Jump to content

insane_alien

Senior Members
  • Posts

    10040
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by insane_alien

  1. the energy stays the same. thats what happens. and it has bugger all to do with resistance.
  2. well, assuming the atom does not interact with anything and proton decay does not exist then the electron will orbit the nucleus for eternity. that is the definition of perpetual i believe. the moment you try to extract energy from the system then it will not be perpetual. nobody said there was a free ride.
  3. yes, but that was the OP was talking specifically about gravitational potential energy. y'know keeping the thread on topic and all that.
  4. well, we would have models of the way the stars are moving as a map, and the ship probably has a clock or two aboard so, you could predict where the sol system had moved to in the galaxy, as for finding your own location, i'm pretty sure any automated ship would record its course especially if there were a malfunction. if for some reason the ship doesn't know where it is, a few other galaxies and the galactic center should provide a reasonable approximation until better data can be gathered.
  5. the mole ratio would not change, you would just have a mixture at the end of CaO and CaCO3 with some carbon dioxide given off. assume the thermally stable compound does not chemically react with either CaCO3, CO2 or CaO then it will not affect the decomposition.
  6. there are several ways of 'addressing' the location of earth in real life. you could use cartesian coordinates based on the center of the galaxy or you could use polar coordinates with the same origin. at any one point in time you would only need three numbers to define the position of earth, not 6. in cartesian coordinates it would be something like (25000,100,20) i have made up the values here just call them light years or something. in polar they could be 28* right 0.5* up and 25000light years out. but this is ultimately useless as the positions would change with time. it is much better to have a model of the galaxy and predict where it will be when you get there.
  7. wasn't chain reaction about a fusion reaction in the hydrogen? when hydrogen fuses you can get some spectacular results. examples include the sun and and bomb labeled as 'thermonuclear'(also known as a 'hydrogen' bomb). if the reaction is finely controlled you can contain it and get a fusion reactor capable of generating electricity, not visually spectacular but still damn impressive. and most movies that have 'sciency stuff' in them are a load of week old baloney
  8. in a way, yes. this should not be compared to the perpetual motion that kooks are claiming. completely different scenarios.
  9. you seem to assume that this has always been the case for eternity, it is not so. this might come as a shock to you but THINGS CHANGE WITH TIME. that corner shop you buy your newspaper at wasn't always there, people didn't always drive cars and the internet is fairly new to the world. and believe it or not, the world existed before you were born so you weren't always here.
  10. no. you would not be going at a constant velocity. and can i just ask, are you being deliberately thick. even 5 year olds will pick up on the fact that the ground is in the way, even if you don't prompt them for it. i mean seriously, there is absolutely no way, short of removal of brain tissue, that you could be this thick.
  11. you won't get there. again you are failing to see the whole picture. THINK about whats happening.
  12. yes, it does, tidal effects from the sun and moon will change the distance.
  13. yes if. luckily for us, the molecules in our body repel the molecules of the ground on the small scale which prevents us from accelerating towards the core. you do have velocity and acceleration, otherwise you would not be well, anything.
  14. i would only be accelerating at 9.81m/s/s if there were not electrostatic repulsion. you are not considering the entire scenario and this is your problem. its like trying to contact someone using a torch and morse code but completely ignoring the fact theres a wall in the way. it just doesn't make sense. now, are you going to grow up and behave like an organism with the ability to apply logic and reason or just stick to 'its fantasy its fantasy, i don't care what you say, its fantasy'
  15. mm flat out fantasy that enables you to be communicating as you are, allows your satnav to work, has allowed us to send probes to every planet in the solar system and then some more. has allowed us to find planets beyond the optical resolution of our telescopes and so on. yup, absolute fantasy and totally useless. you are just plain wrong, and the tragedy is that you refuse to accept even the slightest possibility that you are wrong even in the face of centuries of evidence against you.
  16. as i have already answered, no they are not increasing in number. in the sun they are actually decreasing in number as several nuclei fuse to create a larger nuclei.
  17. traveller, i have explained what pressure is to you twice already. both times you have completely ignored the ACTUAL DEFINITION and continue to assume that atoms some how magically expand. you ask for answers and ignore those given to you. what is the point of asking then?
  18. no, because you would be talking about the unification of gravitational force with electro-magnetism, strong and weak nuclear forces. none of these requires resistance to operate. the last 3 require only the exchange of particles.
  19. no, no, no, no. there, i believe i have answered these already and in more detail earlier. and again, resistance is a TYPE OF FORCE it is not force itself.
  20. bring it back on topic and discuss pressurized gases or this thread will likely be closed.
  21. well for one, no work is being done in containing a pressurized gas. and i wasn't talking about the equation. although, you can use power without any work being done as work is only one specific type of energy(mechanical).
  22. no, no it doesn't. that formula relates power to energy usage but so what. that is definitely not the governing equation of weight lifting for one. the fact that you said that shows your level of physics knowledge is at most that of a 13 year old. and hence very very simplistic and generally wrong.
  23. what has this got to do with containing the sun in a giant sphere. obviously not if i can only just lift 10lbs 10ft in one second. i fail to see what this has to do with anything, gasses do not behave like weightlifting.
  24. oh n/m it wasn't showing till now? hmm. anyway, to hit harder you hit faster. you don't have it moving at the same velocity. and what resistance? there is no resistance.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.