I_Pwn_Crackpots

At least in a nuclear powered car you don't have a few thousand feet of accelerating at 9.8ms^-2 before you hit something...

No, but all those terrorists out there would certainly have a field day in obtaining matryrdom. There would be no need for an airplane to do the job.

Or rather, every time there is an accident there would be trouble.

I'd rather keep nuclear powered engines inside a large powerplant, thank you very much!

I watched "the elegant universe" and it said that quantum mechanics is based on probability calculations. So, to predict something, you calculate the probability of it happening.

 

What experiment has been done that shows sub-atomic particles behaving this way? How did they conclude these things?

 

Thanks for any help! This forum is awesome.

It's not random, it's just very counterintuitive. On the one hand, all objects have a wave-particle duality. And then there's the fact that you can't know precisely the speed and position of a subatomic particle, the photons are too energetic. That's why probability is a must when modeling the subatomic world. Otherwise, quantum mechanics is very deterministic, and one of the best tested theories ever formulated.

But if you really must insist on an ontology, read up on the Copenhagen Interpretation, that might make quantum mechanics make much more sense.

Are you crazy? I wouldn't want to fly in a nuclear airplane! That is about as smart as driving a nuclear powered car.

Actually, there still persists a misunderstanding of the question made by Joshuam168. If one says that the universe is everything, this isn’t commonly understood to mean anything before the Big Bang or beyond our space-time. Scientists are going to use WMAP to attempt to determine events before the BB and Lisa Randall has an unproven theory for dimensions beyond our space-time. So this is what is meant by “outside the universe”. If these efforts indeed turn out to be unfalsifiable, then the question becomes meaningless…but not until then. Remember, it’s the question that drives us.

He asked specifically what was outside the universe as his first post.

Also, we don't know what happened during the Big Bang, or if there was a time before it. If not, then that is also a meaningless question.

I think the persistent misunderstanding going on over here is that (and this applies to the public in general) there are some questions in the universe that simply don't have answers, or have any meaning.

I have no clue what this thread is about (our thread starter is not making a lot of sense to me), but I'd like to say 1 thing about posts that I fail to understand: they're not necessarily wrong.

 

..............

 

 

You can only say someone is wrong when you can point out the mistake. If you don't understand a concept doesn't mean it's wrong. There is merely a (large) communication problem.

But since he is claiming to have found an entirely new branch of physics, he therefore should show math, and that he understands the rest of established physics.

Fir

If such a creature had even rudimentary intelligence, then it would know that interacting with human beings will be very bad for it's survival and so would try to avoid contact. Personally I find the claim that such a creature could not exist in the tens of thousands of unexplored square miles available to be rather extraordinary. After all, felons don't seem to have too much trouble avoiding those actively seeking them if in difficult terrain.

It's pretty damned difficult and hugely unlikely that an entire species of hominids, apparently located all over the U.S., could remain hidden from scientists (or from the general public) like that. And leave no fossils whatsoever of it's evolution. At the very least we should be able to find a corpse, a skeleton, or a footprint here or there every once in a while. The apparent lack of such things is a big giveaway that Bigfoot probably doesn't exist.

The existence of Bigfoot therefore is an extraordinary claim, and one that needs extraordinary evidence.

Maybe he didn't know what simple harmonic motion is.

That's a logical conclusion, given that he also doesn't seem to know basic calculus.

If equation of motion = 2 observations = grip = centrifugal force;

math i.e. categorised version is 2 observations balanced by a third so simple harmonic motion.

 

If a "pendulum" is already present; then you get a time differential-

it comes down to the structure of the pendulum string...? No time as coin-opeerated computer while travelling

I think they were asking for equations, not word salad.

well, a spacefilling model rather than a stick model would look more realistic.

Yeah, that's true. But sticks help the great masses like myself visualize it alot better .

I don't know, and I don't know if there will ever be an answer to that question. Just keep in mind that it took us over 1500 years before we could actually find an application for the fact that the world was round. So while there may not be an immediate application, it's nice that we know one more fact about the universe in general.

Plus, I think the reason that this is of great interest is because depending on the model, we can make predictions for how the universe will evolve in the future. A flat universe, to take an example, will most likely not collapse on itself.

So, let's start with the rolled up dimensions of String Theory. They "cannot be measured, perceived, or detected", can they? But do we we say they "can be fully ignored and disregarded"? Nope. Instead, we are working at ways to detect them.

 

How about tachyons? Can't be detected by our current instruments. Have we "fully ignored and disregarded" the existence of tachyons? Again, no.

I don't mean to derail the thread, but here goes:

You are comparing apples and oranges. The key difference is that with tacyons and strings, you can propose a way to detect them. And if it is beyond our current capabilities to do that, we can fall back on using mathematical models to describe them and therefore justify their existence. Even if we can't detect them or gather data we can still claim they exist via rigourous mathematical proofs.

You can't quite do that with gods. Or unicorns. Or angels and demons. In fact, what I notice from theists claiming that science can't disprove gods and angels is that they often remain silent about the fact that it also can't disprove unicorns, invisible flying dragons, the goddess Athena or the god Vishnu. I really wonder why

Well, I wouldn't say they look like that, no...

Why wouldn't you say that? All atoms in a molecule attach themselves in specific angles. We would have a pretty good idea of what they would look like, if only we could actually see them.

I still think the difference between the observeable universe and what is beyond is the observable uses space-time and the beyond is just space. Without time none of the forces can not actt there is no speed less than C, since only at C is time stopped using SR. Enegy although moving at C as a time aspect called frequency. This requires time to act so energy can not exit in space without time. Due to E=MC2, matter also needs time due to the equvilency of energy which needs time.

I don't get the feeling that you read or understood this thread.

Doesn't the universe already contain everything that exists? Which would mean that to talk about what is outside the universe is meaningless. We might as well talk about what is north of the North Pole.

I doubt what is outside the observable universe is any different than inside of it.

Nice videos! Though, I'm not sure what any of these videos have to do with humans.

The deep sea one is particularly interesting. Gigantic creatures that inhabit the ocean so deep that there is no light, one has to wonder how the ecosystem down there got started in the first place...

I may be wrong but don't proteins look more like this?

This particular one is a ribosomal protein, but there are hundreds of different proteins all together.

Hi, I'm a new member to this site. I'm located in Worcester MA. A friend of mine referred me to this site actually, so I thought I'd check it out. I am a math major!

Anybody here play Counter-Strike, Quake, or Battlefield? If so, just give me a pm.