Jmanm

The DIY method uses a container of water with store brought Hydrochloric acid & chlorine in the right ratios, to permanently smooth the surface. As latex gets used over time it slowly gets scuffed by small wear & tear & the need to re-chlorinate is usually needed. However in the life of the rubber this method can't be done more than 2 maybe 3 times without discolouring dark colours & more than half a dozen times will turn the rubber brittle & weak presumably from the harsh chemicals. So a few questions: Can chlorine gas be used all by it self say in a industrial controlled way? If they had pure chlorine gas without the acid. If so would this type of chlorination be repeatable over & over without damaging the latex? thanks

Is it at all possible in theory to build entangled objects like this? Even if they lasted entangled for even just a billionth of a second. Just sounds like exaggerated theory bordering on sci-fi. I just wan't to know what he really means by entangled as I'm trying to understand the whole monogamy blackhole paradox.

Not sure what you exactly meant, but I tried vinegar straight on a cloth rubbing & it did not remove these water marks.

I was watching a video about Black holes, firewalls & EP=EPR with Leonard susskind, he mentions how in theory you could make two macroscopic objects that are entangled, by continually shooting off entangled pairs in opposite directions & then compressing the two masses of pairs. Or collecting up the emitted hawking radiation the original black hole has emitted & squeezing it down to a black hole so the original & new black hole are now entangled. Well that is what it sounded like to me. Is this kind of thing even possible? Can two large macroscopic objects be entangled? With everything I have read on entanglement it seems to apply only to small systems & small amounts of particles like pairs. If I misunderstood this please explain.

I have water drop marks on my glass windows on my car that are from presumably tape water (after a wash) & maybe the rain (as it sits outside). A few weeks after I already polished the previous grime & water marks off my glass to perfect clean look, the water marks are back again. They don't wash off with IPA or wax & grease remover which is mostly naphtha, despite a hard rubbing action. Again only an abrasive action of polishing gets the water marks off. Why is this? Anything that can be done to prevent them? I was hoping just a weekly soapy wash would be enough to remove them. thanks

Thanks for reply. You mentioned as it goes through the holes there is nothing there, this seems hard to grasp really. As it clearly exhibits a wave behavior that depends on the slits, so to me it looks like it is interating in someway with the material the slits are made of. Also what about the air molecules in the room? From the looks of diagrams the photon goes through a beam splitter but still really secretly in a straight line to the mirror. Like it always has 100% probability of hitting the mirror.

I have read the basics along with the interferometer experiment & feel I'm still not understanding it fully. I understand measurement collapses the wave behavior, but I can't see how the photon can just pass through both slits or a beam splitter presumably as a wave of some sort. Wouldn't the interaction with the actual slits itself qualify as measurement & prevent the interference pattern? Why does it pass through two slits which is matter as a wave yet the actual impact/detection on screen (which is also matter) is a point? Does this have to do with the direct angle it hits the screen? If so this would seem to really mean that passing through the slits it exhibits mostly but not entirely wave behavior & the opposite with detection on the screen. I understand the travelling particle is thought of as a wave or at least behaving like a wave. Once the photon leaves the beam splitter I don't understand this wave behavior really. How does it travel in a straight line between emission & detection if its a wave? When I see particle interactions, they seem to show the outgoing particles now fanning out behaving like a wave again and the angle could be any value, so just confused how it maintains a straight path? Finally, Is it possible that the wave while in transit is continuously interacting with the vacuum energy & other fields causing it to continually exist in a concrete way? thanks

Thanks guys. I don't think I will need to glue this now (fingers crossed). I found a way to help it stick by burning the rubber suction cup surface slightly with a lighter. After that the surface is high friction preventing it from slowly sliding down the windscreen. We just had 4 seasons in a week, hot & dry, wet & humid & cold etc. The mount seems to stick. However you can still pull it off the glass with enough pulling force by hand.

I'm about to glue my Ram X grip phone mount to my windscreen because it doesn't stick properly & have tried everything including a replacement suction cup, none works well. The whole mount just slides down the windscreen within an hour. I had in mind using something like 3M moisture curing urethane adhesive as that is what they use for gluing in windscreens to cars. It sounds like it will stick very well to the glass. I only have one shot at this so wanted to ask: For adhesion of rubber to the urethane glue should the rubber suction cup be roughed up with coarse sand paper or not? Could you think of a better adhesive or something in between the rubber & urethane? Would hot summer heat pose a problem with the rubber to urethane bond? I'm assuming the cup is simply rubber based on amazon reviewers calling it rubber, but there doesn't seem to be any info on what it really is. If you could help, thanks

Hi, Thats what I thought like swiss cheese that had hollows in it from inferior manufacturing. I forgot to add an important bit: When i first got this SS sheet it had a brushed smooth slightly reflective finish. And I straight away went to polish it up skipping the wet sand stage. The end result was an almost mirror sharp finish, but with a nice brush pattern still showing. And although you could shave in the reflection, there was no signs of the pits. Not sure if the pits were hidden among the remaining brush marks? But I doubt it as there were areas free of brush marks & perfect. Thanks. I will try some 316 when I track some down, most places that sell it tend to be big wholesalers. I think the automotive polishes have gotten this absolutely mirror like, no signs of any visible fine scratches.

