thedarkshade

Like iNow said, there must be a REALLY REALLY BIG IF, but let's take into consideration that something has reached the speed of light, and ask what would it see? Well, as time dilation now becomes infinite, then first of all there would be no time at all . Then the mass is completely converted into energy or mass is now infinite. So what would it see? I really can't provide an answer (surely nobody can) to this, but as I was writting something came to my mind. What would you see if your getting into a black hole? there also is no time! And as when you reach the speed of light (which is impossible practically) everything gets tricky, then I guess the view would be QUIET DIFFERENT from our physical world!

"What happens if you follow a photon at the speed of light?" this a question that Einstein itself asked. And I agree that objects with rest mass cannot reach the speed of light, but according to Einstein's theory of Special Relativity they can reach 99% of it, and then the time dilation. Anyway, I think that an answer has nowdays been provided to you and also to Einstein question. And that answer is "If you follow a photon at the speed of light, the photon moves away from you at the speed of light"

E=0??? That sounds kinda unphysical you know! After all, matter is energy and energy is matter, you can prove this by the same equation you used above (E=mc^2).Every single body that reaches the speed of light, it's matter is completely turned into energy, and it also has no time (only for outside observers as the time deviation goes infinite). So saying that E=0 is the same as just saying "no mass, no existence", and we know that photons exist. It sounds kinda weird!!!

Hi Martin, It might sound like stupid but I got this way of looking Big Bang from a different point of view! And there are some things that make me think tightly! So at first there was nothing, just an infinitely dense point. Then there was this energy (dark energy) which made this point expand and accelerate! Normally, this energy should have been given uniformly to that point, so all its sides expand equally, and as it expanded (and expands) in frictionless conditions then it should go one forever. But I always get stuck to the same think! If this energy (dark) is given uniformly so this dot expands equally to all its sides, then why aren't its sides completely the same? The couldn't possible be anything to make these sides change and so differ because there was nothing before! And one more thing. Dark matter is just like a gum that acts between everything in the universe (stops them from getting all away). And if there comes a state when dark energy shall decrease, will then dark matter bring all the universe back to that infinitely dense point?? Strange huh?! Thnc for ur help.

200 years back from now, saying that one day two people 20000 km away from each other will be able to talk for the issues of the same hour, you would be called crazy! 200 years back from now if you said to anyone that all the people of the world will see the same thing on something called TV, you would be called crazy! And perhaps 200 later form now mankind will laugh with thoughts like this one that we will never find the Theory of Everything. Science shall make it!

Yeah, they all do start with U-235. And this link provides quiet good explanation about these things. http://youtube.com/watch?v=fnY_Ug0DabM The Hiroshima Atomic Bomb was build based on these principles. U-235 has the ability to absorb neutron, so you need a neutron to break it into two "smaller pieces". There are some methods of getting neutron, like the Be one. All you got to do is act with alfa rays to a berillium and automatically a neutron shoots out. And when that neutron hits the nucleus of the U-235, it breaks the balance proton-neutron and the nucles breaks into two (Ba-142 and Kr-91, called F-fragments) and releases three neutrons. The probability that the neutron released from Be to hit the nucleus U-235 is quit astronomical, and critical mass in necessary for this to happen. Critical mass is usually spheric so the neutron cannot leak out. And then three other neutron released form U-235 hit the other nucleus' and so it always keeps on doubling. The key thing about uranium bomb is neutron. Super-fast moving neutrons double the other U-235 while the explosion is still in progress, releasing so the largest energy existing (nuclear energy). And it was the energy (heat) that killed all those people in Hiroshima. Another "bad" effect of the nuclear explosion is also radiation. Except the released energy there is also released radiation, which consequences show up gradually. Still today, the level of the radiation on Hiroshima is 10 times higher than normal.

It's kinda strange why all those graphs and maps related to Big Bang progress only on one side! According to what I've read and seen about Big Bang, the very initial ancient state before or right at the Big Bang was infinite density and zero volume. This latter one has been having some hiccups quiet frequently, but what I'm trying to say is that at the beginning was only a point (infinitely dense and zero volume). And a point is circular. So any progress (like explosion or better to say expansion) done to this point should have gone steady to all directions. So why all maps and graphs (even Wiki's) progress in one direction? what about the other part? Excluded from universe??? So you agree that universe was created from nothing (volume zero), because many don't. So creationism or eternal universe? Which you think is the one?

