Strange

Moderators
  • Content Count

    22030
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    78

Strange last won the day on July 18

Strange had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3663 Glorious Leader

About Strange

  • Rank
    SuperNerd

Profile Information

  • Location
    珈琲店
  • College Major/Degree
    None
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics
  • Occupation
    Engineer/Writer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Another solar-powered, propellentless craft described here: https://www.universetoday.com/142894/lightsail-2-is-sending-home-new-pictures-of-earth/
  2. Why are you asking? Or, more specifically, why are you asking me?
  3. ! Moderator Note As the OP has been given a a few days holiday from the site, this thread is closed. (Also because it is nonsense.)
  4. The water would rush to fill the empty space. This would be an extreme form of cavitation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavitation There is no negative state, in terms of mass or energy (or the presence of matter). No. A (perfect) vacuum is zero mass (and energy). There is nothing less than that.
  5. There is no connection between them. The uncertainty principle is about a limit to which things can be measured, even without any effect from the observer.
  6. ! Moderator Note If you have a new idea, please feel free to start a new thread in Speculations. If you want to ask questions to clarify your understanding, please start anew thread for your questions. Thank you.
  7. ! Moderator Note OK. Thread closed I’m glad to see you agree that the science is correct
  8. ! Moderator Note Your incredulity is not a valid argument. Unless you can show an error in the mathematics this thread will be closed.
  9. You are misusing the word "science". It is like saying "science is pink, because it is a flower that grows on a plant with thorns (which, by any other name, would smell as sweet)". THAT IS NOT WHAT "SCIENCE" MEANS. If you are going to make up your own meanings for words, then this whole conversation is pointless. Science is a human activity, invented by humans. No. It is up to you to provide a proper reference, in other words, a written document. Can you read? I would start with a dictionary. And, quite obviously, you have not studied anything. That is the wrong definition of science. You invented that definition. It is wrong. It is like Alice in Wonderland:
  10. I don't have any feelings about it one way or another, whether it connects to the cloud or not !
  11. It isn't always. Many systems use multiple antennas so they can do beam-forming so that they can transmit and receive in specific directions. This make them much more efficient. For example, Wi-Fi uses this; I don't know if cell phones do yet, but there is no reason why they couldn't, in principle.
  12. Black hole. Event horizon Gneeral relativity The vacuum would create no gravitation (because it has no mass). The cubic foot of matter would create a gravitational field depending on its mass: 1 cubic foot of hydrogen has much less mass (2.5 grams) than 1 cubic foot of osmium (640 kg). If it is a gas at higher pressure than its surroundings, Male. But not in general. Massive objects attract one another. Although it is not quite that simple. A completely even distribution of mass will either expand or contract. It depends on how it is measured. It is only negative if you use a relative pressure gauge. When I did a little bit of vacuum physics, a perfect vacuum was a pressure of zero. The pressure we actuallyachieved would be positive.
  13. Definitely. Just leaving the lights on and blocking all the windows but one would generate more force.
  14. Jesus H Christ. Still? THE CRAFT IS NOT MOVED BY THE FORCE ON THE WIRES. How many times does this need to be explained?
  15. I assume you mean ST (string theory) rather than SR (special relativity) ? It is true that string theory does not make any currently testable predictions. In that sense it is not falsifiable. I would reserve unfalsifiable for the stronger sense of "not falsifiable in principle"; i.e. whatever technology or techniques are used. Examples are solipsism or last-Thursdayism or Creationism. I would define string theory as untestable rather than unfalsifiable. There have been examples of theories in the past that could not be tested at the time. But later advances in technology (or a better understanding of the theory) allowed tests to be developed (which either confirmed or falsified the theory).