swansont

You get to the advanced physics and the explanations are mathematical. Things act the way they do because they have to be solutions to the Schroedinger equation.

Velocity is a vector. Once the ball reaches the bottom, there is no way to increase the x component, which gets smaller as the angle is increased. As JaKiri surmised, it's the action that the ball will bounce (y component of the velocity) Consider the limiting case of 90 degrees. The stopping distance is 0. But who knows how long it will keep bouncing vertically.

The statistics used to descibe decay assume large samples. Small samples will deviate from large-sample behavior. You can deduce the probability of decay, but not predict the actual behavior. Similarly, you may know half of the atoms in a sample will decay in a half-life, but you can't tell when any one nucleus will decay.

What people want has little bearing on the issue. Science explains (as best it can) how nature behaves. Science doesn't explain why nature behaves that way.

a. If whatever event that kills the cat happens, and the cat were left for a long time, it would start to decompose. Obviously it wouldn't really be in a superposition of states until you lifted the lid.

What part of "relativistic quantum mechanics" is giving you problems?

EM radiation is, specifically, mutually inducing oscillating electric and magnetic fields. If you look at Maxwell's equations with the time components, you will see that B ~ dE/dt and E ~ dB/dt. So an oscillating E will induce a B, and an oscillating B will induce an E. If the oscillation is e.g. sinusoidal, then the changing E will induce a changing B that then induces a changing E, and so on. The wave propagates. DC fields don't do this. --- As far as combining the radiation, you can also do this in nonlinear crystals in a process called four-wave mixing. You can add two frequencies and get the sum frequency as a result. You can also get the difference frequency. If the two inputs are the same frequency you call it second-harmonic generation (no difference frequency output , of course) You could, in principle, do this in multiple stages to get from RF to visible, but it would be incredibly inefficient.

If that was your point, I fear you didn't make it very well by saying that SR and QM "don't connect" since they obviously do. When did Einstain say that? SR precedes QM by what, about two decades or so? So it's entirely possible that it's been ripped, kicking and screaming, out of context. Saying that theories are incomplete is hardly a revelation. I guess I read too much into your statement. My mistake.

Shouldn't be a problem. Simply hook it up to a generator and power your house with it, and sell the excess electricity back to the power company. Aside from the lack of credibility in general from anyone claiming perpetual motion, it's more galling to hear them cry poverty (or anything similar) if they have the working device they claim. If it works, use the darned thing. Energy = money

a) it's "members only" and b) I'm skeptical that it is an actual theory

Not to worry.

Been there, done that

These people (or this guy) appear to disagree with you. But they're probably crackpots - NASA? Pacific National Lab? Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility? Sheesh.

It's hard to be sure, because these are journalists interpreting science and summarizing, but I don't think what is proposed is time travel in the sci-fi sense of the term. It sounds like the particles will move more slowly into the future, because of the induced redshift. That isn't time travel anymore than the moving twin in the twin paradox. Time travels more slowly, so the particle will not have aged as fast. The novelty appears to be doing it with light.

It's not the conduction electrons that are affected, AFAIK. It's the electrons that stay with the atom. Since they have a fixed angular momentum with respect to the atom, and the atom is in a lattice structure, you end up with a net magnetic moment for a macroscopic part of the material, called a domain. The domain's field can point in different directions (but not randomly); you get a stronger magnetic field if you get more domains to align and thus fewer that anti-align.

E=mc2 isn't the whole story The actual equation is E2=p2c2 + m2c4 and reduces to E=mc2 only for a massive particle at rest (p=0) Within that equation, the m is the invariant mass (aka rest mass), and a photon doesn't have any. It's made up of an oscillating electric and magnetic field - nothing that has mass, but can interact via the EM force.

Why not just point it directly at the sun, and not worry about orbit transfers?

4pi is a constant, so it doesn't vary and doesn't matter where it is incorporated in the equation. the variable is r, which varies as an inverse square.

A particle can be in an indeterminate state (i.e. one of several possibilities), or what is called a superposition of states, and you won't know which one until you measure it. e.g. the electron can be spin up or down, Schroedinger's cat is alive or dead, the atom is in the upper or lower hyperfine state, etc. The act of "measuring" (really any interaction that requires the particle to be in one particular state) will "collapse the wave function" to reflect being in one state, with probability=1, rather than a probability of being in one of several.

Yes. You may notice that ads for magnetic therapies often have testemonials rather than actual research data. You might feel better after strapping the magnet to your body, but that doesn't mean the magnets did anything. You might have felt better anyway, even if you had done nothing. That's why double-blind studies are required to demonstrate effectiveness of medical treatments.

Can't get the link to work, but the main site says: *Statements on this website have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease, but rather are dietary supplements intended solely for nutritional use. --- In the US, supplements don't have to prove they do anything, as long as you make no claims about curing diseases.