steevey

If iron and other magnetic metals lose their magnetic properties when they become molten, how could the core of the Earth be appropriately 9000 degrees?

Yep, that's still conservation of matter and energy.

The reason steel is stronger is because the 2% carbon offsets the atoms so that the molecular structure is less in a straight line and so then takes more force to change its physical structure. If you have iron, its molecular structure is more of a straight line, so its easier to bend. And the reason we know its not a cycle is because in experiments where particles are not determined, the indirect result is a pattern that could only be caused by continuous or constant waves. Also, switching from a particle to a wave doesn't effect the stability of an atom, it just effects how we view the matter we perceive around us. Plutonium is going to decay whether its been measured or not. Not only that, but while we are observing something, its still a wave, however we only see one property or position of the wave which is why electrons seem like there popping up at random locations when we observe them at an atomic level.

If something has a minus charge though, doesn't that mean its charge simply negative? I mean quarks use 3 different charges already, and gluons are suppose to use 8. What's wrong with finding a particle with yet another charge even if that question above isn't what your saying?

What happens with people like this person, is because everyone uses the same exact measurement of time and for so many things, people take time is a mystical force that's always there. If we were orbiting a different star, time would change, if life on this planet evolved with higher energy systems and moved faster, things like bullets would seems slow. Time is just a label to better organize things, it's not something that actually exists. You can do this with math too. You may be able to find a pattern, but your still the one labeling as that pattern with a specific system of logic which doesn't coincide with the universe which is why you can have negative area and distance. Never in reality are two apples going 1+1=2. The only thing that happens is a cluster of atoms are moving closer together. At any point, they can be separated without any math, and the distance between them is never actually 0 anyway due to the electro magnetic force.

But you replied to that after you said you were ignoring me, which isn't what I stated I would do to you at any point, but rather that you stop commenting to me on that particular subject since all your comments were insidious.

Just because some matter acts differently than normal matter doesn't mean it's NOT matter. Any "matter" has mass. Minus 1g would indicate that there is negative matter there, which something that is impossible in reality in the same as having negative distance.

Now that I think about it, there might have to be a difference between the size of the assumed or determined universe, and the size of the quantum mechanical universe, since although matter can exist anywhere within an infinite number of positions, it seems to only be determined around some 13-14 billion light year radius as far as we cal tell. But, why is that true even with the fact that all matter was existing in standing waves before anything was here to measure it? Unless, there is a singular point around which all matter was most likely to show up, and now it's spread out. The only way that as standing waves that matter wouldn't already occupy infinite determined positions is if there was a single determined point at least area where all matter was most likely to show up. Because then, you have this expansion, which means matter already doesn't occupy all determined positions. I didn't ask everyone to ignore it did I?

But if time is something that actually exists, how come I could at any point in my life replace time with something such as "per 100 swings of a pendulum" or "per 200 miles the earth travels around the sun"?

There can be infinite space but only finite matter. That's why the sky is dark. Not to mention all the galactic dust and the fact that an entire galaxy will only look like a single point after a few hundred million light years because of some triangle property of space or that the concentration of light gets weaker by the 4th power of the distance. It may be a paradox, but theres gotta be some reason why the sky isn't white.

C is just an observed property of photons. Because they have no mass, their momentum is infinite.

Well we can't know it, but we can come up with something we are very sure is the answer.

The height may be different, but it still has to have the same volume. So then would there be a difference of force between water coming out of a straw with a height of 3 meters with a volume of v than a cube with a volume of v?

But if matter is neither created nor destroyed, then its infinite too isn't it? So nothing can be superficially finite, at least not anything within the universe.

If the universe is infinite though, we would never see the end and be able to define where it starts and ends.

New quantum mechanical theories suggest that if the singularity universe had a wave function, then everything we see now is just one part of its superposition (or collapsed superposition), which allows it's space to exist at any point which is why a lot of matter appears to be expanding from every direction.

If I'm not mistaken, the total force the water delivers will be the same, but the concentration or power will vary. Its just like how current acts in electricity. The voltage can remain the same, but the amps can vary.

The physical reason they don't penetrate is because they have different mathematical values as a wave or point which govern how they act. If two waves had all the same properties, they would cancel out each other's existence. And when I say entanglement, I'm referring to the phenomena of when two particles interact and haven't been measured since the interaction, their wave functions combine with each other so that the two particles now count as the same particle. But, when the entangled objects are measured, they become dis-entangled and return to separate particle states.

But particles are waves, they have a wave function, and a wave function extends indefinitely through space, so the size of the totality of everything that exists is infinite. This reason things seem finite is because matter has specific areas where it likes to exist the most, and those areas don't vary much.

Well what's stopping that process? Why does there have to be some equivalence?

Generally, particles don't inter-penetrate each other because of the different quantum numbers. However, an electron never stops being a wave either. What can happen as a result of this is entanglement (or if the particles just interact, they can become entangled). If the wave functions of separate particles overlap with certain mathematical properties and haven't been measured, then their properties are no longer determined, and so their wave functions are combined to hold the information of a single undetermined particle. But what tends to happen is this entanglement disentangles whenever its measured in any way.

But I mean what if there's no UV detector WHILE the person is still there with their back facing the electron gun?

Although the wave function property allows electrons to pop up pretty much anywhere, what governs them and their probable areas are a set of 4 quantum mechanical properties or numbers. These 4 properties which are the energy level, angular momentum, spin, and some kind of magnetic quantum number. Along with the fact that like charges repel each other, no two particles in the same system can have all the same 4 quantum values. This is more what separates electron's from each other in a wave or point state.

Why specifically can't matter be created or destroyed? Is it because everything in the universe only changes the amount or position of matter and energy?