Modern and Theoretical Physics

The basic rule,(Matter cannot be created or destroyed,only altered) But anti-matter ,might have to be made or produced under certain variables. combining matter with some other form of energy, Maybe anti-matter exists all around us, we cannot detect it because we perceive things only with our 5 sences. Maybe it it exists in a differant dimention than ours. I compare anti-matter like 2 magnets facing eachother with opposite poles the closer they get the more resistance. And this area of force might be where we harness the power of anti-matter. Kinda like a nuclear reactor, without nuclear material.

If a group of people were in the event horizon of a blackhole, would they appear to be moving away from each other at an increasing rate?

We have 2 different kinds of symmetry: discrete and continous. Basic difference between them: Discrete symmetry is static symmetry (reflections,parity,etc). Not demanding motion,change in time. Continous symmetry is dinamic symmetry.Demanding motion (rotations,translation,shifts,etc), change in time. The motion supposed to be different velocity (from small to relativistic). When we going to relativistic velocity object get different Lorentcian deformations and continous symmetry lost its sense. We get some kind of self-rejection of continous symmetry. 1)Does discrete symmetry only real symmetry? 2)There are exist some universal symmetry where included both sy…

I'm really confused, what's the difference between dark matter and anti matter? Or are they the same thing?! please help.

Since there is no reaction between antiprotons and electrons, could it be said that antiprotons would remain stable as long as they were kept away from cosmic rays and hydrogen? Antiprotons and electrons have the same charge, so they'd repell one another, and a reaction between antiprotons and protons would be about as unlikely as interaction between electrons and protons, right?

How much more abundant are protons in the universe than neutrons? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged(Forgot to set instant email notification.)

If we suppose that the electron is not point-like but smeared classically or better quantum-mechanically, what model would you experts prefer: a "rigid" or "soft" electron? I do not speak of the Lorentz contraction here, I speak of "mechanical" behavior in collisions.

http://www.infocobuild.com/education/audio-video-courses/physics/qcd-cern.html A collection of links to physics video lectures on quantum chromodynamics (QCD) from CERN - introduction to QCD, QCD and collider physics, QCD Phenomenology etc.

If two particles were in the act of exchanging bosons, and in the meanwhile one/each particle disappeared, would the boson headed towards it "miss" the vanished particle and now exist on its own? Example 1: virtual particles disappear before the exchange is complete. Example 2: with normal particles, but one's velocity was suddenly altered before the exchange got completed.

I'm searching for a dielectric material that does not get attracted to the +ve or -ve plates of an electric field. Could someone correct me if this is wrong, but does a non-polar dielectric (e.g. pressurized SF6) get attracted to a positive or negative plate? Or does it simply attenuate the electric field without having a force induced in it since it does not get polarized? Furthermore, IF a non-polar dielectric is not attracted to an electric field source, THEN what non-polar material/gas out there has the highest dielectric constant (i.e. relative static permittivity)?

I understand that Relativity is Einstein's theory of the macroverse and it has been used to predict things with scary accuracy, and I understand that Quantum physics is a theory created by many men to define the microverse. I also understand that it can be used to predict the level of unpredictability at an atomic level. I know the absolute rudimentary concepts of string theory as well, though I know also that this is the most theoretical of these three theories, having no proof or experiments done to prove it. So, why do Quantum and General Relativistic theories counteract each other? What are the conflicting principles between the two? Which has more flaws? Who is t…

Hi I'm new here and hopefully this is in the right place. Alright this may seem like a stupid question, However it is one that's been bugging me quite a bit. So E=[math]\Delta[/math]mc[math]^{2}[/math] And E[math]_{K}[/math]=[math]\frac{1}{2}[/math]mv[math]^{2}[/math] Does this mean that if an object is to go from rest to the speed of light it will "loose" half of it's mass? also substituting between the equations for an omject at the speed of light would give us the equation E[math]_{K}[/math]=[math]\frac{1}{2}[/math]E So kinetic energy is half of the total energy for that object and does this mean that mass constitutes the other half? I h…

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=2542 "A few minutes ago, one of the beams of the LHC was ramped up to an energy of 1180 GeV, besting the Tevatron’s top beam energy of 980 GeV. Update: Actually the beam was lost at 1070 GeV, which is still a record high energy." ========================== An update says that they now have gotten each beam up to 1180 GeV. It also gives a figure for the brightness (how many particles fly past per second). So with two beams each at 1.2 TeV they could be looking at collisions with a total energy of 2.4 TeV. Already this is somewhat higher than what has been produced at the older Fermilab collider---the soc…

http://www.infocobuild.com/education/audio-video-courses/physics/LHC-Tevatron-cern.html This contains physics video lectures on LHC and Tevatron from CERN - LHC detectors, LHC experiments, LHC physics, Tevatron physics etc.

