Ask any question you want about Physics

Glimpse into ambient time at www.scribd.com...
a reply to: greenreflections

I have a physics question.


Rainbows. The primary rainbow, when one ocurres, has the blue band on the inside of the bow and the red band on the out side of the bow. Im not sure why that is but im guessing it has to do with blue being a shorter wavelength. Or something like that.

Now heres my actual question. Further outside the bow, the faint secondary rainbow, when present, has the color bands reversed. Red will be on the inside and blue on the outside.

Why?


Brewster angles, refraction trick, were living in the matrix and thats a glitch nobodies rewritten the code on?

Whys the secondary rainbow inverted color band wise.

a reply to: Nochzwei
Savvy I've explained before that's not the way E=mc^2 works. In that formula c is a constant, not some function of time.

If you want to calculate time effects you need to use the equations of general relativity, which of course predict and experiments confirm the opposite of what you claim.

a reply to: BASSPLYR
The primary rainbow comes from one reflection and the secondary comes from two reflections, so as you can tell by holding up a sign and looking in the mirror, adding a reflection will make things appear reversed, so that's why the colors are reversed: there's another reflection. Or it could be a glitch in the matrix.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Different rainbows correspond to more and more complicated paths of light in water droplets, and with internal reflection combined with chromatic aberration you can get some flips.

C is S/T or for that matter ds/dt sort has to be a function of time. Besides it agrees with expt. So a theory is right if it agrees with expt. I've also explained b4 why clocks erroneously show faster time as you move away from earth
a reply to: Arbitrageur

a reply to: Nochzwei


incorrect, you have no way produced any experimental evidence to show what you claim

and C is a constant... its units are S/T you cannot just arbitrarily change the constant...so...as has been explained at great length, the citation is bogus

Thanks arb and mbk!!!

Lol. Is that the best you can do. Your post is as bogus as it gets. Beside read my explntn for time on the thread why mainstream science is a religion
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Nochzwei
I have read them, i have looked at your evidence and i have to say that it is out right pathetic and shows you understand little to nothing about science, engineering or unit conversion, so please, if you want to discuss science, at least attend a few basic classes so you can actually understand not only the mathematics but the terminology as well.

We have been to the shops and back with your time dilation, anti grav stuff and it is just proof of little more than engineering working jut as anyone with half a days worth of lessons can understand, and proof of dilution of those who peddle it.

Lol, basic classes? Do you know wt it takes to get an engineering degree?
Its your understanding of cutting edge science that is lacking
a reply to: ErosA433

a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

a reply to: joelr
true, sure. Not arguing about that well known fact.

I know lots of factors influence orbit's fate in real world and there is no known orbitals that are absolutely stable (perpetual). Funny thought has crossed my mind at the moment that once space-time is thought to be expanding at every point at say equal rate and geometric perspective takes objects the further out the faster, it is all still being from my personal point of view literally, from my space coordinates.

That would mean, of course, that me as an object with coordinates in space will find that the further the object from my coordinate position the faster that distant object is getting away from me.

This logic of mine says, that is if we are so precise at estimating the expansion speed these days, there must be a way to deduct new space creation per cubic meter. And then down to millimeter and so on)) What I am saying, even atomic structures are affected by new space creation (if we agree that space is expanding at every point).
It is the geometrical ratio that makes one believe he is not expanding. The closer to "ME" the slower my perception of expansion. Atom is less affected because of its size. Fermions experience zero expansion effect, perhaps.

The orbit too in this hypothetical scenario will never remain perpetual even with only two bodies in space while space is getting larger.

I just wanted to elaborate a little my previous one liner responses.


cheers)

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

Only you alone knows what it is?

Just like your "time machine"?

Maybe you should study some real science instead of learning it from pseudoscience websites.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

Only you alone knows what it is?

Just like your "time machine"?

Maybe you should study some real science instead of learning it from pseudoscience websites.

Lolz. I will seek your advice when i need it. ty

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

Only you alone knows what it is?

Just like your "time machine"?

Maybe you should study some real science instead of learning it from pseudoscience websites.

Lolz. I will seek your advice when i need it. ty

You don't need my advice pal. You need psychiatric help.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

Only you alone knows what it is?

Just like your "time machine"?

Maybe you should study some real science instead of learning it from pseudoscience websites.

Lolz. I will seek your advice when i need it. ty

You don't need my advice pal. You need psychiatric help.

dude i shall ask for it when i need it

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Yeah... iv got 4 years experience with a Masters in Physics with Astronomy, a PhD in Physics, and 6 years post-doctoral experience constructing a dark matter experiment... yep... i have a tiny little bit of an understanding of how engineering works (sarc), oh yeah and a tiny tiny bit about physics too

Inspite of all that you fail to understand the expt presented. Yeah right. Besides you will never find dark matter. Any wagers, only i alone in the world know what dark matter is and where it resides

Only you alone knows what it is?

Just like your "time machine"?

Maybe you should study some real science instead of learning it from pseudoscience websites.

Lolz. I will seek your advice when i need it. ty

You don't need my advice pal. You need psychiatric help.

dude i shall ask for it when i need it

And I shall respond when I feel the need to. Especially to someone who doesn't understand basic heat expansion.

originally posted by: Nochzwei
Lol, basic classes? Do you know wt it takes to get an engineering degree?
Its your understanding of cutting edge science that is lacking
a reply to: ErosA433

They offer engineering degrees at technical colleges and can even get them over the net. So yeah they are pretty easy to get and the level of education can vary drastically. Especially in some of the foreign colleges in places like India or even Ukraine. Then there is the fact theremains are so many specific engineering degrees it doesn't grantee a knowledge of any science what so ever. So since your obvious lack of scientific knowledge and understanding saying you have a degree in engineering means nothing.

I've seen people point out over and over mistakes in your assumptions have given you links to learn what science has learned. Yet oddly you refuse to educate yourself and continue to contradict known experiments with no explanations as to why these experiments were in error. I. Science you can't claim something is wrong without giving an alternative explication that can be tested and varified.