Silvestru

I understand how in free space, c is constant. And if I travel at let's say 0.5c and turn on a flash light I will record that the light is traveling away from me at c. I was hoping you could clear up the scenario that I was thinking of below Let's say we have two stationary satellites that are located exactly 1 light hour away from each other and they exactly 1 light hour away at all times. Satellite 2 starts shooting a light beam once every minute directly towards Satellite 1. A rocket starts traveling at a constant 0.6c (let's say) from Satellite 1 directly towards Satellite 2. Would the rocket also record the "frequency" of the light beam signal once every minute the entire journey? (I understand that time would be relative and would pass differently for the rocket and Satellite 1 but I mean relative to each of these observers.) I have follow up questions depending on the answer Side question: From my understanding of Doppler shifting, for Satellite 2(who is emitting the light) the light would look normal("white") but for the rocket the light would be more blue? (would it be Doppler shifted to a higher level of energy? It gains energy from your motion but not speed.) Or is that in the scenario that the rocket would be the one emitting the light? (and the light emitted would actually "slow down the rocket" by robbing energy from it's motion and converting it to energy)

Thank you swansont. Yes I know the second part has nothing to do with spin, I just thought I would air all my questions on the topic haha.

Hmm so technically if I would dig a whole to be closer to earth's center of gravity for example, I would age slower than you who are on the surface? (of course by a very small amount).

This is potentially really dumb, especially the way that I am going to formulate it but please go along with me. I was reading a different thread (Time and speed and how speed impacts time) and I have a basic understanding of concepts like the Twin Paradox but was wondering if let's say Taz would spin on the same spot on the ground at a respectable speed close to c for a few minutes, would it have the same effect as if he would travel in a rocket in space and he would have basically traveled in the future when he stops? (I mean if his twin that did not perform the spin motion age more?)

thoughtfuhk - What is evolution optimising? Why? Apologies for butting in I know the question above has been asked already but it is very simple and the root to this whole mess. OP, can you please answer this no references needed, I just want to understand in your own words what your point is.

Hello Madheart918, I think that light was not present at the very very first stages of the Big Bang. Also as is often mentioned on this forum, the big Bang does not describe the birth of the Universe, just it's rapid expansion from a very dense hot state. I assume you watched Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey. Neil deGrasse Tyson often makes science sound poetic but in this process he makes his statements a bit ambiguous as well sometimes for dramatic purpose. (Also the asteroid didn't "kill the dinosaurs") In regards to your last part, I wont touch upon it as it has more to do with the Philosophy section of this forum.

This is exactly what I mean. I have said a few times that people in the middle ages believed that the earth is flat. I even mentioned it on the forum probably haha. I will stop doing that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

Oh yeah, I think you mentioned this podcast before yesterday. I was reading about the actual No such thing as a fish. Really interesting and the cool part is that I'm sure there are a lot of facts on the podcast that even the more knowledgeable of us did not know.

Hello forum, We engage in conversation with friends/co-workers/family every day and recently during a face-palm moment I was thinking about all the misinterpretation of accurate scientific papers by the media. I am not talking about pseudoscience or papers like the one that Maeder recently published regarding Dark Matter and Dark Energy. To give a few examples that I noticed/been a part of: "The God particle" - Just typing this makes me cringe because I remember all the moments people started talking about this with me. Heck even my mom had an opinion about it. Of course people who mention it don't even know what a particle is so I will just leave it at that with this example as I am sure some of you share my cringe. "The laws of science break down inside the singularity of a black hole." - This is up for debate as it's a quote from Kip Thorne but ofc people recite this like a mantra as a party topic. My understanding is that we just don't know what happens inside a BH. But again, ask the next person who says that what a singularity is and wait for the cricket sounds. (this has less to do with actual scientific papers but:) "There is a statue of a demon in front of CERN. They are doing evil things there" - About the Hindu Nataraj statue. I wont speak more about this one. "Scientists at CERN are potentially going to create a black hole that will destroy the world. It's dangerous" - I swear I heard this multiple times. To be honest I have difficulty explaining why this is something stupid to say because of my own limitations as often times additional questions pop up when engaging in this topic. Can you give examples of such Misconceptions or correct anything I wrote above. I want laymen like me with an interest in science to get rid of some wrong views or misinterpretations that were put there by pop articles or media trying to click-bait readers with big terms. I forgot to add maybe one of the most talked about and least understood ones - "Dark Matter and Dark Energy" - Misunderstood as black/evil energy and a plethora of other ways. Of course I do not have a complete understanding of either of these terms but there are levels to ignorance.

