J.C.MacSwell

That was the point. What do TWP book sales have to do with anything except book sales?

 

As for the other books, if they're so critical of the string approach, why don't you average them in with the sales of TWP?

 

Not Even Wrong #72,021

Road to Reality #8,025

 

Oh right. Because if you did that then the string books would win:)

 

 

.

Is this right? I don't know the #'s but if TWP is out selling 5 other books by itself (correct me if I took that the wrong way), how could averaging it with two more put that groups average behind the average of the other 5?

Edit: OK average ranking, that's somewhat twisted, sales of the group of 5 could skyrocket, but if one stops selling entirely it drags the whole group to oblivion

What kid of reaction would these produce at room temperature? Should they be stored in proximity?

Went with 800

The one with less mass will generally sink fastest. Assuming they have the same weight in air, the one with the greater mass must be significantly larger in volume, so that it would only weigh the same due to the greater buoyant force of the air. In water this effect would be much greater, so all other factors being equal the one with the greater mass, and lower density, would sink more slowly.

Actually it does, a·theist literally means not·theist. Everyone that is not a theist is an atheist....

Yes, I realize that is one of the definitions of the word. It is unfortunately not the only one.

Simply because one must affirmatively believe in God to be a theist and everyone else is a not-theist or atheist.

 

Atheists include everyone that affirmatively denies the existence of God(s) and those that simply withhold judgement on the truth or falsity of the God hypothesis. I am the later, I do not claim that there could not be a God but I refuse to accept Gods existence as fact because there is no evidence to support such a conclusion. That makes me an atheist becauuse of my skepticism, or lack of faith, instead of a faith that God does not exist, the other kind of atheist.

The problem is that atheism is defined as :

1.Only those who deny the existance of God

AND

2. Those who deny the existance of God and those that simply withhold judgement on the truth or falsity of the God hypothesis

Since the above two definitions are not compatible, atheism, like many words, has no clear meaning, but must be taken in the context intended, which is often not clear.

The motion of the pollen is due to water molecules colliding with them creating movement through conservation of momentum. These water molecules lose energy and give it to the pollen, and hence no energy is lost from the system.

 

The motion of the planets is not perpetual since energy is conserved. The rotation is due to the fact the matter the solar system is made of was rotating before it collapsed. The planets actually lose energy as they orbit the Sun but this is arbitrary and is not noticable.

Can you explain this? How is this arbitrary?

Don't recall saying it was correct...but it was accepted in the 40-50's....

Not even the thirties. It still is taught though to introduce quantum mechanics.

I'm assuming that we cant prove the existence or nonexistence of God.

Agree.

Dispixic: one who denies the existence of pixies

Disturbance: Inability to accept the possibility of turbot wearing turbans

Free Will

A. Free Will

B. No Free Will

C. Uncertain of Free Will

This is somewhat targeted at Strong Atheists (believe in no Greater Power), but they are a tough bunch, so I think they can handle it.

Basically I am asking if there is a "Master" (read God) of your brain, or is that part of the Universe just reacting like clockwork (hidden variables included), or perhaps "quantum uncertainly", but still with no Free Will.

Personally, I believe I have Free Will, but cannot prove it even to myself.

. IMO this IS the only conclusion supported by logic, although like I said on most days I'm a strong atheist but I'll admit to this..

It may be your opinion. however, logic will support, their being a God or no God, faeries etc. It is all in the assumptions (often based on faith) you start with.

Faith is required for science and scientific method. Some people have such faith in the underlying principles that they don't even see it as "faith".

We are standing on earth and the light that we see today from all the stars in the sky are that of "the past". Now we get in our spacecraft now we are going faster than light toward whichever star, would it not seem like time is speeding up?

If you are using what you are watching, straight ahead, as a reference, then yes, it would seem that way. The "movie" you are watching would have sped up.

When there is an electrical current running through copper what temperature or temperatures does the copper wire strand reach?

It melts at 1984 degrees fahrenheit(1085 Celsius)

 

 

 

No, I don't have evidence falsifying teapots orbiting the sun either. Or unicorns. Or vampires. Or Zeus.

 

 

 

l.

Mine is. As a matter of fact I've never seen one that wasn't.

