Sensei

Strength of electromagnet depends on current flowing through wire. The larger current I [A], the stronger electromagnet. Because when current is multiplied by time, it's charge Q=I*t, and divided by e = 1.602176565*10^-19 C, is quantity of electrons. The more electrons flowing through wire, the stronger magnetic field around wire. Current flowing through wire depends on resistance of wire: I=U/R So the higher voltage, or the smaller resistance, the higher current. Resistance depends on temperature. At low (really low) temperatures conductor can lose resistance, and become superconductor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnet Device utilizing superconductor is f.e. MRI, which has superconducting electromagnet, to create really powerful magnetic field: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging The best material for wire, other than superconductor, will be such that has very small resistance. Or even actively cool it down to decrease resistance. Battery AA NiMH, have typically 1900 mAh to 2900 mAh capacity=charge (A*s=C). In other words, if 1A current is flowing through wire, you can run it for ~3 hours. If 10 A current is used, it will work for 17 minutes. Your device has to work all the time continuously? You have to take into account for how long batteries will last. For 450 grams device, and 10 AA batteries, each 23 grams, the maximum will be 170 minutes of work @ 10A. Typical core of electromagnet is f.e. iron. but using ferromagnetic material for core, causes induced eddy currents. Optimal core has to have this effect as small as possible. f.e. Ferrite core https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_%28magnet%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_core

Confusi, how about flying balloon, or drone, to long standing trail, gather material, go back to Earth, and analyze it in f.e. mass spectrometer and release what is it made of.. ? Repeat f.e. 10 times to be really sure.. If you would find out that you couldn't find anything in trail.. would you also release this info.. or keep it private.. ? How about buying your own airplane (it's pretty cheap these days), and fly enough high, to leave trail, and see whether its trail will last long or short, as leaved by commercial airplane... ? If your own airplane will last long, is it chemtrail.. ? If you know your airplane didn't released any substance.. ?

Are you presumptuously suggesting that what we learn is not true.. ? There is "knowledge" going from nowhere (f.e."saint books"), with no real value. And there is science. Anybody can repeat experiment by himself/herself. Without audience. Without external person influence. And result being the same. I can tell you how to make antimatter. If you will build device according to my instructions, without any math, or any my influence, it will just work, and produce antimatter, that you will be able to detect. Or see by yourself in other devices, particle detectors.. With fake "knowledge" it would not work. Unique is which sense.. ? Unique mass? Unique configuration of particles? CO (Carbon Oxide) has mass approximately 28 u (or 28 g/mol for 1 mol of them), while N2 (Nitrogen gas) has mass approximately also 28 u (28 g/mol). Are they equal or they are unique? C-12 has 6 protons, and 6 neutrons, N-14 has 7 protons, and 7 neutrons, O-16 has 8 protons, and 8 neutrons. CO has therefor 6+8=14 protons total, and 14 neutrons. While N2 has 7+7=14 protons.. And 7+7=14 neutrons. So their baryon number is also the same. The same quantity of electrons (lepton number the same). Complex systems are always unique. Unique even in every nanosecond. Unique even in every picosecond. You at time t, and at time t+1 ns (nanosecond), are different. Very little, but different.

They are not sacred. They simply works. The old way of detecting planet around star is measuring whether star is "shaking". If some massive planet (or other star in binary system, or even black hole, pulsar, neutron star etc) is orbiting around examined star, one attracts other, and center of mass is located outside of center of star. Therefor on images/videos it appears to be shaking. The new way of detecting planet around star is measuring periodical decrease of brightness of star. When planet is between its star, and us, the less light travels from star to our detector. Solar system example of this effect, when Mercury or Venus transit, and cover the Sun:

Hmm.. I was thinking about something more accurate, like my sheet. Date of year when there is taken photo also matter: in f.e. January Earth is closer to some objects by 300 mln km, while half-year later in June/July it's 300 mln km farther (than in previous closer case). Anyway, thank you. If there will done periodical examination of position of planet-to-be, and known stars behind it, planet should hide them, and known star should disappear from photos. We don't need to rely on light reflected/emitted by body, but also by hiding what is behind. Of course, if there is something.

I made comparison sheet between Earth, Ice-only planet, same as Earth density and Iron-only planet for object that is 10x more massive than Earth: Radius/volume of planet is calculated from mass/density. Somebody wants to make equation how big will be such object on photo taken from Earth.. ?

