Leaderboard

Amplitudes and superposition There has to be a measurement. In your example, as an analogy, the paths are entangled. Even though you didn’t find the monitor after your first two measurements, as you note, it gave you information. You made a measurement. It just returned zero as an answer. Not getting a photon can be a measurement, as in some quantum zeno effect experiments. If you’ve prepared an atom to be in one of two states, knowing it’s not in one state tells you it’s in the other.

It is much less accurate than our current theory of gravity. No. But it gives the wrong results and then you start inventing ways of trying to correct for that. Unlike GR where the correct result (to a very high degree of accuracy) falls out of the the theory. Why? It obviously doesn't work. And we have a theory that does. What "material" do you think 1 kilometre is made of, or one second?

Well unfortunately for me, I have tried to "truly" learn some physics previously, but I came across unscalable walls and bottomless pits. The biggest obstacle for me was the mathematics. I simply don't understand them. I can follow instructions. I can find the area bounded by two hyperbolic functions. I can follow matrix calculus operations. But I can't understand them. They have no "meaning". There are mathematical techniques and tricks that are used that I can accept are true, but I cannot logically comprehend them and cannot apply logical proof to the equations once they are added. In addition I have questions about the legitimate use of some mathematics. There are some assumptions that are taken for granted, or at least rarely mentioned, but these assumptions underlay ALL the conclusions that are drawn from the results the mathematics give. Just for example, off the top of my head, integration relies on a coordinate system that is "uniform", that is the gap between integers are consistent, but what if it isnt? That throws integration out of the window. Any integration with respect to Time from zero to infinity, assumes that it is uniform and consistent from the beginning and forever What evidence do we have this is so? Sure you can calculate the area under a curve...but only if you assume your axes are consistent and uniform. What if the gap between 2 and 3 was larger than the gap between 1 and 2, such that 1 +2 =/= 3? We already know space expands, that is, the axes are stretched. Are they stretched evenly everywhere at the same time? Do two volumes of space mutually exclusive from each other's observable universe and future universe stretch at the same rate? How does space expansion reconcile with an isotropic universe? The second biggest obstacle for me was the scope. If you want to "truly" know one thing, you have to know ten other things first, the rabbit hole never ends. I am truly awestruck by how vast the scope of physics is. It is like running up a mountain of infinite size, and everytime you summit a local maxima, there's ten more summits behind. The third problem was time and attention. I don't have the time or the attention or even the ability to learn all the things I need to know to answer my own questions. The bottom line is, I am resigned to forever never truly understanding anything, and forever asking questions like a child.

To do it from a diagram like that, you can rotate the image 180 degrees, then overlap the ellipses. Here the two suns are the foci. Obviously the accuracy will be limited by image quality but for example you can see that the foci of Mercury's ellipse are farther apart than Earth's, and that Mercury is on the order of 3/2 as far from the sun at aphelion as it is at perihelion. Mercury: Earth:

Well that would certainly involve a lot of antisymmetry relations. Acceleration caused a rotation due to rapidity. Torsion would give antisymmetry to the metric tensor. Ie to describe torsion using the metric tensor you would have to specify a direction of rotation. What you actually need is a covector vector and a vector. The covariant vector is the column vectors while the vector is the row vectors. Using the two vectors above will preserve invatiance under coordinate transformations. Gravity itself is a form of flux of the energy momentum stress tensor. With the Minkowskii tensor you have already made a coordinate choice (cartesian) so you can use the inner product of two vectors. Which will return a scalar value [math]\mu\cdot\nu=s[/math] the Minkowskii tensor is orthogonal all orthogonal groups are symmetric and commute. [math]\mu\cdot\nu=\nu\cdot\mu[/math] However this would not be invariant under coordinate transformation so the column vector would use a covector.

Think of the barrier as a wall. The higher the wall (energy barrier) the harder it is to jump over. If the wall (energy barrier) is low enough then everyone (all electrons) will be able to jump over (tunnel through) it. If the wall (energy barrier) is higher then fewer people (electrons) will be able to jump over (tunnel through) it.

