physics explained's topics - tribe.net

some work that may be of interest...

greenman-23 — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:31:19 GMT

Hi,

just finished writting some work on theories of evolution of the universe...

this looked like a tribe in which some may be able to comment on

http://malcolm.mcewen.googlepages.com/themathematicsofevolution

the above link is to the last chapter but the first, the song of the universe and in particular the ideas on quantum evolution may be of interest

http://malcolm.mcewen.googlepages.com/chapterone,thesongoftheuniverse

the work hopefully brings science and theology closer together,

regards

GM23

posted in physics explained - 2 replies

the movie primer

UncleFishbits — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:35:18 GMT

I caught enough to know it isn't COMPLETELY vacuous.

Anyone understand any of the physics at all?

posted in physics explained - 6 replies

Atheist sees Big Bang in toast

UncleFishbits — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 06:51:47 GMT

http://duggmirror.com/comedy/Atheist_Sees_Image_of_Big_Bang_in_Piece_of_Toast/

This is simply brilliant.

Forget that religious shyster with her toast.

Which shyster is that? All of them!

posted in physics explained - 0 replies

new moderator!

MickD — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:14:10 GMT

I don't want the job. I'm just tired of checking in and seeing that yokel's picture.

posted in physics explained - 38 replies

Project Chanology, Anonymous hackers, and taking down Scientology

UncleFishbits — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:03:44 GMT

Taking down Scientology isn't just important... it's fun!!!!!

http://www.partyvan.info/index.php/Project_Chanology
the hackers have a lot of explanation above.....

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10609174
the economist article about the DOS attacks on Scientology, and the real world protest 10th Feb.

Guys... you could be part of bringing a religion down during your lifetime. You can help destroy a dangerous cult. Read up, think about it, and offer your services where you can.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full Text of Economist Article:

Scientology
Fair game

Jan 31st 2008
From The Economist print edition
An online onslaught against Scientology

A VICIOUS cult run by cynical fraudsters, or a sincerely held religious belief persecuted by zealots? That is the long-standing row about Scientology, founded by the late science-fiction writer, L. Ron Hubbard. In some countries, such as Germany, the group is watched by the security services. In others, such as America and Australia, it has won charitable status as a religion.

Until now the fight could mostly be seen as one-sided. Scientology's lawyers are vigorous litigants. The group argues that its internal materials (which claim, among other things, that expensive courses of treatment can help rid people of infestation by alien souls from an extinct civilisation) are commercially confidential and protected by copyright. They react sharply to any perceived libel.

As a result, public critics of what they derisively term “$cientology” risk expensive legal battles. For example, a new unauthorised biography of Tom Cruise by a British author, Andrew Morton, contains detailed and highly critical material about the film star's involvement in Scientology. It is a bestseller in America but has not been published in Britain. The publisher, St Martin's Press, has even asked internet booksellers not to ship it to foreign customers. Though Scientology representatives vehemently deny breaking any laws, critics have claimed that they experience intensive harassment and intimidation.

Now Scientology is under attack from a group of internet activists known only as Anonymous. Organised from a Wikipedia-style website (editable by anyone) and through anonymous internet chat rooms, “Project Chanology”, as the initiative is known, presents no easy target for Scientology's lawyers. It is promoting cyberwarfare techniques normally associated with extortionists, spies and terrorists. Called “distributed denial of service attacks”, these typically involve using networks of infected computers to bombard the target's websites and servers with bogus requests for data, causing them to crash. Even governments find this troublesome.

Anonymous is also hoping to galvanise public opinion with a mass “real-world” protest outside every Scientology office worldwide on February 10th. But its best weapon may be ridicule. The group got going in reaction to efforts to ban an internal Scientology video of Mr Cruise that leaked onto the internet. The star appears to discuss his beliefs with a degree of incoherence and exaggeration that might lead some to question Scientology's effects on its adherents' sanity. A Scientology spokesman says it has been selectively edited. Several internet sites have taken it down after threats of lawsuits. But it keeps popping up.