You have to work at it. Shampoo the dog, using a flea comb while you do it. Flea shampoo works best. You have to get rid of the flea eggs as well as the fleas. Don't assume you have won when they seem to have gone away. You will have missed some eggs, so repeat in a couple of days and again in a couple more to make sure. Same thing with vacuuming any carpets, and especially wash the dogs bedding every couple of days. Any carpeting you can temporarily remove or isolate the dog from helps as well. If you are very diligent you should be able to avoid fumigation etc.

Yes, that's true, but it would not make sense to talk of the temperature of the house system.

 

Even if, for sake of argument, some classical atoms had zero KE, they would not remain in that state — they would interact with other atoms and be bombarded with radiation.

Just getting their is unlikely enough, for anything approaching a recognizable amount of something (or even a small fraction of that) but classically this remote (read extremely absurdly remote) possibility still exists, and it's relatively simple to prove it.

I'm a sometimes spiritual weak agnostic. I cannot understand Strong Atheism, though I doubt there is any harm in it, or taking the Bible literally. I respect most religions, especially taken in their historical context, though often not the way they are interpreted and followed.

No, a single particle does not have a temperature. Neutrons have a magnetic moment, and should radiate.

 

"Some part of the system" at 0 implies non-equilibrium, and temperature isn't really valid under that condition. Classically, individual particles could be at rest in the system, but temperature is a collective, steady-state property. You can have negative temperatures (T<0 solution to equations of excited state distributions) when you have a population inversion, i.e. not in equilibrium.

If the system was my house including everything in it, I still have a temperature, yet I am not in equilibrium with the rest of the system.

Conservation of energy would be broken if a closed system could reach 0 Kelvin, but I cannot see how a definable isolated part of the system could not reach 0 K in classical theory, however statistically unlikely.

No, I am not thinking about antimatter Ben; but thanks anyway. Antimatter has to due with electrical charges of particles, not the type of energy they have. Exotic matter is not antimatter, it is generally considered to be matter with negative mass and energy.

I usually see it referred to when strength far beyond anything known is required in some thought experiment. But otherwise it is normal matter.

Sure, once you posit a physically impossible situation, you can posit an infinite number of them; it becomes science fiction at that point. But idealized and impossible are not the same thing. Maxwell's demon has valid scientific criticisms that show that such a being would not violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics (it would do work or its own entropy would increase) and as such, is not an impossible construct even if it is idealized. So if we limit ourselves to a mechanism that is not impossible, then the paddle would necessarily radiate, since it would not be at 0 K, and this would limit the temperature of the sample.

 

All without invoking quantum mechanics.

If the Paddle was simply a neutron would it radiate? Not sure if it could have a temperature but it would certainly accelerate during the process. I may have asked you this before but have forgotten. I think the answer was yes, due to its positive and negative parts even though it is neutral, somewhat similarly to an atom.

The only refutation of the Demon (beyond the obvious you have stated) that I have heard is a quantum one with regard to the Demon's uncertainties in the knowledge of the particles and the gate (now paddle in this case)

One other point is that classically if you could start out with some part of a system at absolute zero it would not remain that way very long, the system would move to a different state. Since classical mechanics is reversible, this should prove (assuming classical mechanics) that absolute zero could be achieved. The "different state" could move to the original in theory, no matter how unlikely.

Seeing as maxwell's demon is just an idealised construct in the first place, I think we can assume his paddle doesn't radiate; it's a perfect reflector that emits nothing. He's not physically possible anyway.

 

It's an interesting question, why we can't reach zero K, and the reason I didn't answer earlier is that I don't really understand the reasons we can't. For example, if quantum fluctuations cause random changes in heat energy, surely at some point, in a cold environment, that random change in energy would change the temperature to zero?

Classically I think this is correct, although "some point", for a minutely small sample could be billions upon billions of years (?).

Non classically if our sample reached (not sure if it could) exactly zero K, we could not know where in the Universe it is.

The contraction is only in the direction of the movement. It would not contract in the orthogonal directions.

Sounds good but I kind of need it to be as lightweight as possible and portable. Any other ideas?

 

Thanks for your quick reply by the way

Water is still King for heat capacity for it's mass (and cost).