Sensei
-
Posts
7713 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
26
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Sensei
-
-
To me it is not philosophical only.
The approach says that when time passes by, you continue to "exist" somewhere in the past. And the same for the future: it says that you are already "existing" in the future. This approach says that you are not a 3D human being living its life, it says you are a 4D "extended human being from its birth to its death". It says that from this 4D Reality, the thing you are perceiving is only 3D objects + the "illusion of time " coming from the 4th dimension.
My pet theory says it is wrong.
One of my argument could be that if the 4th dimension exists (aka Time), then why would it be perceived as an "illusion"? Time is that thing that allows motion to take place, time is the same real as distance.
For example, do you know Flatland?
Flatland is described as a 2D Flat world. But since events are able to happen in Flatland, time exists in Flatland. Which means that Flatland is a 3D world (2D of Space + 1D of Time).
The 3D of Flatland can be represented by a cube sliced in a succession of flat surfaces. Each surface representing a moment of NOW.
Ok you can do that, and build a 3D cube of solid wood with all points of all events happening in Flatland.
So what?
Is that time? Have we explained anything?
The question remains: what is the process that makes one slice slide to the other? Is it an illusion? Is that it?
Imagine we have "world" that's 2D array 2x2 fields.
Possible states are:
10
00
01
00
00
10
00
01
And mixtures of these.
Now we have frames going from:
10
00
it's changing to
01
00
it's changing to
00
01
it's changing to
00
10
Then everything repeats. Somebody observing it above, will say "1" is moving in circle.
Time in this example is index to frame, one full set of states.
Let's make it a bit harder: 3x3 array
100
000
000
let's assume that "1" can move only by one row/column, in 1 frame/time unit,
then jumping from above frame, to frame:
000
000
001
would be violation of our "law" of speed limit.
But if it's
000
010
000
Then
000
000
001
No speed limit law is violated.
State in one frame changes to state in other frame.
If you're looking at video/movie, nothing really moves on the TV/cinema screen.
Just different frames are drawn one by one 50/60 frames per second.
If player software will be randomizing index to frame, movie won't make any sense.
The same is with 2D/3D games we play on computer screen.
Do these players-3d objects, actually move?
They jump from one location:
x += vx * delta_time;
y += vy * delta_time;
z += vz * delta_time;
x,y,z is player position
vx,vy,vz is player speed in m/s
delta_time = time taken to render single frame in s (for proper synchronization, how fast/slow computer is generating frames)
Why is one slice able to observe the past slices and not the future ones?
Photons from event are send in the all (or one direction in minimum).
And if they're absorbed by detector (f.e. eye) we see what happened.
If event emitted just one photon, and you absorbed it, then nobody else will know about this event, only you.
What is the process that gives the direction to the sliding?
Conservation of energy, conservation of momentum, speed limit. etc.
And the direction of the oservable?
Thing that will happen in future, didn't released photons during event yet. So how do you want to see it?
And also, do all the slices continue to "exist"? Why are we so sure of that?
That depends on interpretation.
See above pet explanation of frames-all possible states to build.
Does frame
10
00
always existed, or it started existing when I wrote it on keyboard?
ps. It can be interpreted this way. Regardless of my personal opinion about the subject.
0 -
You also didn't give answer for unanswered questions like what is mass, what is energy, what is elementary particle.
Every time you came up with "theory" in thread, it's easy falsifiable.
Like the last time, when I just gave example of annihilation, and your model failed..
In science we analyze set of data, and try to figure out how to predict outcome the next time we will see the same event.
Somebody see trace in Cloud Chamber, and it's behaving differently than known particles, it's spinning in reverse direct in applied magnetic field. And makes different number of circles.
And calls it pion+ or muon+ for instance. See how it's decaying, and new traces coming from it after couple circles..
Analyze what are these particles, what are their charges, what are their rest-masses, what are their other properties.
You have not bothered to build such device when it cost fifty dollars!!!
Start analyzing set of data. And make prediction basing on them.
