Classical Physics

Well, it's being said that theories and properties being done in Quantum physics proves the hypothesis and lemmas of Astrophysics. So scientifically, micro-molecules and femto-molecules actually resemble Mega-molecules and Zeta molecules. In contrary, quantum physics disapproves the laws of Newtonian physics which are vastly applicable to Macro-molecules (i.e; from milli to kilo). What I would say is that, may be Newtonian physics is wrong and quantum physics is right; may be quantum physics holds good for molecules of all sizes; and the fact that newtonian physics is obeyed by the macro-molecules may be because of practical aberrations. Any comments??

The simple harmonic oscillator is an excellent model for a wide range of systems in nature. In fact, not long after Planck’s discovery that the black body radiation spectrum could be explained by assuming energy to be exchanged in quanta, Einstein applied the same principle to the simple harmonic oscillator.

Is the hydrogen atom the one with the intermitent or disappearing proton ?

I've learned that a while ago, several reformulations of classical mechanics were made, like lagrangian, hamiltonian mechanics and poisson brackets and things, which can do all kinds of fancy stuff that would be incredibly difficult or impossible using the original mathematical picture of newtonian mechanics. Is there any hope or need for more reformulation? sounds like a fun thing to do to be honest lol

how does gear efficiency ratios work if there is the 1st law of thermodynamics? By gear efficiency ratios i mena http://www.howstuffworks.com/gears.htm

They used to sit on top of counters in stores, and they were normally filled with orange juice, and a stirring arm rotated very slowly. I believe that the motion of the liquid created some kind of cooling effect. Can anyone confirm this and explain how? And what were they called?

I just want to know if my way of explaining the gravity is correct or not. Gravity can be explained as a mass attraction. As the ( law/statement/hypothesis or whatever ) states . [ "Every object in the universe is attracted towards each other" ] Based on this law, gravity is a mass level attraction exerted , by the heaviest body [(in accordance to the rest of the bodies that are present in that region)] and experienced by the bodies that satisfy both of the following conditions 1) It must falls under the influence OR efficient/effective range , of the mass 2) The body should be lighter than that of the body that attracts [ Is this explan…

1.When you shoot a ball against a wall, the object hits the wall and eventually rebounds following the laws of physics: if the wall is made of a perfect surface, the angle of incidence is the same as the angle of reflection. It is the same law that applies for waves. 2. When you shoot a bullet through a liquid (like shooting with a gun into a pound of water), will the bullet follow a path according to Snell"s law? Will the angle change when the bullet is in water?

The domain of a force i.e. the extent to which it can be perceived is defined by the inverse square law. (F -> 1/r2). If we take the limit of this over infinite distance we can see that the magnitude of the force approaches zero but actually does not become zero. This has implications in the context of a very large (but not infinitely large) Universe. This means that even the most distant quasar can exert its footprint in our galaxy, for example. Also as we know radiation from the most distant quasar does in fact reach us, although we detect it after an appreciable time. May our Universe could be biased in one direction (of expansion) (based on ran…

In another thread, Swansont wrote As seen from someone standing on the ground, freefall means that the falling astronaut is accelerating towards the Earth. It seems obvious that the one on the ground and the falling astronaut are not in the same FOR, since one is accelerated towards the other. So I went looking back at the basics and found those old excellent videos In the second video, take attention after timestamp 4.00. In which it is stated that 1. The Earth IS an Inertial Frame Of Reference 2. An accelerated FOR relative to the Earth IS NOT an Inertial Frame Of Reference. Isn't an astronaut in free fall accelerated towards the Eart…

I am a high-school student of the sophomore year and I have a project which is I want to make a coil gun that is 3 stages and I want all three coils to each be powered by its own capacitor. I want to specifically know how to time each coil which i would find more precise than an IR system(if i'm wrong please correct me) the coils will be about 2-1/2 to 3 inches apart(if there is a better way to space them tell me) and my projectiles will be 6 mm .89 gram steel bullets. I'm open to suggestions. I have limited funds but have access to drafting software and basic soldering and electronics skills but my knowledge is limited.

I've been thinking and I came to the conclusion (probably a wrong conclusion) that gravity isn't that weak. All the matter we see is made up of almost entirely of empty spaces. If you had a spoon of pure matter, it would be incredibly heavy and would have a very significant gravitational pull. The thing is that we don't have such material. My question is, if you had pure matter, would the gravitational force be stronger than electromagnetism?

