stupid physics questions

[KlaxonCow]

Wow. "People will be saying, you guys aren't scientists, but to understand science, you need a broader mind." And there's me thinking that to understand science, you primarily need to have some actual understanding of science.

Specifically, he uses the word "metaphysical".

And not in any philosophical sense, but just simply as a substitute for, well, what I like to call "mystical bullshit". Don't understand it? Call it "metaphysical" and you might even marginally sound a bit like you know what you're talking about. Even though you clearly don't.

Oh dear.


p.s. And Shiva is the goddess of creation / destruction / transformation. In the sense that creation is a destructive / transformative act. Much like how the "Death" Tarot card doesn't necessarily mean literal death, but rather transformation - the end of one thing and the beginning of the next. They have that statue because, in Hinduism, Shiva created the universe. And CERN is looking into origins of the universe. That's the symbolism there. And it is only symbolism, not the "worship" that they later accuse them of.

[Absolute_Zero]

In a Jan-2017 discussion of issues related to gravity; me, motivated by a distaste for dark matter and energy.

For a few years now I've followed an alternative that performs within the error bars of the observational data, without adjustable parameterisation. Just the visible matter, the co-moving diameter of the cosmos and the speed of light.

I haven't run it up the flag pole as-yet for its reliance on the hypothetical Unruh Effect... but I'm hopeful, not least since it fixes several other anomalies besides the galaxy rotation issue [and the aforementioned new cluster observations]. Not to mention [oops] a candidate theory of operation for the EmDrive, if real.

Still, as ever, if wishes were fishes...

@Gravy, since you previously asked, and...
since DARPA has recently granted $1.3 million and a few years to prove it, and...
since a decent science/space-science YouTuber has made a stab at it with visuals...

This is Quantised Inertia (QI). Or alternatively, Modified inertia by a Hubble-scale Casimir effect (MiHsC).

[KlaxonCow]

So, that which is accelerating faster suffers more "quantised inertia" working against it?

Hmm, I wonder by how much exactly.

Because you know how everyone was expecting the expansion of the universe to be slowing down, due to gravity, but then it was measured and we discovered the universe is, in fact, accelerating in its expansion?

If it was travelling faster in the past, then it was suffering more "quantised inertia" working against it, and with gravity pulling it back, it would now be suffering from less inertia.

So, somewhat counter-intuitively, could it be seemingly accelerating faster because it is, in fact, slowing down? Yeah, I know. That sounds deeply weird. But do you see what I'm getting at?

Maybe the original hypothesis wasn't wrong. Gravity IS pulling back on all the matter in the universe. But this is reducing its inertia, so it's seemingly accelerating because of the influence of gravity, not in spite of it (well, not "accelerating", per se, but not being decelerated by its quantised inertia as much, just like those stars on the outer edge of the galaxy).

...and there goes not just dark matter, but also dark energy too?

(Not saying that I necessarily believe this is correct, but just doing the "thought experiment" with this new hypothesis and realising that it potentially not only explains why the outer stars of galaxies seem to be moving faster than we'd expect them to, it could also explain why the universe itself seems to be accelerating, when we were all expecting it to be slowing down because of gravity, as it's also moving faster than we expected it to as well. But if gravity - attraction - can actually reduce this inertia, then we potentially have a mechanism that could explain why the universe is expanding faster because of gravity, not in spite of it. So there is no "missing energy" driving things apart and - poof! - "dark energy" is perhaps no longer required?)

[gravy]

In a Jan-2017 discussion of issues related to gravity; me, motivated by a distaste for dark matter and energy.

For a few years now I've followed an alternative that performs within the error bars of the observational data, without adjustable parameterisation. Just the visible matter, the co-moving diameter of the cosmos and the speed of light.

I haven't run it up the flag pole as-yet for its reliance on the hypothetical Unruh Effect... but I'm hopeful, not least since it fixes several other anomalies besides the galaxy rotation issue [and the aforementioned new cluster observations]. Not to mention [oops] a candidate theory of operation for the EmDrive, if real.

Still, as ever, if wishes were fishes...

@Gravy, since you previously asked, and...
since DARPA has recently granted $1.3 million and a few years to prove it, and...
since a decent science/space-science YouTuber has made a stab at it with visuals...

This is Quantised Inertia (QI). Or alternatively, Modified inertia by a Hubble-scale Casimir effect (MiHsC).

Cheers, that fascinating

[Absolute_Zero]

Back on the hypothetical dark entity soapbox with theoretical physicist, Sabine Hossenfelder...