Until you learn physics, you won't know what we do know already.
1 -
I need help by a partner.
No, you need to:
- learn how to use quote function in posts,
- learn how to make Latex equations in posts,
- learn physics.
To do first simply write [ quote ] stuff to quote [ /quote ] (without spaces).
Your posts discourage everybody from reading because it's so hard to read them without proper quoting.
To do second simply write [ math ] equation in latex [ /math ] (without spaces).
And read Latex tutorial f.e. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Mathematics
Or use Latex editor..
This will make easier to read and understand equations.
To do third, I gave you link with plentiful materials to read.. Did you read all physics history database?
1 -
Upon arrival of sustainable clean nuclear & solar energy, fission will be used to form elements needed.
Fission doesn't produce isotopes that we want or need.
It's producing plentiful short living radioactive isotopes. That are generally dangerous to environment.
-1 -
There is large difference between them:
- Apple designs iPhone, and iOS is their own product, 3rd party companies, Chinese are producing it.
- Samsung is electronic company designing Samsung Galaxy Sx etc. and producing them by them self, but operating system, Android is licensed from Google. 3rd party company.
Apple can add anything they want to their product and OS, as they have direct control over operating system and device.
Samsung is not in such luxury position. They're limited to what Google will give them.
Personally I have Samsung Galaxy S5. Apple has some nasty politics for 3rd party applications developers. Google have much better.
I can host my own Android application on my FTP server (with HTTP), and then visit that website from device, and app will be installed without any problems.
Without any bothering either Google/Samsung companies.
For spy-aps like f.e. GPS moniting app for truck transport company, it's the only way, as Google Play Store disallows apps that gather data without knowledge of user of app (truck driver).
0 -
Slightly derailing your original thread: why not use balloons.. ?
As long as it's less dense than surrounding atmosphere, it'll be flying and gathering data much longer than any airplane, or rocket..
You don't want to spend time flying couple years, spending billions of dollars, just to arrive and find out engine does not work.
0 -
The question is for how long water has to increase its level.
If it's minutes, hours, and locally (not entire worldwide) tsunami is way to go.
It could be created by collapse of volcano or mounting into sea, causing massive movement of water.
As well as hit by object from cosmos like meteor or comet.
Search YouTube for "tsunami caused by landslide". There are some recorded on video.
Increase of temperature and melting ice is so slow that everybody, or at least the most of people would be able to escape it.
0 -
2. Correct. And how do we measure mass, irrespective of weight ?
If you're on board of space ship, and hit object with well known force, it'll accelerate object.
Object that has large mass, will be accelerated to smaller velocity.
Object that has small mass, will be accelerated to bigger velocity.
Search google how is measured mass of atoms in mass spectrometry..
Say you have particles all with charge -1e, and masses m1=0.511 MeV/c^2 (electron), m2=105.66 MeV/c^2 (muon-), m3=139 MeV/c^2 (pion-).
If you accelerate them using electrodes with well known potential, smaller rest-mass particle will be accelerated to higher velocity.
Gravity can be ignored.
0 -
Indeed. There is no bound state of two protons, so if the simulation predicts this, it's wrong.
Helium-2 is extremely unstable isotope:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_helium#Helium-2_.28diproton.29
The three naked quarks in the neutron are held together by two electrons.
The electrons reside at the hub of the triangle of the three quarks, one on each side of the hub.
The three naked quarks plus two electrons give the neutron an overall charge of 0.
However, the neutron has three externally exposed constituents with a charge of +2/3e and two with a charge of -1e.
Do you really carefully rethink it.. ?
Are you aware that neutron decays to proton, electron, and anti-neutrino?
[math]n^0 \rightarrow p^+ + e^- + \bar{V}_e + 0.782 MeV[/math]
Your theory instantly violates Lepton number conservation..
If neutron is up,up,up,e-,e-
and after decay one of e- is emitted,
then proton would have to be up,up,up,e- since then beginning.. ???
IMHO you don't know quantum physics enough to know the all decay modes of all particles..
