steevey

So then the once established idea of "matter cannot be created nor destroyed" is completely irrelevant and eventually the universe will contain twice as much energy as it does now since matter keeps getting created from nothing but then gets converted into energy and stays in the universe? It seems like that time travel paradox where because you keep traveling in time in the past in the future, there will be an infinitely increasing number of the time traveler.

The article that stated that in the last 650 years, the skulls of human populations have changed, while you seemed to be arguing that different genomes are more expressed rather than different genes being created and assimilated into the human race.

Yeah, I got that Well that, when its just in an undetermined wave state I already know. But, when the electron is determined, its position or location seems to be going to different places without appearing the intervening space. How else could an electron have a chance of appearing on the other side of the universe if it couldn't just "appear" in different locations without traveling the distance to get there? Matter gives things mass doesn't it? It's how much matter, which should be physical. If there's a physical phenomena, shouldn't there be a physical cause? A physical cause for the interference pattern is that physically, the electron isn't just a particle, its also a wave.

Well thats the way I've heard it from multiple sources, and if thats not whats happening, what is? Why else would scientists say "the electrons appears at another location without traveling through the intervening space"?

It's not that its not a well defined trajectory, its that electrons literally appear and disappear in and to different locations. I'm not picturing an electron as actually spinning, which I keep telling you, but I am also visualizing an electron as a wave which isn't classical either. I'm only see spin as a physical thing thats going on, but I want to know what that physical thing is. But if we can't answer that, then thats fine for now, but since we don't know what it is exactly, its not fair to say it can't possibly be a physical thing. Your trying to say how you can make something physical from something thats not physical?

So if I take one electron and one positron and put them together, they will generate two low energy gamma rays, and according to theoretical physics, this is happening everywhere all the time. But, whats the frequency of this happening? If my entire room was filled with these gamma-rays forming from matter-anti matter pairs, why wouldn't I get some kind of cancer easily? One of those low energy gamma rays would certainly be enough to accidentally ionize something. And since this phenomena produces energy which doesn't disappear, doesn't that violate the conservation of matter and energy? I have two particles which are creating out of the nothingness of space, but then they annihilate each other and they get converted into energy which then goes about the universe...that doesn't seem right.

It would seem you and your links trying to support the arguement, that because there doesn't need to be a new many adaptations to survive, that evolutionary process in humans is stopping. I could agree with you that perhaps the process of evolution in humans right now is slowing currently, but its not coming to a halt and the environment will change just as its been for the last 3.9±.2 billion years but usually very slowly. And if we discover how to travel faster than light and learn how to live on other planets, theres whole new worlds in which to adapt to. Although evolution can and normally does take many years, how else do you explain the variation in skulls of humans if not by a more prominent and efficient form surviving? I don't think one genome getting more expressed can really do that an an entire population.

Matter, energy, momentum, spin, orbitals, and just about anything else on the atomic and sub-atomic level are all quantized, so therefore, there has to be an end somewhere since infinitesimal and infinite amounts of matter and energy couldn't exist. There might be a lot of activity that we don't notice, but the fabric of space itself hasn't been proven to exist. Although, what seems promising is that thing about space being a composite of all the indefinite waves since it would explain why an electron could pop all the way on the other side of the universe: Not because there's some hole poking through the 4th dimension to the 3rd dimension at two points, but because the electron's existence itself extends all the way to the other side of the universe. Are we talking about the same electron pairs? I'm talking about two electrons at the first energy state, but you seem to be talking about an electron and positron appearing out of the nothingness of space then annihilating each other and then trying to explain a medium using it. But also, isn't the energy released from that type of collision suppose to be very big? Why aren't there explosions everywhere when in the Hadron Collider one particle and its anti-particle release huge amounts of measurable energy when collided?

