exchemist

I am wondering about your mental stability.

It's absurd nonsense to say 1/3 of the New Testament is about casting out demons. There are a handful of stories, that's all. People did not understand mental illness in those days.

From the sound of things - and the look of what is on that plate - you need to get into the habit of eating a few salads, and applying the Japanese principle of eating slowly and stopping when you feel 80% full.

Yes but now you are acknowledging there is kinetic energy in motion of the particles. So thinking in terms of radiation is NOT any kind of alternative to the kinetic theory of temperature, which as I say is that it is proportional to their mean kinetic energy.

What is ridiculous is to think you can explain temperature without the concept of motion of atoms and molecules. It is fundamental.

That’s ridiculous. Temperature is proportional to the mean thermal kinetic energy of the molecules or atoms of the substance. 1/2kT per degree of freedom. This is basic kinetic theory.

In the sense that there is kinetic energy in it. Though you can’t identify a path of course.

Yeah, that’s called Quantum Woo and is the sort of nonsense that has made Deepak Chopra and similar charlatans rich. Science it is not. There is a kind of kernel of truth behind it, inasmuch as the concept of zero point energy implies there is a sort of ineradicable residual motion in the ground states of bound systems. But only in bound systems and not necessarily vibration. In physics, like electric charges and magnetic poles repel, rather than attracting. It is unlike charges and poles that attract. Furthermore, just to put the tin hat on it, energy can’t vibrate. Energy is a property of a physical system. Certain types of system can vibrate and if they do there a mix of kinetic and potential energy in the system, due to the vibration. So the whole thing is ballocks, I’m afraid. You can’t borrow concepts from physics and pretend they explain human behaviour.

This seems awfully garbled not to have much to do with the topic of the thread. 1) Temperature is a bulk property. An individual atom does not have a temperature. If you think you have read that it does on Wikipedia, I feel sure you have misunderstood what you have read. If you can provide a link perhaps I can explain what it is actually saying. 2) E=mc² has got nothing to do with the topic under discussion. 3) The Perfect Gas Equation, or Ideal Gas Law, has nothing to do with the topic either. Firstly the question is about metals, and secondly, the effect of temperature on pressure and volume has got nothing to do with how radiation is absorbed and causes a rise in temperature.

The term “nootropic” does not seem to have a properly defined meaning and is often abused to promote agents and supplements of doubtful utility. Caffeine seems to work, for many people.

Explain in your own words what this “law of vibration” is, please. Nobody is going to waste their time watching crappy YuoTube videos.

Can you give examples of what you mean by dye "quality", e.g. good and poor quality? I was under the impression the issue was how the dye was fixed.

I doubt it. Expansion is not a physical system. A physical system has to comprise matter, radiation or fields of some description, I think. As I understand it, the Big Bang hypothesis suggests radiation and maybe (?) some elements of matter were present at a very early stage, but since the laws of physics break down as one extrapolates back towards the presumed singularity (if there was one), it's probably a bit meaningless to speculate too much.

You can’t have an expansion of energy. Energy is a property, not an entity. Energy has to be the energy of something, a physical system of some kind.

Surely an explosion is a rapid expansion, in volume, of matter, isn’t it?

It is not only bound electrons that absorb radiation. That is true for electronic transitions, absorbing light in the visible and UV range. However IR and microwaves stimulate vibrations and rotation, respectively, of polar molecules. So long as you have a degree of charge separation, you have in principle something that can couple to radiation, if the scale and frequency are right. But I think you must be right that to explain a temperature rise we need to account for how the nuclei are set in motion, in the form of lattice vibrations. A mere sympathetic oscillation of the conduction band electrons setup by the radiation will generate reflection rather than absorption, it seems to me. And of course metals are good at reflecting radiation. So I think we need to look at the interaction of electron motion with lattice vibration. It feels to me as if this is connected with the mechanism behind electrical resistance in metals. There has to be a process whereby coordinated induced motion of electrons is converted into randomised motion of electrons and vibrations of the lattice. But I don't know the relevant solid state physics.

Not at all. That was asking about routes for commercialising a utility model (petty patent), e.g. toll-manufacturing vs. licensing, who bears the commercial risk and so forth, which are perfectly reasonable issues to discuss. This time, the post is asking us to put a commercial value on something we know nothing about.

What a ridiculous question. “I have something in this bag which I will neither show you nor describe. Please tell me how valuable it is.”

I think it is harder to explain for a metal than for a molecular substance. In molecules, there needs to be a dipole for the electric vector of the radiation to couple to, which excites vibrations in the molecule. For example, nitrogen gas does not absorb in the IR as the molecule has no dipole, whereas water vapour does, because the hydrogen atoms carry a partial +ve charge while the oxygen atoms carried a partial -ve charge. In a metals there is a lattice of +ve cores and a sea of surrounding delocalised electrons. Lattice vibrations (phonons) can presumably be excited by the +ve cores coupling to the electric vector of the radiation, but I'm guessing a bit as I never covered the relevant solid state physics at university. Perhaps someone else can comment further.

I thought this article in the Guardian was rather intriguing: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/mar/09/controversial-new-theory-of-gravity-rules-out-need-for-dark-matter As I read this, the proposal is that fluctuations in spacetime itself (i.e. not vacuum fluctuations) could give rise to "extra" apparent gravitation which could dominate over conventional gravitation at long range, thereby accounting for the anomalous rotation rates of the edges of galaxies. Link to abstract of the paper here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.19459 There was a previous piece on this a few months ago which I missed: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/mar/09/controversial-new-theory-of-gravity-rules-out-need-for-dark-matter Abstract of the paper here: https://journals.aps.org/prx/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041040 This comes from a group at University College London. They add the caveat that this hypothesis need further work - and some means of testing. (I see Carlo Rovelli has taken a bet at 5000:1 that it goes nowhere, though!)

I ran my 3G iPhone, the original Jonathan Ive design, until last year. I replaced with the smallest modern iPhone I could get (SE), which is still a bit too long to be ideal but better than the others. I do most of my internet stuff on the laptop or iPad, not the phone, so I have no use for a large screen on the phone.

Get the smallest you can. Then there is some chance you can the damned thing into a pocket.

I am not sure what this means. Can you give an example of the kind of copper object in question?

The UK NHS does keep such a record, though I don’t know how reliable it is in all cases. There’s nothing “mandatory” about it for the citizen, but everyone has an NHS number and a medical record which in the past followed them from doctor to doctor when they changed location and registered with a new local doctor. Nowadays it is computerised.

Yes I think that looks better.