MetaFrizzics

Just let me get out my complimentary textbook on CP violation: CP Violation by I.I. Bigi & A.I. Sanda. Cambridge UP 2000. I'll never sound more eloquent on this subject than my friend Mr. Bigi. I like to credit Dirac with antiparticles, even though he was formally too timid to claim it for himself.

Two problems: a) who decides what is and isn't 'pornography'? b) The three largest businesses in the world are: Guns, Drugs, Prostitution. (Trillions of Dollars) The market is massive and uncontrollable. Almost half the population of the earth is involved or gives passive consent. The main point of it as an activity is money.

Actually, this seems to be a misunderstanding of the function of an uncharged capacitor in a circuit. In fact, uncharged caps act as *CLOSED*(short) circuits, not open circuits! The transient voltages and currents that take place during rapid charging change rates rapidly following exponential curves. There is no true steady-state 'D.C.' current in the behaviour of these circuits until the capacitor is actually fully charged up to close to its rating/and the voltage of the charging supply. Only then (when all the smoke has cleared and the cap is charged) will the circuit behave as a simple D.C. circuit with a counter-E.M.F. and almost zero current. At the end of the charging cycle, you can indeed treat the capacitor as an 'open circuit' as far as relatively unchanging applied D.C. voltages is concerned. But getting there is the whole problem. ...and the safety and longevity of the circuit and components as well.

Right now EM is incorporated in the exponents of the ten field equations. It seems to be a kludge of sorts, although it drops right in.

I was hoping someone *else* would explain the real difference between SRT/QM and Newtonian versions of waves and redshifts. I suppose I'll have to do it myself. But I thought you guys would comb through it like Rapunzel's hair. I still think it is the real question in this thread: or at least a good one: Still, what do you think?

There is literally tons of stuff on the net about Einstein's plagarism and sloppy calculations. People have written whole books about it. Mathematicians in particular have a hard time with his questionable derivations. Alternative Interpretation of SRT D-Theory Motherload for Anti-SRT Example of Re-assessment of E=mc^2

I didn't say there were no difficulties at all: One could approach this part of the problem two ways:(a) There isn't enough hard evidence to force us to accept this calculation. (b) The Standard Model is conceded to be flawed and incomplete anyway. Work would remain to be done. This is only one interpretation of Feynman diagrams and calculations. The interpretation is Dirac's. Feynman never really agreed to it, since he himself invented our most useful approach: Path Integrals over all routes. Feynman would have been the first to jettison 'anti-particles' in favour of a new interpretation that would explain attraction. We should be at least half as creative!

Quick Intro to Tensor Analysis: An alternative method for dealing with the problems of measurement does exist, one that does not require transforming to a Cartesian system but receives its information directly from the metric components [math]g_{ij}[/math]; it does, however, require the development of a different, less pictorial formalism. Such a formalism is provided by a field of mathematics where a dazzlingly elegant notation is associalted with an approach in which basis vectors are hardly, if ever, mentioned. It is called tensor analysis. Differences between Vectors and Tensors One should not make the mistake of thinking that tensor analysis is merely an extension of vector analysis because, even though a closely related math universe is addressed, the fundamental approach of the two formalisms is radically different. Vector Analysis concentrates on properties of geometrical quantities that can be specified without regard to coordinate systems, or components. By contrast, the ethos of tensor analysis is to talk primarily about components: the "underlying geometrical object itself" tends to move into the background. The fact that a relation among tensor quantities is independent of space distortions is then customarily shown, not by avoiding the use of components, but by demonstrating that the corresponding relation among components maintains its form under general coordinate transformations . As a result, tensor analysis, while still profoundly geometrical, is not particularly pictorial at all. Other Objects that Show Up In this new formalism, the role of arrows, sheaves, etc. is taken by a large genus of quantities called tensors. They include, for example, not merely covariant vector capacities (ie. like thumbtacks) but also covariant vector densities (for which no simple picture exists). Also, whereas vector components are numbereed by a single index which ranges over the dimensions of the space, a tensor componoent may carry any number of indexs having that same range. Each index can be covariant (written as a subscript) or contravariant (written as a superscript). One should mention also that there are a number of players on the stage of tensor analysis which are not, in fact tensors, although they carry similar sub and super scripts. Purpose of Tensors Tensor Analysis has many applications. One is in classical differential geometry of the curve, and surfaces in ordinary space, as well as more important generalizations to spaces of higher dimensions. e.g., Riemannian geometry. Another application is mathematical physics. Here tensor analysis lets us easily express (in terms of curvilinear coordinates) the fundamental equations of the various subjects such as hydrodynamics, elasticity, electricity, and magnetisim. It can also help formulate natural laws, since when laws are expressed this way they are independant of any particular coordinate system. This independance of the coordinate system allows us to choose whatever system is convenient or appropriate to describing or solving a given problem.

