Jump to content

fredreload

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    876
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fredreload


  1. On 11/21/2020 at 12:36 AM, CharonY said:

    You can enucleate a eukaryotic cell and put a new nucleus in. We cannot build cells.

    Good call, but how do you build a nucleus around the 46 chromosomes? I googled it says nucleus wall rebuild itself during mitosis but the exact method is unknown.


  2. I got 46 chromosomes(that of a human) that needs to be placed into a cell for it to work(agreed?). There are two ways that I am thinking of.

    1. Inject chromosomes into a pre-existing cell.

    2. Build a cell around the chromosomes.

    The problem about number 1 is that a chromosome is too big to be inserted into a cell through a virus, and even if you do manage to get it pass the cell wall you still need to get it pass into the nucleus. The pores of the cell nucleus is only 2nm wide(last time I checked if I remember correctly). You could get it past into the nucleus in pieces and re-assemble it inside the cell nucleus but it just sounds like way too much work.

    The problem about number 2 is it is something I have never even heard of. Do you induce a mitosis around the chromosomes or clone the stem cells? I mean technically there is no cell formation there is only cell replication.

    Let me know how the recent science would work to complete this

    P.S. Perhaps injecting chromosomes into a bacterial cell would transform it into a human cell(this would be the concept of transdifferentiation), speculation


  3. When you accelerate close to the speed of light you experience length contraction in which the distance to the end of the universe becomes shorter and therefore the universe is perceived to be smaller, but from another person's point of view that is standing still, the universe is of the original length. So how come each person perceives a different version of the universe based on the speed?


  4. 13 hours ago, swansont said:
    !

    Moderator Note

    Well, we’re a science site, and you have gone far afield of science discussion.  Limit your scope. You’re trying to run before learning to walk

     

    That’s 0.000145 cubic kilometers, not kilo cubic meters.

    A cubic km is not 1000 cubic meters. Your own calculations show this

    My bad, must be the wording, the calculation is correct though. I am now thinking of a design for the fusion reactor, something like a coin shape comes up.

    14 hours ago, MigL said:

    They close a lot of your threads for a reason.

    Fusion reactors, if we had a working one, which we don't, need pressure to operate.
    The only energy producing fusion reactions we have, are uncontrolled ( bombs ), and containment to generate pressure is impossibly hard.

    You are trying to use a large amount of localized energy to 'bend' light.
    The first time this was observed, as verification of GR, was by A Eddington in 1919.
    GR predicts an approximate angular deflection

     dA = 4G*M/R*c^2

    where R is the Sun's radius and M is the Sun's mass ( for the 1919 eclipse observations ) and, sure enough, the observations confirmed this ( twice that predicted by Newtonian gravity )

    So, to find how much energy you need to localize in a given radius,R, to get a specific angular deviation in the path of tangential light, simply make the substitution for M = E/c^2 and make sure to mind your units.

    Ya, I also came to the conclusion that Mass = E/c^2, thanks for the background information. Although the sun would also have enough fusion energy to achieve the same feat, not by mass. If you are talking about my speculation, if you are within the energy zone, it would experience the same length contraction as if you are moving close to the speed of light.


  5. 2 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    Oh, is that all.😊 

    Like I said before, there aren't any.

    At any rate it looks like you trying to explain an alien space craft (which doesn't exist) with pseudoscience.  Good luck.

    Well, I was going with my Argon plasma fusion reactor idea before you start asking me what I would use it for, so I gave you my speculation. I would continue with my fusion reactor idea if you got nothing to provide.


  6. 42 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    Correct.  Do you think the clown wasn't an actor in the video?

    None.  You do realize there are no self-sustaining fusion reactors, right?  AFAIK the only manmade device that uses heat AND pressure for a fusion reaction is a hydrogen bomb.

    1. Well I have only mentioned clip #9 is important I did not say all of them are accurate = =.

    2. A fusion bomb? Well I am just looking for a fusion reactor that pressurize the plasma. I mean if you want the fusion reaction to occur chance is you got to pressurize the gas. From the magnetic field confinement video it seems doable, I am just not sure how it would be operated in a fusion reactor(maybe the toroidal and parietal magnetic field helps the pressurization of the plasma).

    P.S. I appreciate you telling me about the heat ionization idea, I just want something more constructive. And for Strange, the mol ionization energy idea.


  7. 25 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    Not that I know of.

