jajrussel

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    445
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

32 Good

About jajrussel

  • Rank
    Quark

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Mostly, just about everything. Then there are the things I seem to foget on a daily basis. Losing my cell causes a panic because I have forgotten just about every bit of information that I have stored on it.

Recent Profile Visitors

7182 profile views
  1. Sorry, I have a tendency to go on and on. I thought I was exercising a tremendous amount of self control. My bad...
  2. Do we need to look at the sun? When we burn coal to generate electricity then flip a switch that turns the lights on aren’t we in effect converting mass to light? Then the sun grows grass then we gather the grasses and burn them at night for light.
  3. jajrussel

    Time...

    Is time effected by our choices? Can we get it to pace back and forth? Can we assign time the properties of our samples? Wouldn’t time then become sample dependent? I suspect the reasoning behind assigning time, properties that only present in certain samples with or without regard to the samples size is to effect an outcome. Any result might only apply to what is sampled. I can’t very well say that water freezes at a certain temperature in a specific amount of time then declare that all things will freeze at that temperature in the same amount of time. I suspect that the validity of the argument was simple reasoning. I love eggs, it would become uncomfortable should they go back into the shell.
  4. jajrussel

    Refraction verses reflected verses acceleration?

    Okay, thank you. But, in the change of motion are they technically accelerating? My assumption has always been that a change of motion can not occur without acceleration. Meaning that an applied force is needed for the change to occur. I am also still wondering what the difference is between a geodesic and an applied force is, if the result is a change in motion? Are you saying that light isn’t following a geodesic as it passes through water? In essence isn’t the mass of a volume of water bending space Time? I know you didn’t say a thing about water. I chose to use water as an example because it provides the most notable observation of refraction. It also reflects well.
  5. I was studying a link that Studiot pointed me toward when I suddenly realized that refracted light is turning. It didn’t sink in right away that reflected light was also turning, but then it did. Is there a difference , should there be a difference between them and acceleration? I have a tendency to draw conclusions because I see things that seem similar, I’m beginning to think that maybe I’m wrong in doing so. Also, is there a difference between a photon following curved space time, and refraction? overall, I know that they are different things, but the results are similar.
  6. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    Finally found the video that says it all. It’s long and as I watched it again I started getting bored about 30 minutes in. I do have questions cause I am trying to figure out a way to get from c to entanglement. I’m still thinking. Once I figure out how to explain it , it shouldn’t hurt anything to mention it. Actually, I was watching two other videos where they were discussing quantum physics, and string theory where in one they added an an extra dimension to get an answer they were looking for. Then there is string theory... Then just before I fell asleep I thought, hmm, if they can add even one dimension to describe an effect, then they shouldn’t object if,for a dimensionless point in time, I suggested removing one, so you can have a distance that isn’t bound by time. Then, maybe you can get from A to B instantaneously without violating c...Not sure? I can’t think why deleting time for a certain distance can’t be shown mathematically. Of coarse if I am the one who has to do it. It may take a while. Also they may have to complete their search for the Loch Ness monster in order to prove it. If the weather only holds? The video actually stopped being boring after a good yawn. Okay, they found Nessie. I didn’t remember that the first time. I’m guessing that the first time I watched it , I must have fallen asleep about the time I started getting bored.
  7. jajrussel

    Time...

    This is Moderating to perfection... Lol
  8. jajrussel

    Time...

    you’re getting good at this moderator stuff... You have managed to get me wondering what I meant by coincidental. While at the same time answering a question I hadn’t thought to ask yet... Though, I was mentally putting the non-blocks together to see if they would indeed go in the direction I envision time going in. Which would always be in the direction I go, whether I choose to go or not? Though I’m not sure you would have applied the fourth dimension quite the way I did... I read something not to long ago that referred that the Big Bang was not a point in time, but rather a moment in time. Is the tetrahedron shape an attempt to legitimize the way of thinking of a point of time as a moment encapsulating much more than just a point? Suggesting that it should mean more than a mere point, and should be thought of as having volume? There seems to be a number of people who would disagree with that thought because they can’t envision the beginning of time as a moment in time. I mean, even the beginning of time would technically be a point in time. Assuming that the beginning of time is the first step after zero. The stretch for me would be assuming volume. Though after thinking about it it makes sense. If you think Delta Time, the shape implies change. I was just wondering if I was the only one to notice. Hmm, I didn’t realize that trying to understand this would require my learning a new language. I’m afraid I’ll just have to accept, others explanations.
  9. jajrussel

    Time...

