warped space

I was reading a few articles about random quantum stuff I'd love to say theory or fact or something like that but it's more a hobby not a profession but one that seamed a bit interesting was the vacuum decay theory that the universe could basically just be destroyed by an excitement in the boson field that would realease the pent up potential energy from bosons and expand out at the speed of light "destroying" the universe so in that I have several questions (sorry for the grammar)

What is vaccum decay?

What is the boson field?

Could vacuum decay actually be a fundamental driving force of the universe that explains relative time or am I missing some important information and this question is nonsense?(more specifically could everything be expanding at the speed of light at different relative rates and that be a product of the kinetic energy of the boson field from the Big Bang)

More importantly though I just want a lesson on the in depth parts of boson physics if that's what it's called and don't know where to look for the "accurate" information about a science that seems to be quite fluid.

Ok looking in, time is slower the closer you get to the center of gravity of an object but I could be wrong about that

Ok so what I'm gathering from that it pulls everything to the center until it gets there but because each individual particle has it's own mass and gravity the net gravitational pull is 0 in any direction because it is being pulled in every direction that makes sense but the question I ask now is gravitational relative change In time does that still apply just the same or is that essentially nullified

Ok I understand the subject of this topic is rather brief but that is irrelevant I have a question or possibly a topic for debate does gravity pull you towards the center of mass or does it pull you towards the object?

Now what I mean by that is better explained with a hypothetical example. Ok so you have a ring the ring is about the width of earth and stretches in a perfect circle around the sun but for this example assume the sun is not there and that the only thing is the ring now with mass there is gravity that isn't the question the question is that will gravity pull you towards the center of the ring where there is no mass or will it pull you towards the ring itself

The instability is what makes it work and yes they are small im saying if you produce large quantities of them cumulouesly would it cause a localized area to "slow down" if observed from somewhere outside of the stream of black holes and the short duration which they live for is what makes it unreasonably plausable

Ok so its preaty well known that if you are moving extreamly fast relative time slows down depending on where you observe it from also time does the same when somthing are effected by gravitational mass so hypothetically could you bombard an object with microscopic black holes causing an area where they are passing through (in abundance) to stand still relative to the world around it?

Say for instance earth is where youoh are observiby it from

Say for instance earth is where youoh are observiby it from

Say for instance earth is where youoh are observiby it from

ok so say for instance you are being sucked into a black hole and matter and has an asymptote value of how close it can get to the speed of light and the change in relative time to the outside world assuming we can observe the inside of a black hole would matter literally slow down after it crosses the event horizon because the relative time is effected so much?

I've seen the quantum locking stuff and have a fairly moderate understanding of how it works but on the quantum level how does energy flow through a wire and a superconductor how exactly is it different

I'm asking this as in how does it flow on a quantum "level"

Ok so film a moving object and play it in reverse lol I mean literally time as we know it is mearly perspective draw two points and connect them and ask where does it start and end because both points you can assume are starting points and going backwards the only logical thing that happens according to the universe is that physics would applys backwards as it does forward and you would go backwards walking backwards like a rewinding film unless you skipped a portion and that is impossible

Hypathetically speaking

Hypathetically speaking

Understood thank you

I know I asked a question that defys normal physics but the reason I asked if you would see the two spin is because now say you are moving twords it if there is somthing behind you it is blocked by your shadow now if your moving away from it FTL wouldnt you be your own shadow?

Well any physics for that matter

Ok so say you are a mass moving fate than the speed of light (ignore the fact that your mass would become greater than infinity) and you are moving away from the earth and the moon and you are watching the two spin backwards would you really be able to see the two spin or would you block your own light in the past relative to the light

Im fairly un professional to this so would you basically take the ohms at one point along the line and then take it in another place along a environmentally isolated wire that is at two hights from earth because gravitationally that changesthe relative time

How is electrical resistance effected by reletivity

ok so i was talking to my chem teacher and he was mentioning something about energy lost when nuclear reactions and particle annihilation reactions happen or maybe not energy but i am just asking how much truth and fiction there is to this and where i can start to do research on such a subject

that was what i was looking for though i was looking to do a bit more research and the particle entanglement is what i was looking for. but yes i did not put anything into my question about particle entanglement because i did not know that was what i was looking for

I have to go with AW on this - sounds a lot like you're trying to describe particle entaglement, which has been observed in the laboratory between photons (which, if understand how you're using the the word, are luxons or massless particles that always move at the speed of light).

ya that sounds like it im just looking to do a bit more research into it and dont know where to start

ok so i have no idea what to look for but i was talking to someone who knows a little bit about quantum theory's and watches some of the newest discovrys of quantum physics and he mentioned something about when one of the two or three if you include gravitons, luxon particles interact with each other it will move simultaneously regardless of distance inferring faster than light reactions i want to no how much is fact and where i can get some more information on this topic

This seems almost as questionable as the grandfather paradox but for one acording to Stephen hawkings (or this is how I perceeved what he stated in his book a brief history of time) if you move faster than the speed of light which we think is the only way to move backwards in time you could see something before the creation of the universe and such you would exist outside the universe and as such this would basically mean you dont exist or you could do anything no one really knows

If antimatter had negative gravitational mass, wouldn't black holes create huge amounts of matter and antimatter, with the latter being expelled towards the exterior of the horizon, that is to the univers we can observe?

 

Hawking radiation is faint because the short-distance tunneling effect following pair creation must take advantage of the tiny gravitation curvature at the black hole so the falling particle loses more potential energy than the expelled one gains - explaining why small holes with a stronger curvature are more efficient. But if antimatter loses potential energy by flying away, then the tunneling effect could take advantage of the gravitation field, not just its tiny curvature, and pair production would be hugely efficient.

 

My guess is that the absence of such an expulsion of antimatter towards our observable universe proves that antimatter has a normal gravitation mass, and even must put bounds over any possible mass difference between normal and antimatter. That would make a funny little physics project for a student.

 

Marc Schaefer, aka Enthalpy

i don't know a lot about hawking radiation but i did a little research and at the bottom of the article that i read (http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/hawk.html) it said that at the last seconds of a black hole it would create something that the article called a hadronic fire ball which would emit large amounts of gama-rays and a large assortment of other particles as that disintegrated well i no that we have never really witnessed such an event but do the laws of physics eliminate the possibility that it could also emit large amounts of matter and anti matter and is it possible to just barely push something to black hole gravity and make it small enough to where it would evaporate within seconds not killing everything on earth and but making one of these "hadronic fireballs" and harnessing its energy

by particles i was referring to wavelengths of light not massive particles

So could this be the difference between matter and anti matter

And another question however theoretical it is if you have an anti gravity and a gravity particle (so to speak) would it create any form of one directional momentum or energy

Ok thank you for the help

Not to argue on weather or not dark matter exists but is there a possibility that other galexys and etc basically im saying this newtonian gravity of the other galexys and stars and also not to mention other planets orbiting stars