    You are trying to use physics to explain a silly YouTube video?  I am pretty sure your physics will be as real as the YouTube video

    1. Well then which fusion reactor or what design is capable of it?

    2. How can it be silly when it got the craft of a super intelligent specie? Well, if you think it is a silly video then I guess I cannot convince you otherwise.


  8. 40 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    You can't just state what the point is?

    You can increase the pressure but not in the Tomakak which you were asking about.

    1. I am trying to use the energy to achieve length contraction, but as to how I derive this result is speculative, I can write out the story in which how I got this result if you are interested.

    2. Really? I thought Tomakak got the toroidal and parietal magnetic field capable of pressurizing the gas, if it does not then which fusion reactor or what type of design is capable of pressurizing the plasma?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before you say this is wrong or non-scientific, bear with me since I derive the ideas from physics.

    It all started when I came across this craft on Youtube from the clip 11 scariest things caught by drones posted below.

    I set the time on clip #9 because that is the craft I am observing. The craft goes by many names. In America they call it the Protoss, and in Japan they call it May-Be Soft because of its soft metal like feature.

    The craft disappeared in a spherical flash of light and I must have replayed the video 100 times to figure out how it does it. So I went with the idea that spherical flash of light or photons must have been the way to its teleportation. Now the craft did not open a portal or crashed, those are the two ideas I rule out.

    So I searched online, could photon bend space time. And I got a Quora result.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-photons-bend-spacetime

    The important reply is from Eric Pepke here:

    "It's a very tiny effect, practically negligible for any purposes.

    Theoretically, yes they do, but it's in a very strange way.

    The thing that distorts space-time isn't mass or energy. It's energy/momentum, energy and momentum taken together. This is usually represented as a funny kind of vector, though quaternions work as well. The rest mass is a scalar, which is the absolute value of this energy/momentum construct. When the momentum is zero, a lot of terms in the calculation become zero, which is where we get E=mc². For something like a star or planet, a bunch of mass in a ball just sitting there, just using the mass and the Schwarzschild solution is good enough. You can ignore all those other terms based on how things are moving.

    However, with a photon, since the rest mass is zero, all those nice scalar terms drop to zero. The only thing that's left are all those terms you normally neglect.

    To say that two photons will experience a gravitational attraction (to each other) is an oversimplification. However, let's say that you have two photons in opposite directions passing each other. That will be equivalent (for a very short time) to a particle with a rest mass the same as the sum of their energies. A photon going nearby will follow a geodesic just as if it had passed some mass."

    Now I know that energy bends space time, but what is a good clip showing what the craft is observing as it gained enough energy? Now I know the craft did fusion because of the static that is created on the drone's screen, those only comes from gamma rays. I came to a cartoon known as Dragon Ball Z and its depiction when a super being gained enough energy to bend the space time.

    Right after I see this clip I know the craft uses lorentz length contraction and the effect is relativistic. So I thought about the equation from Einstein E=mc^2 and its correlation with the lorentz contraction formula. Apparently with enough energy. the c^2 carries over to lorentz length contraction and the length of the entire universe becomes 0.

     

    What does this mean?

    So if you can provide enough energy, which I went with Argon plasma, if you can create the same amount of energy in joules that satisfies E=mc^2 equation, you would obtain a relativistic effect such as length contraction with this energy(by plugging the c^2 into lorentz) and arrive at the place you want to go to instantly.


  9. 44 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

    1.  Yes, the temperature would be high enough for complete ionization.

    2.  No

    What does any of this have to do with E=mc^2?

    I want to reach that amount of energy with Argon plasma, it is a long story. I will explain my reasoning if you guys would be entertained.

    2. Magnetic field can pressurize plasma you know as shown in video below. You sure it won’t reach 1000atm?

     


  10. 2 minutes ago, MigL said:

    Are you asking people to check your math, or your idea ?

    E=mc^2  is the equivalent energy of an amount of mass, m, as measured in its rest frame.

    What does this non-sensical calculation of ionization energies have to do with mass-energy equivalence ???
    At best it is a measure of the binding energy of electrons to their nucleus.
    That is, assuming the math is correct.

    Well, two things I have in mind.

    1. Would a fusion reactor strip all 18 electrons off the Argon gas.

    2. Would the pressure reach 1000atm.


  11. This is the calculation Swansnot was asking for. If I made any newbie mistake feel free to point it out instead of yelling at me about it, thanks.