[Absolute_Zero]

Wolfram: "Finally We May Have a Path to the Fundamental Theory of Physics… and It’s Beautiful"

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/202 ... -beautiful

[Dvorak]

Wolfram: "Finally We May Have a Path to the Fundamental Theory of Physics… and It’s Beautiful"

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/202 ... -beautiful

Now that is an exciting read.

Wolfram's treatment of time is a bit cheap, if you ask me; so maybe this is 'just' a clever way of deriving special and general relativity and not much more...

[zip accident]

Wolfram: "Finally We May Have a Path to the Fundamental Theory of Physics… and It’s Beautiful"

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/202 ... -beautiful

Now that is an exciting read.

Wolfram's treatment of time is a bit cheap, if you ask me; so maybe this is 'just' a clever way of deriving special and general relativity and not much more...

He said he was playing with the system and physics fell out into his lap. He does claim to have found analogies to quantum mechanics too, so that's a big unification if it works out.

[Absolute_Zero]

Stephen streams on Twitch most days.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/593845657

"Implications for Computer Science Technical Q&A" is the most recent.

[Jamesac]

Ignore this. Wrong thing.

[gilesgoat]

HUMIDITY

Ok "after many experiments" I got to the conclusion that HERE, in Wales, there's "some particular condition" that "water will NEVER naturally evaporate".

You can put "any amount of water you want" from a drop to a bucket "everywhere", INCLUDING/ESPECIALLY INSIDE THE HOUSE and N days later IT WILL BE THE SAME !!

Now "the house IS insulated" and "it's not really cold" .. yet I THINK "there's something in the air itself" that "prevents evaporation" and/or someway creates "a saturated envirronement ?" ..

I don't know what to do .. everything seems to be "constantly humid" .. solutions ?

I am trying to dry up things it seems to be taking "forever" .. you can't leave "anyting out in the air" it gets soggy/soft/wet eventually moldy "in very short time".

Must be said "this is the first year I see such an extreme" but we had months of rain in a row ...

[WiteWulf]

It definitely sounds like either the atmosphere in the house is saturated (and unable to absorb any more moisture) or it's cool enough that you're constantly at or below the dew point.

Seems like an excellent excuse to grab an arduino, esp32 or raspi and a temperature/humidity/barometric pressure probe and run yourself up a little weather station for use in the house. You'll soon figure out the atmospheric conditions and why you're observing this behaviour

[KlaxonCow]

I'm not sure about this.

It's a free game to teach kids about quantum physics on iPads and iPhones, with a half-alive / half-dead cat that was delivered in a box. Which, for some odd reason, uses the McDonald's "I'm loving it" ditty as its theme tune.



I mean, young kids won't know about the "what's in the box?" scene from the movie Seven, but I can't help thinking of that. Particularly when what's actually in the box, in this case, is a half-dead cat.

I don't really understand what's going on, to be honest.

[pyroxian]

HUMIDITY
Now "the house IS insulated" and "it's not really cold" .. yet I THINK "there's something in the air itself" that "prevents evaporation" and/or someway creates "a saturated envirronement ?" ..

It might be well insulated, but how well ventilated is it? When I first moved into my flat it was incredibly well insulated, but had a terrible damp problem because there was so little ventilation. I have to leave the windows cracked open a little bit at night in order to stop puddles forming on windowsills in the morning. It doesn't seem to make any difference to the temperature either - possibly because it's less damp, so feels warmer.

[gilesgoat]

OK .. " a cooking phenomenon " .. you have let's say 2 electric heaters ( on your cooking stove ) .. one is "big" one is "small" .. the difference in diameter of the heating element let's say the 'small' is 2/3 (?) of the 'big' anyway you know how they look like.

You have let's say BOTH "big" and "small" running at let's say 'mark 5', both started the same time and both cooking something.

Then at some point the thing cooking on "small" is ready and you move it away.

At the same time let's say on "big" you have some water that is near or just started to simmer/boil very gently ( or it's very near the boiling point ).

You say "don't need the big any more, can move it to the small" .. and you do so .. suddenly you get a quite violent "boiling situation" where the water that was "just about" almost imediately goes to "crazy boiling" the moment you move the pot to the smaller heating element.

WHY ??

Ok "idea 1" .. despite being both on '5', the temperature on 'small' is actually higer than 'big' ?

"idea 2" ... there's more heat concentrated in a smaller area creates a "gradient" in the water that someway causes that ?

Other ?