Sensei

You're making assumption that every star has the same mass as Sun and/or that Sun's mass is average star mass across entire observable Universe.

There is something deeply wrong with how I am trying to understand this. I know that the surface of the water exposed to the atmosphere doesn't matter because I have read it in multiple sources. But I don't understand why.

How many water molecules is in [math]1 m^3[/math] volume?

[math]1 m^3[/math] volume of water has mass [math]1000 kg = 10^6 g[/math]

H₂O has molar mass ~18 g/mol.

[math]\frac{1,000,000g}{18\frac{g}{mol}}=55555.556 mol[/math]

[math]1 mol = 6.022141*10^{23} molecules[/math]

[math]55555.556 mol * 6.022141*10^{23}=3.34563389*10^{28}[/math]

1 Liter of gas has approximately 0.0446 mol = 2.686*10^22 molecules

1 m^3 volume has 1000 L, so 44.6 mol = 2.686*10^25 molecules (at normal pressure, room temperature)

That's approximately 1245 times less than in water with the same volume.

Only tiny tiny fraction of molecules of water has direct contact with molecules of air, on surface of water.

Try to slice these volumes/areas to smaller and smaller pieces. 1m^3 volume with 1 m^2 area on top. Then 1mm^3 with 1mm^2 on top and so on so on, until you will receive single molecules at nano and pico scale.

Air molecule don't let water molecule to fly away from container.

If we will place glass of water in hermetic container, and pomp out whole air from it, nothing will be pressing at water from above, and water molecules will fly away from glass, becoming gas.

What about: electric and magnetic fields, phonons, semiconductor holes, etc.? Physics is full of concepts that are only used to make calculation easier, with no promise of being material.

But electric field is result of presence or not presence of electrons, ions, or other charged particles, which are "real physical objects".

There will be no electrons, or nucleus, there will be ~0 electric field around them.

We use electric field to learn about other electric fields f.e. place plates of electrodes around flowing water, and causing change of direction of water (that's polar).

We use magnetic field to learn about other magnetic fields f.e. place magnetized iron needle, and checking in which direction it's rotating. If there is lack of artificial magnetic field, it will rotate according to Earth's magnetic field.

Magnet made of "real physical object" is source, and magnet made of "real physical object" needle is target.

yup, it strikes you at the strangest times, right?

Toilet-bathroom is good place to make experiments also.

I have there couple 25L aquariums where is produced HCl, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and other substances (how many do you know people who are keeping their gold in toilet? electrodes...)

So while watching how things are going (sometimes not going, 2 weeks ago there was explosion of Oxygen at 4 at night, so access to water is needed. I just finished repairing electronics that was damaged in this accident), I have new ideas how to improve setup, or ideas of new experiments, etc.

i actually have an idea board opposite of the mirror in my bathroom...

i get ideas when im relaxed....

I have always 40+ empty pages of paper A4, and calculator in my toilet. Used every day not once..

48.95 KW

Typical house in EU has power provided U=230 V,I=18 A, P=U*I=230 V*18 A = 4140 W = 4 kW

After exceeding Imax fuses are disconnecting..

Better check your maximums before proceeding (even if you're in factory).

I don't see the logic of that.

C'mon!

For example, I could define a "real physical object" as one made of atoms. That says that electrons are not "real physical objects" but we are still real.

Then it's not true. Atom is nucleus + electrons. You would have to say "real physical object is made of nucleus/baryons", to reject electrons from being real physical objects.

We are not made of electron-positron pairs, either.

But we're made of electrons that were created (or at least could be) in pair production, while its antiparticle travel somewhere else, or annihilated already..

We are not made of photons, so I don't see how you've established any connection here.

Didn't I say in #13 post about pair production?

[math]\gamma + 1.022 MeV \rightarrow e^+ + e^-[/math]

[math]\gamma + 1.876544 GeV \rightarrow p^+ + p^-[/math]

Does a particle have to be a real physical object?

If particle is not "real physical object", then we (clusters of billions of billions particles) are not real either..

Are you suggesting Universe is simulation?

It could be.

But if it's perfect simulation, then we will never be able to find it out.

Suppose so, intelligent life is appearing in the Universe. It's evolving. Learning physics. Creating computers. Making simulation algorithm that has everything included.

And in simulation there is happening Big Bang, then stars are forming. They're fusing etc. etc. and finally after billions years of simulation there is appearing intelligent simulated life, and cycle is repeating..

No, not really. Physics doesn't claim that a photon is a real, physical object. It's an abstraction we use to describe interactions and behaviors of certain types.

If photon is not real then electron, positron nor any other particle is not real physical object either.

Photon can create pair of electron and positron, or any other pair of more massive particle-antiparticle...

So, if electron-positron are real physical objects, then photon that created them must be as well real physical object.

That's basically the unit of pressure anyway: kg/m² (Pa), or pounds/in² (psi). So the surface has already been taken into account. The mass pressing down on the surface area has already been normalized to 1 m² or in².

