dripto biswas

the sun is losing mass faster than the earth is. so later in the future, the gravitational force beetween the earth and the sun should decrease. my question is, will this actually happen and if it does, will the orbit of the earth be stable or could it shoot out into the universe?

the refraction of light as it passes through one medium to another. can these phenomena be explained using quantum mechanics? also y does violet light bend more than red light(quantum explanation)?

loved the answers

PLEASE HIGHLIGHT A FEW PROBS

WHEN I ENTER ANY NUMBER GREATER THAN 1 IN A CALCULATOR AND KEEP SQUARE ROOTING THE SQUARE ROOT OF THE NUMBER, I WILL OBTAIN 1. ALSO IF THE SAME IS APPLIED TO ANY NUMBER GREATER THAN 0 BUT LESS THAN 1, THE RESULT IS 0.999999............. TO INFINITY. WT IS THE CAUSE AND IMPLICATION OF THESE RESULTS. PLEASE TELL ME AS SOON AS U CAN

I SAW A REALLY COOL VIDEO ON SUPERFLUID HELIUM ON UTUBE. WT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS Y WOULD FLUIDS NEAR 0 DEGREE KELVIN WILL BE FRICTIONLESS OR THEIR VISCOSITY WILL BE ZERO. ALSO Y WILL THE SUPERFLUID RISE ALONG THE WALLS OF ITS CONTAINERS? CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER THIS

my dear friends, an infinite number of concepts are based on time. but if we didn't measure it, it would not have existed.

dark energy is what theoretically reacts against the force of gravity at just the correct rate to prevent recollapse. just imagine a yourself blowing up a balloon. the more you blow, the more it expands. the tension in the rubber membrane of the balloon causes the balloon to return to its original shape. but the air you blow from inside is what keeps the balloon expanding. our universe is like this balloon, gravity like the the tension in its membrane and the blowing force is like the dark energy. just like your blow will eventually come to an end, there will be a time when gravity will take over from dark energy causing it to recollapse.

listen my friend. do you know that our universe is expand at a huge rate? if you do then please try to understand this that even the nearest star is only too far away to cause any harm. any light from its explosion will take at least 4 years to get here, thereby causing no harm. you may see a tiny flash now and then, if the light from the respective star reaches you then. and you also need a very clear sky to see most of the tiny flashes of light. also most stars of this stellar generation is juvenile and moreover most of them do not die in an explosion.

do i really have to mention the radiation? i mean, you guys should more than me about the form of radiation. and may i please ask you HOW i will still be limited if my apparatus is not in physical contact with the particle?

you see MR . Arjun Artro, as far as i can imagine, you can use general relativity and its geometrical picture of our universe to find a solution to your problem. if you do not know why according to general relativity no light can escape from a black hole, then i'll try to explain it to you. if you take a stretched rubber sheet and put objects of different masses onto its surface , you will see that the heavier the object the more is the curvature of the rubber sheet. now, here we take that the rubber sheet represents the very nature of the space-time in our universe. we all know that a black hole is a mass of infinite density and therefore it will act like an object of infinite 'weight' and thus will form an infinite curve in the rubber membrane(space-time). so when light passes near the curvature of the black hole, it starts to fall within the curve of the black hole. but since it is an infinite curve, then theoretically, we should need infinite energy(impossible) to over come the curve and leave through the other side. now, think of an object moving with uniform velocity in circular orbit. its direction changes every instant but its velocity does not. same is the case here. the light travels with constant velocity but when it 'changes its direction towards the infinite depth of the black hole's 'gravity well', the velocity does not change. hope that helps !

i heard that any object above absolute zero should radiate some form of energy. so, can't a particle's position be pointed at any instant if i place very sensitive radiation detectors all around its path? can't i pinpoint the paritcle's position and velocity at any given instant like this? the detectors are not physically interacting with the particle and therefore can't be responsible for any change in its velocity or position. can anyone please clear my doubt on this topic.

can you guys think of new , theoretical cameras to take pictures of the night sky instead of using the common high resolution cameras?

once we have a steady foothold in robotics and its most interesting chapter of nano-robotics, we could send spaceships of them to mars, and they could build a new home for us. the most interesting part is that they can be monitored and controlled from earth, and incoming radiation can be converted into "photoelectricity" to power themselves.