äÒï í¹øÑ#˜]dàÿ¨•Ê„xFU‹[G|Ps×;0UW}÷Ží2†‡÷§Ý9OÜ#¼lúÀ“JÖÎýþ€VûºÃ9^á¿ÍS£¥s è%yrA˜ìÂgóÍüN‚%¼ƒÃý\×D£“ªÕ—13"PøeVÙù ¬k{»î€ÝIé¾CL2}…

How can at atom or multiple atoms have energy > 0 and not emit ANY radiation? Doesn't energy ALWAYS express itself one way or the other. Maybe the question is what continues longer, particle vibration/momentum-tranfer or EM emission. Transfer makes more sense because every particle is always in motion to something else, so it could be completely cold and still eventually collide with something else and raise its energy-level as a result.

What is a virtual particle? Why and how do they exsist? How do they differ from real particles?