Unit of pressure is [math]\frac{N}{m^2}=\frac{kg*m}{s^2*m^2}=\frac{kg}{s^2*m}[/math]

Do you need to use spectroscopy to figure out substance?

Or do you just need to figure it out any way possible?

Looking at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C8H9NO2

They seem to have significant difference in properties, like melting/boiling points..

Another way that came to my mind is to do spectroscopy of all these known substances from list of possibilities, and compare with what you have unknown.

I have java 8 update 25 and I dont need it that much was only to asces something.So here is the problem when I try to remove it says preparing to remove and it sudenly showes some window asking me something to update software and I dont want to update it I want to remowe it.Does anyone knows how?

They don't want you to remove their software. Typical problem...

Brute force method is simply find folder and delete it. But this way you won't have registers updated and appropriate Documents & Settings removed.

You should probably ask on Sun's support forum.

Maybe in newer version they fixed issue.

For $200 you can get pure non-touchable monitor 24" LED...

If you wouldn't have money issue, I would suggest Wacom Cintiq

Wacom Cintiq 13" HD have not bad price $1000

https://store.wacom.com/us/en/product/DTK1300/

Of course better is 24" version, but also much more expensive:

https://store.wacom.com/us/en/product/DTH2400/

Significant quantity of similar charges is easily visible:

Not charged (neutral):

Do you see on the streets people walking with hairs pointing each one in different direction (other than punks)?

Strange's answer is: he is looking (he was looking) at the Earth as it was 2 million years ago.

I am questionning Strange's answer. I say: how can we check that?

When we're sending command to distant satellite like Voyager, it's arriving after some time [math]t=\frac{d}{c}[/math] (d - distance).

And satellite is returning result after yet another time t, giving total delay between sending and receiving answer 2*t.

Astronauts that landed on the Moon had delay 2*1.21=2.42 to 2*1.35=2.7 seconds. When speaker talked with them, their answers were arriving with such delay.

Press ctrl-alt-del and check out in Task Manager how much memory is consumed during playing video..

On WinXP after booting system and opening Firefox and starting browsing net (3 tabs) memory usage is already 987 MB = ~1 GB almost.

[latex] 4HCl + 3As2O3 + 4NaNO3 + 7H2O -> 4NO + 6H3AsO4 + 4NaCl [/latex]

 

If we check, we see that the equation balances.

Correct.

My new application for chemistry is also showing it's good answer, see:

Better?

Which companies ordered, received eCat, and are using it right now for energy production.. ?

Here is a photo...

 

It's not PHOTO.

It's 3D computer rendering visualization....

Sensei introduced some specific, quantitative analysis of the topics under discussion, therefore he was not guilty of the approach I associated with swansont and others. I was approving of Sensei's contributions.

Actually it's not me, but my applications that I wrote..

I am just entering data to applications showing fusion and decay energy calculations, and they're showing result for me (and copy'n'paste to posts)..

The outcome would be a molecule with absolutely no energy, or possibly negative energy.

That's simply not true.

Annihilation of proton-antiproton paths are listed below:

Total energy prior annihilation is equal total energy after annihilation.

I don't know if this could physically work, as it would be pretty much impossible to create this experiment, as we could not make antimatter into plasma with current technology. I would like to know if this experiment could even possibly work, or if it can't, why it wouldn't work.

Antimatter (antiprotons) are in plasma state when we're creating them in particle accelerators. They don't have positrons (yet).

Damn, I did not explain the issue properly.

 

I should have asked how temperature can be a function of volume. In other words, how does decreasing the volume of a container increase the temperature of the gas? Or would it?

 

In terms of V₁/T₁ = V₂/T₂, I don't think my air compressor heated up when it would take in and compress the air. Although I may not have noticed.

[math]\frac{V_1*p_1}{T}=\frac{V_2*p_2}{T}, T=const[/math]

When you will decrease volume (f.e. close one end syringe and push it), you will increase pressure inside.

In other case:

[math]\frac{V_1*p}{T_1}=\frac{V_2*p}{T_2}, p=const[/math]

This simplifies to:

[math]\frac{V_1}{T_1}=\frac{V_2}{T_2}[/math]

But both volume and temperature has to change at the same time, to have constant pressure.

 

Thank you for that detailed explanation. I am not that good at programming, so unfortunately did not understand everything that you said. I was wondering if you had a different recommendation for simulation software that would not be buggy, would be easy to setup, would be relatively easy to use, and would be free. Thank you for your suggestion.

For your purposes Arguslab should be fine.

Remember we're talking about situation with hundreds or thousands atoms.

I wouldn't call it buggy - it's simply not using higher version API, but lower.

Bug is behaving abnormally, or crashing application, disallowing any usage.

I'm not sure what it means to "add increase pressure" without adding more gas or adding heat.

It means decrease volume, with const temperature.