Concentrate on filling this gap.
0 -
2D Special collision between 2 protons producing Fusion and Strong Force
You probably don't know, but fusion of two protons produce positron and neutrino, and release 420 keV energy...
[math]p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow D^+ + e^+ + v_e + 0.42 MeV[/math]
0 -
Explosion turns solids to gases,
or liquids to gases.
While breaking solid in parts, like breaking cup, newly made parts generally remain in the same state of matter.
However some atoms can change state on the edge.
f.e. meteors are melting in air while passing by atmosphere. They change state because of enormous energy.
0 -
Of course heat alone will not make a cup.
[...]
When we change the cup with some other material that can indeed be rebuild without human help, then you say we were talking about a "isolated system" and you cannot input heat.
It's not heat.
It's conversion of internal energy (bonds between quarks, atoms, electrons and molecules), to kinetic energy of newly produced parts.
Unbroken cup has one momentum for entire object. They act like one piece.
After breaking each broken part has its own momentum, and flying in its own direction.
Better illustration is quantum physics, fusion or decay of atom.
f.e. Uranium-238 at rest will decay to Thorium-234 and Helium-4 with decay energy 4.267 MeV (in this case converted to kinetic energy of Th-234 and alpha particle, majority to alpha).
Reverse of this process would be shooting alpha particles at Thorium-234 target to receive Uranium-238 back..
Chemistry equivalent experiment:
we have KNO3, Sulfur and Carbon, all solid, after ignition they turn to gases, the better adjusted amounts, the more gas, and the more powerful explosion.
Reverse of it would be turning these gases back to solid state KNO3, Sulfur, and Carbon from CO2, SO2, etc.
But if you would catch all these gases, they would loose all their energies, in kinetic energy originally owned, and cool down, so they wouldn't be able to.
Compounds are in lower energy state than they were initially, prior explosion.
0 -
Looking at a question (and no, I'm not in school) I'm not too sure of the answer. This area clearly is not my forte!
4.32g of PbBr2 are produced, how many grams of Pb(||) were required to react..?
If they asked for grams, like you said above...
The answer they were looking for was 0.0117. Surely they made a mistake? Or am I missing something?
...they cannot accept answer in moles..
Units don't match.
I worked out that there were 0.0117mols in 4.32g
Right.
but the proportion of Pb was 0.006...mols.
Proportions, any kind, wouldn't be given with units..
to get 0.006 mol you multiplied 0.01177 mol * 0.5646 = 0.006645 mol
But you should multiply initial mass:
4.32 g * 0.5646 = 2.4389 g
or from moles:
0.01177 mol * 207.2 g/mol (Pb mass) = 2.4389 g
Ratio 0.5646+0.4354=1 is of course from mass of Pb / total mass, and mass of Br/total mass. Unitless.
1 -
100 W = 0.1 kWh/h * 24h * 30d = 72 kWh/month
Here we pay $0.165/kWh. Which would be $11.87 for all the time running light bulb.
Why don't you simply put metal with high resistance to water, it'll be like heating element, or heating element by itself, like for making tea ($2 cost or so).
You could control amount of energy simply by adjusting where is wire plugged to 2nd end.
0 -
What when the snow freezes and makes the iceberg again?
Michel, iceberg, or snow, is not made of the same particles.
It might looks similar for human imperfect eye, but it's not in the same configuration..
If you would be able to assign identifiers to each particle of water (or any other),
you could trace where they're going and where are in the cyclic process the "next time"..
And every snowflake is unique.
In the case of cup, there is only one configuration of broken parts, where they fit, and were they where prior breaking.
0 -
DrP voted for Isoamyl acetate,
Imatfaal and hypervalent iodine for Isobutyl Acetate.
There is easy way to check which is true: by its melting point.
Isoamyl acetate has −78 °C,
and Isobutyl Acetate has -99 °C.
Using dry ice will make one of them solid?