Star Trek: TOS Come on: they practically invented the whole TV sci fi genre. Pioneers always look clumsy and hokey and dated in hindsight. Give the old folks the respect they deserve. Hendrix couldn't play guitar worth a crap. But he is still the most original guitar player of all time. Ditto for Star Trek. And the Actors too: Kirk made the series possible. Spock and Bones were essential, and Scotty was the perfect engineer. Star Trek: TNG This was the peak of the polished genre. Professional, convincing, powerful and modern International? Intergalactic in political scope. The climax, while it was all still fresh and new. Picard was the only style of captain that could fill Kirk's void. Sadly, the other characters are mere cameos except Warf. Data was too artificial. Star Trek: DS9 A failure. The genre had been played out. This was just the typical sequel quality, not surprising but still disappointing. The best it had to offer were the Ferengi. Star Trek: Voyager With the baton passed on to feminazis, the series was finally irrevocably destroyed. The whole thing had far too much feminist/gay agenda to even be convincing on its face, let alone break any new political ground or push the envelope. Everything has been done at this point. Star Trek: Enterprise Never even bothered to look. Let good things die with dignity. Babylon 5 Too subliminally Christian/liberal to appeal to the intellect at all. Whatever hope lay in having earthlings as a dying race vying for a position as a kind of 'Jewish bookkeepers' of the universe just lacked any plausibility. As if the universe would need us at that point. Inevitably all the shows got contaminated with 'pro-American' propaganda for Imperialist world domination disguised as 'benevelant teacher/guide/landlord'. Time to vomit. X-Files Finally something with a bit of edge and teeth, at least a first, until it got corned up. But no points for originality. Nothing touches the original Outer Limits as the dark side of Sci Fi. It was all invented there. Even Twilight Zone had to borrow. Lexx (the Penthouse version. But too tamed down to have any real cutting edge.) Pre-Gelded by censors and markets. Stargate: etc. More American Army morale boosting garbage. Feeding into America's worst faults (xenophobia and racism), it just sucked. Others. Why bother?

Yet apparently, according to North American statistics, 60% of married women have never experienced orgasm (with their partners), and the stats are worse in other parts of the world. There's theory, then there's reality. Even sincere people seem hopelessly inept at the most basic things. Well, it would break the back of the sex-trade. (facetious). Actually, it seems a no-brainer that assault is assault. If the act of skipping consent could be justified at all, it would be biologically in the name of perpetuation of the human race in spite of the education of women, which reveals to them the actual systemic inequity of being child-bearers. Soon in fact, we can expect birth rates to drop everywhere, beginning with the advanced countries as women en masse reject their traditional roles. In this case, an argument could be made that women's consent is not necessary until and unless another way to create and carry children is found practical on a grand scale. Unfortunately, this is *not* the reason or the result of a majority of rape cases. The male is not trying to reproduce at all, but rather it seems to be a hate crime of sorts, or an act of domination for its own sake.

In fact, the force of attraction is *not* a mystery, provided you are willing to put your money where your mouth is regarding physical laws: (1) All known physical laws are time-reversable. (2) Backward travelling particles simply explain the force of attraction. (3) So Feynman believed, and his program of extension of QED to QM has been carried out successfully by Mead (Collective Electrodynamics -without Maxwell!) and Cramer (Transactional Interpretation of QM - backward particles & realistic causality)

...the stuff dreams are made of."Ich will deinen Geist befreien, Neo. Aber ich kann dir nur die Tür zeigen, durchgehen musst du ganz allein."

While the Milky Way is obviously as 'old' as other comparable galaxies, it should be obvious that it cannot have had its 'bar' shape for its entire lifetime. Consider that strictly from the common-sense view of Newtonian physics (which is what astronomers rely upon alot), the 'bar' must have formed some time in the middle of the Milky Way's history. It is obviously an anomaly, and the disjoint structure created by it's combination with the rest of the galaxy bespeaks of a growth/decay process. Only one of two general scenarios seem probable by my understanding of the forces of rotating systems acting in a 'liquid' like flow pattern under gravitational forces: (1) the 'bar' is expanding, eating alive the galaxy as it does so, by drastically changing the normally semi-circular orbits of the stars and systems at its radial border, pulling them out of orbit and into extreme / chaotic elliptical orbits similar to comets. (2) the 'bar' is contracting, as stars at the outer edge fall back into a trailing spiral. This scenario may have greater promise of a 'stable' final form for the galaxy, which nonetheless mean huge changes in the gravitational field where the Sun is located. That is to say, the bar is an artifact of 'turbulence': a type of turbulence which by nature must be destabilizing the motion of the galaxy arms. It seems unlikely to me from the viewpoint of large-scale entropy that the galaxy could be undergoing a 'reverse' process of stabilization of chaotic motion. Bar Galaxy Research <-- click here

