geordief

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    1555
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

geordief last won the day on August 31 2018

geordief had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

83 Excellent

About geordief

  • Rank
    Primate

Recent Profile Visitors

8996 profile views
  1. https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/lhcb-discovers-matter-antimatter-asymmetry-in-charm-quarks "Matter and antimatter cannot coexist in the same physical space because if they come into contact, they annihilate each other. This equal-but-opposite nature of matter and antimatter poses a conundrum for cosmologists, who theorize that the same amount of matter and antimatter should have exploded into existence during the birth of our universe. But if that’s true, all of that matter and antimatter should have annihilated one another, leaving nothing but energy behind." That quote from an article detailing recent findings at the Large Hadron Collider (probably a more interesting story in itself than my query) I thought I had learned that "pure energy" is a misconception but that quote seems to me to be describing it in those terms. The matter /antimatter collision seems to leave behind nothing but energy. Can anyone clear up my misunderstanding?(I thought there was a respectableschool of thought that posited that there was a zero total of energy in the universe even though perhaps this could never be shown experimentally)
  2. geordief

    Electrons in orbit in the atom

    Thanks, that will take me some time to learn.
  3. geordief

    Electrons in orbit in the atom

    Suppose there are a number of electrons at various locations (at the same energetic level) in the atom,is the probability wave used to determine these likely locations? Also do these electrons interact with each other?
  4. I think I have heard that if there is an energetic input into an atom then a constituent electron (or electrons?) will move to a higher energetic level in the atom. Am I to see this as the same electron (s?) moving from one level to another or should I imagine the first electron disappearing from the first level and the second electron materializing at the different level? Would it be the global state that determines the local state? Also is it correct to see the locations of the electrons in their levels as being determined by probability waves and not waves in space (or should that be spacetime?)
  5. I had in mind 2 lines on a sphere which we draw parallel for a short distance (locally,as I think it is described). When these 2 lines are produced (follow their own direction) they converge.
  6. Are you more of a knowledge for knowledge's sake person or is it more of an itch that needs scratching depending on the particular problem? I think the former kind is an illusion and is related to how knowledge was a more valuable commodity when it was unavailable to others. Even Trump seems to be an expert on aviation these days.
  7. I was thinking that we may be like the scallop with all those eyes around the inside edge of the shell. Each of those eyes (each of us "individually") is the universe peeking out. When we are extinguished we just go back to there whence we came (not the exact same place but the place with the same potential for what we are now experiencing to develop) The wish to "live forever " ,whilst understandable puts the cart before the horse and aims to put our puny individual capacity in charge of the running of the universe itself. Quite apart from the misery or irrelevance such an outcome would actually occasion. Strange is tempted live long enough to see things like quantum gravity understood (if I got that right). That would be a mirage;I am sure there would be many equally interesting questions following on from that.
  8. geordief

    Nail Polish Remover: Acetone vs Ethyl Acetate

    https://www.solventis.net/products/esters/ethyl-acetate/ Any alcohol,perhaps? What adhesive was that? My nails are shot . Even a little extension might be a nice thing if it was strong ,stable and didn't damage the underlying nail.
  9. Would it be fair to consider Euclidean geometry as a kind of (subset of ) curved geometry in the limit ?(when the local region becomes infinitely small)
  10. Don't they converge on the surface of a sphere? I was thinking of parallel lines as two sets of physical measurements drawn locally where the distance between corresponding opposite elements was constant. If these 2 sets of elements were used to produce 2 lines then ,on the surface of a sphere they would meet and I understand the same would happen in curved spacetime. Since spacetime can be (is?) curved by light itself I imagined that two such lines made of light would eventually converge I think I have learned from this thread that whilst this may be so it is impossible to verify experimentally.
  11. Would gravity be the only force ( if "force" is the correct term) causing light beams to converge? Btw do the two beams generate their own inter attractive force ?(if ,say it was 2 extremely powerful laser beams)
  12. I am no experimenter.Might there be two additional beams of light placed at the extreme edge of the mirrors forming the cavity-?- these to keep a stable distance between them. In the middle would be the two beams whose "parallel effects "we would be interested in. But are you suggesting that the experiment is far too difficult to achieve any worthwhile result? Even one based on statistical probabilities?
  13. Suppose we have an experimental set up where there is a set of mirrors parallel to each other and two beams of light are set off bouncing back and forth in between and perpendicular to them for an extended period. At first the two beams are aligned parallel to each other. Can it be shown that these two beams will always always converge when any effects of gravity are allowed for? If this can or has been experimentally confirmed does it show that there is no such thing in Nature ( the physical world) as the Euclidean idea of parallel lines?(only approximations) Or might there be other ways of attempting to reproduce experimentally Euclidean parallel lines in Nature? Something even more accurate than two beams of light...
  14. geordief

    Is change real?

    Is it the same as form vs content? Does the shape "make" the object?
  15. geordief

    Is change real?

    C Do quantum theories entertain the notion of past and future (whatever about extrapolating)? is it possible to say anything at all about the time ordered nature of any two quantum states (systems?) Are all quantum states(or systems?) "time virgins"?