Hi! Are M-Theory’s ‘other’ branes (that is, not ours) thought to physically exist 'elsewhere'… that is, in another universe somehow ‘next’ to ours… i.e. not mingled within our physical space. Or, do these 'strings on other branes' purport to exist within our space – that is, intermixed with the strings on our brane? Or... all of the above. It would seem that this would be… one way or the other. Or, is the answer is neither… and is it one of those ‘things’ which is expressed in the mathematics but, is beyond what mortal man can imagine, envision or understand, LOL. It can be that way if you don't know the math. Thanks any help! Rusty

:confused:Some say time is the movement of earth around the sun and the earths axis. Some believe in the space-time continuum. Others believe in different things. What about ageing of matter or shall i say existance of matter and the laws of physics. Could that be time? Here is an example if all forces and matter stoped to interact and spin would time carry on? Please state yours vieves upon this subject (i am aware of the laser experiments involving the sun and all that)

Is there a specific method you must follow to send entangled particles on their merry ways (in opposite directions)? For example, can you just shoot a lengthy and concentrated beam of entangled particles into open space while their partners remain locked in a box here on Earth? Then later on, you interact with the particles from the box to affect their distant partners.

Big things and little things don't work the same. From what I understand this has always been the problem. Black holes seem to require a lot of mass focused on a central point under a lot of preasure. How does the LHC put these three things together?

http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cms/performance/FirstBeam/pictures221109/CollisionEvent.png

Hi all, My question relates to the size of any possible black hole that could possibly be created by the LHC. Please bear in mind that my interest stems from trying to explain the minute scale of the actual interaction to a non scientist. What I'm trying to achieve is an explanation that while not being 100% accurate, is sufficient to allay fears. To this end I have decided to concentrate on the size of the particles involved and possibly the energy. Here's what I've got so far : Assumptions - a proton can be said to have a "size" of approx. 1.0 x 10^{-13} mm a human hair can be said to have a diameter of about 2.0 x 10^{-1} mm the distance between atoms…

Hi, My latest animation project has shown how big (or small) subatomic particles and strings are in relationship to each other and how much empty space exists in the quantum world. Now I need to move on to membranes and here there’s a practical problem. First I’ll show the ‘logical view’ the familiar brane stack… waving vertical sheets with a different world on each one. Then I’ll show the physical view of the brane… a very very thin and very very long ‘thing’ floating next to me saying that this is what the membrane really looks like. They I’ll say that everything we can see and interact with has the ends of its strings attached to the same membrane. At th…

In a Fusion Reaction on let’s say a star, the fusion is supposed to be between 2 hydrogen elements creating helium. But what if in the fusion reaction there were a more elementary particles causing the fusion first forming hydrogen then proceeding to heavier elements? It’s kind of a long shot I know, but if it were true it would advance fusion research. The reason why I ask this is because I have noticed that all the fusion reactions use Hydrogen (isotopes) at extremely high temperatures to initiate the fusion. But if you have a lesser particle it may not require such high energy systems it would yield a much higher ratio of energy produced to energy consumed…

Hi Everybody, I recently wrote an article on quantum mechanics and entered it in a competition where I'm a finalist! It's at http://www.scientificblogging.com/science_rants/blog/enter_quantumland_where_you_just_cant_stop Whoever gets the most votes wins, so it'd be great if I could get my article to people who are interested in quantum mechanics! It only takes a second, I appreciate any comments, I'd love your support!!!!

Hi, What follows may be complete BS and, if so, I’m sure all of you will tell me about it. Newton described gravity with mathematics. Einstein described relativity with mathematics. Quantum Mechanics was described with mathematics. String Theory is described with mathematics… elegant, balanced, anomaly free (at one time anyway) mathematics that ties relativity, quantum physics and gravity together. It’s the first theory that does so. If you only look at mathematics… relativity, quantum mechanics and M-Theory are all mathematically correct (or, if not ‘completely’ correct, then to a significant degree). However, we’re told that strings do not – indeed cann…

Hey guys, I have thought of many interesting topics and one of them is the "Traveling back in time". First I want to say that maybe there is such a question in this forum and I apologize if there really is... Second, excuse me if you find mistake in my English ------------------ So, I have thought a lot about traveling back in time.Of course I couldn't invent a time machine ( xD ), but there is one paradox and I want to talk about it with you... Imagine that you invent a time-traveling machine and go back in time.Incidentally you kill one of your predecessor (for example-father, mother...). That means that if he/she dies you would never been born. HERE comes the …