Jordan14

I only relised this page is here so... My name is Jordan and they is someone else on the site called Jordan as well, great people are called alike. I'm 15 interested in Quantum Physics, physics as a whole, philosophy, maths (mechanics and desicion, not stats thats boring). So there you go. Oh! and i lived in England

Here are a few links: http://www.eclipse2006.boun.edu.tr/sss/paper01.pdf http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0408/0408023.pdf help you enjoy the acticles

I don't know if anyone in this forum reads New Scientist, but this weeks issue had a very interesting acticle; about gravity fluctuation. It explained how a pendulum act eratically during and solar eclipse, first observed by french physicist Allais this activity seems to flaw Einstein's relitivity laws. This behavior during eclipses have been noticed many times during different experiments, also during eclispes gravity has been noted to drop largely. Obviously this development is in it's first stages, but I would like to ask other people's veiw on gravity fluctuation and any links that would be of interest, as Allais papers are mostly in french, and that's not my best language.

sorry if this goes wrong

Call me stupid but how do you take a desktop photo.

I'll think i'll rephase the question is nothingness an existance? Thinking about what you just said if nothingness exists in time then does that mean that nothingness is an existance?

Yes the first question was is nothingness an existance. And I think that we can define a contained nothingness as a existance because it has a defined shape, so we can measure the shape that nothingness is occupying so nothingness does exist. However I think we have moved on to CAN nothingness exist? Because does that suggest that everything (in physical terms) will go on forever because it can't end in nothingness as that is an existance. And on a simple level does this not suggest that the universe can never end.

I seem to be talking about vacuums constantly, but when facing another problem I hit this. In order to stop a box holding a vacuum collasping inwards you could freeze the box to stop particle activity. My point is what is the temperture inside the box (which is the vacuum) because you need particles to have a temperture however if there are no particle is there no temperture, which I find very hard to imagine.

To both of you thanx for the great sites

To both of you thanx for the great sites

ratio of amount needed to produce leathal effects: to amount needed to produce theraputic results

ratio of amount needed to produce leathal effects: to amount needed to produce theraputic results

I don't understand why the box would vapourise can you explain it to me a little more please. Thanx.

I don't understand why the box would vapourise can you explain it to me a little more please. Thanx.

To the first point. A vacuum always has to be cotained in order to keep it alway from particles, so in this sense if a vacuum has to be contained can a vacuum be formed? Except maybe in somewhere abstract like the 0th dimension as the vacuum would not be contain if the sense it can only occupy a dot not because it is contained but because it is inadaquate to move in any other direction.

To the first point. A vacuum always has to be cotained in order to keep it alway from particles, so in this sense if a vacuum has to be contained can a vacuum be formed? Except maybe in somewhere abstract like the 0th dimension as the vacuum would not be contain if the sense it can only occupy a dot not because it is contained but because it is inadaquate to move in any other direction.

I understand that virtual particles and anti-particles are made and destroyed resulting in what some might call a vacuum not being one. Can a physicist happen this a bit more in depth, please.

I understand that virtual particles and anti-particles are made and destroyed resulting in what some might call a vacuum not being one. Can a physicist happen this a bit more in depth, please.

Thanck for the response i'm going to go to the physics forum and post a thead on quantum vacuum fluctuation is sounds intriguing.

Thanck for the response i'm going to go to the physics forum and post a thead on quantum vacuum fluctuation is sounds intriguing.

I didn't really know where to put this post in the forum. I decided it probally mostly fitted in here. I have a box, inside is truely a vacumm does inside the box exist?? Obviously you can see inside the box let if there is nothing in the box can a nothingness be an existance. In affect if nothing is an existance then nothing can end because it can't be surrounded by nothing if nothing is an existance. I know this is terribly worded, but your thoughts please.

I didn't really know where to put this post in the forum. I decided it probally mostly fitted in here. I have a box, inside is truely a vacumm does inside the box exist?? Obviously you can see inside the box let if there is nothing in the box can a nothingness be an existance. In affect if nothing is an existance then nothing can end because it can't be surrounded by nothing if nothing is an existance. I know this is terribly worded, but your thoughts please.

Then do you beleive that in the 2nd dimension a shadowis two d etc etc? and if you do wot do you eleive the shadow of a 0 dimensional (dot) object to be

Then do you beleive that in the 2nd dimension a shadowis two d etc etc? and if you do wot do you eleive the shadow of a 0 dimensional (dot) object to be

Meaning that a shadow is not a 3 dimensional object but infact a the actual 3 dimension if you know where i am coming from