1. Sub Quantum Echo Particles...(SQEP's) & Sub Quantum Echo Particle Kinetic Resonance Flux

[Mordred]

no problem try to think of it this way any complex problem is composed of little problems. In a sense its similar to programming you break the program into smaller simpler steps to get the final form.

Its no different in physics you start with classical physics then you build it up to your complex systems. Every physics theory is comprised of kinematics (equations of motion) even when those equations of motion are waveforms they have vector equivalence.

[Imagine Everything]

46 minutes ago, Imagine Everything said:

48 minutes ago, Mordred said:

thermodynamic hydrostatic fluid  equations

That sounds fascinating. I'll take a look after I get through your previous post. Thanks

Looked at that a little, more yikes. Ok not ready for that yet, hopefully with time I'll start to understand it.

[Mordred]

start with f=ma then recognize pressure is force per unit volume

[Imagine Everything]

On 11/8/2024 at 3:18 AM, Mordred said:

E2=(pc)2+(moc2)2−−−−−−−−−−−−√

What is the long sign/symbol that covers the last part of the equasion called?

 

For some reason it seems to have come out backwards....ish

Edited November 10 by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

Square root symbol encompasses the RHS of the equal sign.

Edited November 10 by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Mordred

I found this https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/one-dimensional-motion/displacement-velocity-time/v/introduction-to-reference-frames

so off to watch it now but would you know of any other online physics for beginners/dummies courses you could point me in the direction of please?

[Mordred]

Sure I will dig up some good lectures this evening for you

[Imagine Everything]

28 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Sure I will dig up some good lectures this evening for you

Thanks Mordred.

[studiot]

1 hour ago, Imagine Everything said:

Sorry I don't have a physics keyboard so I can't write it the way you do.

 

1 hour ago, Imagine Everything said:

Sorry I don't have a physics keyboard so I can't write it the way you do.

Just a little bit of help here.

Charmap

 

Many of the symbols used, including the square root sign, are not available on the ordinary keyboard but can be obtained using charmap if you are using Windows (any version)

In later versions just type charmap into the query box and press return.

Boxes like these should open up.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=charmap+symbols&form=WNSGPH&qs=SC&cvid=0f0cbd2b7805469e9dcdfe1e8cfc51c4&pq=cgarmap&cc=GB&setlang=en-GB&nclid=74D28496F4DE45C06BECB76344916980&ts=1731258460021&wsso=Moderate

 

You can then scroll up and down.
Select a particular character
Copy it

and paste it into your text.

 

 

Extra hint  It often pays to select several special characters and paste them in and add one more step

Delete the ones you don't want at any one place.

Edited November 10 by studiot

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Studiot

Thats really ϹΘΘɭ

Did not know about this, thank you very much!

Edited November 10 by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

Khan University Simple harmonic motion pendulum case.

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/mechanical-waves-and-sound/harmonic-motion/v/pendulum

lectures from Unit 8 Oscillations and mechanical waves main page

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/mechanical-waves-and-sound

Feymann lectures are also useful

https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/

tons of study material just click on the links to turce e volume and get the volume table of contents then click the section of interest.

example

https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_09.html

for momentum and force

this open source textbook on basic physics also contains numerous hyperlinks to various video lectures so should prove useful

https://d3bxy9euw4e147.cloudfront.net/oscms-prodcms/media/documents/Physics-WEB_Sab7RrQ.pdf

you will notice it will contain links to khan university for support lectures example

Newtons first law of motion

https://www.khanacademy.org/embed_video?v=5-ZFOhHQS68

current discussion is covered in chapters 1 to 5

 

Edited November 11 by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

Thanks Mordred, appreciate the time it took, very kind of you.

I had yet another imaginative thought moment last night but man who knows..maybe I can find out as I move along with more learning, however here it is in all its shameless glory lol

https://www.livescience.com/space/cosmology/james-webb-telescope-confirms-there-is-something-seriously-wrong-with-our-understanding-of-the-universe

So I saw a video about different rates of expansion and byt looking around found that the name for this is Hubbles Tension.

The imaginative thought was this...

Could the rates of expansion be measured by their content?

What I mean is, if this 'thingy' I'm talking about is simply created & forced into this 3rd state space before it dies thus creating a small non attractive movement by pushing whatever was in that space before it was created, outwards in all directions, could it be the reason there might be different rates of expansion?

And even if it isn't my weird and wonderful thought, doesn't DM have to made of something that keeps being created somehow for expansion to take place at all?

So my thought last night was wondering if somehow more DM was being created in certain parts of the universe than it was in others.

Could it be that whatever creates this DM, maybe creates more forced pushing and then in turn creates a faster expansion due to more DM being created?

And also the slower rate of expansion would follow this if the above is true?

