QuantumT

It started with the steam engine (appr. 1800), and ended with coal and gasoline (today). Profit decides what happens next, even if it kills us all.

36 minutes ago, beecee said:

I suppose the best way to answer that is that Earth/Moon space is far less tenuous then interplanetary space, which again is less tenuous then interstellar space, which in turn is less tenuous then intergalactic space.

Yes of course. Silly me. Thanks!

Okay, here's the question that I just need to ask, even though I know the answer will be a hard "no"!

If the Earth and Moon can hold on to such a large cloud of hydrogen atoms, couldn't a galaxy do the same? And (here comes the criminal part) could it account for dark matter?

This is the most surprising news I've heard in years!

Old data from the SoHo spacecraft show that Earth's exosphere reaches far longer into space than anyone had ever imagined: 391,000 miles! That's way beyond the Moon!

https://www.sciencealert.com/earth-s-atmosphere-is-so-big-that-it-actually-engulfs-the-moon

I don't know if this is "Wow!" or "WTF?!" news, but it's up there.

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

You have to learn every tool in the box before you can think outside it. 

Wise words!

Consciousness as the factor in the measurement effect is one interpretation. But most physicists don't subscribe to that.
I myself am also fascinated with the collapse of the "wave function", and looking for proof of what exactly causes it.
One clue could be the simulation "hypothesis", where matter only takes shape when needed. But that is unfalsifiable, and thereby bad science.
Another clue could be the many worlds interpretation. But that is equally unfalsifiable.

We just don't know why.

4 minutes ago, beecee said:

Ideas, speculations etc, are fine and dandy, but the first step is to know thoroughly the accepted mainstream theory that applies to that situation, why it applies, what it describes and explains, and the predictions that it makes that support that theory. The second step is to understand what a scientific theory is and why it remains a theory, in line with improving technology, further observations, further gathering of data and the possibility that while a scientific theory remains the highest echelon in science and its ability to explain, it can always be improved on, modified or even scrapped. eg: GR is continually being put to the test to understand its exact limitations, despite its incredible success. The third step is to realize that if you believe you have invalidated any incumbent theory, on a forum, from the comfort of your lounge chair at home, then you are probably delusional. 

Can I reproduce the following again?

Anyone with an alternative speculative  idea they wish to debate should take note of the following points:

Understood, appreciated and accepted 100%.

My error was that I thought no one had ever thought of photon/QF interaction before. That was presumptuously stupid of me.

But besides that, my approach is to ask and learn.

11 minutes ago, swansont said:

Consider the logistics of evasion. The ability to detect particles has an angular size limit, and you need to track for a period of time to get a trajectory. Some particles will be unavoidable. You may also not be able to avoid everything if multiple particles are in play. The kicker here is maneuvering will likely be a fuel hog.

Honesty, deep space travel sounds like a fools errand.

Maybe in a thousand years, when we got tech we can barely fathom now.

5 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

It is your approach. You are making stuff up.

If having ideas that you want its legitimacy answered by asking questions, then yes, I am making stuff up! 

Happy now?

If conjecture is all you can think of, when questions come alongside examples? Then... Jesus!

3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

The problem with your approach is that you are doing more than just asking questions. You are (in this case) trying to tie photons to the expansion of the universe without having any foundation for doing so. When someone tells you why that won't work, you then pull some other factoid out of your hat and say "well, what if I throw in this random piece of information rather than my previous piece of information? Would THAT make my conjecture right?"

Rather than making a conjecture and then trying to learn some physics that would allow it, you might be better off learning some physics first and THEN coming up with a conjecture based on those physical principles. That would allow an easier back and forth as you refine your knowledge of the subject.

That is your interpretation of my approach, but I assure you, it is not so.

My questions have been answered now.

17 minutes ago, swansont said:

Um, no. The shielding tech portrayed in Star Trek is fictional, but that doesn’t represent all (or even most) of the options. A steel plate is shielding tech. 

Evading would be preferable either way. Who'd like their life to depend on a hull?

A mission starting now would depend of our technological ability to evade any object in our path. Shielding tech is still Star Trek stuff.

That being said, we still have no cryo tech to keep our crew alive for 1 light year, which would take approx. 200.000 years to complete with current max speed.

50 LY would take a million years. Give or take.

5 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Sorry, if I sounded too harsh in my previous reply.. you know.. there is Saturday night.. (8th beer etc. etc.)

 

Cheers! 