I am not prone to physical violence but If I were to kick someones ass I would rather do it in the summer when it's nice outside and go for ice cream after than to go to all the hassle of getting dressed up in winter gear and crawl through the snow to find this guy/girl and administer justice. On a serious not though, I think people just stay way more in the house in the winter. Less chance to get axed.

Nono, I didn't mean it like that. I read all your article after I posted and actually the subject is the same but these are two different sets of information.

I know this sounds crazy. And feel free to criticize me on this one...but I am sure he will somehow find a way to get reelected. I am not a US citizen and don't know much about politics in general but he kind of reminds me of Nixon (Tricky Dick). I know all your friends think he is a monster and a crook and an imbecile and you don't know anyone who would vote for him buut... you forget about those bible belt states who still hold him dear. Same thing happened the first time. (this comment is in general for all members, I know you are from UK StringJunky ) People are easily manipulated through https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt. Nixon prolonged the Vietnam war just to get reelected. Some similar tactic could be used, who knows. (sorry for putting out my thoughts with no factual stability behind them)

Makes me appreciate my small rented apartment a lot more.

Hehe very similar to a post from a few weeks back.

I think StringJunky has a point. It might not be weather but daylight. Although I want to bring to your attention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Greenland. I consider suicide to also represent violence so I am bringing this to the table. Also 1 out of 4 of Greenlanders attempt to kill themselves at one point. That blows my mind...

Sorry, this has been bugging me the whole weekend: Ether has been proven and is 100% legit and fun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ether Aether on the other hand is a lost cause.

Hello emmanuelmelville and welcome. You have posted your opinion on governments and corporations but you have not asked any questions or proposed a specific path on which the conversation should go. It's more of a rant. Furthermore you posted it in Other Sciences which I think it is not. It's nice to back up your argument with some facts, papers, news from respectable sources (whatever that means nowadays). When you mean poverty what places are you referring to specifically? The lower-class minimum wage employees that work for a corporation or 3'rd world countries? I think change will come from the individual's way of thinking. Also you mention: Actually depends. Some governments are very aggressive with their taxes towards corporations. That's why a lot of Corpos set up a branch in tax havens to escape this. Please give a bit more details in which direction you want this topic to go to.

Are you proposing aether because you're uncomfortable with the idea of waves not needing a medium? Our modern understanding of quantum mechanics is that all kinds of particles have a wavelike nature, so, if you accept that matter can travel through empty space, you should have no problem accepting the same for light or anything else. Why need aether?

I'm starting to think philosophy nuts are replacing religious nuts lately when it comes to denying science. To be honest, I haven't seen/met a religious person fighting the war on science in a long time but I (I am a layman but even I) get surprised at least once a week in the philosophy thread. Apologies, I just wanted to make this observation.

I met people like this and it's more depressing that that Mootanman. These people would pass a lie detector... I would prefer to live in a world full of liars. The problem is that we live in one full of imbeciles.

Yeah, that's what I meant to say

So that means certain atoms such as the one mentioned by you, cooled to temperature close to absolute 0 can share the same quantum state with a photon. That's very interesting. I have a lot of reading to do.

So how are these fermions that pair up distinguishable from bosons? Are you referring to Cooper pairs?

I understand how multiple photons may potentially share the same quantum state but I find it more difficult to accept this for bosons that have mass like the Z and W bosons. (Bosons all have integer spin - This might be the explanation for my question but I would need some clarification). I am sure it is just my limitation and I do understand that the PEP does not concern mass but I would appreciate if someone could give me more details on how this can be possible.

Thank you very much Mordred. I also found a paper related to this, maybe you can check it out as I am unsure about some conclusions that it draws. (I'm mathematically limited) https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.2232v2.pdf