Or liquid nitrogen will be needed?
ps. N2Microbes, you need to use IR spectroscopy, or you can do whatever you like to identify compound?
I would burn it in controlled environment, to produce CO2 and H2O, and measure amount of gas produced..
Butyl acetate has BP at 126.1 °C, and RI 1.3941, closer to measured values.
0 -
Sensei, you're right here, but using full heights of all three cones makes it easier to get to the final result. In my original calculations (which were obviously incorrect but only by a difference between square root and cubic root of the same number) I used partial heights and getting to the result was very tedious. It's much simpler with full heights as imatfaal has done and I can still get ratios I need.
If h2 and h3 are absolute, not relative (unlike your original post) then
[latex] 2V= \frac{\pi r_2^2 h_2}{3}[/latex]
and
[latex] \frac{9}{4}V= \frac{\pi r_3^2 h_3}{3} [/latex]
are true..
You never said that 2V is difference in volumes between the smallest cone and middle..
"If we use V as the volume of the bottom cone, then middle cone is 2V and the outer (largest) cone is 9/4V. "
so I assumed Vsmall=V, Vmiddle=2V, Vouter=9/4V
0 -
Volume of Cone = 1/3 pi r^2 h
so we know
[latex]V= \frac{\pi r_1^2 h_1}{3}[/latex]
Right.
[latex]2V= \frac{\pi r_2^2 h_2}{3} - \frac{\pi r_1^2 h_1}{3}[/latex]
Shouldn't be here
[latex]2V= \frac{\pi r_2^2 (h_1+h_2)}{3}[/latex]
??
[latex]\frac{9}{4}V= \frac{\pi r_3^2 h_3}{3}-\frac{\pi r_2^2 h_2}{3}[/latex]
Shouldn't be here
[latex]\frac{9}{4}V= \frac{\pi r_3^2 (h_1+h_2+h_3)}{3}[/latex]
??
According to this info h2 and h3 are partial heights:
"h3 - from the top of the outer cone to the top of middle cone
h2 - from the top of middle cone to the top of bottom one
h1 - from the top of inner cone to the ground"
0 -
(He also points out that if the electron had structure, the constituent particles would have masses of at least 177 GeV/c^2)
That's up-side-down quantum physics... More mass-energy from decaying smaller mass-energy particle.. ? That's instant violation of energy conservation..
f.e. muon is elementary particle in Standard Model,
but the all particles mass-energies it is decaying to,
are smaller than rest-mass of muon, 105.66 MeV/c^2.
f.e.
[math]\mu^-\rightarrow e^- + \bar{V}_e + V_{\mu}[/math]
[math]m_e = 0.510998928 MeV/c^2[/math]
The all known particles ALWAYS decay to particles with less mass-energy than they have prior decay, to conserve energy..
0 -
I believe that time-travel allows us to see into the future. Time travel is possible, although it is probably dangerous and could be life threatening.
Do you what me to foresee your future? You will be banned soon from this forum..
0 -
File explorer 'lost' several important folders I had recently created.
Instead it concentrated on showing me all sorts of rubbish I didn't ask for and don't want.
Surely the point of a file / folder listing program is to list files?
The best file explorer was Directory Opus 5 for AmigaOS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_Opus
(before v5 it looked like GUI-like Norton Commander, forget these versions)
The all explorers built-in Windows are really crap, in comparison to it.
I really miss DOpus 5, whenever I have to do any file manipulation on my disks..
DOpus exists for Windows since v6. But it's somewhat different than v5 Magellan.
This feature to call batch operation on selected files seems interesting around 11 minute of video.
Also cool to see preview of .txt file after hovering file by mouse.
Heh, after opening file by some process, and trying to delete file, DOpus is showing which process locked file, so you know what to shut-down and then retry delete.. Cool feature..
1 -
Or should I trust the meter and gritch at Mouser that the Vishay resistors they sold me are monstrously out of tolerance?
Resistors have color code printed on them.
Check what is nominal value of it this way..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_color_code
(or Google "resistor color code")
Multimeter can be damaged. I have one such showing wrong measurements. It was destroyed by too high voltage..