Ok, so the gradient would give you a vector field - which is still insufficient to capture all the necessary degrees of freedom. As I said, at the very least you need a rank-2 tensor field to adequately describe gravity. Time dilation is a relationship between clocks, it’s not a covariant quantity, and it isn’t local either. So, such a thing as a “time dilation field” does not make much physical or mathematical sense. A solution to the Einstein equations is given by a metric - this is the primary and most fundamental mathematical object in GR. Once you have the metric, you can then calculate the relationship between given clocks in spacetime from this.

Is this a response to one of my questions? Without quote it's tricky to see. Big Bang was not an explosion. Big Bang model does not have a center. Big Bang has no outside where a medium could exist. No medium supports a speed of sound that equals speed of light in vacuum (c). Ether is not part of Big Bang model. Can you point at something that is not in conflict with established theories?

I would just like to point out here that Einstein did not refer to photon's or quantum theory when he introduced relativity and light clocks. Indeed he carefully avoided the mechanism of light until he had included it in his maths where he always discussed a light pulse. The light pulse being the instantaneous 'front' of whatever constitutes a travelling light ray. 'Das lichtquant' was another paper, directed at and confined to other effects.

Yes ,I realized after I posted that "die" might be the wrong word. I think that you put it right,it is when it's reproductive /infective mechanism is sufficiently degraded (as far as I know,anyway) No idea how they might determine that but I think they they say that soap destroys its lipid exterior structure ,so it might be something similar that which occurs when a virus is left in an inhospitable (for it) environment.

Hi, I recently performed an experiment similar to the Schmidt (1980) experiment, and unlike Schmidt, I got something that looks like a positive result, but only after numerous unsuccessful attempts. This is part of the abstract of the Schmidt (1980) paper; A Search for Advanced Fields in Electromagnetic Radiation: An experiment to search for an advanced component of electromagnetic radiation, as suggested by the time symmetry of Maxwell's equations was conducted. A dipole transmitting antenna was driven periodically with 10.2 GHz microwave pulses of 12 ns duration and 4 watt instantaneous power. A receiving dipole antenna at a distance R = 10m away was instrumented to search for power above noise received in a time gate at a time r/c prior to transmission of each pulse. Data were integrated over 10 to the 7th power pulses. The experiment was performed at Lick Observatory, atop Mt. Hamilton, CA, to enable placement of the antennas so that a line connecting them, when extended to infinity in both directions, encounters no local complete absorber. In the Schmidt experiment configuration I also got negative results. After at least 2000 runs in which no statistically significant signal above the level of the noise were detected in the advanced time window, I introduced three important changes in the experiment. The positive result was obtained only when all three changes are implemented simultaneously: 1. The experiment is carried out at wavelengths greater than 21 cm. It is possible that, due to the red shift in the distant future, microwaves of shorter wavelengths become stretched to the wavelength of 21 cm and absorbed by interstellar hydrogen, as suggested by Fearn (2014). 2. The detection is done with a λ/20 antenna, as suggested by Niknejadi (2015). The advanced signal disappears when antenna of ≈λ/6.7 or bigger is used for detection. 3. The antennas are placed so that a line connecting them, when extended behind the receiving antenna, points to the sky at an angle of ≈10° above the horizon. The advanced signal disappears in conditions of high relative humidity of the air and overcast sky at angles of less than ≈5°. Even though the SNR of the signal measured in the advanced time window defined as μ/σ reaches 30.9, the possibility that the real cause of the signal is an unknown source of systematic error cannot be completely ruled out. If perhaps someone is interested to reproduce the experiment to confirm or refute the results, here can find more details about the experiment: Measurement of Advanced Electromagnetic Radiation - http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.247283 From the above working paper: The block diagram of the basic experiment is shown in Figure 1. RF signal generator Signal Hound VSG25A generates pulses in duration of 6 ns to 24 ns (FWHM) and 10 mW (CW) power. Signal is supplied with an 8 cm long coaxial cable to the RF amplifier Mitsubishi M57796MA from which the signal amplified to ≈100 mW (CW) is supplied to a λ/10 monopole transmitting antenna, placed 200 cm above the surrounding terrain. At a distance of 430 cm, a receiving λ/20 monopole antenna is placed at the height of 300 cm above the ground. Angle between the horizon and the line connecting the two antennas is ≈10°. Received signal is supplied by 60 cm long coaxial cable through simple high pass filter to 50Ω input of 300 MHz oscilloscope Rigol DS2302A and a 100 MHz wide digital band-pass filter is applied to the signal. Horizontal scale is set to10 ns/div, vertical scale is set to 500 μV/div, while the mathematical scale in which the filtered signal is shown is set to 200 μV/div. Fig. 1 Figure 2 A shows a signal measured in the above described configuration at an angle of ≈10°. Peak of the retarded pulse, 12 ns FWHM, wavelength of 167 cm is at 0 ns. Peak of the advanced signal is at -28.6±0.2 ns. Average value (Vrms) of advanced signal after 1000 pulses is 252.3±9.5 μV. Error is the standard deviation. As shown in Figure 2 B, by raising the transmitting antenna by 50 cm and thereby by reducing the angle to ≈ 3.5°, the advanced signal weakened to 35.4±5.1 μV. Runs were made 5 minutes apart at clear skies and low relative humidity. Same effect can be achieved by lowering the receiving antenna to the height of the transmitting antenna. In conditions of high relative humidity of the air or cloudy weather, the signal completely disappears at angles smaller than ≈5°. Fig. 2A Fig. 2B I'm not a professional physicist (obviously), so it is possible that I made some big mistake that I did not aware of. Any criticism is welcomed and appreciated.

