questionposter

The only reason this universe exists is because of what's going on at the quantum mechanical level. You can do something like describe biology using quantum mechanics, but because biology is at such a bigger scale, you just need to do more work. It's not that its impossibly, it that its bloody difficult because your dealing with such a complex thing. Your not just calculating the wave function of hydrogen, you calculating the wave function of like 10^100 atoms while knowing the temperature of a system which effects how fast those atoms will bump into each other and you need to calculate how much force they'd bump into each other then, and need to calculate how the light hitting it effects the changes in random molecules and etc. It's just very very very very hard to use quantum mechanics at a macroscopic scale.

I think your trying to say that the universe works so complexly that to us it "seems" random, but no, it's really just random. If you flip a coin, you could know the exact angular momentum and exactly how much energy every air molecule touches every atom of the coin with what energy at what angle (for air resistance) and say its going to be heads, and it there's still a chance it will be tails and it would eventually be tails after enough flips. This is what chaos is. Not only that, but if the universe has infinite fractal symmetry like a normal mathematical fractal anyway, then there is ALWAYS some lower or higher level which effects things on an infinite and therefore incalculable scale (which can also lead into that thing where all the most subatomic of particles are universes, and this universe is just the base particle of another universe and etc. I don't know how it works exactly, but its something like that). So there would always be some infinitesimal thing effect things at a larger scale, or something at an even larger scale effecting things at a large scale. I don't see how you can completely know anything for sure, even if the universe isn't as infinitely complex as that. We'd need computers even more powerful than what quantum computers are suppose to be in order to have a chance of calculating the motion of everything in the universe from the smallest scale, but then you still need to ask "well wait, why is it acting how it is on that scale?", and then if you find the answer, you still need to ask "well wait, what's causing things to do what it does on THAT scale?" The universe is just too infinite to be completely deterministic.

But if my model is wrong, that's saying photons don't take up 3 dimensional space. But then you also say that something like a radio photon takes longer to interact with an electron, so doesn't that mean that a photon 3 dimensional has to completely run into an electron in order to absorbs itself completely an electron up to the next energy level? And if it doesn't, then its still the same problem because that means that an electron can still only interact with part of a photon. How does something oscillate at the wavelength of a football field and bend around objects and not exist in at least 3 dimensions? Also, how are such low energy level photons created if electrons can't absorb them? Also, I CAN jump in front of a bus and back out of the way if its traveling slow enough, and even if it was moving fast, so what? It's still possible at a highers speed. Maybe i should make GIFs in photoshop to show you the visual problems.

Potential present is not a term I'm familiar with, nor is the internet apparently. So if a clock accelerates to near to speed of light, so what if it accelerates to near the speed of light? Why would how much kinetic energy it has effect how it perceives time or how other objects perceive its time if its not distorting the fabric of space in a way that's proportional to it's kinetic energy? Unless time universality flows at a specific speed and the only thing that changes is how we perceive that flow?

I'm not saying a species ever stops evolving (unless it doesn't have DNA), I'm saying that a particular gene will not alter the whole of a species when any large alteration to it will only cause harm to the organism carrying it therefore it won't be passed on. I never said humans were "Done" evolving, but some alterations obviously won't make humans any more successful, such as alterations to the gene responsible for controlling the processes cell cycle, since alterations to those are either cancer or a shortened life span (that one disease where you age faster, I can't remember what it's called), which is why these alterations usually aren't caused by evolution since it would have been eliminated a while ago by the process of natural selection. Yeah, giraffe's necks can be a little shorter or longer than average, that's fine, it's obviously a subtle enough alteration where it doesn't effect the well-being of Giraffe's enough. But something like a decrease of over two feet or increase of over two feet (in proportion to the giraffe) might cause some problems, and so a giraffe carrying that extreme alteration might not survive to pass on those more extremely altered genes.

While it's true other animals don't accomplish as much as us mentally (as far as we know), its still no excuse to not better ourselves if we can. There's still a lot of terrible things happening despite this development.

