CPL.Luke

sysiphus thats not strictly true, for instance electrons and other fundamental particle have intrinsic angular momentum that has nothing to do with inear momentum this is known as "spin" also DH is a working physicist he tends to konw what he's talking about. its true that most angular momentum's are consequences of an objects linear momentum, but that is not true in general. in fact the better way to look at it is in terms of the various smmetries of problems. for instance in classical mechanics if you are analyzing the total system, then you will find that two of the symmetries are going to be translational, and rotational. the translational symmetry implies conservation of linear momentum, and the rotational symmetry implies conservation of angular mometum the 3rd main symmetry is time translational, and this implies conservation of energy.

where do you feel energy? where do you feel momentum? the only things your really "feel" are mass and if you like charge, everything else is pretty much abstraction torque is to angular momentum as force is to linear momentum both things are related however thats essentialy all there is to it. Once you rationalize why levers work (I did this by thinking about conservation of energy) all you have to do is work out the math on the things

most of those experiments have been performed, also physicists don't exist to due your bidding

yeah that violates distributivity, which I believe is an axiom of vector spaces

I'd imagine that its done by looking at the KE, as momentum is equal to (2m (KE))^1/2

the dollar coin is the most annoying thing ever to be produced, they get lost like all cahnge does except of dropping a few dimes or maybe a quarter your dropping dollars. also the US GDP is something on the order 30% of the worlds with europe carrying another 31% or so (ever so slightly higher) and the rest is divided up among the other countries. One major problem with dollar prices depreciating is that 60% of the worlds wealth is contained in US dollars, and while most of that money is in investments and thus no one will lose money. people are more likely to hold investemnts in other currencies where they can get better returns, thus they're are more dollars on the market and the price of the dollar further declines.

or tanh (tanh^-1 v + tanh^-1 v') easiest way of doing the relativistic velocity transform, and a useful way to remember hyperbolic tangent identities.

I said before that what me and bentheman were talking about was the case where the rocket was in a situation where it was accelerated in such a way as it could be considered an inertial frame of reference (say a gravity well) I still havent done the gerneal relativistic calculation on a rocket however I do know that if the rocket can feel the acceleration then the twin comes back younger

why do we have pores anyway?

I never really understood the need to demonstrate the other axioms in order to show that an object is a vector space, if you just show that it is closed under vector addition and scalar multiplication, then the existance of additive inverses soon follows, same with the the existance of a zero vector which you could simply define as a-a the only other axiom that I see a need for is that every vector is unique, otherwise the rest follows from the closure.

Atheist we just talked out this problem in general relativity (it is my favorite course as well) I found the reason we were disagreeing. you were speaking from thepoint of view as if the space ship knew it was accelerating thus making it an invalid reference frame, while I was speaking from one where it was not and thus geodesic. this was the version of the problem I putto my professor for clarification on. imagine a gravitational potential well, where the earth is situated at the top of the well at a point where dv/dt is zero. and the ship is an infinitesimal discplacement closer to the well where dv/dt is not zero. the ship thus falls into the well, and begins a harmonic oscilation where it eventually comes back to that infinitesimal distance from the earth, if you were to compare times between these two reference frames they would come back to have an infinitesimal discrepancy as they were both geodesic, and as such the they are both valid reference frames.

your mixing up alot of different things. for instance the transformation equations are 1-1 and onto which essentially means that every point in space time prior to the transformation gets mappe onto a pointin the spacetime with gravity. also if you are drawing a box with a black hole inside of it and you don't want the sides to be effected by gravity then the sides must be an infinite distance away from the black hole. you also have to be careful with your reference frames. in thecase of special relativity you believe that you are living in a simple cartesian hypercube, and as long as you don't care about other reference frames this is fine. however if you are talking to a friend who's going at say .8c with repect to you, and you want to talk about the objects that surround the two of you, then you must consider special relativity just so that you co-ordinates match up. although his cartesian distances (x^2+y^2+z^2) are contracted, similarly he will believe the same about yours. although you will both agree about the distance in spacetime between two points (-c^2t^2+x^2+....z^2) its important to keep in mind that for two reference frames there is no way of deciding on a preferred one and that the effects you see in his frame are the same ones he see's in yours.

