Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/14/24 in all areas

  1. You knew and yet you asked anyway As I stated previously, one method is spontaneous parametric down-conversion. It's a two-photon decay in an atom. Along specific paths the photons will be entangled (yes, the scientists know which paths; you can google this if you want more info) You couple the light into a fiber with a lens. News flash: any detection of a photon destroys it. You only "have" the photon for as long as it's bouncing around in your optics.
    2 points
  2. I am fairly confident that my generation has been able to retain its longer pre-web attention spans wow is that a gray squirrel in the yard haven't seen one this far west in years!
    2 points
  3. Never? The microwave wavelengths are chosen for good penetration into the food. Although the food nearest the surface does tend to absorb more than food further, the food further can actually get hotter as the thermal energy has further to go to escape and may also, depending on the microwave design, and the geometry and any lack of homogeneity of the food, actually absorb more than a similar volume near the surface. So the temperature can build up more toward the middle depending on quite a number of factors.. So sometimes the food does actually cook from the inside out, even if this wasn't the explanation given to you as a non scientist, by an advertiser non scientist.
    1 point
  4. I think it will be rotation. You would need IR to excite stretching and bending vibrational modes, surely?
    1 point
  5. I would explain it to you but history has shown that you will ignore the answer or dismiss it, so why bother. I will ask you how do you think solar cells work. I also suggested you goggle "how does a photon transfer energy to an object". With any luck you will be able to find a description that is simple enough for you to understand. Good luck!
    1 point
  6. Stockholm U. astronomer Villarroel and her team have been studying transient light sources on old photographic plates. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92162-7 9 transients that appeared in April 1950. https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/527/3/6312/7457759 Three transients that coincided with famous July 1952 Washington DC sightings of UAP. Article that includes section (scroll to last third of article) on Villarroel's team. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/jan/14/what-happens-if-we-have-been-visited-by-aliens-lied-to-ufos-uaps-grusch-congress Other astronomers, using different techniques, have seen things that warrant further investigation. Beatriz Villarroel, assistant professor of physics at Stockholm University, is leading a team of astronomers looking at photographic plates of the night sky that date from before the first artificial satellite was launched in 1957. As satellites orbit the Earth, they can reflect sunlight causing bright glints to appear in the night sky. These leave streaks on astronomical images or spots of light that appear and disappear seemingly at random. Mysteriously, on one plate from April 1950, Villarroel found nine sources of light that appeared within a half-hour period and then vanished. Conducting observations using the Gran Telescopio Canarias, on La Palma in the Canary Islands, revealed nothing at the locations of the light sources that might have flared up. “There is no astronomical explanation for this type of event,” says Villarroel. More recently, her team found three bright “stars” on a plate dated 19 July 1952 that have since vanished. Provocatively, this is a date burned into the diaries of UFO enthusiasts around the world because it coincides with a famous incident in which pilots and radar operators saw lights they could not explain in the skies above Washington DC. “I think it’s very important to do this kind of [nearby] searching for extraterrestrial objects because the [astronomical] community mostly looks for things very, very far away. I think it’s time to do something new,” says Villarroel, who is now working to establish the ExoProbe project to look for anomalous objects among the vast number of human satellites currently in orbit. (this will get interesting if contamination of these old photographic plates can be ruled out. The Guardian article also discusses the psychological effects on the public, if a conspiracy of concealment of ET evidence were to be revealed, though that might be another thread topic)
    1 point
  7. Do you see how contradictory and confusing your posts can be? Please aim for more rigor, you're challenging mainstream science so you need to be extra persuasive in your arguments. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary support.
    1 point
  8. Oobermensch has been banned for being oober-insufferable
    1 point
  9. This assumes there are light sources, and that the scientists are so clueless as to not realize this. You don't even give them the benefit of doubt that they'd realize this and turn light sources off, even though I already told you that one would do this. (Plus the fact that if you're doing this with an optical fiber, it's really hard for extraneous light to get in) And possibly enclose the experiment, if needed. I've had setups that did this, so the room lights could be on. Light doesn't get into the box. So I will ask again, what light? I'm telling you there isn't any.
    1 point
  10. I'm just amused that you compare yourself with Galileo, which is one of the classic symptoms of crankery on forums such as this. In this case, though, you are not even advancing a half-arsed alternative theory, but arguing it is impossible to do an experiment that has already been done. So it's as if Galileo had spent his time disbelieving in the European discovery of the potato, when there were already potatoes actually being grown in Europe. 😄
    1 point
  11. That which does not yet exist cannot cease to
    1 point
  12. I used to teach the folks running the reactor. If you actually knew more your son would be in violation of national security laws for having divulged classified material to you, and he’d lose his clearance, and probably his job and pension. You don’t need to separate them; most are irrelevant. They would be thermal photons that don’t trigger the photodetectors. If these are near-visible or visible wavelength photons being entangled and you’re worried about contamination, there are wavelength filters and also the very technologically sophisticated step of turning the room lights off during the experiment. There’s also the coincidence measurement I mentioned, which is a filter in the time domain.
    1 point
  13. Alkonoklazt has been suspended for a week because staff would like a break from all the rebellion against the system.
    1 point
  14. If the moon does not exert a force on the earth, why does the moon orbit the earth? (consider Newton’s third law) In any event, tides present no conflict with Newton’s laws, and nothing is being ignored. The issue is your lack of understanding of physics, which is not going to be fixed by looking at this exercise; there are too many issues to address. (coordinate systems, linear vs rotational physics, action-reaction) Basically, if you think that physics is wrong, it’s invariably your understanding of physics that’s wrong or missing.
