swansont

Difficulty with reading comprehension might be a result of the virus.

WSEN has been banned for inappropriate posts

! Moderator Note We will not be discussing torture. Rule 2.3

! Moderator Note We will not be discussing torture.

Dying is not a possible result of catching the virus? I think you should reconsider the facts.

No, not really. It didn’t help that drumbo chimed in, but there was little serious discussion. ! Moderator Note How about opening a thread about biogas, and refrain from the sophomoric commentary? That might stay open.

The border is nowhere near this scale. Can you discern the orders of diffraction for a wave of this wavelength, going through a slit wide enough to accommodate a human?

! Moderator Note From rule 2.7 Attached documents should also be accompanied by a summary, at minimum.

! Moderator Note From Rule 2.7 Advertising and spam is prohibited. We don't mind if you put a link to your noncommercial site (e.g. a blog) in your signature and/or profile, but don't go around making threads to advertise it.

The end of that referred to ITER. The citation needed is one showing that fusion is as polluting as fission.

Only if you are referring to relativistic mass, which is to say, the total energy — so why not just say the total energy? The mass (rest mass) is the same.

You do realize that was fiction, right? And that wasn't simply reduced exposure, but no exposure at all? It has not been established what the optimum level of exposure is, so claiming less will be worse is a guess.

No, but you don't need to go that far. You can put clocks on planes and send them around the worldThat was done almost 50 years ago. Their level of precision allows smaller effects to be measured than ages of astronauts. More recently, it's clocks on satellites (e.g. GPS) Mass differences from a nucleus being in an excited state vs ground state has been measured. The frequency shift of atoms owing to their height in the gravitational field has been observed.

No, which is why it can expand faster than c It's also why things like a planet or a solar system don't expand - they are subject to forces that hold them together, despite the expansion Similar to "distance" and "time" two other words representing abstractions. Fields, operators in a Hilbert space - physics is chock full of abstract words. Some reify these things, but they are not something you can hold in your hand, or kick (if you are a fan of Samuel Johnson) If you can hand me that meter of space, I will concede that it is a thing.

As an anecdote to the contrary, I haven't had a cold since this all started, which is unusual. Not sure if it's the hand-washing, the mask-wearing, the social-distancing, or the shutdown meaning kids weren't mixing and sharing their germs with their parents, who might then share them with me. Probably a combination of all three. Lowering resistance might not be an issue if you avoid being exposed to a virus in the first place.

How is it that you know these aren't being considered (and possibly already ejected - what other effects might they cause)? And which is the worse result? Dying or having dry skin? What you think is irrelevant. Do you have evidence to back this up? The conclusion one might draw is not that masks are bad, it's that it's a good idea to wash your masks if they are to be re-usable, and discard ones that aren't.

For starters, a mole of an ideal gas at STP takes up 22.4L, so any reaction that takes liquids and/or solids and gives you a gas will start you off. One that created more gas than what the reactants comprise (e.g. large molecules that give off multiple molecules of H2, H2, CO2, N2 etc. is going have a large pressure if constrained to some volume) It would also depend on excess energy released, because that would increase the temperature, which would give a greater pressure.

They can apply but be irrelevant. Consider the act of walking through a doorway. Will anyone notice how much you diffract? Your deBroglie wavelength is of order 10^-36m, which is similar to the deflection you would have with the first diffraction order through a 1m doorway, 1m after you walked through. Similarly, you are in a (gravitationally) bound state — do you notice the quantized energy levels? In the basic 1D particle-in-a-box problem, the energy levels are proportional to h^2 and scale with the inverse of mass. So perhaps the steps are of order 10^-70J. Are you going to notice the difference between settling in on different energy levels as you take a step up the stairs?

You are piling up the violations. A neutrino is a lepton with spin 1/2. It can’t just pop into existence. Photon absorption reactions are inconsistent with a neutrino being involved. Photons, OTOH, are bosons, and their number is not conserved. Relativity is consistent with experiment. E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4 If a photon has mass, p≠E/c You can’t change one part of physics without the effects rippling through other aspects of it. If you overhaul it, you have to overhaul all if it. And you need evidence to support your assertions. Wrong for you? You don’t have your own personal universe.

Photons having mass falsifies your conjecture. We know, for example, the the photon momentum is E/c, which is inconsistent with them having mass. Out of curiosity, what happens when a photon is destroyed? What happens to these rings of charge? Well, that would be a problem, if you don’t understand magnets exert/experience torque It’s scary enough that you’re an engineer who doesn’t understand physics

1. The wavelength is energy dependent, so thus separation us not fixed 2. This isn’t a calculation (what’s the equation for this purported equilibrium point?) 3. You are ignoring torque This is a cop-out. You run away from the responsibility of learning and working through basic science, which is known to work, and expect others to do this. Why would someone develop a model that’s so obviously at odds with how physics is known to work (basically, you’ve pre-falsified your ideas). This isn’t some cutting-edge case that demands new physics. This is physics that has a century or more of confirmation. Showing up and asserting you’re right but expecting others to do the work is not going to fly.

You need to show this, rather than just assert it

They would tend to push themselves apart because each ring is a line charge. Each element dq would repel all other elements in the ring. And then the rings attract each other, but only repel if aligned a certain way, and the separation varies with energy, so I don't see how a stable configuration would ever be possible (even if it was stable at some value of separation, which it isn't)

Any evidence that particles like this exist? That runs up against a lot of other physics that says they are massless, which means they don't move at c It's not enough to merely state this. You need to show such a configuration is in a stable equilibrium. Account for the forces and torques. If the separation is half the DeBroglie wavelength then the interaction between the rings varies with photon energy You're saying they have a physical size (rings separated by half the DeBroglie wavelength), so they are not just mathematical structures. Why would they not be separable? What physical laws would that violate?

It’s not a classical particle, so why must it conform to classical descriptions and behaviors? Physics makes no claim to tell you truth, or reality. It describes how nature behaves, not what it is. To quote Dr. Jones, “If it's truth you're interested in, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall.”