-
Posts
18295 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by studiot
-
Thank you for the reply. The explicit nature is in quark stark contrast with Wiki, which is why I asked for better information. They also do not explain how that is an oscillation. How is your t, v explanation different from the situation with my car which has a certain energy every t I fill the tank, but the t intervals may be variable and certainly do not constitute an oscillation, although I drive at a some speed v. If you prefer consider a jet fighter with mid air refuelling to avoid the stopping and starting business. So it must be something else.
-
Do Physicists ask why? Anyway my first quick reading of the Wiki thought that as well, but if you read it carefully it does not actually say that mass is the cause, it could be taken to be implied, but Physics statements are preferably explicit rather than implicit. But that is not the my main point, which is that elementary particles do not have quark type internal structure to support the kind of oscillation descibed, so it must be something else. As I said, my knowledge is not good enough to say what. Perhaps Marcus or Mordred or the old reliable swansont. And that is why I was not impressed by the article.
-
A good question, Strange +1. Butch I can't see anything objectionable in your post +1 to cancel the negative. But I don't fully understand the explanation Strange, this is also beyond my knowledge of particle physics, but that Wiki article is self declared to be unfinished and in need of improvement. Your quote starts with how it arises. Stepping back a bit to finding out what it is and As I understand things, the electron is (considered) an elementary particle so could not 'oscillate' in the proposed manner. So although the statement is true why include it? Equally the original statement of what is meant by oscillation does not include any reference to an essential requirement of oscillation, that of periodicity. The maths presented has periodicity but not in time but over an energy range, which would be another one of these hilbert phase space oscillation (not waves) rather than a classical oscillator.
-
I see you failed to answer or even acknowledge my polite reasonable and non threatening question in this thread as well as one in your other thread. This is against forum rules. Should I report these infringements?
-
I agree. +1 I would be interested to hear you account of what you think the relative velocities are in this situation. Remember there is only length contraction in the direction of relative velocity. Then perhaps we can help you put your account right.
-
Yes I think we are all agreed on these good points, which have been mentioned at various stages in the discussion. To facilitate discussion I have sketched the situation show clearly that the existing timber would be subject to a significant increase in stress. This must occur in the existing timber alone as it is beyond the 'reinforced' part. One question occurs to me. Carports and garages are usually longer than they are wide so why was there only one extra support post to remove. What happens at the back end? and what about the middle?
-
When Rejection Seems "Out of Hand"
studiot replied to Phi for All's topic in Suggestions, Comments and Support
Yes welcome, but surely there are more than that? A further thought. Euclid did not discover his elements in the order and layout finally presented. For most folks, one of the most boring and repulsive or discouraging methods of presentation (teaching) of knowledge follows the formal (streamlined) structure after it was discovered and worked out in detail. There are, of course, a few who prefer to study that way. We create this formalism because such a structure is invaluable once the subject is known and grasped. So discussion between peers ie when both sides already understand the foundations of the matter will be different from discussion with someone who is less knowledgeable. -
Not sure if you are referring to the proposed plates as reinforcing? Pretty much as I see it, with the addition that the timber transfers the shear load (sorry to keep mentioning that) to the supports and will continue to do so. Thus the cross connections to the plates must transfer that shear, in turn, to the plates.
-
When Rejection Seems "Out of Hand"
studiot replied to Phi for All's topic in Suggestions, Comments and Support
Some random thoughts about this. 1) These 'speculations' are all too often posted in mainstream sections and equally all too often have to be forced into 'speculations' by the moderators. So how many come to speculate or realise they are speculating or even know/understand what a speculation is? 2) Those with closed ears can often be recognised by a barrage of 'word salad'. 3) Some seem to me to be somewhat autistic or have some other disability and are genuinely doing their best but have unconventional thought processes. These people often have difficulty expressing themselves or following conventional discussion paths. They may appear obstinate and non receptive to outside comment, despite the contradiction of being on a discussion website. This is just the way they are. Patience is essential with these people. 4) We have one active (nameless) member who has moved out of the obstinate category and achieved some genuinely productive threads. Frustrating at first, but rewarding in the second. -
I wonder if you have, perhaps, misunderstood the original description. There are two beams not one. These two have a common bearing at the intermediate post and probably some loose connection. There is therefore maximum shear acting at this post, on both these beams which should be considered as simply supported. Do you agree with this? I do wonder what this piece of timber is actually supposed to support. Perhaps only itself?
-
1) There is currently zero moment at the post to be removed. But there is substantial shear being transferred. (otherwise no post would be needed) Making the beam continuous exchanges this shear for increased moment. But at the expense of increased shear in the joints. Stress can only be transferred from the wood to the steel by shear connectors. So shear considerations are vital. 2) Yes of course it could be designed so. We are all agreed on that. But certain parts of the existing beam, notably at 10 feet from the end, will be subject to a greater moment than before. 3) Relying on friction in properly controlled conditions yes. And with proper subsequent inspections to confirm that no relaxation has taken place. Relying on unknown workmanship and subsequent regimes is questionable.