Any material can become a solid with the right temperature. So could it be possible to freeze photons into a solid or gaseous state? Though you would need contain the photons into a static state in order to freeze them. This could help with future space travel for going almost as fast as light.

Sorry, but this will be a long post. This isn't homework, I'm reviewing physics after many years of neglect. Halliday & Resnick, 4th Ed., section on variable mass and rockets, refers the interested reader to an article, "Force, Momentum Change, and Motion," Martin S. Tiersten, Am. J. Phys., Jan. 1969. I'm trying to apply Tiersten's methodology (which seems to me to be more straightforward than other methods) to 2 problems. The usual representations of Newton's 2nd law for open mass systems: [latex]M\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt} = \sum\vec{F}_{ext.} + (\vec{u}-\vec{v})\frac{dM}{dt} = \sum\vec{F}_{ext.} + \vec{v}_{rel.}\dot{M}, (1)[/latex] [latex]\frac{d}{dt…

Hi all, I'm a little confused. I thought that an object that has a spinning axis (a wheel, gyroscop, etc.) will have an angular momentum that tends to maintain the spinning axis. Now, I've been throwing stuffs in my garden, like a playing card, or a pizza's cardboard support. I give it some spin upon throwing away, and the spinning axis will rotate (this new rotation axis is parallel to the absolute motion trajectory) (and no it's not due to a blast of wind, silly). It always turns the same way ; if the initial spin is clockwise (top-view), the axis rotation will be clockwise (back-view). There must be a way to explain it with dextro/levro-rotation vocabul…

Question Why, when I break a glass for example and then assembling the pieces that fit perfectly together, why do the pieces not stick together just like that and reform the glass solid as it was without glue? Has the structure been modified so that the pieces correspond perfectly but the structural bonds are gone? I hope my question is clear.

If the law of physics allow us to travel back in time and meet the people thousands of years ago, are we some kind of computer program?

I would like to know if a a inductively coupled power transfer system also emits electromagnetiv waves. The system contains of two inductance coils one generating the magnetic field with AC, the other picking up the magnetic energy and transforms it into an AC, also. The current frequency is above 100 kHz. In my oppinion, the self inductance of the coils do emit electromagnetic waves, but i have read that only an open oscillating circuit by meaning of a straight antenna emits electromagnetic waves. Does anyone knows can help me out here?

Is there loss of linear momentum of 2 objects in an elastic collision if the net angular momentum increases and vica versa?

suppose in thought experiment a box with negligible mass is isolated from any other mass . An elastic spring is attached to the ceiling of the box while other end carries certain mass . The box is uniformly accelerated alternatively in direction from lower end of the spring towards ceiling and then in direction from ceiling towards lower end of spring .Will there be any tension in the spring in both the cases?

If gravity is what happens when mass curves space and time, what would be the situation were a given mass remotely non-spherical - i.e. a perfectly flat bar or sheet, for example? Would there still be a localised curvature of space and time? If so, how does gravity's tidal pull fit into this arrangement?

Hello Every One! I am currently doing master in the field of energy, in Germany. Most of the institutes, across Europe, working in the field of thermodynamics are basically working in thermodynamics application. In order words, they work in applied thermodynamics. Can anyone recommend me some renowned institutes in Europe which are doing research on the fundamental level of thermodynamics, work delivery cycles, energetic balancing etc.

please help me out in this query!! actually i need to know why when we use a battery or dry cell, As we know it consists of :- 1)electrolyte 2)cathode and anode. but i need to know as electrolyte is consisting of a salt (we take it as NaCl salt for it ) and the ions is formed from the salt due to potential we make on both ends of the battery, but why it cant happen as if the ions can directly form without connecting the battery into a wire , because the two terminals consists of positive and negative ions which can directly put force on NaCl compound and can break it ,but why their is a need to create a potential…

In the normal description, E, J and the vector potential A are taken to be vectors. B is an axial vector. q is a scalar. Would any physical description change should these roles be reversed? For example, B would become a vector, E would become an axial vector, and q a pseudo scalar.

Hi everyone, I am studying about the coriolis effect which affects the hurricane's spinning direction on the earth. I got lots of confusion on it but I wish to figure it out. Here are my two questions which I really hope you can explain in details. 1. In terms of conservation of angular momentum, how does the earth's rotation affect the direction in large-scale wind? (why is the path curved?) 2. Somebody told me that the different toilet flush rotation direction between north and south hemisphere is due to the Coriolis effect, is it true taht the Coriolis effect can really cause effects in small scale? Thanks in advance! Really really …