Physics

Hey guys, So I learned from my Physics teacher that many things even explosions are just high velocity oxygen particles. So he told me when a grenade explodes, it the high vel oxygen that kills you. So I want to know then,,, What particles are part of a fire and How do those particles move that causes a fire? ------------------------

< Does ? the photons of light polarized with / H2o ,, changing the temperature of the atmosphere. as a result cooperating in the warming up of the so Call ?

This will be very simple for most of you but please clarify something for me. A Proton/Neutron is composed of two up quarks and one down quark/one up quark and two down respectively and they are held in place by gluons. Protons/Neutrons are fermions but gluons are bosons. Can someone please clarify? Thank you.

Our DNA converts photosynthesis powered plant material into electricity after eating food, we can scale this process up by creating unconscious DNA power plants fueled by organic material ultimately powered by the suns fusion Magnetically contained nuclear fusion appears to be impossible, gravitational containment of nuclear fusion is likely required

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.

okay basically I was wondering, since the speed of light cannot be hit, and it takes more and more energy to go faster the faster you go, what happens to the energy added to a particle moving at 99.9 percent the speed of light? My first personal guess is if you took a particle moving at 99.9% the speed of light and poured an entire supernova's worth of energy into it, that would move it up to 99.99% the speed of light and all that energy would still be in the particle as potential energy so when it struck something, it would strike it with the force of that whole supernova. But if thats true that makes me wonder what would happen if a particle fed more energy to …

The heat death of the universe says that all energy is eventually lost in the form of radiation. But why cant radiation by gathered up and turned back into matter or turned into the energy needed to turn it back into matter? If its just a matter of ineffeciency then that doesnt sound like an absolute problem. Maybe eventually the solar system could be put into a box and the sun refed its own released energy to keep it from ever going red giant. And one day put the whole universe in a box.

Im trying to go to sleep but I keep having these thoughts. Note when I say kike "for a year" I mean relative earth time. Okay, from the pov(point of view) of a photon, it is teleporting, going from point A to point B instantly.And its only from our pov that light seems to go so slow, taking millions of years to get from star to star. Now the faster you go, the faster time seems to fly by. If you spend a year traveling at 50% the speed of light, it will feel like 6 months. It will only be a year for the observers. But speed isnt the only thing that affects the rate time moves. If someone stood in a machine that made their rate of relative time passage the s…

I am an artist, and have begun working on a project based primarily in the origins of the metric system, however my research has led me into theories about potential standardised basic units of measurement suggested in the past. One of these was by Gabriel Mouton in 1670, suggesting that the world should adopt a uniform system of measurement based on the length of one minute of the earth's arc. Despite my high school level grasp of mathematics and physics I've managed to figure out how fast I am spinning here in Banff, Canada (1050.21 km/h) based on how quickly the earth rotates at a fixed point on the Equator (1675 km/h) however I thought it would also be interestin…

Since tidal power basically turns gravity into electricity does this slightly weaken gravity? If you had enough tidal power stations, would the moon fly off? I have no idea how this works.

So I've been out of school for about 10 years and have always wondered about the Big Bang theory and want someone to really clarify it for me if they can and if it is strongly supported by most people or not. I have the basic idea of how it is explained from school but never attended a class that really went in depth about it. If someone can do this I will explain my thoughts on why it doesn't make sense to me.

Hmmm. That is ambiguous, or may be even wrong. Imagine the following 3 situations: 2 cars, each with 50 km/h frontally collide 1 car, 50 km/h, collides with a 'perfect wall' 2 cars, one is standing still, and the other collides with it with a velocity of 50 km/h The relative velocities are clear (forgetting relativity for the moment). But a person in between will experience the same effect in 1 and 2, where the relative velocities differ, but not in 3. But this also means that the single car in situation 2 will have the same effect as one car in situation 1, even if the relative velocity in situation 1 is 100 km/h and in 2 50 km/h. Or am I totally confused?

I've been trying to figure out why things stop around you when you're going at the speed of light, rather than going incredibly slowly. And I would like to know what that ratio is.

