| ||||||||
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions at one of the pages linked to above. | ||||||||
|
Can a photon be called a virtual particle,as it only acquires mass during interaction,but not during transit?
Dear Japanese brothers and sisters,
Keeping process instruments, particularly in oil refineries, calibrated and online presents numerous obstacles in our country. Does this problem exist in Japan, as well. Thank you for your reply.-- 202.4.4.23 09:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind advice. You are probably right, no reply from our Japanese colleagues. I had actually thought they might have the most sophisticated experience in Asia as we are based in the Philippines. -- 202.4.4.23 06:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I was reading a book called "how to make your own time travel machine" by paul davies who is a respected physicist[ i read on the book cover anyway i have never heard of him" but in the book he claims that we have the capacity to create an anti-gravity force from the quantum vacuum and an exapmple of this is the casimir effect, apparently it produces negative energy so therfore anti-gravity. what puzzles me is that if gravity is an attractive force and anti-gravity is a repulsive force, then how come the casimir effect produces an attractive force between the two plates? is it something to do with the setup? bernard haicsh and paul davies claim that the casimir effect can be engineered to be repulsive and there could be other effects that are casimir like that produce negative energy and there for repulsivve antigravity, paul davies even cites one which is a single vibrating mirror. is this true? Robinresearch
Well have been on those no mention of why the casimir effect produces atractive force from what should be an anti-gravitational reaction because it produces negative energy. Looked up paul davies and he is not a controversial physicist, and have gone on NASA website and read that indeed negative energy can produce propulsive force. So it stands to reason that it is possible that if negative energy can be produced by the quantum vacuum there could be an effect that produces more negative energy and therefore more anti-gravity correct? Apparently NASA are looking into this.
However still no mention of why the casimir effect produces attractive rather than repulsive force. Teh casimir effect page says that it is possible for the casimir effect to be repulsive in theory, so that question is answered.
So in summery, negative energy can be produced by the quantum vacuum [zero-point energy], negative energy creates repulsive anti-gravity, the casimir effect can produce repulsive and attractive forces and the casimir effect only produces a small amount of negative energy but theoritically only for now but other reactions that could produce more negative energy from the vacuum and therefore more pronounced anti-gravitational effects are possible. This is not however a free energy source as the activation of enough negative matter would take at least a small bit of energy to cause the reaction that would effect macro-objects. Is all of this correct?
But i still need an answer as to why the casimir effect produces attractive force if it produces negative energy that means it should produce repulsive force. Is it something to do with the mirrors themselves?
Robin research
When I try to transmit video from my hitachi dvdcam camcorder(model dzmv550a) from a dvd ram disc to my pc using movie album se software It wont transmit and a flashing hourglass and arrow cursor come up on the screen. What can I do to fix this problem? Thanks Erich
If you had to design a liquid rubic cube, that would be at least 1x103 orders of magnitude more difficult than a solid state rubix cube, how would you do it? Keep in mind, the only restrictions on this exercise are that it must be liquid, and must also resemble a normal rubix cube in either form or function-- 71.247.125.144 13:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
glass strangely enough, is in fact a glass (aka an amorphous solid). Xcomradex 23:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
What experiments could I do about time travel? -- 66.41.55.93 14:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Run a block as fast as you can and run back. Compare yourself to your identical twin. He will have aged more than you by a very tiny bit. Edison 15:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
SERIOUSLY you could get two atomic clocks synchonized together. One is left on the ground and one is put on an aircraft which travels around the world. When the clocks are compared after the flight there is a discrepancy. One has travelled in time relative to the other. It was done in 1971
[2] .Also the perehelion shift of the planet mercury is proof that Einsteins theory of relativity works. So I guess you have the last laugh and HAVE asked a relevent question!!
I forgot who the scientist was, but I remember an article in my newspaper about how it may be possible to take an extremly massive object, an put it in a circular path at high velocity and the space inside the circle time will travel slower, so, in say 50 years in the circle 500 years passed. Not sure on reason 69.29.78.229 18:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
If i recall correctly, the actual experiment was done of flying an atomic clock on a jetliner, and showing that it "aged" less than the identical synchronized atomic clock who remained on the groung. Edison 03:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
No-one seems to be around on the Mathematics desk and I'm sure you scientists are equally capable of helping me with the question I recently posted there about standard error. Sorry for (almost) cross-posting, but there's an element of time pressure on me. Help gratefully received. -- Dweller 14:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Light current 05:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Taken from ( August 12th): No, but seriously, bioluminescent pigs, how cool is that?-- 71.247.125.144 15:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Will I be able to find the bacon when the refirgerator light has burned out? Edison 15:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Better link: fluorescent green pig. Henry Flower 22:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
could any other animals other than humans evolve to be as smart as humans. Would it happen, as in, could chimps get smarter and eventually be as smart. Also, could humans stimulate animals like birds through enviroment modification to spur evolution in that area? 69.29.78.229 18:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Mad scientists have already inserted human brain tissue into rats. In time, they will likely do the same with chimps. Edison 03:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I need to find a table or chart that shows the optical density and emissivity of Gold and Silver. Thanks for any help!