-
When Rejection Seems "Out of Hand"
studiot replied to Phi for All's topic in Suggestions, Comments and Support
Well that about sums up the difference between the US and the UK. You hit people with 2x4s we hit them with 4x2s. -
Well the new maximum moment will be 56% greater than the old and still occur within the old unstrengthened timber section.
-
Whilst I expect the shear to be the main issue, going from a 16 ft beam to a 20 ft beam will increase the maximum moment, so the ability of the existing beam to resist this would need checking. Otherwise it could need reinforcing along a greater length than 4 ft.
-
How do electrons have mass but no spatial extent?
studiot replied to StringJunky's topic in Modern and Theoretical Physics
Well the size of the electron depends upon what model you are using and what you are going to do with it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_electron_radius If your model is one dimensional (as is used for many purposes) then obviously it has no volume. Often the application is such that the region of space you are operating in is vast compared to the size of the electron so it can be considered a point particle. Different models come up with different sizes depending upon the interaction. But if you are considering a quantum solution then the wave function must (theoretically) be summed over all space and extends over that, although there may be a 'concentration, in one part of it as in an atomic orbital. Someone else will have to answer about Higgs. Does this help? -
Edge of the universe split from A centre of mass of the Universe.
studiot replied to MarkE's topic in Speculations
I thought we were talking about the Universe as we see it today, not where it came from or where might be going. As to dark energy, that wasn't in the OP. It was stated to be about expansion. I said nothing whatsoever about a new form of energy. I was simply trying to get you to think about/work through the implications of what you were proposing. If you are going to move the world cup posts, I'm out of here. -
Kinda depends upon the load the beam is carrying ! The basic idea seems good, I assume the 4ft sidespan is also currently timber of the same size so you can have two 4ft connections. This would introduce continuity to allow removal of the post. I assume you mean coach screws by "wood bolts" so that a positive fixing into the timber is achieved. Relying on friction induced by clamping pressure is less reliable than a positive fixing. There should be a large number of these to distribute the load between the weaker and stronger materials and they should be arranged in a series of vertical lines to transfer the shear. This is very important. You haven't told us the depth of the beam so I can't say how much plate you would need since it is the depth of the plate that carries the shear (acts as the web). The flitch construction would be sound against web buckling of the plate.
-
Sorry, you will have to ask you teacher about this, I don't know much about the use in nanotechnology. My equation comes from its use in electron ballistic devices (valves mainly). The only thing I can think of would be that it is balanced or two sided, whereas your app might be one sided ie all the variation is extra counts. This would account for a 2. I would be interested when you find out, though.
-
OK so here is my working. The question asks for a current change. So the units of this are amps. So looking at my equation this is the square root of the left hand side. On the right hand side we have a current times a charge times a bandwidth. The units of bandwidth are seconds-1 The units of charge are coulombs. So the right hand side is in amps *coulombs per second But coulombs per second is amps. So we have (amps)2 We are given e = 1.6x10-19 and iA = 100*10-12 amps and B = 1/1 second Substituting we have i2 = 2 * 1.6x10-19 * 100*10-12 =3.2x 10-29 = 32 x 10-28 i = √(32 x 10-28) =√(32) x 10-14 =0.06 x 10-12 amps = 0.06 picoamps
-
It is also worth considering the difference between 50 milliwatts of swansont's IR radiation and 50 milliwatts of digital signal, bearing in mind two things. Quantum transitions depend on frequency. The IR signal is spread out over the cycle in the normal sine wave fashion. So the peak power is 1.1 times the rms or 55mW. The digital signal can operate at a 10: 1 mark to space ratio so all the power is concentrated in short pulses, and the peak power is 10* 50 = 500 mW
-
This is a good question, and good thinking on your part as far as it goes. +1 But do you have any evidence that nickel was tested for and found absent or not present in enhanced quantities? What is the normal concentration of nickel? the so called iridium spike of Alvarez was found to be an increase of 30 times from 0.3 parts per billion to 10 parts per billion I think that nickel and iron are more abundant that that. It is an interesting exercise to take an average % nickel for (say 20%) the chixelub meteorite and calculate what increase it would make to the average crustal concentration of the Earth if spread out over it. Would it produce as spectacular a spike ie increase the concentration by a factor of 30?
-
inept at technology? That's a pretty puny short list. how about inept at:- technology lawmaking politics economics public speaking/tweeting spelling ...
-
Edge of the universe split from A centre of mass of the Universe.
studiot replied to MarkE's topic in Speculations
I am fond of saying that Nature is stranger than Science. So I don't see why there has to be an edge if our best Science can come up with examples/theory of 'no-edges'. The Poincare Disk is one, but that is purely theoretical. Nature goes one better with a real world example. Temperature. What is beyond absolute zero of temperature? Well we know that, just like the Poincare disk, the closer you approach, the harder it gets to cool the next increment and it is thought impossible to actually reach AZ.