    So Argon gas has a atomic number of 18, which means it has 18 electrons. When an electric field or enough energy is applied to the Argon gas it would strip an electron off call the ionization energy. The result is if enough electron is stripped off it would turn the Argon gas into Argon plasma like the video below.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZxUdJcxNk

    Now I want to produce enough energy to satisfy the formula for E=mc^2. I would use a mass of 1kg and that would get me an energy of 9*10^16 joules. I would attempt to generate this amount of energy with Argon gas. I would have the Argon gas placed in a Tomakak reactor and heat it up through ohmic heating that it would generate enough energy to strip away all 18 electrons theoretically(please verify this for me). Below is a video of the Tomakak reactor running plasma.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8hXBrEhxKU

    Now I want to strip all 18 electrons off the Argon gas, and the mol ionization energy is listed below. This is the amount of energy required in KJ to strip 1 mol of Argon gas of 1 electron, 2 electrons, and so on.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molar_ionization_energies_of_the_elements

    Since I want to strip all 18 electrons I sum up all 18 mol ionization energy(please verify this for me).

    1520.6 +2665.8 +3931 +5771 +7238 +8781 +11995 +13842 +40760 +46186 +52002 +59653 +66199 +72918 +82473 +88576 +397605 +427066 = 1389182.4KJ

    This is the amount of energy it takes to strip all 18 electrons from 1 mol of Argon gas. So now we calculate how many mols of Argon gas we need. We take the energy from E=mc^2 and divide by the mol ionization energy.

    9*10^16/1389182400 = 64786308.8389 mols

    In standard temperature and pressure(STP) 1 mol of gas takes up a volume of 22.4L. So we multiply the mols of Argon gas by the volume to see how much space it takes up. Also 1L = 1000cm^3

    64786308.8389*22.4*1000=1.4512133*10^12cm^3
    convert cm^3 to m^3 1cm^3 = 1*10^-6m^3
    1.4512133*10^12*1*10^-6=1451213.3m^3
    convert m^3 to km^3 for 1m^3 = 1*10^-9km^3
    1451213.3*1*10^-9=0.0014512133km^3

     

    What does this mean?
    This means the amount of Argon gas it takes to satisfy E=mc^2 for 1kg of mass is around 0.00145 kilo cubic meter or I estimate around 113.22 meters for width, length, and height(could be wrong some rough estimate). This however, is without gas compression. If you are running this at 1000atm you could crunch the gas down to 1451m^3 which is roughly 11.32 meters for width length and height.


  12. 52 minutes ago, swansont said:

    What does “satisfy E=mc^2” mean?

    What question? Is this a continuation of another thread? Why isn’t it in that thread?

    Normal air is mostly N2 (~80%) 

    Show your work. Give context. Science, not hand-wave.

    1. I would create an equivalent amount of energy based on my mass. For instance my mass is 104kg so E=mc^2 gets me E=(104)*(3*10^8)^2 joules and I would create that equivalent amount of energy in joules using plasma energy from Argon gas with a molarization energy of 1520KJ.

    2. Ya, that thread got closed = =(sad face).

    3. Good thing we are not dead from nitrogen overdose.

    4. You remind me of air pressure volume p1v1=p2v2, that is a good start.


  13. Based on Strange's question about how I came up with 1km distance for plasma generation in mid air. Well, first thing we need to know is how to create plasma in mid air and Aerial Burton has a good idea about doing it from the video below.

    Now for the electron density in air for plasma generated with this method is around 10^15 electrons per cm^3(this means 10^21 electrons per m^3). Normal air is mostly O^2 which gives a molarization energy of around 1320KJ. So If you do the math to find the amount of plasma you need to satisfy E=mc^2 equation you will find that you need about 1km of plasma which is inefficient. On another hand you can compress the gas and for Argon gas on 200atm you would get an electron density of about 10^26 to 10^27 electrons per meter^3. So how do you compress the Argon gas plasma? With an magnetic field coil like the video below.

    I am not sure if this is 200atm, but I am looking at like 1000atm. I am not sure about the magnetic field strength(tesla) to plasma compression ratio if someone can get me the formula it would be cool. The end result is I need around 10^36 electrons per m^3 to satisfy the E=mc^2 equation and technically it is achievable with Argon gas because it has a molarization energy of 1520KJ(only on first order). So technically I want to stuff enough energy to satisfy the E=mc^2 equation in 1 meter of energy cube. Do not ask me what I am going to do with the energy, it is theoretical from there. I've worked out the math using Google calculator, I am just too lazy to show it here.


