RichIsnang

Where do the four fundamental forces get their energy from? it takes energy to move things, and the forces do it constantly seemingly without an energy source?

second law of thermodynamics states that entropy of a closed system will most probably increase over time. people say you see a vase smashing but never unsmashing. but if i just leave a vase on the work top the probability of it smashing of its own accord is also extremely low. but thats a human example which i think isnt extremely relevant with entropy. water in space freezes and goes into a sort of ordered state of its own accord, and stays there? gas in space will come together to form a star if not a planet, which are pretty oredered, we can be more certain of the arrangement of molecules of a planet than of a nebula. whats the relation between brownian motion and entropy? it seems to me they are pretty much the same thing, and brownian motion describes the situation alot better than entropy. I struggle to find examples of the second law in action that arent brownian motion. also it seems to me like there is always something stopping the entropy increasing, gravity, cold, electrostatic attraction etc. i may have mistaken the law, does it mean you need to put work in to stop entropy decreasing?

uncertainty in energy x uncertainty in time? > reduced planck's constant?

does having the same wave function mean they have to same probability of being found in the same place?

Can a particle have an irrational amount of energy?

From what i understand, the principle states that no two identical fermions can occupy the same quantum state at one time. i have a few of queries: Is there no two electrons in the same quantum state in the whole universe? If two electrons are on either side of the universe, can they be in the same quantum state? Would we not have noticed this? If we try and put an electron into a quantum state, but it some galaxy far far away (pardon the pun ) there is already an electron in that quantum state, would we have trouble putting it into that state? is it not possible? or would it force the other electron out of that state? violating information/speed of light. or is it possible to have two electrons in the same state if they are far away from each other? if so what's the limit of distance? how far apart do they have to be? why? and how many different quantum states are there? an infinite number? does it take a ton of energy to put electrons in some of the quantum states? its alot of questions i know i can split them up if needs be rich

HahahahahahHahaha zapatis, that made me laugh Yeah sorry that was a bit uncalled for, I was having a bit of a stressy moment, My apologies

a) (s)he can can him/herself what they want b) that definition for noob and n00b are complete rubbish, I think the definitions will change depending on who you ask and c) It's completely off topic, unnecessary and irrelevant. Don't do that again please

Is it possible that the star was formed from gas that was created in the big bang, but was really spread out so took ages to form a star? By ages I mean like 12.5 billion years?

Space bar broken?

Ok, thanks black holes are so strange

What does that mean? Sorry my knowledge is a little lacking

how is heat capacity related to entropy?

Couple of queries so far. How are these black holes emitting electromagnetic radiation? Why is 10^30 the limit you place on hz? How can you measure the mass of subatomic particles, i don't even think it's possible. I assume you mean quarks? And I don't know why you are going on about degenerate matter, that would just make a neutron star, unless you mean some new form of degenerate matter made of only quarks? And just for the record, you need to be careful when compounding a load of equations together, they may not all be valid in the same situation. And when you say 'Exn' why are getting the product of the number of mol and the mass of one particle?

C is a conversion factor in e=mc^2 if you change that to v, that's fine if your object is moving at c, but for all other values of v, the equation no longer holds true as the relation between the mass and energy is false.

correct me if i am wrong on any of this. the nebula has higher entropy as a neutron star. we know the position of the particles in a neutron with relative precision, but in a nebula this will be much harder to know. this means the nebula has higher entropy. we can know the positions of particles in a star with more precision than we can in a nebula simply because they occupy a smaller amount of space. quote from Brian Greene's book: 'hence black holes have maximum entropy' the schwarzschild radius for a non-rotating black hole of the mass of the sun is ~2950m the radius of the sun is~ 695500000m seems to me there are any less possible combination of particle positions inside the schwarzschild radius than in the radius of the sun. so why is he saying it has higher entropy? everything has entropy, we defined it that way, so weather or not it as a negative heat capacity it irrelevant?

Yeah good luck making neutronium on earth in any substantial quantity

Neutronium is degenerate matter

If you take a large cloud of gas in space (nebula), it has very high entropy. Once it starts to attract itself through gravity, its entropy decreases. When it gets hot enough to form a star, does it have even lower entropy? and at the end of its life cycle does, lets say this particular star turns into a neutron star, neutron stars have extremely low entropy right? so gravity lowers entropy, so why is it proposed that black holes have maximum entropy? it seems to me, even if you took all the possible combinations of particles inside the event horizon, this would still be lower entropy than if all the mass in the form of a star.

Beta decay is mediated by the weak force, so it involves bosons. And doesn't sodium 22 undergo beta + decay? It definately emits positrons.

I was thinking because it is so dense, but I guess if it's only a small amount then fair enough

I thought if they made it on earth it would just fall straight into the middle of the earth?

I think they have made degenerate matter, they have made a BEC and isn't that degenerate matter? I don't know if you have to constantly it tho Correction: I dont think a BEC is degenerate matter I don't think we can make it

Does gravity make any difference to the probability wave? Or is that more mix n match?

Ok thanks guys