    1 point
  15. Orientation: (Oversimplified) It’( i)s (perhaps) easiest to say (ruffly=approximately), although the Earth rotates Eastwards, (but) it (=the Earth) travels: ((in a) net) west(ward direction) around the sun, e.g. (at) noon (slightly_)slower (e.g. slowest) & (at) midnight (slightly_)faster (e.g. fastest); & (=but) ruffly at the (same) net_speed at (both) 06:00 (sunrise_equinox, south) & 18:00 (sundown_equinox, north). Earth’s matter (mass) moves at many different speeds (& directions) wrt to its center. It'( i)s very dynamic. =Disclaimer: NOT all of Earth's matter moves at the same speed, NOR in the same direction. Newton made the best 3 motion laws=observations; but he did NOT always use them. (..when he should (have ((also) used them, too))). Complaint: The (Earth’s rotational) water’s inertia is missing in (most) Physics explanations! You can NOT stop the (automatic) laws of inertia from happening; they are expected. Something (inertial) must be happening to the oceans(‘s waters) because of the Earth’s rotation(al) inertia (=average_momentum) direction_(angle)_change. The direction of motion changes into the opposite direction, (=180°) (ruffly) every ~12 hours, e.g. ½ a sidereal day (is) 11 h 28 m 2 s; which works out to slowing & speeding (up) of the (net west) speed, around the sun. E.g. Parts of the Earth are moving faster around the sun, while other( part)s are moving slower. E.g. It (rotational inertia) is happening (to water), (& so) it exists (as the tides); but (it is ridiculous, that) NOBODY mentions it as though it does NOT exist. Is it possible that instead, they (people) (ignore Newton’s laws, & their (laws) affects & implications; & (those people)) prefer to 1st discuss their hocus pocus (NONSENSE, about the) “pull of the moon” (& (imaginary)) “action at a distance” hypothesis (for what reason I do NOT really know)? The Earth’s rotational_inertia also affects the (Earth’s) tectonic plates. The(ir) friction which causes heat & thus volcanic activity (melted stone, lava) & Earthquakes (irregular movement, caused by its (=stone's, =mother Earth's) irregular braking (deceleration)).
    -1 points
  16. Directional charge? Charge is a scalar. ! Moderator Note Piling nonsense on top of nonsense, and repeating assertions instead of addressing issues. A hand-wave is not a model. We’re done here. Don’t bring this up again.
    -1 points
  17. Except that a single photon is not visible and you have no idea which one is the entangled one in the bunch so your odds would never be more than 50/50 which means that knowing is impossible.
    -1 points
  18. The thing about extremists is, they don't always tell the truth; which, it turns out, is more common than you think...
    -1 points
  19. My son had the best noncommissioned job on his sub, because no one else was allowed in the radio room with him so he got privacy while working. All Navy sub communications are encrypted, the FBI handled the top secret SCI level clearance that my son had and has. It's not the captains job to decrypt all messages, it's the radio operators job, though there may well be certain messages for the captains eyes only, and if so my son would notify him. My son's Navy clearance is one of the qualifications for his working at the World's foremost defense contractor. LOL my son even got a commendation directly from the secretary of the Navy for finding a software flaw. How about you? Got cool photos from ICEX at Santas workshop at the North Pole too. https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2203/7083059/1000w_q95.jpg I know that, so how are the two entangled photons generated? Say they are in a fiber; how did they get there and what generated them? Furthermore, how do you ever have one to compare the other too as both are moving at light speed or if stopped, they vanish
    -1 points
  20. In other words you do not know either. LOL they also invented a vaccine for covid that everyone was required to get, or you would not be able to shop for food, or work. I actually retired rather than get a phony vaccine like you chose to get. All lies as the CDC now claims that 58% of covid deaths come to fully vaxxed fools, which is why the mandate was lifted. https://www.businesstoday.in/coronavirus/story/58-of-americans-dying-due-to-covid-19-were-either-vaccinated-or-boosted-report-354161-2022-11-25 But you keep right on believing everything that you are told
    -1 points
  21. Really, you described how to recheck the spin of a no longer existing photon? LOL, see even if Trump dies of natural causes on the golf course, the thumb drives with the JFK files hit the net. Isn't that great? and the swamp gets drained and everyone named Bush will move to Moscow for their own safety Yes, all Navy radio operators are trusted, trained and fully vetted by the FBI, and have at least a TS-SCI clearance, this takes time. So if a Navy radio operator is not trusted, they are not a radio operator in the Navy.
    -1 points
  22. What you just said is that I am a troll because you do not know the answer. You are correct that I question things, as did Galileo who was jailed for not agreeing with the establishment. Has anything changed? Asking for the answer to the question. What is the process of separating 1 photon moving at light speed from the trillions around it? Is this a crime?
    -2 points
  23. Is that your answer as to how to measure a single photons spin? Because I missed it, but you are allowed to try again Everywhere there is light there are trillions of photons. Number of photons emitted per second = (100 Watts) / (3.98 x 10^-19 J) Calculating this, we get: Number of photons emitted per second ≈ 2.51 x 10^20 photons Therefore, if we assume the light bulb is 100% efficient and emits light at a wavelength of 5 x 10^-7 m, approximately 2.51 x 10^20 visible light photons leave the light bulb per second. I find it easier just to say that trillions of photons are emitted from light sources. I did not compare myself to Galileo, I said that there are still people who believe whatever the Catholic church or government tells them without thinking. I am not one of them
    -2 points
  24. LOL, so if there isn't any light, there are no photons to entangle. So how are two single photons generated for entanglement? Is there a single photon generator that can entangle two photons at generation, you know like a really small quantum flashlight?
    -2 points
×
×
  • 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.