What causes distortion and static? It's probably something simple, but I'm always fascinated when I hear static on the radio or see distortion in a video when I'm out of "the range"

Reading through some of Relative (molecule's) posts, he inspired me to make a clear, scientific definition of what darkness and light is. Basically, much of what Relative was saying hurt my brain and didn't make much sense to me. But if he still checks backs on these boards, maybe he can read my ideas of what dark and light is. Darkness, is basically, a lack of energy. A stillness. Okay, let me rewrite this. Human darkness, is when the energy frequency is out of bounds (<4000 angstroms>8000). Also, to Bender. Giving a robot a color sensor will not say whether or not it can see in color. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness If I am…

Hello Everyone YouTube link removed per rule 2.7 Here is a simple video I made explaining the difference between renewable and nonrenewable energy resources! Hope You Enjoy

I'm skipping a lot of steps here, but if traveling back in time was actually real, could this simulation happen? (I took these notes on my phone, just gonna copy and paste) There are 2 ways to travel back in time: (1) Consciousness (2) Mind and Body (Consciousness and your body) - When traveling with your mind and body, you only go back temporarily, because you should have an object to get you back to the future. Also, your body would age, so you will be older once you get back. For instance, you go back in time when you're 20, to help your 7 year old self to get age 10. Once you head back, you'd be 23 but it would seem like you left for only an instant, because…

is it more space...or?

We have a scene in a time-travel-themed TV pilot which speculates about travel to the past. We're wondering whether it makes hypothetical sense to send a tiny device through a wormhole and have it hack into the senses of a person living in the past, then allowing those electrical signals in their brain to re-create the sights and sounds that person experienced in a person living in the present, through another hypothetical device. This is inspired by the parasitic fungus that lodge in the brains of some ants and are able to control their minds. Additionally, the scenario explains that a person is unable to be sent back through this wormhole due to their sheer size…

Okay, most sources say that once you get past the event horizon, you will be ripped apart by the gravity and die. Yet, they also say that once you pass event horizon, every direction leads to the singularity. This doesn't make sense. If every direction leads to the singularity and you get pulled toward the singularity then you are getting pulled towards the singularity in every direction... Wouldn't the forces cancel out? Also, since the singularity is infinitesimally small, wouldn't it take you forever to actually get to the singularity as every part of you is approaching that which is infinite?

I was solving some online physics question papers. Can anyone explain, what is Turning Effect of Force? & also guide me how to solve this: A uniform beam of 1 m is supported at the 50 cm mark. Given that a weight of 2 N hangs at the 30 cm mark, how far away from the pivot must another weight of 4 N be hung to balance the beam?

Quantum physics is becoming really popular on TV and other media, mainly b/c it has the potential to offer so much, but in reality provides so little. yea it sounds cool to talk about wormholes and quarks and leptons, but at the end of the day, what does this get us? I really think quantum physics got started by a bunch of geniuses who got bored and started breaking down matter to unnecessary levels. Sure, I can tediously calculate all the electrons on my computer screen, or explain why benzene is a stable ring due to its orbitals. But at the end of the day, these don't really save or help anyone or anything. Yes, I'm aware of the things physics has given us such …

I wanted to ask if there is an equation out there that describes what is real and what is not. Sort of like a ''mathematical backbone'' that can separate reality from an illusion. Is there such a thing in physics or is it just an individuals point of view?

I have to measure the voltage of various citrus fruits to see the voltage of a battery. What information can be provided here?

Ok, I have been hearing about the EM(Electromagnetic) drive, and I heard that NASA and Eagleworks labs explanation for the mysterious thrust is a different interpretation of quantum physics, that electrons do have an certain place at a certain time. Can anyone give me any more information about this? For those that don't know; The EM drive is an engine designed for space travel that runs on the theory that when microwaves are put into a cone-shaped enclosed tank(sorry if that isn't the right word, I'm very tired right now. I had a long night.) it creates thrust. So far the research has been successful, and the EM drive is consistently producing 1.2mN/kW, with hopes …