moth

thank you for your reply since electrons are not quarks i guess the properties of this field are different from a magnetic field. do you recall anything about how matter would be affected by this field?(is there a name for it?) Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedor, if this field is the same as a magnetic field then maybe it is involved in diamagnetism. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedlearning backwards is full of surprises. after a quick look at wikipedia's quark article :doh:i see quarks do have electric charge that is a fraction of an electron's charge. it's interesting, quarks associate in three's and their fractional charge is thirds. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedelectroweak theory looks like an interesting place. talk about slow light, a W boson must be insane. i found some scraps on the color-force field from SLAC - "After a high energy collision, a quark or gluon starts to move away from the rest of the formerly color-neutral object that contained it. A region of color force-field is produced between the two parts. The energy density in this color force fields is sufficient to produce additional quarks and antiquarks. The forces between the color-charged particles quickly cause the collection of quarks and antiquarks to be rearranged into color-neutral combinations. What emerges, far enough from the collision point to be detected, is always a collection or jet of color-neutral hadrons, never the initial high-energy quark or gluon alone." http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/colorchrg.html#Confinement it's not clear to me if all these quarks and anti-quarks are destroyed or if some of the collision energy is transformed into "new" matter??

if you want to go to the moon i'd bet on this guy once on the moon could some kind of capacitance effect be used to detect asteroids entering the danger zone? could the magnetic field around the sun be used to deflect a charged(by microwave or laser beam from the moon) asteroid?

i think time is a different concept for a scientist than for a philosopher. for a scientist time is like a measuring stick, for a philosopher time is a license to babble. be careful - you might get a bad rep posting in P&S:-)

so just to be clear you believe time only passes if an observer is there to measure some difference? first you suggest i apply time alone to an objects motion, then you say it's impossible, which is it?

that is an argument for philosophy, does time pass unless a tree falls in the forest etc. how do you apply time alone to movement? where is it moving?

almost the same as the essence of up.

what if time ran at a different rate? or backwards? wouldn't that have an effect on entropy?

entropy requires time and energy to make sense.i was trying to point out there is a "long" time in addition to "differential" time like the distance argument in O.P.

is entropy an intrinsic physical property of the universe, or of time?

you can also use an array of antennas to get a beam. wikipedia has lots of info under "phased array". the square kilometer array telescope will use array antennas http://www.skatelescope.org/pages/page_student.htm this page has more info and an animation to illustrate how a phased array makes a beam. http://www.radartutorial.eu/06.antennas/an14.en.html

i was just reading up on superdense matter in this article: http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.2708v2 and this passage got me wondering "There has been much recent progress in our understanding of quark matter, culminating in the discovery that if quark matter exists it ought to be in a color superconducting state [22, 23, 24, 25]. This is made possible by the strong interaction among the quarks which is very attractive in some channels. Pairs of quarks are thus expected to form Cooper pairs very readily. Since pairs of quarks cannot be color-neutral, the resulting condensate will break the local color symmetry and form what is called a color superconductor." when color charges move do they cause a field like the magnetic field when electric charges move?

is it just the label "lose" that makes some people dislike the game?

check these out http://www.vega.org.uk/video/subseries/8 all about light from a master of exposition.

it is slowing them down. thats why you usually hear the speed of light is constant in a vacuum, but it's not constant when moving through matter. it still travels at c between interactions with electrons around the atoms but takes longer to cross a distance through matter than a vacuum because of these interactions. the press paints a picture of photons just hanging in space when they are actually stored in the supercooled atoms. you got me with the new avatar i took a couple swings at that bug on my screen before i realized it wasn't.

watch this: i'm waiting for a new spinal cord for my neck. he starts with the economy but keep watching it's only about 20 min. long.

i wish i had some suggestions instead of questions but are you looking for xenotrophs?

doesn't CP symmetry suggest time reversed matter and anti matter are equivalent? aren't photons their own anti-particle and able to move both directions in time? can the problems at t=0 be avoided by assuming the B.B. also exploded into the past and just kept going, maybe taking all the anti-matter with it?

"frozen in the atomic medium" sounds like absorbed to me. the light pulse is being stored in the electrons around supercooled sodium atoms. light always travels at c.

the symmetry of time progressing away from the "big bang" in the direction of our history could explain why Newton's laws don't care which way time goes. it's hard to think of a testable hypothesis maybe something to do with quasars as white holes dumping anti-matter into our side of B.B. just to be clear i mean white hole as in time reversed black hole not as in the aig b.s. that pops up in google

like this? http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html the line about no lower speed limit on light makes me wonder what they're smokin at harvard the laser cooling technique she uses is a pretty amazing tool though.

i think it's my terminology that is flawed. i didn't mean a unit vector i meant a vector that is one unit long in the same orientation as the vectors to the sun and the fire hydrant. O.P. "How is the (bisectriz) bisecting vector elevation and azimuth calculated ? Simply sums divided by 2 ?" sounds like he's looking for the vector halfway between the sun and hydrant vectors?

what a machine! the ALMA dishes are so large, agile, and MOBILE it has to be a milestone in several fields. i've got to go search for info on fermion nature of neutron stars. thanks!

thanks, i'm new to vectors and spend as much time remembering algebra and trig as i do learning vectors. i was trying to suggest in this case, where you just want the angle, you could measure the elevations and azimuth and forget about the distance to the sun or the hydrant by pretending the vectors are 1 unit long in the right direction. does that change the angle somehow?

it depends how accurate you want to be. you may be able to get away with using a compass for azimuth, and a protractor and a plumb bob for elevation (don't stare at the sun of course)

cool ALMA and SKA are like watching the earth evolve eyes.