Yes. I'm saying there is a strong chance that waves will interact with the mass at various levels of penetration with resultant exchange of energy and work done as heat before the waves carried by the field can cancel. In fact I would predict a wave-like probability pattern in the absorption and also re-emission of EM radiation based upon a QM-type distribution in space along the direction of transmission. Keep in mind that waves from different sources can never completely cancel everywhere, since they are spherical expansions, and will always exhibit Moire' patterns of reinforcement and cancellation even in perfectly isotropic mediums.

that's right. While sophisticated power supplys do have current limiters, and very cheap power supplys may simply trickle-charge capacitors, most moderate and home-made supplys will need an external current limiter like a resistor for the simple reason that it is cheaper to just use a resistor than to repeatedly replace fuses or reset breakers. Why risk damage to your charging supply and cap when such a simple solution is readily available? Also, this doesn't address home-made power supplys or projects he may build with the capacitors he has rescued from the old VCR. In these circuits he would be well advised to add resistors if they are not already indicated in the schematic he might be copying.

This is bad news for us. The galaxy has a much shorter life expectancy with the destabilizing bar, feeding the black hole at the centre. By the time we meet bizzarro superman on the other side of the galaxy, it will be all over.

Brothers and sisters have I none, but this man's father is my father's son. Who am I?

Hi, I'm new here, just a young female first year student thinking of majoring in science! I love magnets. My fridge is covered in them. I am just really having trouble understanding how they do their thingy, but I think I can learn fast, if someone could explain a bit about them for me. P.S. I'm trying out for the cheerleading team, but I don't really know anyone on campus to hang out with, so making new friends is a priority! Thanks in advance! PM me if you think you can help me with any kind of science! Get outta my way! I saw her first you drooling clowns!...hey! Your not a ...why you dirty old bugger!

No need to worry: the true meaning of the Kabbalah can only be perceived by those ready and able to do so.

Definitely use a resistor to limit the current when you throw on the power, since the capacitors will act like a short circuit (zero resistance) when uncharged and presented with a voltage. Once a capacitor is charged, you can bypass the series resistor with a switch. This is done for instance (via a relay or transistor -timer circuit) in power supplies to allow rapid replenishment of charge in the caps and provide a steady (or slow changing) voltage supply with varying loads. Keep the maximum D.C. voltage below 90% of the rated value of the cap and at least as high as 1/3 of the rated voltage, to prevent arcing and failure of the capacitor(s) especially if you are going to use them for 24/7 duty cycles in a power supply left on. Modern caps will also have a 'surge' voltage rating about 20% higher than the sustained rating, but this is not a safe voltage for use, only a statistical failure rate for parts placed under stress for very brief durations (something on the analogy of a 'slow-blow' fuse).

Update Interestingly, today I accidentally picked up an out-of-country newspaper to find a related article on this thread, corroborating some of my points: The Globe and Mail is a conservative newspaper which meticulously avoids controversial articles and unfounded scientific claims.

LOL! technically I think he is considering the repulsion of the electron cloud first."why settle for billions, when we can have... ....millions!" (Dr. Evil)

In this case, it seems to me that you have not distinguished between Special Relativity (SRT) which postulates that the speed of light is constant, versus say sound waves, which travel through air also at a constant speed but change in frequency if the source is moving. For completeness you should explain the difference between SRT and sound waves, as well as the similarities!

I think you have to qualify this:There are scenarios in which waves can be completely out of sync (180o) and still transmit energy to a target (made of more than one primitive particle). For instance you can beam waves at an object from opposite sides and heat it up or compress it, performing work and transferring energy. As a static analogy, consider the huge difference between a weight hanging freely on a string, and the same weight also held in place horizontally by elastics or springs. The behaviour of the weight will be different, and new reservoirs for energy storage and exchange will have been created. Similarly, the EM field in Maxwell's classical EM theory acts as a 'reservoir' and transfer medium of energy, preventing simple cancelling of field potentials.

The [ img ] tag can be better if you want to update your picture periodically, since you can't edit your messages after a certain period of time. Also, the [ img ] tag can automatically display a picture, rather than the viewer having to click on it. You have to put the picture up somewhere remotely, and use an URL pointer to it. [ img ] http: /myurlanddirectory/mypicture.jpg [ / img ] Notice this is a slightly different layout than the URL tag: [ url = http:...etc ] Any Name I want to Show Here to Click on[ / url ] (remove spaces to make this line work, and replace the example with your pic addr.) For example: A nice monoblock power audio amp I built.