Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Edtharan

  1. Other than Nuclear bombs the bigest explosion that has been created by humans was a Wheat Silo
  2. Yes and No. They are both a wave and a particle. They are a wave as in a ripple in the electromagnetic field and at the same time a descrete entity (particle). It is strange but that is QM . Actually all matter is also subject to this priciple (and AFAIK has been messured). As long as the total energy "borrowed" due to the hisenberg's uncertenty principle is paied back the transfer is allowed. I'm not sure of the mathematics involved but the virtual photon is treated like an energy carrier between the two particles. This energy can puch them in different directions. One of which is closer together. This depends on the charge of the two particles.
  3. AFAIK: Ii is the exchange of virtual photons that cause magnetic and electrical attrations. Ie partical A emmits a virtual photon and it is picked up by particle B. Scine there has bee an exchange of energy between A and B then B must change its postion closer to A (If I'm wrong please correct me). Photons are a warping/ripple of the electromagnetic field. Could Gravitons be a similar thing, a warpin or ripple in the space/time fabric?
  4. Yes. You have to flip the chages on the quarks that make up the neutron.
  5. The 'God" particle that they are trying to detect is the Higgs Boson. This oparticle is believed to be responible for the Mass of objects.
  6. I have also heard that not all the air you take in while eating comes out as burps. The air passes through the digestive system and comes out the "Other End" (I hope you get the picture ). SO not only will you burp more you will also have more embarasing moments...
  7. A vacuum is an area without any matter. So an area that has all the air removed could be called a vacuum. Also, when you are looking are the spaces between atom and inside atoms then these areas don't have matter in them (they are between then particles that are matter), would also be a vacuum. When you take Hisenberg's Uncertanty Principle into accout then empty space (the vacuum) seeths with fluctuations in energy.
  8. If gravitons exist and they radiate out from a gravitating object, and although they have no mass, they do have energy. Where does this energy come from? If it comes from a gravitation potential, does the gravitating object loose some of this gravitational potential over time, or does it come from some other source of energy, or could it come from the mass of the gravitational object (which means it would also reduce the gravitational pull of the object)? So if gravitons radiate from an object, it should mean that the object (over a period of time) would loose either energy, or mass. Or am I missing something?
  9. In starwars and star trek (in fact all sci-fi) the space ships move at exactly the speed of "story". Sci-Fi, although it uses a lot of terms that are (or sound like) scientific usualy have nothing to do with the real world. Remember the specific thing avout science fiction is that it is fiction. Wormholes (another staple of Sci-Fi) are curently purely theoretical. They have never been observed, neither has any effect caused by them been observed. They only exist as a mathamatical construct using relativity. If you are looking at pure speculation about what could allow us to travel between the stars then you should look at "Space Drives" (engines that don't use a propelent but "push" against empty space) or "Warp Drives" (not the star trek type). The theoretical Warp Drive works by compressing space in front of it (like a large mass would do) and expanding space behind it (the opposite of what gravity does). There has been no observation of this reverse gravity effect that would be needed for the warp drive to exits (although if we did find some then we could probably make a warp drive). Various ideas for space drives exist, but none have been demonstrated to work. One concept for a space drive works on what is known as the dynamic Casimir effect. This occures when a reflective plate (usually metal) is vibrated back and forth in a particular fashion (this is important and difficult to do). As the plate move back and forth, virtual particles at the surface of the plate are given energy which promotes them into real particles with a velocity away from the plate. The result of this is to give the plate (and anything connected to it) a net velocity in the oposite direction. This kind of space drive could be made today. However, the actual thrust from this drive is extremely small and that makes it impractical as an engine. Also this engine is still theoretical and has only been designed mathamaticaly and not tested in actuality (though the scientists do say the engine could be made more efficent). Currently the best method we have (that we know would work) is to use an Ion Drive space ship, which accelerates for thousands and thousands of years. You would use an Ion Drive in preferance to a standard rocket engine because an ion drive, although it has less thrust, is far more fule efficient that a rocket engine.
  10. Also it is only from our perspective that we are the most evolved animal. All animals that are alive today are equaly evolved, just evolved for a different environment than we are.
  11. You are talking about something a gravitational shadow. As light (electromagnetic carrier particle) casts a shadow when it is blocked by an object, why dose gravity not do the same? Is that what you are asking?