Or battery can be exhausted. Replace it by fresh one, for a moment, to see whether there is difference.
0 -
-----No. To have a me needed (as you say) 1e+-1e +1+e subs to have in total:
(-1e + 1(photon stationary))
I don't understand why are you saying 'no'.
If we have -1e in center of electron, and photon that has -1e and +1e, then it's exactly like in mine post above. Then why're you saying 'no'? Doesn't make sense to me.
Photon has neutral charge 0e
My equation was for Q, electric charge inside of electron or positron.
Qelectron=-1e-1e+1e=-1e
Qpositron=+1e+1e-1e=+1e
Then photon has to have
Qphoton=+1e-1e=0e
That's the only way to not have instant violation of electric charge conservation, within your framework from post #1.
-----That right Sensei with above correction.
Explain me your correction..
This is my point in this post, but I think you are moving a little fast,
But you're moving too slow. After half-year when you're not here, you should have spend time on learning the all leptons, mesons and baryons decays..
You should came up with ready theory that has everything what we already know about them.
creation of photons is another issue. In this post I am speaking about stationary particles. Not about interaction, annihilation, creation of photons.
Annihilation violated your model instantly.
If you think that this is an argument against essence of this post, let me know.
I just did in post #8...
---- Please explain me (you know I am a lay man) how photon has obtained 1.022 MeV, when one electron and one positron in, stationary situation, create (or they may arent able?) two photons with overall 1.022 MeV. Or I am out?
Photons with high energy can be created by f.e.
- cosmic rays,
- decay of unstable radioactive isotope
- decay of unstable particle f.e. [math]\pi^0\rightarrow\gamma+\gamma[/math] (neutral pion meson decay, it has ~135 MeV/c^2 rest-mass)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pion#Neutral_pion_decays
- fusion in the star f.e. [math]p^+ + D^+ \rightarrow He^3+\gamma+5.49 MeV[/math]
- annihilation of mesons or baryons.
In other words: they're not from annihilation of electron and positron. At least not stationary electron-positron in our FoR.
0 -
Do you want to explain gravity by subtle electrostatic force interactions.. ?
If yes, I have something for you:
Isotope of element has the same quantity of protons, same quantity of electrons, but different quantity of neutrons in atom, thus different mass.
So if you would take 1 ton of Iron-54 it would have:
10^6 g / 53.9396 g/mol = 18539.255 mol of Fe-54 (multiply by 6.022141*10^23 to get absolute quantity of atoms, then multiply by 26 to get protons/electrons absolute quantity)
Same quantity of protons and electrons of Fe-56 would have mass:
18539.255 mol * 55.9349 g/mol = 1036991.4 g = ~1.037 ton
Should or shouldn't have different gravitational force more massive Iron-56 ore.. ?
0
SR and the passage of time
in Relativity
Posted · Edited by Sensei
String theory has not been proven.
Not even experiment confirming it has been performed.
What physicist BELIEVE really does not matter. No matter what is name of him/her.
Matters what physicist can prove or disprove.
Performing the real experiment, not on white table.
But the most of time these people doesn't even know of decay modes of particles.. Nor can list them..
Comparison completely failing.
Silly comment.
You must use your own theory formulas with the real set of data to be sure result matches with reality..
That's what differs them from 'uneducated internet trolls', that skip this stage.
No matter how professional you are,
you're limited to set of experimental data, especially if you're not experimental physicists.
You must rely on data provided by 3rd party people.
If they will make error while calculation, you will get wrong data.
And all calculations basing on them will be also wrong.
The thing is any professional does not know what he/she does not know.
New experimental data could completely disagree with established knowledge.
Imagine you are early XX century scientist. Atom was thought to be indestructible. You learned it in school.
And then somebody finds out it's not true. It can annihilate. It can decay. etc.
Your whole understanding of world is smashed..
For the most of people such turn around 180 degrees is very hard. As they used to what they learned.