Mellinia

How would the wave packet carry charge?

Pa=Pb does not imply Ma=Mb. It implies MaVa=MbVb, and for the same reason that 1x4=2x2, 4 does not equal 2.

How is it better than the already available wolfram alpha? http://www.wolframalpha.com/ It computes the answer, gives the graph, provides the range and domain, and also shows alternative ways to express it.

In physics, Energy is not understood through Weight and Motion. I presume you're referring to mechanical energy, which includes potential energy(related to position of object in field and etc) and kinetic energy(related to motion). You might want to state a frame of reference. A heavy object, with more mass, has more energy only in a gravitational field, compared to a lighter object, with less mass. Also, further down your "essay", do a little research between the narrow definition of "mechanical energy" and "energy", and also "entropy" The abstract energy that you propose is kinda like the potential energy within atoms, which is linked to entropy.

There was once when I met a girl who would staunchly refuse me to pay the complete bill for the reason that men and women are equal. She did say that now is not the time for me to provide for her. I guess some girls don't like to be too dependent, when they have the ability to provide for themselves, but they still like the idea that someone's always there to catch her back?

Just tried using a burning match. Hey, you can also try to do it. The fire just went out. It's just like blowing the match. Of course charcoal is different but the velocity of air is not the factor, instead, it is, as you have said, the flux of oxygen gas in contact with the flame.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/69602-objective-of-nasa-space-programme-to-create-jobs-only/ some guy did ask a similar question before though.

The yarn ball would have a haphazard winding and I was afraid that would not maximize the effect of induction. So I thought maybe I could arrange one coil like the one in the MIT paper, then wrap another one, in another direction, outside the sphere, and repeat again, in different directions, as much as I can. I was thinking about using this to make a electric generator, but putting a spherical magnet inside it. Arranging infinite bar mangets into a sphere was what I thought, but wouldn't take a huge amount of energy to keep them together since their poles basically repel every other magnet.

wait. As I'm reading down, you do notice that most science speculation require basic laws of science(or evidence) to back them up, right? But then again, you did say that this is pseudoscience so I guess we'll have to throw logic reasoning out of the window? lol

I guess you're not going to post your paper online for fear of other people stealing your idea? I trust maths more than I trust the lingual treatment of any theory.

Basic biology tells us that our eyes see when there is light on our retina. Irregardless whether it is directly or indirectly. Also, basic biology tells us that our eyes will try(try!) to tune to get enough light to form an image. on a hot day, the heat wave you see, is the blurry image formed as light from behind the heated air column gets refracted as it passes through the heated air column of different densities, and then enters your eyes.. I believed this is covered in basic optical physics? The light does not push the air away. If it was so, why would it not pass straight through instead, pushing the gas out of the shortest optical path? Refraction also occurs when two different substances of same temperature meet. Try doing experiments. If that was not so, then the straw in a glass will not appear bent as it enters water from air of same temperature.

While I agree that psychiatry can't be quantified nor quantified, I still cannot agree that there is no such thing as mental illness as there is unfortunately, recurring patterns in cases of "illness" where parts of the brain are damaged. It's just that psychiatry is not an tool adequate enough to use.

You can always just try to live in a rotating chamber(preferably in space), with centripetal force compensation for the "G"s. The speed of the rotation can be slowly increased for the body to slowly accustom the additional force. Unfortunately, that means that the muscles, once exposed to a place without that much gravity will have the same scenario as astronauts exposed to 0G.

Actually, that winding in http://web.mit.edu/6...apter8/8.5.html (the spherical one) was exactly what I had in mind, with the difference that it is not connected to a electric supply, and that there would be more layers oriented into different directions. Was wondering if I could make a generator that did not matter what direction the magnet was moving. Thanks for that link, btw.

I think you might be searching for nanorobots that can actively interfere with our neurons? In that case, you can interfere with the cell body directly instead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence You might want to check out the pc2 term behind E=mc2 E=mc2 is only for objects with rest mass not equal to 0. For light photons it becomes E=pc, not mc2

Consider the following scenario. If there was a solenoid shaped into a sphere, connected to an ammeter and voltmeter, and there was a spherical magnet inside it, I have a few questions regarding this: 1) What is the magnetic configuration of most spherical magnets? I.e. are they simply horizontal? Is it possible for the north pole to be on the outside of the sphere and the south pole of the sphere? 2) If I shake the solenoid and the magnet inside it moves, would that produce an induced emf provided that the sphere rolls inside the solenoid?

The different colors of light cannot be seen anywhere since the glass slab I used for the snell's law experiment was transparent. No scattering means I can't see the light ray in the slab. Kinda same like it's impossible for you to see laser beam paths in clear vacuum.

I tried doing it on my porch but nothing of that happened. Will try to post a photo. Also, how did you managed to see the blueish shadow? It's...just too strange because this becomes more like scattering of light than diffraction.

Do you have a picture? It's hard to imagine how the pipe can diffract considering that the pipe is way bigger than the wavelength of light.

As swansont has answered, the refraction at one surface is reversed at the other side. Have you done the calculations? The light ray reforms on the other side, parallel to the original light ray if and only if the sides of the prism is parallel. Though there might be difference in width.. Say, you can also try doing this experiment. I've done it in school last year, and nope, no rainbow was formed on the other side when white light is shone on the rectangular prism. In fact, if it did, I shouldn't be able to use the optical pin method.

note: you should have gotten Pa=P+Pb from the conservation of momentum, and the knowledge that |P|<|Pa| since it's an head on elastic collision. I guess that's done then with additional mathematical manipulation.

If you mean how does electricity do work, i.e. how does electrons in motion do work, you might want to understand how electric fields do work first. Because the concept is (almost) same.

Yes. QED is needed to explain the interactions between electrons. Somehow a photon is exchanged when two electrons collide and that causes them to repel each other. Note: the last line. Ever heard of displacement current in maxwell's correction for Ampere's circuit law? Hertz proved it's real 8 years after the formulation of that theory. Science works either ways.