  12. Also why do all forces have charges, except gravity?
  13. You could use something called the Dynamic Casimir effect.. It works similar to the standard casimire effect, however you use a single plate and move it is a certain way and it will produce a net thrust in one direction. This is still thoretical and has only been demonstrated mathamaticaly. The thrust, however is very small and not useful. The scientists that discovered this effect did say that their design could be greatly improved upon and so more thrust could be generated. this engine would have no fuel, however, you would need some kind of energy (electricity?) to move the plate.
  14. Actually, sucking through a straw decreases the pressure. When you suck ( ) you decrease the presure above the liquid in the straw. The greater air pressure (normal air preasure) in the can pushes down on the drink and forces the drink up the straw and into your mouth.
  15. Im thought so, but it seemed a resonable consiquence of antimatter as matter moving backwards in time. Although the Antimatter universe would not nessesarily be of the same physical structure. Take 2 pairs of matter/antimatter particles. If the positron from pair 1 anhialated with electron from pair 2 then the positron from pair 2 travels backwards and will evolve differently to the electron from pair 1. With more particles this would increase the differences between the two universes. But as you said this is not taken seriously, hence why I put it is speculations
  16. It is the speed of the air over the wings that cause lift, not the speed of the wheels on the ground. Regardless of how fast the weals are moving, if the speed of the air over the wings is not enough to generate the requiered lift then it will not take off. Think of a kite. While holding the string the kite has no speed relitive to the ground. However the speed of the wind causes the kit to fly. If you let go of the kite then it quickly matches the air speed (or close to the air speed) and so the lift cause by that air is lost, but is is now moving relative to the ground, at rounghly the same speed as the air. The kite having lost the lift will fall to the ground. So it is the speed of the air (air speed) that is important, not the speed compared to the ground (ground speed). In a car you feel the air rush past you because you have speed relative to the air, you also have speed relative to the ground, but this is a different speed (think of driving into the wind as opposed to driving with the wind). In fact if you drove your car with the wind at the same speed as the wind then you would not notice the wind at all even though you are moving.
  17. Ahh. Got it now. What would happen if the positron in the first image encountered an electron and anihalated with it. To make it clearer. The situation I am wondering about is a magnetic field perpendicular to the page (as in the first image) with two metal plates next to one another like this | |. the virtual electron/positron pair form between the plates and the magnetic field directs them to intercept each plate (the electron on one and the positron on the other).
  18. Ok I understand the second picture,but the first is baffeling me a bit. Could you explain what is happening in it? Thanks.
  19. I'm not sure if this should go here, but it is just a specualtion and not a real theory. If antimatter is just normal matter moving backwards in time then at the big bang, or more accurately when matter formed, Particles and their Anti Partlicles would form with the matter partivcles moving forward in tiem and the Anti particle would be moving backwards in time. Any antimatter that did not immediately annihilat with matter would then have traveled back before any matter existed, and therefore would not be annihilated. This antimatter would continue backwards in time. But what would happen after it got to time 0 (the big bang)? Could this antimatter form a reverse time universe that is occureing before the big bang (that might not actually be a sensable question as time did not exist before the big bang)?
  20. I understand that particle/antiparticle anhialations do release energy, however in this case the virtual particles have "borrowed" energy and the anhialation of the virtual positron with the real electron would "pay back" the borrowed energy leaving the other virtual electron. Scine the energy needed to produce the virtual particles has been paid back the total enegy of the system is balanced (returned to the starting energy). Of course this situation would only occure if the virtual positron could anhialate an electron. What I wnat to know is, could this situation occure?
  21. Thanks Dave. Also on the same line: Could a Virtual Positron Anhilate a Real Electron while at the same time promoting the partner virtual electron into a real electron (and there by returning the energy sum to 0)? The effect I would assume is something like Quantum teleportation or Quantum Tunneling.
  22. I have actually been in a course that had only two assesment categories. They were "Competent" and "Not Yet Competent". Most of the students felt that this was an awful way to represent the acedemic standing. It did not encourage students to try, as a mark of Competent was the same nomatter how much effort you put into it. I could work as hard as I could, studying day and night to get the top mark in a test, and as far as any employer would know is that I was just as good as someone that only put in the barest effot to get that passing mark. Graduated pass marks arre nesessary to encurage students to try their hardest as they are rewarded for their efforts. Not being able to fail reduces the impact of the "punishment" that is not puting the effort into the study needed to reach a passing grade.
  23. I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but it seemd the most apropreate. A question that has been in my mind for some time now is: Can charged virtual particles curve in a magnetic field?
  • 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.