you guys do realize that the waste naturally occurs in nature right?, why not just put it back into the mines where you got the stuff from and be done with it. besides you seem to be talking about plutonium decay rates, which has a hlaflife of about 30k years. If you make sure to use all of your plutonium for energy this problem is not nearly as extreme. with the waste products decaying after about 5 years. the thing that saddens me about gw is that the standard response is lets all make green energy, however even if you paved over most of the midwest with windmills you wouldn't be able to generate enough power to run the US, green energy sources as they are currently defined will never be able to sustain us. (not to say they can't help). However because of all the hype around them they are now building dozens of new coal plants across the US because the state has to save money after blowing it on the renewables. The net effect is the push for renewables will probably serve to increase greenhouse emisssions. whereas we have the technology to practically produce energy with zero emmissions in clean coal and nuclear. A simple policy of "no power station shall be built in the US which contributes more than x amount of co2 per watt produced. 2 clean coal plants were already built with private money out in the midwest and have been quite succesful, and the new pebble bed reactors are incapable of meltdown.

it sounds like a very good high school for the sciences, you will have a good time there, and they offer far more courses than the average highschool does in the sciences, enjoy for a minute I hought they were a college and was a bit concerned, but for a highschool they seem to be quite good.

also I konw for a fac lee smolin does answer his email, he just filters it like everyone else. I have a friend at hampshire college (the school smolin graduated from) and he emailed smolin to ask what he thought of his time there and if he had any recommendations as to what kind of courses he should take if he wanted to become a theoretical physicist. Smolin sent a full page and a half back to him with advise about the school and courseload. (it should be noted that hampshire is a highly non-traditional school, so alot can be gleaned from a quick set of emails with a graduate)

I would guess a coke and vodka or some other such variant of coke. personally any diet coke (coke zero etc.) now permanently tastes like it has vodka in it as the diet cokes don't have as much flavor in them and as such has a similar effect on taste as coke watered down with vodka. I would recommend usin fanta or something like that next time. I don't like YT's explanation as I don't get that effect while drinking wiskey or any other such drink.

just chiming in on the budget deficit issue, currently the government deficit is running at about 40-50% of the gdp (about 8-9 trillion dollars) and climing fast, by no means an unprecedented level, but still not very good. its interesting to see how the debt breaks down, once you add in things like social debt (social security etc.) the debt jumps to about 58 trillion dollars. also of the 8 trillion dollars the government owes directly china owns 1.5 trillion. hence why we never reevaluate our exchange rate with them.

there also is a chance that a computer could form randomly, I would guess that if you were ever to analyze silicon deposits carefully every few thousand tons you would find a simple transistor circuit, and probably every few trillion tons a complex processor

also your points about the second law do not gel at all. I'm a physics major, I work with thermodynamics all the time. And I can tell you that the equations apply just as well to open systems as they do to closed systems however they produce different results, an open systems entropy can decrease, however the entropy had to have gone to a different system, usually you talk about the entire system and then analize the different parts. for instance you can produce hydrogen and oxygen out of water, the hydrogen and oxygen out of water, which on the surface reduces entropy but if you were to analyze the water, electrons and air that the h and o escaped to you will see that the entropy increased. similarly your body makes complex hydrocarbons out of simpler ones. the primordial earth is still not very well understood, but there are various enviroments on the planet where you can expect the conditions of the miller experiment to hold, for instance underground caverns, deep sea volcanic vents etc.

its far simpler than that, unless the entire chain is dropped simultaneously its not going to be free fall, hus the "missing energy was really from assuming freefall. for instanc if you were to have a case of free fall its simple to prove conservation of energy. I may be able to pst this tomorrow but I have a road trip to get ready for.

