Bishadi

I know our brain Is the one that processese all info that we take in, so in that sense it is, but, surely, the brain does not have a whole bunch of transistor like devices making up processer unites do they?

 

Im not really sure how the brain takes in info and decides what to do with it, has nueroscience found out yet? What has it found out about the brain?

 

If I understand right, CPU's work on algorithms and logic gates{ wich I really dont understand, I just read about on a website}[like to though], And that is how we make things like robots and computers{right}?

 

but, our brains do not work the same way, do they?

 

instead of doing every calculation to find something out, we kind of do a more educated guess and check method dont we?

 

Has anyone found out how this works?

 

I just do not know about any of this stuff and would like to.

 

thanks.

look up (google) 'crystal structures and neuron'

the whole field is about to explode

(another item is to look up is the nano tubular-like structures of the cytoskeleton, then notice how well 'light' conveys within)

Why do magnetic feilds like say from a magnet on top of your head not affect the brain? It would alter the current up there, but obviously doesnt.

 

Or any part of the nervous system in fact, why dont magnetic feilds affect?

ie.... if life was running on electrical impulses putting your head into a 3 tesla magnet (MRI) would just rip it all apart (memories)

see polaritonics and get an idea of how a wavelength can be affixed to a structure and recalled (perhaps how memories work)

huh? salt is Na+ and Cl- even when in its solid form. there is no ionization involved in forming a salt solution.

is it an increased state of energy? (quantum jump/bohr model)

what is that 'thing' that is captured to even enable any atom to increase its potential (added to the electron to jump shells)?

this doesn't make any sense whatsoever. ionization is when an atom or molecule gains a non neutral charge either by the addition or subtraction of electrons.

and so, for an electron to leave any atom, what must be 'upon' that electron?

Please confine speculative answers to the "Speculations" forum

would that mean that most all answers are speculative?

the posting on the standard and the non conformance were represented allowing any to observe the ideologies of both (so they can measure themselves and given the opportunity to explor with questions and the intent of seeking)

nothing is claimed erroneously and each item can be represented in publications currently around the world.

the frame may not appear or be worded the same (i am not a plagerizing kind) but the observational evidence does exist, or i would not post anything esoteric that cannot be verified

if there is a question you wish to ask, please do

but to limit observations to what is accepted by the group alone will limit the evolutionary progression to the bias and depth of this group

If gamma rays have the highest frequency, then they must have the highest energy. So why aren't they able to ionize atoms? (by removing electrons)

because the mass is not capturing the exchange. Almost like light going thru a window.

Ionization is when mass captures a portion and the remaining is upon the environment of the associated mass.

for ex; a cup of water and salt, the NaCl becomes Na+ and Cl- within the body of the solution. The Na Cl can maintain a greater wavelength between the associated system; hence the whole cup will freeze at a lower surrounding temp because the solution has retained a greater state of energy (em).

What is the nature of the observations affect on the entanglment. Could there ever be a way to observe without interfering, or is it an absolute rule. If it's absolute, how was it determined. ie examples of experiments

this subject is the bomb folks!

sure bell labs has described entanglement but the easiest method of observing entanglement is by human experience.

Words entangle mass! Ie... you read what i am conveying, you measure, weigh and log the interaction. But nothing exchanged except the photon and appicability in association to the previously recorded definitions to the words. When the correct alignment find coherance, you understand what is conveyed and an action can ensue (potential to mass).

Em (light/photon/electromagnetic energy) shared between mass entangles all exposed to that dimension (slice) in time. (ieee... words can transcend time; see books)

Now the longer bodies exchange energy a greater potential can ensue between the bodies (see casimir, van der waals)

at bell labs, Mit and all over the world; this single property of energy is finally being measured and will be proven that this property is the 'missing link' to physics

ie.... show me entanglement in virial theorem before the 'creation' of the entities dark energy/matter?

let the claim stand; entangled energy between mass is that gravity between mass (just note what E=mc2 means; that mass is just em)

I think understanding what "quasi free" electrons are is quite beyond me.. ;-)

So.. basically it's not electron jumping up and down in the energy levels that causes black body radiation but the vibrational energy of atoms right?

that resonant energy is em (hence the photon)

eg... note what the mass is (elemental structure), the volume and the environment. Each will have different thresholds just like each emit different wavelengths (photons) and noted quite easily with the colors we see.

a method to see all that mentioned above is to heat up a piece of iron to various temperatures.

hello, i'm new here.