  14. 27 minutes ago, Strange said:

    And who said space time cannot be bent this way? Cuz you just yell out loud? You make it sound like I am challenged or something = =. Next time you yell out something to disprove my saying you should really prove it first = =, I dunno if I ever wronged this forum.

    This is the block universe concept, sometimes I just find it hard to get through on this forum = =.

    https://interestingengineering.com/block-universe-theory-is-the-passing-of-time-an-illusion


  15. 31 minutes ago, Strange said:

    Length contraction does not involve any bending. It is a linear process.

    A black hole is probably closer to whatever is going on in your imagination. (But you still several billion light years away from reality or any physics.)

     

    I just made several billion light years 0 unit.

    31 minutes ago, Strange said:

    Which part of "it doesn't create a hole" are you having trouble with?

    And how do you know it does not? Where is your proof?


  16. 37 minutes ago, Strange said:

    The whole point of eversion is that doesn't create a hole: "Remarkably, it is possible to smoothly and continuously turn a sphere inside out in this way (with possible self-intersections) without cutting or tearing it or creating any crease.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere_eversion

    I am using length contraction to bend the space time in accordance to sphere eversion. Like how you fold the space time inward, length contraction. By the time it finishes the eversion, there would be a hole in space time that links to the past/future in the block universe. Is it only intuitive to me that I am the only one trying to bend space time based on this sphere eversion algoirthm = =?

    37 minutes ago, Strange said:

    I don't know how you calculated that (I'm guessing you just pulled it out of thin air) but it is wrong.

    Using that energy built out of plasma to create a theoretical c^2 plugging into the Lorentz to create 0 distance.


  17. 7 minutes ago, joigus said:

    OK, punch a hole in the universe and go somewhere else. Good luck.

    Well the problem is it is hard to punch a hole in the universe vs going beyond this universe. Because you cannot create a variable magnetic field to manipulate the plasma or I have not worked it out. I am deciding which is easier to do after checking out its possibilities = =. And if you are here I assume you are here to help me through the problem @@.

    P.S. 4 got it to work and I still have not figured out how they do it = =.


  18. 18 minutes ago, Strange said:

    1. What evidence do you have that the universe is a sphere?

    2. How on Earth do you plan to turn the entire universe inside out?

    3. Why do you think that turning the universe inside out would lead to time travel?

    4. Does sphere eversion work in 4 dimensions?

    5. Why do you keep posting nonsensical ideas?

    Fool through? 🙂

    1. I am trying to pull a hole in space time with length contraction using energy.

    2. Florpus(JK)

    3. By falling through the hole that is created through sphere eversion, not the entire universe the energy would be pulled back they cannot go pass each other.

    4. No 3 dimensions.

    5. Why do you keep calling my posts nonsensical and blocking them = =?

    3 minutes ago, joigus said:

    You cannot reach speed of light. Requires infinite energy for massive bodies. Period.

    Well if I take my mass 104kg for E=mc^2 it would require an energy of.

    E=104*(3*10^8)^2 joules which is doable to generate @@.

    Then the universe would be of length zero to me.


  19. 2 minutes ago, joigus said:

    I think "fall through" are the key words.

    Cool, two points.

    1. If you can fall through the universe why can you not move past the current universe. At light speed if the length of the universe becomes 0, then what lies beyond the universe at length 1? Wouldn't that suffice as a time machine?

    2. It is simple to create a sphere eversion pattern energy with laser on mid air, you just etch the design in mid air as a plasma, but it would require a 1km radius of such plasma. With the Argon gas confinement you could compress the gas at some 500 atm to crunch the whole design in maybe less than 10 meters but it becomes harder for the plasma energy gas to follow the eversion pattern as compared to a laser = =. I am still working out on that part but for a variable magnetic field to twist and turn the plasma gas to shape the design seems kind of hard = =, or am I missing something?


  20. I am not sure what happens when you contract the length of the universe to 0 when you reaches the speed of light rendering all distances from the lorentz length contraction to 0. That means moving pass this point would supposedly help you move past this universe to the next one. Does this make for a good time machine or should I go with sphere eversion method = = aka falling through the universe?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.