I completely agree. I personally think that the point of each task you get (physics in this case) or any task you set yourself is to get the result, accurate and fast result! Classical methods have no problems getting this, so why replace? on the other hand the "usual numbers" used in QM are astronomical. This would be just like saying "will mankind ever chose the hard way instead of easy way"! And about QM-Relativity! QM, as you all said, fits with Special Relativity as they both got to deal with high speed and extreme conditions (at least not experienced in out daily life). But the problem (Modern Physic's main problem probably) is that QM does not fit with General Relativity! And I've often heard that one of these Relativities has got to be wrong (thought I don't think so)! Or something inside QM or General Relativity has got to be wrong! They just got to fit, as they're both right on their own "paths". I'm saying this because these paths are part of the same world, same universe! QM and General Relativity both deal with the same universe (differing in scale), so how come two exact theories, about the same thing don't fit? Why do they differ?

Store informations into earth just like into a hard-disk? Who's the storer then? Mankind? How?

There is this limit for smashing everything into something smaller! For example you can smash a magnet till feromagnetic particles, but not smaller. And to matter as general, string (if it exists) is the limit! I was thinking of the universe as spheric too. In all those graphs of the Big Bang you always see it progressing in one direction, when it should be in all directions. And that the whole thing is rotating putting us and all the other parts of the universe in different places in the universe, making us impossible to find out where we actually in the universe and find out where are the edges of the universe!

As far as I can understand it, Dark Matter is just like a gum that acts between all substances in the universe, and it makes it impossible for them to get away form each other (stop galaxies from running away form each other). I was thinking if I could look at it this way and I got a thought! If dark energy starts decreasing that means that dark matter will start increasing pulling everything closer to everything, until it gets to a state were density will be infinite and volume 0, that means the state before Big Bang. Possible???!!!

Massless and frictionless are two adjectives which are unknown for realistic situations so this one is completely idealistic, so we'll treat it that way. As you say that this plane is incline and frictionless, any forced acting on it (vertically as you said) would just slip (because of frictionless situation) and it would also slip from the rail too (as it is also frictionless), so no force (acting vertically) would be able to make this plane move. This slip is caused from the frictionless situation and also because of the angle which cannot be zero. If the force acts from left, than it would make the plane move infinitely with a constant velocity. At least I picture it that way!

If not an explosion, than what?

They are so many fact that deny the evolution, evolution itself denies evolution, and we still blindly believe on it. How irrational mankind can be! First of all I just want to clarify an issue! MUTATIONS! I've been reading all those replies and I find it difficult to believe how can "scientists" think and say that the mutations have contributed to evolution! This is insane! To deny this thing all you need is very very basic knowledge about genetics. Mutations are changes that happen during replication (DNA synthesis), transcription (RNA synthesis) and translation (protein synthesis). But one thing we should understand is that MUTATIONS ARE ALWAYS NEGATIVE!! There still hasn't been A SINGLE case when mutations have had positive effects in that organism when they happened! From the foundation of the genetics, for more than 50 years scientists have been trying to cause, experiment or observe a positive mutation but they always ended up failing. This is because there are no POSITIVE MUTATIONS. Just think of some mutations like Down's Syndrome, Condiodistrophy, Albinism etc, they're positive right???!!! One scientist used a really good expression to illustrate this case "The hasn't been a single case when mutations have contributed positively in the development of the organism. This is like an earthquake to have positive effects to a city!" And he's actually right! So how could organisms evolve in a higher scale of development by mutations when the word "positive" is absolutely contrary to mutations! Another impossible maze for evolutionists! How did mammals appear and what happened to reptiles? When it comes to this evolutionists usually have only one thing to lean on, and that is Archeopterics! They say that this creature was the "bridge" between reptiles and mammals! And they failed again here, because Archeopterics was warm-blooded, which means a mammal. And yet evolution cannot explain the pass reptile-mammal! A very interesting quotation about this issue is: "The passing phase between reptiles and mammals is still a mystery! This is just like a play when all the key roles are taken by reptiles and the curtains suddenly go down. And when the play starts again the key roles now are played by mammals!" Yet another impossible maze for evolution! LAND-WATER How do evolutionist explain this? They do it but still using a failed example. And the example is coelacanth. Coelacanth is oldest specie of fish living. When it was first discovered, this was a great breakthrough for evolution because coelacanth is thought to have a weak walking mechanism. But after the capture of more coelacanths, the conclusions say that it is a fish that lives in deep water and never goes higher than 180m. What is ridiculous about this land-water pass is the original example used by Darwin! And guess what he said:"I see no barrier for a bear to be converted into a whale by jumping into water" For the love of God how can a thing like this happen! Explain it evolutionists! Then another blockade for evolution is Cambrian Explosion! To not make this more boring I'll just use a very simple, convincing example! Evolutionists say that mankind has evolved from apes, and that the Homo-Sapiens first appeared about 60000 years ago. Then how do the evolutionists explain the discovery of a 1.6 million year old man footstep? Then all those scandals with falsified fossils and skulls (which I would not like to mention). And if mankind evolved from apes, then how come that not a single man has evolved from an ape for all this time that mankind has been present? CONCLUSION : E V O L U T I O N I S F A K E I completely agree with you. Evolution means reaching a higher scale of development, more complicated, more advanced. And according to evolution these advances happen by mutations (well according to neo-darwinists), but mutations only have negative effects, never never never positive. Then how come NEGATIVE mean ADVANCE? And also that the probability for creating any new biological structure or any new organ to a organism from mutations goes far far beyond the possible mathematical probability (10 followed by 50 zeros). Darwin itself wasn't sure its own theory and he always used "IF" when he referred to his theory! Isn't all this convincing???!!!