Doesn't an increase in kinetic energy increase an object's relative mass, and more mass distorts the fabric of space more? I think energy distorts the fabric of space better than matter, which is why scientists were planning on trying to accelerate mass particles to the speed of light using the gravitational fields generated by high power photon lasers rather than just giving particles kinetic energy which obviously wouldn't work. Also swan, just move this thread then, don't make a big deal out of it, just move it.

I can touch a wave if want just by putting my hand in the water. In fact touching a wave is how you can interact with photons at all since they are part wave. When you touch the wave of a photon, it bumps an electron to a higher energy level. If it was just "feeling" a wave, then the photon would leave on its own without an electron going to a previous energy level due to the fact that as a wave a photon is still traveling, although I still don't get that swan, how does the energy of the entire wave instantaneously transport to one single interaction point? Because photons occupy at least 3 dimensions right? They move in at least a 3 dimensional way which is why they can stretch to be as big as football fields. So if a photon has a length of a football field, how does the energy contained in the part of the photon that's in the back suddenly become tranported to the front where it was touched?

The precise selective cause is the environment. If something cannot survive the environment on Earth, it will die. What's complex about evolution is how mutations build off of each other like to give dinosaurs feathers or to give giraffes long necks. What happens is you have a gene that gets altered which allows a species to survive better, and then after that original mutation becomes common in the species, as in nearly all the members have it, there's a good chance that the alteration of that gene will then alter again. Since its so successful and so many members have the alteration, there's a greater chance for that alteration to alter yet again. So giraffes had a gene that only made their necks like 2 inches longer, and then when that become common, the probability of that gene altering again increases, so then now it gets altered to make their necks 4 inches long, and since it helps the giraffes still, then that same process just happens with that alteration and this process happens again and again until that gene can't be altered without some back-draw which is why that gene stays the way it is. So right now, Giraffes necks might be as long as they can get before being a burden, which is why they don't alter anymore, because an alteration in that gene again would only do harm, so the organism containing it wouldn't survive to pass it on to the species in order for the alteration process to happen to it again. Or like with humans, there's not a whole lot that could get bigger or smaller and still be as helpful. We could have a bigger heart, but then there could be less room for other organs. We could make more room for other organs by having a smaller heart, but then it would be easier to have a heart attack. Eventually a gene alters in the same way to a point where it doesn't change a species any more due to the fact that its unsuccessful and any members carrying a surplus of alteration die before they can pass it on, so then evolution selects some other gene to alter. Although there's a sort of loophole that can happen to this. This surplus of alteration isn't always completely dead, it could also be a recessive gene. We can still carry it, but it wouldn't make our offspring successful in the right circumstances so then that DNA wouldn't get passed on to a future generation, unless it was also recessive in the offspring and then recessive in the offspring's offspring and etc. But the spruplus thing I'm talking about is true for dominant genes. If a Giraffe's neck is "too" long, then it might not be able to carry it's neck well enough or it might burn calories too fast or it's center of balance would be too off or etc.

Microwave a match in acrylic glass. That's cool looking plasma.

Is heat caused by the fact that when particles absorb infrared light, they go into a higher energy level, so since the atoms have a larger radius now, they bump into each other more frequently and with more potential energy supporting the electro-magnetic repulsion between electrons? Although I don't get exactly how heat would be transferred in that scenario. For some reason, the electrons would have to go to their previous state in order to release the infrared light, so does that mean that infrared light is released because atoms bump into each other when an object is heated up?

A Higg's boson is what's suppose to be carrying mass in the fundamental mass particles right? Well how can a force carry mass? Plus, isn't there already some other type of boson to describe how the force of gravity is carried like a W boson or Z boson or something like that?