I'm a high school student. i have a research subject which requires us to make a problem. Mine's a complicated one. I am going to test the effect of the electricity on plants. I mean i have leads to how my research will go: how can acids be a bridge to plants and electricity? and including the electron transport chain? is that also related? thanks for reading i hope you can give me some advices. I hope that i may be able to come up with something. I aspire to be a chemist someday..... thanks.....

have you read up on getting electricity FROM plants (trees)?

"This is really something out of left field," he said. "In my 25 years of practicing patent law, I've never seen anything like this."

 

Lagadonis said tests have generated 0.8 volts to 1.2 volts by driving an aluminum roofing nail half an inch into a tree attached to a copper water pipe driven 7 inches into the ground. But the electricity is useless because it's unstable and fluctuates.

 

The trick will be to learn how to filter and stabilize the electricity so it can be used to charge batteries, Lagadinos said.

 

"It's a renewable source and it's an unlimited source," he said. "It's virtually untapped. The issue is clean energy and it's readily available. There are trees everywhere."

 

Manwell said his skepticism is science-based.

 

"There's a fundamental law of physics," he said. "The energy has to come from somewhere."

http://www.masshightech.com/stories/2006/01/09/story12-Plugged-in-Startup-hopes-to-tap-electricity-from-trees.html

and remember, you can actually contribute in these fields (brand new of today's science.)

do some googling and enjoy the ride.

what to keep in mind is that in chemistry, they believe the combinations are a reductionary process but you will find, that is not the case; they combine to increase the total potential of the energy, the mass is just there for the ride, too.

Initially, I was a smidge unsure where precisely this question should go, seeing as it isn't quite chemistry based, but at the same time, having a knowledge of physics that would, at best be deemed mediocre, decided to put it in the general thread. I appropriately apologize to any moderator, whose unfortunate duty it may be to rectify the error.

Anyhow, to get to the point, I am interested in why ferro, dia, and paramagnetism occur, in various compounds, as while I'm sure everybody knows the nature of the effects, it surprises me that I haven't thought about why such a phenomenon occurs. As always, any aid is most appreciated.

 

"No, you have the largest cookie mr. hippopotamus!":D

 

ps: It's best not to ask about that conclusive quote...

this http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/classes/physics/phys196/ferguson/P196-32.MinMat.011.html

is combining 'planck' and 'maxwell' to offer a bit within the current observances and how it is used and conveyed.

Do i agree? No........... but to be fair, i am sharing material for you to observe that will assist in addressing the basics.

i consider an increased magnetism (biased) as the increased wavelength of em (kind of like 'amplitude' of energy; the coherant combining increases the total power of the energy 'state' upon the mass)

eg..... a piece of iron magnetized will possess a greater total potential of iron without; not because of more electrons but because of the 'energy upon the mass' (em).

a real easy item for each to observe is the 'right hand rule' of electricity

there is no electric potential without its magetic field at "perpendicular planes"

ie.... most all electicity is from what; electric and magnetic fields in perpendicular planes (generation of; at the power plant)

Merged post follows:

Isn't light a repulsive force generally since it carries momentum?

 

Sounds like they found an additional repulsive force to complement an attractive force they found previously.

same forces, just 'finally' being causal

So my question to you is :

Is there any element that if a stimulated using a wireless frequency, would create heat/energy?

in which a (per se) electron is released from the em (light) imposing upon mass

what you may wish to observe is that 'heat' is not a property or energy itself (never has been)

em is the cause of the effect measured as 'heat'

 

I.E. : If gold created heat/energy when stimulated in said way, would that heat/energy be able to be converted into electricity, for example.

not real efficiently unless drilled down to the wavelength but yes

 

*Note that I am just a stupid 16 year old who doesn't know anything, so don't hate on me too bad if what i'm saying isn't making sense...*

please, you are our future

please do not discount yourself especially knowing we (mankind) are in for a paradigm shift (which means, you young minds will be exposed too and have more capabilities than albert einstein, newton, copernicus and Jesus himself within these coming periods)

in fact, you have the internet and none of them EVER did.

please ask the questions you need answered because if your generation is not sharper than we are now; then 'we the people' have failed you.

Hello,

for the first post it seems prudent to repesent what many will find out later;

I am an autodidact that may articulate in an esoteric manner.

I consider myself honest and expect the same from any who wish to debate

Please be patient with me.

Learning and sharing is my job!