however if there is no way of choosing a proper inertial frame, and the equations in both frames are inconsistent. Then you still have a paradox that prevents you from stating absolutely that the frame of the earth is the one from which the equations should be run. forgive me I'm no expert in this subject, I'm just going off what my modern physics professor said, and the few general relativity texts that I've read the intro to (I'm taking my first course in GR this semester ). However from what i've seen the time dilation equation of special relativity is missing an extra term which shows the time dilation to to acceleration effects (usually gravity). For instance the global positioning system has to be correct something like 19 nanoseconds of lag due to SR and 33 nanoseconds worth of boost due to GR. however as the twin perodox shows SR is only consisted with non-accelerating frames of reference, and once you have any accelerating reference point, the equations are inconsistent.

actually the time dilation equation you posted doesn't provide a complete answer to the paradox, in the frame of the earth you could run that equation and you would get the answer that the twin has aged x number of years while you aged y number of years. however you could just as easily state that the reverse were true for twin in the space ship. the question really becomes what are we missing which decides which equation is true. you might be tempted to simply state that the ship is an accelerated frame and thus you can't use it as a frame of reference. however if the ship accelerated in such a way that every object on board accelerated at the same speed, so no measurement could show that it was in an accelerating frame, then the space ship could just as easily say that the earth was accelerating away from it. to make it simpler imagine two particles which existed in a universe devoid of everything but the particles and a constant gravitational field that started at a point in between the particles and drew one of them off along the x axis. now say that that field were to reverse itself and send the particle back in such a way that it would eventually be at rest with respect to the stationary particle. which particles frame was the proper one?

agreed but pangloss as far as I'm concerned the lenders who knew these people couldn't pay the loans but gave them anyway so they could sell them to people who had no idea how the market worked except that they were getting a 10.5% interest rate. the big problem here is the restructuring of the mortgage market, have you kept track of who your bill goes to over the past 10 years? I'll be that its changed hands alot. about ten years ago they de-regulated how mortgages could be sold, so instead of having lots of guys who've been in the business for years and just wanted to make a steady profit off of reliable people, you ended up with new hotshots who were going to get as many high interest loans as possible and then sell then put them in big lots where they would be sold to another company for a big profit, the net result being that Person A gives a loan that he knows won't be paid, but sells it to person B in a batch large enough that they won't see anything but the interest rate. personally I think both sides were dumb, however I think the guys who were selling air shouldn't get bailed out, and instead provide the cheaper more affordable loans to homeowners (although it should be noted that the prime rate is 8.25% right now and so cheap is still pretty expensive). probably one of the best moves right now would be for the fed to dump some of the federal reserve back into the bankers hands and thus lower the prime rate on a grand scale. btw the money equation is (velocity)(money)=GDP(GDP deflator) where velocity is the number of times a dollar changes hands, by dumping the reserve cash back into the banks, interest rates fall and velocity goes down more than money goes up and thus inflation (gdp deflator) should also fall. this would be somewhat equivalent to bailing the banks out except that its still the bank money, every bank is required to put 10% of its cash into the federal reserve, so the fed could still dump money into the banks, it would just be coming from the banks. (although this might be what they're doing now.

farsight you have to remember that in order for your theory to be right it would have to be able to agree with every verified prediction of the standard model. you can't chose experiments, also you haven't presented a model or a theory or anything else that could be use to explain anything, for instance if some unexpected result came out tommorrow that wasn't predicted by the SM I could go and toy with the SM until I could get a prediction that matched the experiment (or I could fail and show that the SM could never explain tha experiment). there is no math in your hypothesis, so I couldn't do any of that. you also need to provide a mechanism for how the photons turn into particles, as bentheman has shown there is no known mechanism for how a photon could do this, the standard model just says that they are all completely different particles and thus no mechanism is required, however the standard model shows that all of the known laws of physics are protected in thee interactions and thus everything works out. So how does a photon turn into a pion? or any other particle? you've alluded to special geometric configurations which result in these paricles, what are they? and why do they elicit these special properties?

I wonder what the cost of buying out all of those loans would be anyway? its entirely possible that fixing this problem would lead to a dramatic increase in debt, and I fon't think that we could find anybody to pick up the bonds. It also doesn't sove the problem of people simply not being able to pay the loan, for alot of these people you could cut their interest rate by a more than 25% and they wouldn't be able to pay the loan.