Is it common to have nystagmus upon waking from a vivid dream? It happened to me the other night when I woke suddenly from a nightmare. It had a semicircular pattern with the fast phase to the left. It only lasted a few seconds. In the dream there were a lot of video screens with images flashing rapidly up and down. -- Joelmills 22:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
In Star Trek, every other episode you get a case of characters devolving into monkeys or growing giant brains or turning into spiders because they've had their DNA changed. Presumably, the idea behind this is that if you change a individual's DNA (genotype, I suppose) you can almost immediately affect their phenotype, their outside characteristics. So to use a simple example, if I could somehow change the allele for brown eyes to blue eyes in a human's DNA, at some point (instantly? in days? weeks? years?) the human's eyes would turn blue. I assume the science is that as the iris cells die and are replaced, the new DNA is used to code for the iris colour, resulting in a different colour.
This has always seemed rather dodgy science to me, but it has a spark of believability about it. So the question is: if I change a person's DNA, will it ever change their appearance, etc.? Sum0 22:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
If you could change the gene in all cells then you could change the appearance. Cancer cells are an example of mutations that change the genotype and phenotype. Except in this case only a single cell is involved. In star trek i think they usually invoke a virus whivch presumably infects (and changes) all cells. Or maybe only the brain cells in your " giant brains " example. David D. (Talk) 22:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Aside from your brain, your a totally new you ever 7 years due to cells dying and being replaced. Some cells, like red blood cells, are replaced faster tahn, say, bone. 69.29.78.229 23:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Why is it that people's eyes sometime roll to the back of their eyes? Also, why do some people's eyes roll back when they die and some don't? 63.23.82.53 22:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I've heard stories of people who, while witnessing atomic testing, have held their hand in front of x-ray film, and gotten a clear picture. It sounds sketchy to me, but I suppose it could be true. Is it?-- 67.172.248.207 23:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Hand over the eyes story is absolute bullshit, since the eyes are not especially sensitive to x-rays, and the lens and cornea are not remotely capable of focussing xrays on the retina. If you were close enough to a nuclear explosion to absorb about 100 millirems, and you held your hand over an x-ray film or other photographic film in a lightproof paper wrapper oriented so the hand was normal to the vector between the film and the explosion, you could hardly help but take a fine x-ray.
Edison
03:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
| ||||||||
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions at one of the pages linked to above. | ||||||||
|
Can a photon be called a virtual particle,as it only acquires mass during interaction,but not during transit?
Dear Japanese brothers and sisters,
Keeping process instruments, particularly in oil refineries, calibrated and online presents numerous obstacles in our country. Does this problem exist in Japan, as well. Thank you for your reply.-- 202.4.4.23 09:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind advice. You are probably right, no reply from our Japanese colleagues. I had actually thought they might have the most sophisticated experience in Asia as we are based in the Philippines. -- 202.4.4.23 06:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I was reading a book called "how to make your own time travel machine" by paul davies who is a respected physicist[ i read on the book cover anyway i have never heard of him" but in the book he claims that we have the capacity to create an anti-gravity force from the quantum vacuum and an exapmple of this is the casimir effect, apparently it produces negative energy so therfore anti-gravity. what puzzles me is that if gravity is an attractive force and anti-gravity is a repulsive force, then how come the casimir effect produces an attractive force between the two plates? is it something to do with the setup? bernard haicsh and paul davies claim that the casimir effect can be engineered to be repulsive and there could be other effects that are casimir like that produce negative energy and there for repulsivve antigravity, paul davies even cites one which is a single vibrating mirror. is this true? Robinresearch
Well have been on those no mention of why the casimir effect produces atractive force from what should be an anti-gravitational reaction because it produces negative energy. Looked up paul davies and he is not a controversial physicist, and have gone on NASA website and read that indeed negative energy can produce propulsive force. So it stands to reason that it is possible that if negative energy can be produced by the quantum vacuum there could be an effect that produces more negative energy and therefore more anti-gravity correct? Apparently NASA are looking into this.
However still no mention of why the casimir effect produces attractive rather than repulsive force. Teh casimir effect page says that it is possible for the casimir effect to be repulsive in theory, so that question is answered.
So in summery, negative energy can be produced by the quantum vacuum [zero-point energy], negative energy creates repulsive anti-gravity, the casimir effect can produce repulsive and attractive forces and the casimir effect only produces a small amount of negative energy but theoritically only for now but other reactions that could produce more negative energy from the vacuum and therefore more pronounced anti-gravitational effects are possible. This is not however a free energy source as the activation of enough negative matter would take at least a small bit of energy to cause the reaction that would effect macro-objects. Is all of this correct?
But i still need an answer as to why the casimir effect produces attractive force if it produces negative energy that means it should produce repulsive force. Is it something to do with the mirrors themselves?
