SamBridge

There's all sorts of explanations for matter and energy in the universe, ranging from god to string theory, the only problem is none of them are provable.

Plasma is less efficient than lasers, because first you have to spend a lot of energy ionizing matter, then you have to project that matter in a straight line. My guess is that you could make plasma weapons out of today's technology but they would be very inefficient.

I'll go to any depths to figure something out that I want to know, the only problem is I can't always swim. My guess is that if you leave out complex math above basic calculus out I'll be just fine.

I'm familiar with Euler's identity, but in reality, how do you actually raise something to the power of an imaginary number? Ever since I first encountered imaginary numbers I've been searching for some way to make physical sense out of them. Where the hell does x^2+10 cross the x axis? I don't see any "i" values on the y-axis. wtf? I thought of some way that might work, I'm too tired right now to try it myself right now, maybe someone else can play around with it. Take an imaginary plane, where coordinates are (iy, ix). Then solve for the equation iy= either (ix)^2+2 or x^2+2, maybe it will make more visual sense, but not too much because where would that situation even be applicable?

I'm not a particular believer or fan of "god", but I was experimenting with putting relativity into metaphysics, and essentially what I came up with is that god, from it's own relative perspective can do anything it wants, but the universe has to follow its physics to accomplish it's will. So, god could have created humans from God's perspective, and here's how: God willed humans to exist. From the frame of reference of god which by definition is beyond physics, the process seemed instantaneous, but from the frame of reference of Earth, the process took millions of years of evolution, it's like some kind of time dilation, basically god's will is automatically translated into physics that the universe has to follow in order to accomplish it's will.

Why do people keep thinking the universe is unifiable? It's already proven not only that not all logic can be converted into algebra but that not all logic can even be put into terms of math of any kind, which is why scientists need to develop ever more varying mathematical systems to describe our growing knowledge of the universe only to this day not be able to make a square with the exact area as a circle. Maybe not everything is suppose to be put into one equation.

With my current understanding of physics, it's impossible to have smaller particles beyond a certain point because only quantized amounts of matter and energy can sustain the oscillation of of matter-waves existences, and they are unsustainable below a certain point with our current knowledge of particle properties and essentially what would happen is the probability would in a way "leak out", I guess you could imagine it like pushing on a swing, if you push too early the force of your push cancels out the backwards face of the person on the swing, so it stops swinging. Dark matter might as well be things like black holes or neutrinos, it doesn't have to be some new matter it's just matter we can't see, but perhaps scientists don't think it's black holes because the number of black holes required to make up for the difference in mass would essentially cause all stars to be devoured, which means we wouldn't be here, but I don't know for certain.

I'm trying to do research for my own extra-dimensional manifold physics for engineering purposes, but I don't know exactly how to accomplish certain tasks. Have we even made a real life Klein bottle yet? And if so how? Or how close are we? Is there anything that can help with constructing objects in real life that have apparent dimensions higher than 3? I was looking into using high-energy laser beams to bend the fabric of space into different 4-dimensional shapes, possibly into mobius strips, does anyone know of any research that's already been done like that that they can direct me to? I know DeGrasses Tyson wanted to build some kind of accelerator that bent space enough in a way to do what he thought would be accelerating particles faster than light. I know it's not actually possible, he's more of an astronomer than a physicist and probably at the time didn't know that the lorentz transformation would cause more and more length contraction as particles approached the speed of light in whatever relative direction they were instantaneously moving in, but that's pretty much just a 4 dimensional well, a pretty simple shape, basically what objects do already.

Hi I was wondering exactly how the transfer of force between particles works in current gauge theories. It doesn't really make sense to me, shouldn't particles emit their energy away? But, when scientists come up with a solution to that problem, they say the boson "snaps back", but that doesn't make sense because when a boson interacts its effects then become real and it goes into an Eigenstate so it shouldn't be able to hold its superposition upon interaction with a fermion as to go back to it's parent particle, that would seem to violate the conservation of energy simultaneously as well.

I have question: Why does emitting a photon cause an electron's spin to go down by 1? I didn't know spin was a physical spinning that had physical conservation.

Hi I'm new to these forums I don't get exactly how it works but I need a way to test theories of higher dimensional shapes, how do I make those and test them? I don't know anything about programming and I don't like it, is there just some thing I can do in blender? Like mesh-->render->tesseract plugin or something? I need to run things through them too like waves and fluid and balls and ect.