Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Interests
    I like to make youtube videos. youtube.com/cramboom
  • Favorite Area of Science
  • Occupation

CramBoom's Achievements


Quark (2/13)



  1. Thanks, I know all the stuff about wave function, wave collapse, non-local interaction, and the basics. I just wanted to know the formulae involved and the more complex reasoning for why it is happening (theoretical reasoning).
  2. Can anyone explain simply what quantum entanglement is and how it works (with equations). I understand the basic principles, but I found the in depth information a little bit confusing. Thank you.
  3. What is non-locality then? I know it has to do with quantum entanglement, but that is all I know about it.
  4. Thanks everyone! He built his own PC, so space shouldn't be a problem.
  5. I was wondering, at this day and age, what graphics card do you recommend for a dual monitor set up? This is not for me, but for a friend. He wants to run 2 1080p monitors, and he games a lot. He plays games like Call of Duty, Minecraft, and Battlefield 3 (and other games, not sure which ones though). He wants to future proof his machine, for the upcoming COD Ghosts and other graphically intense games. List of things he was wondering: -How many GB of DDR5 ram? -Any specific models? -What to look for in graphics cards? Thanks.
  6. But infinity is such a powerful concept. Even though gravity is inversely proportional to the distance squared, an infinite amount of massive bodies kind of counters that in a way. Or am I terribly mistaken?
  7. I am by no means an expert on this, so I'm probably completely off. But, if our universe was infinite, wouldn't there be infinite gravity all around us? I know gravity is weaker the farther away you are from the source, but an infinite universe should have an infinite amount of massive bodies, therefore there would be an infinite amount of gravity everyone. Since gravity is uniform everywhere, it will cancel itself out, and voila, no gravity. Doesn't this factor rule out the possibility of an infinite universe? I am sure scientists already thought of this, so why am I wrong? Thanks.
  8. Ok guys, I uploaded the video. My aim was to explain it without any equations or high level math. Do you think its accurate?
  9. That's true, but I want to try to approach this problem without using equations. What if I added this sentence to the end of the explanation? You have to remember that the difference in penetration is quite tiny, and that the amount of energy required to rotate the block of that size is also very small, which is why a small factors can affect the outcome so much.
  10. Alright, I want to make a video response, and I'll be sure to credit you guys. But is this a simple yet effective explanation (so most people understand)?: So, basically, both blocks went the same height because more energy was lost in the first impact. No matter how where you hit the block, there will be an equal amount of upward force. When the bullet hit in the middle, most of the kinetic energy is lost due to sound, heat and friction. This is because the center of mass was where the bullet was shot, so the block had to stay straight when the bullet made contact. This meant the bullet could lodge itself deep inside the block without the block moving out of its way. This compression and splitting of the block used a lot of the bullet’s kinetic energy. But, when the bullet hit the side of the block, the block rotated slightly, since the center of mass was not where the bullet was shot. This meant the bullet could only lodge itself so deep before the block rotated too much for the bullet. Therefore the kinetic energy that was previously used to lodge itself deep inside the block was now used to rotate the block. This allows both blocks to reach the same height, with the same amount of energy.
  11. I don't have any degrees in science, I'm barely in highschool, so bear with me if I didn't understand you correctly. Basically, the momentum from the impact is conserved, so no matter what, the same amount of upward force is applied to the block, no matter how far from the center of the block the bullet hits. This is because you lose less energy because there is less heat, due to penetrating the block less when impacted on the side (assumed because the block is easier to move when it can rotate about an axis, so it turns before more heat can be produced by friction). The second equation explains the amount of rotational energy (angular momentum). Did I get that right, or am I compeletly off? Thanks for your help.
  12. I am not sure, sorry. All I know is the information from this video, and the previous one. Here is the previous one: I believe he said the bullet lodges itself inside the block with both shots.
  13. In this veritasium's newest video, you can see that he shot 2 blocks with a bullet. One in the center, other on the side. Therefore, one block was spinning when it went up, whilst the other wasn't. But, both blocks clearly reach the same height. Also, they had the same amount of energy applied to them (one gun shot), but one appeared to have more energy, since it reached the same height but was spinning. Can anyone explain this?
  14. For me, it is a tie between elephants and octopi. Octupi are smart in thier own way, and have advanced brains, whereas elephants have self consciousness, can recognize themselves in a mirror, problem solve, etc.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.