I thought about it, and those experiments with time dilation use clocks, but clocks aren't measuring time, they are just counting the number of times a quartz crystal vibrates or the number of times a gear turns of gears that turn. So, wouldn't a dent in the fabric of space make it tick slower since it would be a higher force of gravity being put in the gears which means that the same amount of energy won't make something travel the same amount of distance in time? So, how does time itself actually effect a quartz crystal vibrating? Shouldn't the effect of a dent in the fabric of space just be that because there's a high force of gravity, that it's harder for the quartz crystals to move? And then when objects move faster, don't faster moving objects just distort they distort the fabric of space more (having a higher gravitational pull)? I mean, a photon doesn't have mass, so I don't think it distorts the fabric of space the same way, which is why different energy photons will still travel at C, since if photons did have mass, a different amount of kinetic energy to move the mass would make them travel at different speeds.

Wait what? I could have swore scientists put a clock in an airplane around the world and compared it with a clock here on Earth and the clock on the plane was slower http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae433.cfm

My problem is your saying that by only touching the first part of the photon, that I am somehow perceiving all of it, which can't be true because if I red-shift a photon, then that means less of the photon is hitting me per second, or in other words, less of the wave-crests are hitting me per second. But the reason radio waves are so large is because of he uncertainty principal. Something with such low relative mass is that much more delocalized.

So doesn't that mean I interact with all of the photon regardless of how far away I am from the actual end of the photon if I only touch the first part of it? But then how could that doppler effect work?

Ok, scientists have been trying to find the theory of everything for almost a century, so I think the problem really is that they need to have more discoveries, not how they fit them into old models. In fact, new discoveries usually mean new models in physics, like with the older model, there was no quark, when when quarks were discovered, a new model of the atom was invented which more accurately described it.

So your saying the size of a photon isn't due to it's wave mechanics, which is why a photon will continue to be large even when it hits something? Does that mean the uncertainty principal isn't wave mechanics, but it's own thing?

So the gluon mathematics doesn't fit perfectly, but pretty close?

But a photon doesn't exist in just a single position, it's wavelength can be as big as a football field right? So it's size is as big as a football field. So if only the first tiny part of the photon hits my body, what happens to the rest of it? Or with a gamma ray, the only reason I measure it as radio-waves when traveling away from it is because less of the photon hits me per second, like with the Doppler effect, less hertz from an emitted sources hits me per second as a travel away from it. Are you saying that just by touching any part of a photon, that all of it somehow instantaneously condenses to the single point of where it touched me? But then what about radio waves? They travel through solid walls and electronics and they still exist as acres in size when doing so, they don't get determined like how you say.

So I've heard somewhere or read somewhere on here that photons can distort the fabric of space, but what about energy itself? Why would energy need to take some other form to distort the fabric (mass) when it already does so? Because as you approach the speed of light, time slows down from your point of view, but the only time that time slows down in relativity is when the fabric of space get's distorted, which means by adding energy your somehow distorting the fabric of space more, but if energy doesn't carry "higg's bosons" or whatever causes mass, how does energy do it? I mean energy has relative mass, but it isn't mass itself, that's why it needs to be converted, so I don't get this.

So a photon is it's own particle, but how come whenever an electron jumps to a lower energy level, the energy is released in the form of a photon? Why does this new "photon" "particle" have to be created? Where does all this extra particle-ness come from? What's wrong with just pure energy?

I've heard photons described as electro-magnetic waves, waves of momentum, pure momentum, pure energy, etc. But with mass, matter carrier of mass, but there is suppose to be some particle that causes mass and causes a distortion of the fabric of space? So, is there a principal particle that comprises photons, or are photons pure energy? In which case, why can't we just say energy is an actual substance?

Animals don't live to compete, they live to survive, that's why we can be friends with other animals like birds and dogs since in that case , both are surviving, even when there might be a limited amount of resources, humans and other animals can stick together.

Well, I don't know about running with an average animal, but Blue Whales burn energy more efficiently than any other animal because they are the largest animal. Scientists have noticed a pattern that the bigger an animal is, the more efficient it uses energy, though scientists have no idea why this pattern occurs. With humans I suspect that humans "can" be the most efficient for running if they force themselves to work out heavily every day, which other animals don't do because they need to conserve energy for searching for food, but otherwise I don't think humans are naturally the most efficient since there's larger animals than run more and run faster like tigers.