22 million digits only in decimal system. In binary system number 2^n-1 has n quantity of digits. All with just 1. f.e. 1 11 111 1111 11111 Mersenne Prime examples: 11 (3) 111 (7) 11111 (31) 1111111 (127)

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't said they are starving right now. My words can be rephrased to "if they didn't import food, their people would be malnourished". Is that better? Can I use simple mathematics instead.. ? Russian population is 143.5 millions. Each of them is eating (or at least should) 0.5 kg of bread, 400-500 grams of potatoes, 150 grams of sliced meats (and/or cheese), 300-400 grams of chicken (or other meat (but they are even more expensive to produce) ). Per day. To produce 2.5 kg wheat bread, there is needed 1 kg of wheat. To produce 1 kg chicken there is needed 4 kg of feed. To produce 1 kg pig there is needed 6-8 kg of feed. To produce 1 kg beef there is needed even more. 143.5*10^6 * 365 * ( 0.2 + 0.15*8 + 0.4*4 ) = ~ 157 bln kg = ~157 mln tons of grain needed per year to be self-independent country from external supplies of food (if fish meal is not used at all). And it's still very idealized number. As not all kg of chicken is eatable. And I didn't include lost during production and delivery to consumer. Now see numbers how much grain russia is producing (source mostly wikipedia or google:XXX world producers). It's hard to find reliable up-to-day data. 59.7 mln tons of wheat (other source says 60.5 mln tons in 2015). Enough to be self-independent for bread at least. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_wheat_production_statistics 4 mln tons of oat 0.834 mln tons of buckwheat 2 mln tons of rye 15.4 mln tons of barley Feed for animals can be not only grain but also fish meal. http://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=fish-meal&graph=domestic-consumption Couldn't find reliable data. Data from one website does not match data from other website. They're often self exclusive.. According to this http://www.pigprogress.net/Pork-Processing/Markets/2015/1/Russian-pork-imports-down-40-in-2014-1693622W/ russian pork import was 543000 tonnes in 11 month (prior ban) = ~592 mln kg/y / 365 / 0.3 kg per capita = 5.4 mln people per day could have cutlet. According to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato russian potatoes production (2013) is 30.2 mln tonnes * 1000 / 365 / 143.5 mln people = 0.57 kg/per day/per capita. enough to not have to import.

If you don't believe in that electrons (or other quantum particles) exist, you should ask question in the mainstream physics forum section "how to detect electrons/alpha/positrons/etc?". And then somebody would come up with description how to build the cheapest particle detector for $30 that you can build and use and see by yourself: I don't want to repeat myself over and over again, so here you have more about it and how to measure quantum particles properties: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/92998-universal-evolutionary-process/page-4#entry900023 Which you can do at home, by yourself. Spending just time and a few dollars.

...especially when you have no idea about them....

Electronics engineers also learn physics and quantum physics. Especially the one who are responsible for building CPU and lasers (used in CD/DVD/Blu-ray for example). To make efficient laser there is required knowledge about spectral lines, absorption, emission, doubling-frequency etc. etc. CRT (Cathode Ray Tube), legacy television, is quantum physics particle accelerator... With electron gun, emitting electrons, and high voltage electrodes bending paths of electrons during travel through vacuum.. When high kinetic energy electron hits atom, there are created photons, observed on TV screen.

Where did you get data from GPS satellites (or ISS) to analyze? Please attach link for review.

If mass of Earth would be significantly different from currently estimated value, it would influence g acceleration. It wouldn't be ~9.81 m/s2 on the ground, anymore. Earth mass can be estimated from content of Earth. p = m/V Density is mass divided by Volume. It can be reversed: p*V=m Mass is average density of object multiplied by volume of that object. Volume of sphere is 4/3*PI*r^3 so in the case of Earth, we just have to know average density. If Earth would be made of ice/water, it would have 1000 kg/m^3 density, if it would be made of pure Iron, it would have 7874 kg/m^3 density. We know that Earth is neither of these. But value reside somewhere between these two. Measure average density, and you have total mass. Experiments prove it's approximately 5515 kg/m^3 5515 kg * 4/3*PI*6,371,000^3 = 5.974*10^24 kg

This equation anybody can prove at home, releasing something from known height and measuring time needed for flight.... To improve quality of measurements: use 1000 FPS recording camera, and vacuum to get rid of air resistance. Every time M is different for different cosmic object. Oil drop experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment is measuring charge of electron Q = -1e = -1.602176565*10^-19 C, not electron's mass (me = 510998.929 eV/c^2). If you want to know how to measure physical constant, ask question in the mainstream part of this forum, and we will answer it, if we will be able to. Mass of electron is pretty much visible in radioactive decay of unstable isotopes. f.e. Tritium H-3 -> He-3 + e- + Ve + 18.6 keV Mass of Tritium nucleus is mass of Helium-3 nucleus plus mass of electron plus 18.6 keV (pretty small value, 27.5 times smaller, in comparison to 510998.9 eV for electron mass-energy)

No, not *always*. The thing is Newton's equation will work the same on Earth, as on Moon, as on Mars etc. You just have to replace mass of object in equation. While G will remain the same. g is not constant. It's gradient. The further from object causing gravity the smaller has value. g( r )=G*M/r^2 so for object with different mass M (Earth,Moon,Mars etc.) it's g(r,M)=G*M/r^2 If you will make such equations for couple various cosmic objects, you will be able to calculate G and masses of these objects.