53 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Well your right in so far as photons do contribute to expansion, it is part of the current radiation density term. It simply isn't a major contributor in our current universe time slice. Every particle species contributes to a certain degree, albeit some species less than others. The dominant contributor however in our current time slice is Λ .

However as explained in previous threads the standard model of particles contribution will continuously reduce as the volume increases, while Λ stays constant to the point where any deviational evidence isn't sufficient to show a variation due to volume change.

 Hence as the universe expands Λ becomes more and more the driving contributor to expansion. Eventually reaching the point where it will be the only contributor where it can be determined.

10 minutes ago, swansont said:

eV is energy. A 1 eV photon would be in the near-infrared (1.24 microns)

Doesn’t work so well underground.

No new matter. It’s quite likely the photon would promote both the particle and antiparticle if this happened. Not doing so would violate a bunch of conservation laws. Meaning that’s not going to happen.

They are virtual pairs. Not two individual virtual particles.

Thank you for your explanations!

I know it must be somewhat of an annoyance for you to read proposals from fools like me, and then have to explain the science. I imagine it happens quite frequently.
I never meant to be annoying. I just thought I had a unique idea. An that must also be annoying for you. That we think, you didn't already consider that!

Once again, thank you for taking the time to enlighten me!

4 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Ask if you don't know rather than guessing or making something up.

That's exactly what I'm trying to do. I realize that I'm quite ignorant in your eyes, and I'm okay with that. It's more or less true, compared to you.
But I have to tell you about my chain of thoughts, to explain why I would ask such questions that I do. Like why I think photons could contribute to expansion.
You can then reject it or correct it, if you are generous enough to spend your time and effort on it. That would make me grateful.

22 minutes ago, Sensei said:

So, you basically have no knowledge about physics, regardless of your nickname..

I forgot to clarify why I use that name.
I use it because I am fascinated by QM, and because I think the name sounds cool. Plain and simple.

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

eV, electron-Volt, is unit of energy. Volt is also not unit of charge. Charge is Q in Coulombs...

So, you basically have no knowledge about physics, regardless of your nickname..

That is quite a pessimistic assessment.
I currently have no mathematical knowledge about physics, but I understand many principles and mechanics of it.
I would call my knowledge optimistically incomplete, or poor at worst.

On 2/22/2019 at 12:49 PM, swansont said:

There is no such thing as a charged photon.

I thought you meant that each photon was ~1 eV. Volt is a charge, but it sounded strange to me too 

On 2/22/2019 at 12:49 PM, swansont said:

I don't know how likely it is for a photon to interact with a virtual particle. It is possible to "promote" a virtual particle pair into being real by adding energy, so there is a chance you could do this with a photon, provided the fluctuation had an energy deficit smaller than the energy of the photon.

That is very exciting reading!

I have a graphic/visionary approach to physics. I see 3D films in my mind, how molecules, atoms and particles behave and interact under different circumstances.
I know that most (if not all) physicists use math, and I would love to learn to do that as well. Put some writing to the images. I consider that my biggest challenge.

If I state, that you can see stars, no matter where you are in the universe, would that be wrong?
And if that is correct, then most (if not all) QF's would be hit by photons, or what?
We would then only need some of them to result in promotion, to turn the phenomenon into a heavy contributor to new matter. New matter that would add volume to space, and push its boundaries.

I know this a far fetched, and full of "if's", and I do not claim that it is real or even possible, but it is how I envision it.

Before you cry "FRAUD!", you need to consider motive. Who gains from the world abandoning fossil fuel? The richest most powerful people? Hell no! They lose the most!

So who gains from this "fraud"?

I had a similar question that I googled, and got this:

https://www.quora.com/Which-particles-emits-photons

I know it's not the same, but it gives a picture of matter <-> photon interaction.

A thing that has made me wonder is, how a photon can go from zero to C in an instant?

That is partly why I made this thread. It seems like a lot of power!

I realise that photons are radiation, and as such does not require locality like matter would. Is that the answer?

I recently stumbled over an article about weird physics facts, made for laymen by a cosmologist:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/6546462/The-10-weirdest-physics-facts-from-relativity-to-quantum-physics.html

Not being an expert of any field in science myself, I was surprised to find three errors in it. So if I can find three errors, I wonder how many there really are?!

How many errors can you find?

The errors I found was:

All right then. Thank you all for answering my questions.

1 minute ago, MigL said:

You have no idea what would happen yet you make conjectures ?

No, I ask questions. I thought I was allowed to do that. I want to learn more about particle physics.