davey2222

Thanks.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/05/27/german-teen-solves-300-year-old-mathematical-riddle-posed-by-sir-isaac-newton/ Does anyone know what is this problem that was unsolved for 300 years, and the other part about 'bouncing' problem?

I copied and pasted the following from Unexplained-mysteries.com: "Imagine an electromagnet, hooked up to some energy source. Attached to it by a frame is a piece of iron, at some distance from the magnet. The electromagnet is switched on for a fleeting instant, and then switched off again. Its magnetic field travels out in all directions as a wave, propagating through space at light speed, about 300,000 kilometers per second. When it reaches the piece of iron, the iron is pulled toward the electromagnet, and its own magnetic wave travels back to the electromagnet. But by the time the wave reaches it, the electromagnet has been switched off…so it is not attracted toward the iron. The forces within the system are unbalanced, and there is an “impossible” net momentum in one direction. The entire apparatus, including the piece of iron, is accelerated in that direction."

Thanks guys

When someone tosses an object into the air, the trajectory is a parabola as I have learned in Physics. But why do planets follow ellipses? I ask this since both the object and planets are being pulled by gravitational force.

Turning produces acceleration (= artificial gravity directed outward). Warmer air, being less dense than air-conditioner air, moves inward, hence the rise in temperature if you are sitting there.

You do not have to worry about your toothbrush becoming radioactive after its exposure to UV if this was the gist of your question.

why can't people post properly oriented images? Was it so difficult to edit them first?

I have been thinking it this way; zoom out enough times and we end up zooming out of a quark or gluon or whatever smallest thing in the universe, then a fundamental particle, then an atom, then a molecule, then a surface, etc. Speculation; Instead of an infinite universe, the universe is infolded.

But still they refer to it. Any place one can look at the Heaviside Component, or anyone here who can state it? Bearden website talks but does not show it.

I have been looking through the limited available electromagnetic books I can find for the Heaviside curled EM energy flow component, and I can't find it, at least I think they don't put it into textbooks. Does anyone here know what the equation looks like?

I doubt it. If that were the case then it would be the same as my speculation #1.

I think there may be some theory like a broken-symmetry something somewhere in this? I am curious if you had an answer to this problem. Mind sharing with us?

In physics there is the problem in unifying gravity with EM and Quantum mechanics. Perhaps this is the result of our unsuccessful attempt to unify gravity with them, that we are unable to answer such a question satisfactorily?

Here are my speculations: 1. Perhaps there exists a non-EM signal which propagates at infinite velocity. 2. Maybe at a higher dimension particles are all connected and it takes zero time for the flow of information from particle to particle. 3. Or the information moves into another dimension, travels at finite speed but backward in time, and emerges and show itself at the other location in our dimension. 4. Someone made a mistake in the entanglement experiment.

I think the issue questionposter brought up was about conservation of energy. If the photon gets blue-shifted due to gravity, where did the energy to blue-shift the photon come from?

Interesting. But even if the earth's rotational (or translational) kinetic energy is used up in blue-shifting a photon, its gravitational field is still there. Then further blue-shifting through the g-field will result in what? Perhaps you meant to ask if the g-field will become weaker instead?

That length in Biot-savart law is for the geometry of the conductor so I think it does not depend on length in this case. Your question did say the geometry was a straight conductor. My answer to the question would be current alone.

Nobody understands it perfectly, hence the dual property that depends on the detection/experiment method as the generalisation. Perhaps someone will come up with a better theory.

This is what i learned in my university: whether light behaves as a wave or particle depends on the experiment, or detection, method. If we talk about a receiving antenna then assume light behaving as waves. For the photoelectric effect then assume particles. Double-slit experiment then waves. Etc.

Maybe distance is an illusion and somewhere in a higher dimension we are all overlapping?

Try looking up Wheatstone bridge.

Well friction is not a field. For a time varying EM field is it possible to move a charge around a closed path such that the net work is non-zero?

Does there exist a field which is non-conservative at all?

Vacuum is indeed something in my opinion, it is existence. Quantum fluctuations appear in the vacuum.