Robin research
When I try to transmit video from my hitachi dvdcam camcorder(model dzmv550a) from a dvd ram disc to my pc using movie album se software It wont transmit and a flashing hourglass and arrow cursor come up on the screen. What can I do to fix this problem? Thanks Erich
If you had to design a liquid rubic cube, that would be at least 1x103 orders of magnitude more difficult than a solid state rubix cube, how would you do it? Keep in mind, the only restrictions on this exercise are that it must be liquid, and must also resemble a normal rubix cube in either form or function-- 71.247.125.144 13:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
glass strangely enough, is in fact a glass (aka an amorphous solid). Xcomradex 23:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
What experiments could I do about time travel? -- 66.41.55.93 14:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Run a block as fast as you can and run back. Compare yourself to your identical twin. He will have aged more than you by a very tiny bit. Edison 15:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
SERIOUSLY you could get two atomic clocks synchonized together. One is left on the ground and one is put on an aircraft which travels around the world. When the clocks are compared after the flight there is a discrepancy. One has travelled in time relative to the other. It was done in 1971
[2] .Also the perehelion shift of the planet mercury is proof that Einsteins theory of relativity works. So I guess you have the last laugh and HAVE asked a relevent question!!
I forgot who the scientist was, but I remember an article in my newspaper about how it may be possible to take an extremly massive object, an put it in a circular path at high velocity and the space inside the circle time will travel slower, so, in say 50 years in the circle 500 years passed. Not sure on reason 69.29.78.229 18:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
If i recall correctly, the actual experiment was done of flying an atomic clock on a jetliner, and showing that it "aged" less than the identical synchronized atomic clock who remained on the groung. Edison 03:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
No-one seems to be around on the Mathematics desk and I'm sure you scientists are equally capable of helping me with the question I recently posted there about standard error. Sorry for (almost) cross-posting, but there's an element of time pressure on me. Help gratefully received. -- Dweller 14:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Light current 05:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Taken from ( August 12th): No, but seriously, bioluminescent pigs, how cool is that?-- 71.247.125.144 15:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Will I be able to find the bacon when the refirgerator light has burned out? Edison 15:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Better link: fluorescent green pig. Henry Flower 22:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
could any other animals other than humans evolve to be as smart as humans. Would it happen, as in, could chimps get smarter and eventually be as smart. Also, could humans stimulate animals like birds through enviroment modification to spur evolution in that area? 69.29.78.229 18:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Mad scientists have already inserted human brain tissue into rats. In time, they will likely do the same with chimps. Edison 03:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I need to find a table or chart that shows the optical density and emissivity of Gold and Silver. Thanks for any help!
Is it common to have nystagmus upon waking from a vivid dream? It happened to me the other night when I woke suddenly from a nightmare. It had a semicircular pattern with the fast phase to the left. It only lasted a few seconds. In the dream there were a lot of video screens with images flashing rapidly up and down. -- Joelmills 22:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
In Star Trek, every other episode you get a case of characters devolving into monkeys or growing giant brains or turning into spiders because they've had their DNA changed. Presumably, the idea behind this is that if you change a individual's DNA (genotype, I suppose) you can almost immediately affect their phenotype, their outside characteristics. So to use a simple example, if I could somehow change the allele for brown eyes to blue eyes in a human's DNA, at some point (instantly? in days? weeks? years?) the human's eyes would turn blue. I assume the science is that as the iris cells die and are replaced, the new DNA is used to code for the iris colour, resulting in a different colour.
This has always seemed rather dodgy science to me, but it has a spark of believability about it. So the question is: if I change a person's DNA, will it ever change their appearance, etc.? Sum0 22:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
If you could change the gene in all cells then you could change the appearance. Cancer cells are an example of mutations that change the genotype and phenotype. Except in this case only a single cell is involved. In star trek i think they usually invoke a virus whivch presumably infects (and changes) all cells. Or maybe only the brain cells in your " giant brains " example. David D. (Talk) 22:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Aside from your brain, your a totally new you ever 7 years due to cells dying and being replaced. Some cells, like red blood cells, are replaced faster tahn, say, bone. 69.29.78.229 23:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Why is it that people's eyes sometime roll to the back of their eyes? Also, why do some people's eyes roll back when they die and some don't? 63.23.82.53 22:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I've heard stories of people who, while witnessing atomic testing, have held their hand in front of x-ray film, and gotten a clear picture. It sounds sketchy to me, but I suppose it could be true. Is it?-- 67.172.248.207 23:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Hand over the eyes story is absolute bullshit, since the eyes are not especially sensitive to x-rays, and the lens and cornea are not remotely capable of focussing xrays on the retina. If you were close enough to a nuclear explosion to absorb about 100 millirems, and you held your hand over an x-ray film or other photographic film in a lightproof paper wrapper oriented so the hand was normal to the vector between the film and the explosion, you could hardly help but take a fine x-ray.
Edison
03:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)