I can't say I do, I'm sorry. I'm thinking of taking a back sit on this one. I'm not ready for this discussion... just yet. I want to read more arguments. Yes, I did. I had nothing to add to that one. Yes and no just doesn't do it for me. It's just that I want to take a break from fundamentals of QM for a while. I've had so much arguing for years with my friends from university... There's been so much nonsense said and written about it through decades that I feel overwhelmed. It is entirely possible that I misinterpreted. Occasionally I need to take a step back and let everything sink in.

This coronavirus situation is starting to get out of hand.

When you get admission in online degree courses then kindly enquire about it. Most of the universities mail the degrees or certificates on request of the student. But mostly you have to go to the universities to collect the certificate.

When you enroll you are supplied access to a website and you carryout your studies online. During your studies you will be invited to tutorials and when you graduate you'll also attend your graduation day. The University will after graduation make arrangements for you to receive your certificate.

Sorry, Moontanman, I will not start a quote war: 'Citation please'. Just for the info: I said my quotations come from Wikipedia. You will find them. And you missed my remark about Acharya S above? And now you refer to her home page as a reliable source? She is just an anti-religionist missionary, preaching her own religion (The Gospel According to Acharya S'), denying the existence of more or less all religion founders. She is just on a crusade. And you seem to miss the main point I made. I draw my conclusions. I stick to what the majority of the scientists have to say. Now you can deny that it is a majority. A citation of Richard Carrier next time?

Yes, this is Richard Feynman in 1965. Have you heard of entropic gravity? Erik Verlinde deduces Einstein's equations and Newton's laws. And it is by no means sure it is the right theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity#Criticism_and_experimental_tests IOW, people don't buy it just yet. Why should scientists pay more attention to you than to Verlinde, for example? Com'on, don't make a fool of yourself any longer. This is really painful to witness.

I don't think an over-the-top analogical exaggeration Is a reasonable response to the physicist writings.

I have personally never heard of gravitational time dilation being explained via "width contraction" to maintain the global invariance of c, but I guess that would work. Varying absorption/emission times does not work. As an aside, I saw an interesting video about radiometers which claimed that the rotation comes from the edge of the fans. The face color of the fans does not matter, which makes sense if you think about it -- the energy hitting each side of the fan is the same, and the energy being emitted from the black side is the same as the energy being reflected from the white side.