I don't know what your trying to tell me exactly, but there is no "proof" for a fabric of space-time, since no particle has been discovered which comprises it or acts as a medium for light and forces, so I suppose its possible that space being infinite and all is a composite of the waves of particles which, a wave function also extends indefinitely through space. The Pauli exclusion principal though seems to come second; If I start with one electron is the lowest energy orbital then add one more electron, the other electron is already there and repels the other electron, so the added electron will have something different about it such as its spin. If your trying to ask "why two objects can't occupy the same space", its because forces such as the electro-magnetic force prevent it. One electron will repel the other, and without extensive research on things like neutronium, the matter in neutron stars comprised only of neutrons, that's the best we can do it seems. When trying to visualize the quantum mechanical world, I can't rely just on real-world objects, I have to use my imagination too combined with the understanding of how it works. I can't really visualize the fact that an electron is undetermined, so I just have to realize that as I'm imagining it as a wave and that it results in this spherical shape which is the electron in an undetirmed state of existence. Usually, real-world objects are only good for the mathematic portions, such as what you said with the tuning fork. If I have a double p orbital or dumbbell, then one is + while the other is -. Or its also good because we can't distinguish two different electrons at that level, so we have to use math to make it as though their wave functions are combined to form a single one, which the warp-able surface or a drum might be good for as well, although you can just use cosine/sine substitution and see the same effects on a wave.

I don't think an electron is actually spinning like a top, but doesn't there have to be some explanation or physical thing for it? Or do scientists not yet know that? Scientists don't know whats physically going on with spin, but they know there's some property of it?

If I had good sources other than books and people in real life, on the internet, I would have used them, but the links I used still contain real research and scientific input, so there's no reason for them to keep saying that evolution can't possibly be going on today.

If the gravity of a planet smaller than Earth is much stronger than Earth, why can't great amounts of atmosphere exist if the gravity can hold it in place? There's even atmospheres of iron gas predicted to be around neutron stars. Are you saying it requires too much potential energy? Cause if a planet was small and had a large atmospheric mass, the atmosphere would extend further into space than on Earth, so would the atmosphere just have so much poential energy then that it would just leave the planet?

But when I'm picturing an electron, I'm not picturing it as this particle, I'm picturing it as a wave which is the undetirmination of an electron with relative shapes. They have regions, but the regions get weaker or "less probable" as the distance increases from its most probable place, which is more or less where on a wave, it would be the crest, just like in the double slit experiment where the most probable place corresponded to being hit on a wall as a wave on the wave crest or top of the wave. How exactly do scientists know "spin" exists if there is no determined path for an electron and it pops up in different random places? Is it that classically, an electron still does have a physical spin or physical movements, but because of quantum mechanics, an electron is also undetermined and follows mathematical probability? It would make a lot more sense for electrons exist in the same state but still avoid each other as waves.

I'm not talking about matter-anti matter pairs, I'm talking about the electron itself re-appearing in different locations without passing through the intervening space. I've seen lectures though and I know some of the math for it and how its quantized and that it helps avoid the exclusion principal, I just don't visually see how it would be physically operating within a particle such as an electron. I can imagine that two electrons exist in the same energy level and shell because they have opposite spins, which mathematically makes them not occupy the same exact space at the same time, but what physical thing is going on thats making them do that? What is spin doing to the electrons to make them not hit each other or occupy the same space or give them the specific shapes it gives them? It isn't necessarily directed towards you, but to anyone who can answer it.

Except if you read my links you'd know that there is real evidence evolution is going on today. I didn't mention them that much in the actual post because I thought it would be redundant since you'd be expected to read them before saying my point is invalid.

I don't know exactly what your trying to say, but it might have to do with more than just charge. Electrons do repel each other with the same amount of strength since all electrons are identical, but there are other factors which determine where they are, such as energy or the angular momentum and the mysterious spin which allows electrons to exist in other places because of the Pauli exclusion principal. Electrons don't tend to cancel out each-others existence by having all the same properties, but to avoid that requires some properties to be different such as the ones I mentioned before. So its not just charge that repels electrons, its also exclusion, and for specific and different distances from the nucleus, the properties required to occupy that space can change. Two electrons might exist in the s orbital at the first energy level and classically they would repel each other, which they do, but also, one will have spin up and the other will have spin down making them different and distinguishable.

Maybe electrons aren't virtual particles, but I keep seeing in places that they seem to "pop" in and out of different locations with no discrete pattern. In fact, I've even heard that electrons themselves pop in and out of existence in different locations very quickly almost quote-ably. But if thise isn't a virtual particle, what makes an electron different? Another way I heard it was that electrons, as particles, can appear in different locations without existing or passing through in the intervening space. But also, I don't see what about spin actually exists in reality. I have a hydrogen atom, surrounded by a single electron. The electron is a wave-particle which when undetermined takes the form of a specific shape, which I think is "S" for "sphere". Where's the angular momentum in this electron which is just a wave? It's just a wave that has the form of a sphere. Unless that doesn't matter because observable things only occur with particles in a determined state, making a wave act as single particle, but they still have no discrete path, so how is their angular momentum even constant if the path it takes isn't specific? It could go one direction, or the other. It could go that way, or the other way, with no predictable motion, so how does a physical spin exist?