I polished up a sheet of grade 304 that had a brushed appearance. First I wet sanded the surface with 1200grit sand paper to remove these machine brush marks & then machine polished to a mirror gloss using automotive type compound. After the wet sand marks were removed it become clear there was a problem. Although it was like a mirror, tiny specs that looked like metallic flake in a car paint job were visible, on close inspection they are tiny shallow holes. No amount of polishing of wet sanded prevents these, they always form. I'm wondering if this caused by the compound (Meguiars M105) or the chromium oxide (black residue during polishing) or just the air it self? Maybe its just a sign of inferior made stainless? I know that when polishing up aluminium that the black oxide that comes off onto the polishing pad can damage the surface causing marring. Only way to avoid is keep using a new polish pad very often. I guess all I can do is try a Metal polish & another grade of SS. Thought Id ask to learn from this if I can. thanks

Yes this will hide the defects well & add an extra level of gloss, at the expense of leaving the surface sticky. Thanks for the info As for polishing the marks off impossible I'm afraid. Any kind of polishing I know of just scuffs latex more because polishing is a form of abrasion & latex is highly flexible & not well suited for polishing like say a car paint job. That's my understanding. As far as I know the glossy side comes from when the latex in liquid form is poured & cooled onto a smooth surface I think.

I brought some black coloured Latex sheet material from a reputable source that sells for fashion & design etc. One side is matte & the other glossy laminated side. After I washed off what looked like talcum powder & rinsed properly, the latex glossy side has a coarse feel to it & sticks to itself like it was glued. But I noticed it's very easy to scuff the glossy appearance up just by rubbing your fingers along it moderately. Does this sound right for manufactured latex sheet? Or is it a sign the rubber is degraded or something? It has been years since I had experience with latex sheet & I can't remember if it's this vulnerable. thanks

I don't see the point in these forums if I could get the same type of replies on a PC gaming forum. Judging by the majority of replies on many threads sadly these forums seem to be all about dropping short useless comments. Why are you here? I have read many topics in physics, cosmology & stuff that is speculative & its simply not fully understandable for most laymen. I will never shorten my questions. A sensible answer as you put it will be useless & won't explain or help.

Ive read up on these topics and still don't think I really understand, if someone could correct me where needed & answer my Q's. Arrow of time. I can't help thinking there still has to be some more fundamental time that always goes one way, otherwise it seems like saying that things that happened could be undone literally so that they never happened.To me if the one way direction of the past to the future is nothing more than physical events happening that obey laws of physics, you wouldn't be able to say something like: 'at any given time one would expect the system to be in equilibrium'. If the arrow of time is a result of entropy increasing does that mean time is really like a block & the future is set in stone like a spacial dimension? As I understand the future is not determined according to chaos & the UP. Can someone explain in a simple way why we don't remember the future & only past? I read its about correlations but don't really get it. They say its possible for the wind to deposit sand into a sand castle but classical this would be impossible as the wind doesn't have hands & what they mean is actually due to the atoms not having definite positions & a small chance of them all being in that configuration from quantum tunneling. Is this correct? Same as a box of gas molecules in equilibrium, I can't see how they all suddenly appear over in a corner lumped together, they always have energy jostling around but not enough to all clump. If it's quantum tunneling that give rise to this, well it's a completely different thing. If you drop an egg on floor, can the event actually reverse straight after? even if so unbelievable unlikely. I can't help to think it could only happen if everything in the future reversed & not just an isolated area & time. As the future events depend on the past. If protons do decay, does this mean in far future no more things can appear from the empty space like brains etc? How will a brain form out of empty space? Just like magic it appears? or gradual with many failures along the way? Does the brain then slowly rot like normal matter? So how does a brain or the big bang get created from the vacuum energy? This seems completely different from something like an ice cube forming in a glass of water.I can understand the water molecules forming ice, but how does vacuum energy or quantum fluctuations form physical things? The energy is almost nothing & in a different form to matter. I don't understand how the universe was considered a low entropy state around shortly after the big band. Since everything was spread evenly in a volume. It seems to me that its really only when stars start to form that its low entropy compared to the distant far future. And what they mean by low entropy is just the right conditions straight after time 0. Like the right gravity, distribution of matter, having inflation, right physical constants etc. I don't see how our current universe was like finding a slightly melted ice cube in a glass of water & not what you would likely expect if the laws are truly time symmetric. Perhaps our observable universe is surrounded by an ocean of brains far out? Slightly off topic, I heard a physicist say QM predicts if you pushed on a wall for such a long time you could tunnel through. But can you say such an event is physical impossible still due to the fact no materials could possible last such long time scales. thanks