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

Interference and interaction

glenwells — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:48:52 GMT

What is the difference, if any?

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

e8 math, clowning on superstring, a new GUT, a soul surfer, and a theory for everything

UncleFishbits — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:41:34 GMT

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/E8_graph.svg
if you look at this and aren't tripping out, you beat me.... cause I is tripping out.

It's the the most elegant form in all of mathematics!!!!! Why does it matter?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml&site=30&page=0

he did it without superstring, and used e8 math... .. AND....

GRAVITY IS COMPENSATED FOR!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E8_(mathematics)

http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.0770

you can download it the abstract.

Science has rigours of peer review that no other field does.... this will make the go arounds for a bit, and possibly get blown out of the water. One thing about science is that it is wholly revisionistic... you take the best answer the data currently provides, and then patiently wait for the theory to be revised with better data, or fall into the category of "best answer for now", and then be the dominant theory (like evolution versus ID).

Anyhoo... this SERIOUSLY brightened my day.... a surfer physicist doing a G.U.T. without string theory that also deals with gravity among the other natural forces. I know superstring is a framework, right? But still.... why not throw the framework away!

Too early to take it seriously, but very interested nonetheless!!!!

posted in physics explained - 0 replies

Question on running down hill.

Curry — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:59:11 GMT

I go out running with some friends who do not want to run on the street because it is too hard.
These same people do not mind trail running down steep hills.
I think that running down hill should have more impact that just a hard surface.
Question:
Is there some easy way to figure out how much more impact you would get for different slopes?
Or a slope of 30 degrees? That would be a steep down hill trail.

posted in physics explained - 8 replies

Black Holes

Brian — Mon, 19 Jul 2004 22:39:40 GMT

This should be a good topic considering Hawking's impending presentation. My basic question is this: Do the event horizons of Black Holes or their gravitational pulls come in different sizes and intensities? If all EM signals can not escape the event horizon of a back hole, but gravity "signals" do (whether that's the propogation of deformation of the time-space continuum, or if its a graviton), what does that say regarding the relation of gravity waves to EM waves (faster, more energy, just not affected by a nevent horizon <most likely>)?

posted in physics explained - 19 replies

Big Bang Paradox

Skott — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 03:15:36 GMT

If we had an optical device that was powerful enogh, could we look out into the cosmos and see the Big Bang? Since our best estimates of the age of the Universe are about 15 Billion years, then it follows that if we could see light from 15 Billion light years out, then that light would be from the "flash" of the Big Bang. Is my reasoning correct here?
If so, then to see the Singularity that started it All, then we would need to look to the extreme of bigness. I have trouble with this, to see the tiny point we need to look as far as we can?!?

Any help with this would be apreciated.

Skott

posted in physics explained - 6 replies

The Atlantis Style Space habitat

Gerard — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 13:22:13 GMT

I'm attempting to be a writer.

I've written a screenplay and am in the process of writing the follow up novel. It's set in the future and part of the world that I've created is Atlantis.
Atlantis is a ringworld of emense proportions. It encircles the sun half way between the Earth and Mars and is made of a number of fifteen kilometer diameter spaceport spheres linked together by habitat drums. These spheres are a hundred thousand kilometers apart. The whole is encapsulated in a granule/solid layered skin. The drums roll on tiny linear motors that hold the inner drums away from the main structure by ten millimeters. The drums are five kilometer inner dia. and six outer before we encounter the five hundred meter thick skin.
From Sun side to outer of each space port is a linear canon. The entire Sun side of the station is solar panel. The structure was completed in the year twenty three-ninety two and was made from the material found in the asteroid belt with a few shaving from Calisto thrown in. The technology that made all this possible was the largest construction robot ever built which had seventy per cent of it's make up being nanotechnology.
I need to make this real and to do so I need to have people do the math.
Getting from point A to B in space should cost nothing in fuel if you're using linear canons attached to your start and finish point. The technology is around today, it just needs to be put to good use.
Anybody wanna try and help design the future

posted in physics explained - 0 replies

polarizing lens

MickD — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:14:25 GMT

It's been a while since I've had to explain it, and I just got asked to explain it:

How does a polarizing filter work? Why would I want polarized sunglasses or a polarizing filter on my camera lens?

posted in physics explained - 7 replies

Deep Field

csolly — Wed, 17 May 2006 17:45:13 GMT

I love going to lectures at the Museum of Natural History here in NYC. I went to one last week that turned out to be totally boring except for one part:

He showed a picture of the Hubble Deep Field.
http://internal-imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2004/07/images/m/formats/full_jpg.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field

It blew my mind.

posted in physics explained - 2 replies

Mental experiments

Jeff — Sun, 07 May 2006 05:45:22 GMT

Can anyone think of any really good mental experiments that would help to explain Relativity and Time/Space dialation?? My teacher isn't very good at them, and I have a conceptual test this thursday.

posted in physics explained - 3 replies

Moving heavy objects w/o tools

iHod — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:21:42 GMT

Spotted this over in the DIY tribe, but thought it was cool and appropriate here too. The clip shows a fellow moving some incredibly heavy objects without the aid of any modern tools. He's building his own Stonehenge...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRRDzFROMx0&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eneuralgourmet%2Ecom%2F

posted in physics explained - 3 replies

Soduko puzzles

sacredgoddess — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:20:14 GMT

okay...so are these new or is it something that we are just discovering

posted in physics explained - 2 replies

Question- Physical forces of a hooping move

sayyida — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:34:20 GMT

Hi everyone,

I am a hooper, and I like to know what the physical forces are behind what I do, to aid in instruction. A question I have been asked by a fellow hooper is why when doing the move shown in the link below, the hooper can turn only in the same direction in the hoop. The move will not work if you try to turn in the opposite direction. Here is the move being discussed:

http://www.christagiles.com/video/orbit.wmv (requires Windows Media Player)

Also, if this sort of stuff interests you, here is a little video tutorial of mine on the physics of hooping and other flow toys. I would love to hear any thoughts more educated people have on this matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e1s8q9Pr28

posted in physics explained - 6 replies

Is light the fastest know thing in our solar system?

The Goat — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:50:55 GMT

Question: Is light the fastest known thing in our solar system?

I'm asking due to some recent thinking on Vedic Astrology. In the ancient language of Sanskrit the word for Vedic Astrology is Jyotish. Jyotish means "that which is related to shining." Astrology is the art of determining the exact time of events along with the make up of the event, so is intrinsically related to time and matter...

Any information would be helpful.

Thanks

posted in physics explained - 10 replies

Magnetic field question,

Phyfer — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 08:14:32 GMT

Question:
How would I make a magnetic drift engine?
Explanation,
I want to build a satellite (space probe) that would derive its propulsion from a magnetic pulse that moves between to poles.
i.e. 10th of a second and so on. The magnetic pulse then pulls the vehicle forward.
My point. build a satellite that could cruse the inner solar system using sun light as a power source and a magnetic pulse a propulsion.

How far would the to poles need to be from one another so that a single short pulse would require time to travel from one pole to another?
is there a consideration for frequency?

Thanks
kirk

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

New idea from a none physics person

Lee — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 12:20:07 GMT

Hi my name is Lee

I have this idea about physics.
In fact is several ideas.

1. In bodies like planets the room space have a singularity in the middle of them where the room space fabric can't keep the material in that small spot in the material state but rather
lets the material convert back into energy according to E= mc2.

This would explain why planets are hot inside...
There is other explanations I know but this I think is a new one.

What do you think is a good theory?

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

How about this question?

Jeff — Thu, 11 May 2006 21:40:47 GMT

Can anyone clarify the difference between virtual and real images in optics?

posted in physics explained - 3 replies

Quantum physics and "string-theory".

ENIAD — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 03:40:20 GMT

Well, I agree to revive this tribe.
I would like to find out more about "string-theory" and quantum physics.
I hear it can be used to explain synchronicity and a host of other unexplainable happenings and also that it has come under criticism recently.

posted in physics explained - 2 replies

Is this tribe dead?