I'm still not seeing how angular momentum plays out in the picture if spin or angular momentum has nothing to do with any physical motion. Is it derived from the Bohr model since electrons occupied circular orbitals and therefore were always accelerating in a different direction but in a constant pattern? I thought the Bohr model was wrong. If I just have this piece of matter thats a wave, and then it gets determined to be a single point, does its virtual-particle-ness disappear? And if so, is it that there is a physical motion caused by angular momentum, however an electron is moving so fast with no determined pattern that we can't tell exactly where it is? But if it has only 1 specific quantized angular momentum, and its only acting as a particle and not at all like a virtual particle, what's stopping scientists from actually finding an exact position or determining where it will be next?

Airlines don't stop everything do they? Some times sicknesses sweep through nations, like Cholera in Hati, or in Mexico. The population of Mexico is resistant to Cholera since in very recent geological time their ancestors drank water which contained Cholera. But, not every process of evolution is driven by resistances to germs either, which should be obvious. There's also this article to provide yet some more evidence http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4643312.stm that natural selection is still at work, and once again, here's this http://www.time.com/...1931757,00.html

Mathematics for unobservable things is based on words put into terms of numeric values, there has to be some way to describe it which logically equals the equation otherwise the equations would be meaningless and no one would know what they represent. Maybe Heisenberg forgot to mention it in his diary or only high esteemed physicists know. If there is no physical spin or physical thing that is the electron going at an angle, how does angular momentum exist? Is it more of a way to measure the orbitals? It seems as though "energy" and "angular momentum" in QM seem to be the same thing, since one unit of angular momentum makes an electron leap up 1 orbital, and a photon with 1 eV (or something along those lines) makes an electron leap up 1 orbital. I can see an electron as a wave just fine, but what I don't see is how this constant "angular momentum" fits in anywhere. I just can't seem to work out what x is in z=cos(log(Ln(x+z^cosh+y-(2/acos(t/y)))^tan(Q)+U^tan(J))))^tan(90)

Ok, so as a particle, an electron does in fact have some kind of motion related to angular momentum, but what about as a wave? And then why can't scientists locate the exact position of an electron at any desired moment in time if its not because they keep "appearing" and "disappearing" to new places which are random but still have specific areas where its more likely to happen?

I didn't mean it to say that the actual genes causing them are disappearing, but rather that the amount of extreme genetic diseases has gone down, especially since nations starting restricting people from marrying members of their own families. There are definitely still many people all over the world with different genetic diseases, but with all the research being done, people can even see which genetic diseases they are carriers for. And by the context, it's important to note that "appeared" doesn't mean "suddenly created", it also means "noticed" or "becoming more prevalent", which I've already provided evidence for with populations becoming immune to diseases or germs and groups of populations developing different diets such as being able to digest lactose or raw meat without negative effects.

I don't think there's exactly an uncertainty of measuring distance, but I suppose if there is a particle that comprises the fabric of space time, the uncertainty principle might effect it.

It hasn't been "stopped" by any means, which if you read any of my other posts you would know, but its a way to prevent deaths. Just because more negative genes are dying out doesn't mean positive or just different genes aren't appearing more. There's also still plenty of genetic diseases scientists have no cure for which arise from people marrying in the same family or pure coincidence.

I know spin is quantized, but I'm still not visualizing what it is or what it looks like in quantum mechanics. Are you trying to say that the electron spins in integers, as if it moved in pixels? Even at that point, I still don't see how the electron is a virtual particle and a wave but somehow moves about in a circular motion with angular momentum, unless that's exactly what's going on. What if there's a p orbital or a d orbital? It wouldn't seem to be moving circular, but rather helically or conically. Based on all the research I've done outside here, it would appear that spin is a real circular motion that particles move about with, even if they go in and out of reality. But, is that just for particles in a determined state, or do waves also have angular momentum? Or if it is in a wave, is it more of a relative term for an actual "particle" form?