Nowdays scientists use different kind of expressions to refer to the same thing, and this makes it confusing. I think that these two concepts that you mentions are the light-depended and the light-independent phase. The first one requires the presence of the pigment clorophyl, which has the ability to attract light rays. The light dependent phase happens in granums (which are a group of thylakoilds put one on top of other), and the light independent phase happens in the space between granums, and that space is called stroma. I hope this is usefull. DraZ

Lately I've heard an idea which really made me thought! Three inches in Earth are equal to three inches in Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, Saturn wherever. But three seconds in Earth are not equal to three seconds in Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, Saturn wherever. And few physicist now believe that there got to be some equations that can be used to measure the velocity, acceleration without having to consider time. So this kind of thinking leads to something that's called "NO TIME"!!! And that's weird. That's impossible actually. As you all know the entire universe is four things : time, matter, space and energy! Or it might be better to sat the universe is made of two couples energy-space and time-matter. And excluding any of them is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE because that would cause the exclusion of the three other. You see, time stands to matter as space stand to energy. You might find this confusing but it actually is not, it's very simple! Now let's take a closer look! All out current equations that we use to measure velocity, acceleration, the amount of motion etc, all these equations have time integrated within them. And why is that?! That is because every single event that happens in this perfect and endless universe happens through time. Even the Big Bang itself is thought to have happened in the presence of time ("imaginary time" - Hawking Model). So there is not a single event that can ignore time. And why I said "time is to matter as space to energy"? According to Einstein's equation E=mc2, when a body reaches the speed of light, then that body is one the limit of it's energy (the largest energy that body is able to produce). And again according to Einstein, when a body reaches 99% of the speed of light, then the time dilation is infinite, that means no time. So as we can clearly see, when a body reaches the full speed of light, that body (as matter) is actually converted into energy and it has no time (as it has reached more than 99% the speed of light) so it only moves though space. But so far, nothing but light has reached the speed of light so we can't experiment, neither observe such conversion (time-space ; matter-energy). And if someone makes it find an equation using which we can measure velocity ignoring time, then I really want to see it.

This year, we've been learning about elements one by one at school, and the one I really find interesting is kalium (K). Its characteristics just fascinate me, and I really feel that I really must get some (as I've been thinking for its use). So could anyone please tell me how can I get kalium in a nice, economic, easy way?

Hi! I've also been dealing with these kind of equations recently and sometimes they can be tricky! The equation that you have typed in called "the neutralization equation". That is because the substances formed have pH neutral [pH(NaCl)=7 ; pH(H2O)=7]. And to decide if the reaction is neutralization or the pH scale is acidic or basic, we have to know a few rules for hydrolysis. If strong acids(HCl, H2SO4, HClO4 etc) react with strong basis (NaOH, LiOH etc), then the pH=7, which means neutral. If strong acids react with weak basis (BeOH), then the pH<7, which means acidic medium. If weak acids (CH3COOH, HF, H2CO3 etc) react with strong basis, then pH>7, which means basic medium. I hope any will be useful to you.. DraZ