The less DM being created means less forced pushing and therefore less expansion or slower expansion?

And perhaps this can only happen on a cosmic scale due to the nature of quantum or perhaps sub quantum size.

Wouldn't DM itself have to have started life as a seriously seriously tiny minisculey miniscule % of an energy type?' something' (I have no idea what its called or could be called, perhaps its similar to a wimp)

 

Anyway, finally I get to the nitty gritty , sorry had to say that first bit first to get to this...

So could it be that maybe certain types of galaxies and all their wonders withing perhaps even BH, quasars and certain types of stella nurseries, Neutron stars, Nebulae in one part of space contribute to a more greater volume of DM being created? Possibly even more or even more of a certain type of things and less of another, whatever it is that creates DM to start with?

And also the same for the slower rate, perhaps there aren't enough stella nurseries or galaxies or BH's or whatever to create the same amount of DM and is slower because of it.

I'm sure there is a lot more out in the universe but you get the idea hopefully.

Even though no one knows what DM is or how it's made yet, could that idea make sense?.

Or does DM simply stretch across the universe in which case I guess what I just wrote doesn't apply really.

I might also just be talking right out of my huh hmm,

 

Off to learn some more now , thanks again for the links Mordred

I'll look at as much as I can this week and try not to post too much inbetween, it always seems to take me further into the ordered chaos/chaotic order that seems to be science

I'm reposting these here for my own benefit otherwise I keep having to hop back and forth between pages in this thread.

Another khan University lesson I would like you to watch is constructive and destructive interference.

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/mechanical-waves-and-sound/standing-waves/v/constructive-and-destructive-interference#:~:text=Constructive interference happens when two,they cancel each other out.

This will help to understand Elastic vs inelastic scatterings when two particles meet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_scattering

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_scattering

the first link will also help understand wave resonance.

https://juddy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Notes-4.1.3.pdf

HINT the mechanical elastic PE terms above apply ie a crystal resonating with a frequency those resonations of the atoms will follow the same equations of motion (sound waves are mechanical energy)

take k for spring constant now replace with binding energy via the coupling constant of a field. In those Feymann integrals "g"

for the EM field g is the fine structure constant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant

 

An ty Studiot for making the Newtons cradle more defined to me, I always thought it was a perfect line of energy that went back and forth, didn't know it could act differently at each end

 

Edited November 11 by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

Don't be concerned with Hubble tension, I've been following the Research but the gist of the problem isn't a need for new physics. Its a problem more in terms of fine tuning of luminosity to distance relations. Holicow used near field measurements while Planck is far field ie CMB. Both require fine tuning but more so with the Holicow dataset for using standard candles. 

We will get into the FLRW metric later on (its a good stepping stone to cosmology and GR) 

This is one of the more recent papers on the Tension

https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06153

On Leavitt Law calibrations

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.06280

this stuff is too advanced for you but suffice it to say its being researched

Edited November 11 by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

It wasn't so much I was thinking about the hubble tension, more that I stumbled across it and in my head it kind of slightly crossed it into my 'idea' about a 'particle?' in this 3rd state I see/envision and the way it might work if it does.

And thanks, I understood the below sentance and wouldn't have done without yours and Studiots help.

Its a problem more in terms of fine tuning of luminosity to distance relations

I don't mean all the things behind that sentance but more the terms you used.

Perhaps one day there will be a telescope powerfull enough to be able to see even further and more definitively.

44 minutes ago, Mordred said:

This is one of the more recent papers on the Tension

https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.06153

On Leavitt Law calibrations

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.06280

this stuff is too advanced for you but suffice it to say its being researched

Way way too advanced but sort of interesting. That in itself led me to wanting to ask a few questions but I won't.

I've seen images of our sun next to even bigger and bigger stars, red giants and blue giants, totally amazing to think just how small our sun is compared to them and then how small our earth is to our sun and then how small we are as humans to our planet and seemingly no matter how big something is, it all seems to have started at a very tiny point somehow.

I there's an asian saying/philosophy I heard once  'Every long journey starts with one small step'.

I need to go watch these lectures now so I will head off to Khan academy, thanks Mordred.

Edited November 11 by Imagine Everything

[Imagine Everything]

2 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/mechanical-waves-and-sound/standing-waves/v/constructive-and-destructive-interference#:~:text=Constructive interference happens when two,they cancel each other out.

This was very interesting, I'll leave it there for now but already I'm starting to see or wonder how this fits into my original post.

Is a mediator a wave length?