Jeff — Mon, 15 May 2006 09:37:50 GMT

I don't want it to be.

posted in physics explained - 12 replies

Physics toy

jeau — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 16:30:16 GMT

Hi there--my son has asked for a particular gift for his birthday, but neither of us knows what its called (thus how to find it)! It consists of five (or so) stainless steel spheres, each suspended separately, all on the same vertical plane and in a row. You grab one of the spheres and pull it away from the others, then let it go...it hits the rest of the row and causes the sphere at the opposite end to swing away from the row, and back again, and the energy transference just keeps on going (for awhile). Anyone know what this gizmo is called, or where I might find one? Thanks! (I'd also welcome any insight into what this teaches about energy, physics, etc.)

posted in physics explained - 4 replies

Neutrinos

PapaRed — Fri, 03 Mar 2006 05:53:46 GMT

I just found out that they've known for two or three years now that neutrinos have mass. Nobody ever tells me anything. I think that probably solves some of the "dark matter" problem. Why do physicists continually base their calculations on impossible things? Such as, neutrinos having zero mass, a point having zero dimensions - even the concept of infinity is a total waste of time when introduced into equations.

Eric

posted in physics explained - 9 replies

Really stupid question.

ferrous_arts — Fri, 15 Jul 2005 07:17:56 GMT

I've got a keg in my kitchen... I've got a fan blowing on it. Will the fan keep the keg cool?

posted in physics explained - 6 replies

maxwell's equations

princemyshkin — Tue, 26 Jul 2005 18:58:33 GMT

Does anyone know how to explain or know of a good resource that explains maxwell's 4 electrodynamic equations, breaking down the math and it's corrosponding meaning to the fields?

posted in physics explained - 0 replies

stupid question

heidealist — Wed, 23 Feb 2005 05:30:18 GMT

Hi! My dad was getting rid of a Tasco telescope and I wanted it. According to my first few sweeps of the nety, maybe I didn't actually want it. But- I tried to see the moon tonight- just thew moon, and was thwarted. I think a piece may be missing. Can you explain some super basic telescope mechanics so I can understand if there's a piece missing before I try to look at the moon again?

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

Blurring the Line btw Quantum and Classic Physics

jonjacobmoon — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:01:59 GMT

I have been reading Brian Greene new book and just got to the point where he discusses coherence and decoherence. Not sure I understand it.

From what I can gather, small particles have all possiblities bec other things (ie paticles ) so infrequently interact with them. With larger objects (us, this table, this computer) the probability curve flattens out to a point because there is no many things interactivn with it (ie. particles, me, the air). Those particles which don't have intereactions have coherence while large object which do have decoherence.

Not sure if that makes sense or is right.

Any thoughts?

posted in physics explained - 0 replies

Life on other planets

markallen — Sat, 28 May 2005 04:27:07 GMT

If one were to accept the idea that in some solar system there is a planet in an inhabitable zone for humans (i.e. human could live and breathe on it.) I have a few questions I would like to hear some thoughts on:

1. Would humans ever beable to oxygenate a planet if it lacked oxygene?

2. If there were to be planlife - what are the chances it would look like plant life on earth?

3. If there were "intelligent life" - what are the chances it would a) be something that we as humans could recognize as a species and if that is the case: b) be symetrical and even bipedal?

Thanks for your thoughts!

posted in physics explained - 1 reply

Black holes don't exist?

yogi_scott — Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:13:41 GMT

Check out this article in Nature:

www.nature.com/news/2005/...28/full/050328-8.html

There is a link at the bottom for the paper presented at a conference. Please, tell me if his ideas make sense. It looks very interesting to me.

Thanks, Scott

posted in physics explained - 2 replies

regarding mars

SOI — Wed, 31 Mar 2004 02:45:08 GMT

what specialists will be going to mars if any civilians will be going at all? And what kind of timeframe can be expected for this to happen?

posted in physics explained - 1 reply