    I keep running into the situation where I am apparently trying to quote a quote. Leaving me wondering how to reference the comment I want to make. Usually I just give up, but in this case it doesn’t seem too difficult. If you follow the word simplex in Stranges post it leads to a geometric representation of what I believe is to represent a unit of time. I was wondering if it’s shape resembling Delta was intentional, or coincidental?
  10. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    The problem seeming to be? How do you derive spooky action at a distance, or instantaneous from a diffraction pattern? The assumption is that there must be a correlation that that says the velocity is the same for both wave, and particle. From what I’ve read the math suggested otherwise, and was accurate enough that it bothered a man who’s life work said; “ impossible.” Perhaphs, another assumption just as inaccurate as the first. How do you put it in units? What number do you get when you jump from c to instantaneous? How do you get there from here? There was another video. An experiment planned. Not completed due to weather? Was it ever completed? The video reminded me of another video in search of the Loch Ness Monster. I’m beginning to doubt. At what point did the skepticism begin? It’s hard for me to remember. Getting to another room, wondering why, was beginning to become an old joke anyway. Then I found myself standing keys in hand suddenly annoyed with the memory that I wanted to drive home. Then early this morning, how long was I staring at the blurred words of the book I wasn’t reading? What was I thinking? Literally? I t reminds me of a feeling I I had once when I read something. Vanity, all is vanity. Oh, well...
  11. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    Hmm, the pop media quick read? The third article says they fire electrons at the standing waves photon particles ? If the particles struck belong to the standing wave why doesn’t the wave collapse when the particles are struck? it also says that as the light particles are hit the effect is to make them move faster, or slower. How do they move faster? The implication seems to be that at least some of the waves particles must already be moving slower. Which, seems once again to lead to the question slower than what? Normal? I thought I new what normal was for a photon? Am I going to learn something new here? Is there something about a standing wave that slows its photons down to some degree where they could be noted to speed up when struck? If they are firing that close to a nanowire how do they know they hit a photon? Is there any chance they compressed a portion of the wave causing the emission of a photon? Are they using a nanowire to slow photons down?
  12. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    I came across another video that seems to at least rationalize what I've been thinking. There is a section that says to my head, " there it is, you can make the leap they have already, in a way, said it." Perhaps a quantum leap, in keeping with the subject, which, is the thought I started off trying to explain, or is it the abyss that says, go to your room, lock the door, switch the light off, and ask yourself, why, oh why, did you go there? You know there are a number of videos about quantum physics that picture amazingly magical things occurring all around us as we at the least hold onto a drink of some sort. A Martine? Maybe, a scotch on the rocks gently swirled while people and colors pop in and out of existence all around us... This isn't one of those videos... Actually, I think this one is better in spite of the affinity I have for scotch... Which I would like to point out that I no longer touch.
  13. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    After reading everything over and over, again, and again. I finally realized that I was the one who said "I needed a photon" , so basically, I am the one who implied that I needed to know what I was measuring. So, my bad, Eise... I apologise.
  14. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    Okay, thank you...
  15. jajrussel

    Speed of light

    Okay I found the original video I was thinking about and yes it was long, and yes it was hosted by Brian Greene, but it was not boring and the only reason it seemed long is because while watching the vedioi I suddenly realized that a part of the video was repeating, but I couldn't find anything that referenced the thoughts I had, which means therewas something else that trigured the thinking of what if. Bummer, I was hoping that the video would at least rationalize what I was thinking.