Edited November 11 by Imagine Everything

[Mordred]

A mediator is an offshell boson or field of bosons for EM field its virtual as opposed to real photons. For strong force it's gluons, for Higgs its Higgs boson for the weak force is W+ W- and Z bosons.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

Edited November 11 by Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

20 hours ago, Mordred said:

A mediator is an offshell boson or field of bosons for EM field its virtual as opposed to real photons. For strong force it's gluons, for Higgs its Higgs boson for the weak force is W+ W- and Z bosons.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

Thanks Mordred

[Imagine Everything]

On 11/11/2024 at 6:03 PM, Imagine Everything said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_scattering

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_scattering

What is an Incident Neutron or Incident Photon, what this Incident description referring to, sorry Mordred I got a little lost trying to understand it.

Would Newtons cradle be described as Inelastic?

https://juddy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Notes-4.1.3.pdf

This made a lot more sense to me after watching the sound wave Khan Academy lectures.

Thanks for those Khan links Modred, I seem to be able to understand a lot more and retain the information better from watching them. My head likes to see things in images, though I think I'm good with english, it's much easier for me to see these things in action as images/animations with their definitions & explanations

I extracted the below sentence because it sounds quite like what I see in my idea (I don't know for sure yet) but one of my thoughts that I posted not so long ago was the connection between people among other things and how we seem to be able to pick up whether we instantly like them or not. As in we all have our very own personal resonant frequency and like certain types of atoms, we are attracted or repelled by other peoples resonant frequencies.

In simple terms, a resonant frequency is “a natural frequency of vibration determined by
the physical parameters of the vibrating object”

Anyway, I digress a little, just wanted to say thanks again. And ask those 2 questions.

[studiot]

3 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

What is an Incident Neutron or Incident Photon, what this Incident description referring to, sorry Mordred I got a little lost trying to understand it.

Incident means incoming as in artillery shells aimed at you by the enemy.

3 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

In simple terms, a resonant frequency is “a natural frequency of vibration determined by
the physical parameters of the vibrating object”

 

Although this is not wrong, it is not the whole truth.

 

A vibrating object posseses energy by virtue of vibration, regardless of any other energy it may also possess.

In order to vibrate the object must accept energy from somewhere.

That energy can be delivered in two ways.

Firstly

By a single impulse such as plucking a guitar string once.
If this happens the body will respond by vibrating at its natural resonant frequency.

Secondly

By a continuous input of energy at the resonant frequency or by series of pulses timesd to arrive (be incident) at the resonant frequency.

 

I tried to describe this in my previous two examples.

 

3 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

As in we all have our very own personal resonant frequency and like certain types of atoms, we are attracted or repelled by other peoples resonant frequencies.

This is something quite different.

It is actually called 'phase locking' or 'pulling of an oscillator' in electrical circuits. A biological examole would be the synchronisation of periods within groups of women living closely together.

[Imagine Everything]

On 11/12/2024 at 11:32 PM, studiot said:

Incident means incoming as in artillery shells aimed at you by the enemy.

 

Although this is not wrong, it is not the whole truth.

 

A vibrating object posseses energy by virtue of vibration, regardless of any other energy it may also possess.

In order to vibrate the object must accept energy from somewhere.

That energy can be delivered in two ways.

Firstly

By a single impulse such as plucking a guitar string once.
If this happens the body will respond by vibrating at its natural resonant frequency.

Secondly

By a continuous input of energy at the resonant frequency or by series of pulses timesd to arrive (be incident) at the resonant frequency.

 

I tried to describe this in my previous two examples.

 

This is something quite different.

It is actually called 'phase locking' or 'pulling of an oscillator' in electrical circuits. A biological examole would be the synchronisation of periods within groups of women living closely together.

Thanks Studiot

 

Hmm..so in my idea I see this 'whatever this is' particle being created by possible quantum tunneling & the merger/collison or like minded/attracted atoms/particles through the boundary conditions, which could then be the incident? and cause of the vibration within whatever this particle is, but due to the very busy nature of them and all the other atoms/free particles/vp's in this 3rd state (gap) could or would they all be vibrating due to their creation and the various collisions within this gap?

It doesn't neccessarily have to be what I see in this idea, does this scenario happen anyway when any 2 states/boundary conditions meet each other?

Do free electron collisions create incidents towards or with other atoms?

Is a vp an incident that sends back slightly more energy to free electrons for example?

I hope I said that right.

Edited Thursday at 05:16 PM by Imagine Everything

[Imagine Everything]

For a nucleus to exist, must it have at least 1 proton?

Just thinking, is that a stupid question directly above? Would no protons simply mean no nucleus?

Or does a nucleus need at least 1 proton and 1 electron?

If it didn't would it mean that if there was an electron, it would be a free electron?

Is there such a thing as a free proton or neutron?

Another weird question perhaps (idk why I can't stop thinking about DM) what would be the difference (if DM could be measured like light and photons) between these 2 massless particles?