Transmission from spacecraft is not in visible spectrum. Spacecrafts to communicate in power saving mode are utilizing directional antennas. That's it: if your receiver does not have the right settings (angles, position of Earth, time) when transmission arrives, it will miss it. Similar like laser is emitting photons in one direction. If you're not on path photons will be traveling, you will miss it. You can even not know it's emitting photons.

You didn't said whether electron has to be free or bond to atom.. Here you have video summary of reactions between photons and electrons/atoms:

They cant even feed their people, and have to import *food*.. And they dream about Moon or space.. ? Rather propaganda.. There are more urgent problems, really. It's always have been this way: russia exchange oil & gas, for food and technology.. Pu-238 is artificial unstable isotope, created by human. If you have Uranium, you can make Plutonium from it. Especially if somebody have their own nuclear plants.

Take for example two electrons. With the all properties equal. They have the same charge, the same velocity vector, the same kinetic energy, the same momentum, the same relativistic mass, etc. etc. Are they "the same thing".. ? or Are they "the same kind", rather.. ?

Annihilation of anti-matter, precisely positrons, produced in proton-proton fusion is responsible for 7.65% of energy emitted by our Sun. Now. Anybody with powerful enough electrostatic generator can make their own anti-matter easily (electron-positron pairs). Proton-rich unstable isotopes of elements are emitting anti-matter positrons as well.

Here the most popular building insulation material is extruded Polystyrene/Styrofoam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polystyrene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styrofoam

I completely dont understand where you get idea that quantization of field automatically leads to transferring 10% of energy through wires... ? E=h*f is equation for energy of photon. In transformer you have no photons as such. There are accelerated electrons, moving back and forth in wires. Transformer requires AC. Equation for power is: P0=U0*I0 or energy: E0=U0*Q0 on primary winding. (divide it by frequency of AC, and you will have amount of energy per single sinus wave) And P1=U1*I1 or E1=U1*Q1 on secondary winding. Perfect transformer would have no loss of energy/power, thus equations: U0*I0=U1*I1 U0*Q0=U1*Q1 would be true. Divide Q/e to have quantity of electrons. In other words small quantity of electrons, with large voltage, is turned to large quantity of electrons with small voltage. Or reverse. It depends on quantity of winding on core. Make your own transformer, and you will see dependence between voltage, current and frequency of AC, in primary and secondary winding. But during work, transformer is heating (wires have resistance R>0, usually Copper wire, as it has very small resistance), and thus losing part of energy/power. (not the only way to loss efficiency) More about transformer efficiency and losses http://www.electricaleasy.com/2014/04/transformer-losses-and-efficiency.html

I have two setups bought in shop. One has slit width 30 um (0.03 mm), distance between centers of slits 60 um (0.06 mm). Second one has slit width 50 um (0.05 mm), distance between centers of slits 100 um (0.1 mm). They need to be precisely done.. Otherwise in-accurateness will be greatly influencing results, and further calculations.

You ignored my link. And at the end of article was link to PDF, where is showed comparison between 100 MHz, 500 MHz, 1 GHz, 2 GHz bandwidths, which are all working on the same signal @ 100 MHz. http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf Pages 6-7 You're completely not interested in frequency of signal, since 49 MHz, will still be 49 MHz. You are interested only in amplitudes.. So bandwidth does matter..

Read this f.e. https://blog.adafruit.com/2012/01/27/why-oscilloscope-bandwidth-matters/ You can't measure 49 MHz signal with oscilloscope that has 40 MHz bandwidth IMHO.. "But what does the 50MHz or 100MHz really mean? If I purchase a 50MHz scope can I accurately capture and measure 50MHz worth of data? The answer (like everything else in engineering) is: it depends. You should be able to measure frequency up to and even beyond the maximum rated value, so if determining frequency is all that matters (checking how accurate the output of an oscillator is, the pixel clock on an LCD controller, etc.) you can safely go up to the maximum. Where things become more fuzzy is amplitude (the upper and lower voltage values measured by the scope)."