Is that how you guys have managed to see DM? Simply by seeing what is there vs what seemingly isn't?

I'm assuming DM would have to be massless or v similar to light & it's photons.

Dark light & dark photons perhaps. Hmm and so my imagination starts running again....

Relating to BH theory & information from things pulled into and destroyed by it, I have (as you may have seen) read and heard about quantum hairs being the information about such objects left behind.

Has anyone been able to calculate what this QH might look like sub atomically?

Would or could it exist as some time of particle, maybe even on a sub quantum or maybe a base level that everything else is built on top of as it were?

Is there even such a thing as a base level?

Would that be quantum or does/can it go even smaller?

Or would that be some sort of degeneracy that at some point also collapses in on itself when it can no longer zip around due to the gravitational pull of the BH singualirty?

Idk if that question is impossible to answer or not, Idk if QH's have been proven or just predeterminedly and probability thought of in the possible randomness of a BH singularity.

lol see what your help and guidance has done to me!!!

 

 

Edited Thursday at 07:01 PM by Imagine Everything

[swansont]

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

For a nucleus to exist, must it have at least 1 proton?

Yes

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Just thinking, is that a stupid question directly above? Would no protons simply mean no nucleus?

Right

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Or does a nucleus need at least 1 proton and 1 electron?

The protons and neutrons would be the nucleus. The electrons are not part of it; they are part of an atom.

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

If it didn't would it mean that if there was an electron, it would be a free electron?

Pretty much, yes.

4 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Is there such a thing as a free proton or neutron?

Yes. But free neutrons decay, so they aren’t around all that long, and free protons attract electrons to form hydrogen 

[Imagine Everything]

9 hours ago, swansont said:

13 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Or does a nucleus need at least 1 proton and 1 electron?

The protons and neutrons would be the nucleus. The electrons are not part of it; they are part of an atom.

Sorry that wasn't as dumb as it might have sounded, I mean nucleus with the proton with the  electron orbiting. I imagine without an electron orbiting it would simply be a free proton?

Oh and is it always nucleus surrounded by K shell / L shell / M shell / N shell...?

If it is, why not start with    A shell / B shell / C shell?

9 hours ago, swansont said:

Yes. But free neutrons decay, so they aren’t around all that long, and free protons attract electrons to form hydrogen 

Interesting, thanks Studiot

It might seem at times that I ask the same question twice or ask a question about something I previously learnt.

It's slowly sinking in but hard to remember so much.

Edited Friday at 08:00 AM by Imagine Everything
typo

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Sorry that wasn't as dumb as it might have sounded, I mean nucleus with the proton with the  electron orbiting. I imagine without an electron orbiting it would simply be a free proton?

You can call it either one, just like a helium nucleus is also known as an alpha particle

3 hours ago, Imagine Everything said:

Oh and is it always nucleus surrounded by K shell / L shell / M shell / N shell...?

If it is, why not start with    A shell / B shell / C shell?

The shell naming is an artifact of science history. The emitted light was discovered before the electron shell model was developed.

“The names of the electron shells come from a fellow named Charles G. Barkla, a spectroscopist who studied the X-rays that are emitted by atoms when they are hit with high energy electrons. He noticed that atoms appeared to emit two types of X-rays. The two types of X-rays differed in energy and Barkla originally called the higher energy X-ray type A and the lower energy X-ray type B. He later renamed these two types K and L since he realized that the highest energy X-rays produced in his experiments might not be the highest energy X-ray possible. He wanted to make certain that there was room to add more discoveries without ending up with an alphabetical list of X-rays whose energies were mixed up”

https://education.jlab.org/qa/historyele_02.html

[Imagine Everything]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

You can call it either one, just like a helium nucleus is also known as an alpha particle

The shell naming is an artifact of science history. The emitted light was discovered before the electron shell model was developed.

“The names of the electron shells come from a fellow named Charles G. Barkla, a spectroscopist who studied the X-rays that are emitted by atoms when they are hit with high energy electrons. He noticed that atoms appeared to emit two types of X-rays. The two types of X-rays differed in energy and Barkla originally called the higher energy X-ray type A and the lower energy X-ray type B. He later renamed these two types K and L since he realized that the highest energy X-rays produced in his experiments might not be the highest energy X-ray possible. He wanted to make certain that there was room to add more discoveries without ending up with an alphabetical list of X-rays whose energies were mixed up”

https://education.jlab.org/qa/historyele_02.html

Hey Swansont, hope you're well.

Thanks for that. It makes a more sense now.

Can I ask, does it go all the way from K -> Z ? Or would Z live in the realm of undiscovered heavier elements?

I'm assuming without knowing better that these shells are filled the initial 2 & then they have 8 electrons before needing to have another shell for more electrons?