Ask any question you want about Physics

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
question, a decent one this time. no trolling.

apparently intact bottles of wine and or champagne were salvaged from the titanic wreck.

potablity issues aside. how did the bottles or cork not get compromised with the crushing pressures of sitting for 90 years (likely ) at 12,500 foot depths

Some survived intact, and some didn't. Did you see the movie "The Abyss" where they fill the diver's suit with oxygen-containing liquid? That was science-fiction but with a relatively good grounding in science fact.

Liquids compress only slightly so the biggest problem with compression at depth isn't with liquids, it's with gases. If the bottle is relatively full, there's not much gas to compress, so maybe the cork got pushed in a little at depth to partially equalize the pressure and it may have moved back out somewhat as the bottle was brought to the surface, again to partially equalize the pressure.

I read about some corks blowing a hole through the bottom of the bottle but it's hard to find details. I don't think that would happen if the bottle was full, but if it was only 1/5 full or so I could see how that might happen. The ocean side of a 3/4" cork would have 2460 pounds on the 3/4" surface area trying to push the cork inside, but the pressure on the opposite side of the cork in the bottle would only be about 6.5 lbs (1/379th as much since it would be 1 atm instead of 379 atm). That's a net force pushing in of over 2450 pounds, so when the cork finally broke loose it might be something like a bb fired from an air rifle except bigger and faster.

The reason I don't think that would happen on a full bottle is the gas pressure inside the bottle would rise very rapidly as the cork moved even a little inside the bottle, which would stop the cork, and even if that didn't stop the cork, the liquid inside the bottle would slow it down enough to prevent it breaking through the bottom, I think.

First ever image taken of a atom. It is the tiny white dot between the two pins. The two pins are about 2mm appart.

strontium-atom

a reply to: spy66
No source?
Is that a question?
I don't think it's the first image of an atom, seeing as these images were posted in 2009 and even they don't claim to be the first images of an atom, though I don't recall any previous imagery showing the shapes of atoms:

New Microscope Reveals the Shape of Atoms

originally posted by: VitalOverdose
reply to post by Nathwa

 

Well it proves that the maths we have been using to simulate atoms and the theories we have come up with about the way they work are correct. It means we are on the right track to understanding how the universe works.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/48da3d162815.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/68cbe40a92ea.gif[/atsimg]

We are indeed clever little monkeys

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I dont know if you noticed, but the image is from a ardinary camera?

You can see the atom With Your eyes..... No one have seen a atom before live With their own eyes.

a reply to: spy66
What I noticed is that you didn't provide a source, and I asked you about a source in reply, and you made another post without providing the source.

I shouldn't even have to ask. If you didn't take that picture yourself (which I assume is the case), then you should have provided the source for it when you posted it.

Since spy66 apparently cant be bothered to back up his own source... this is the best review of it i can find in about 30 seconds of looking
www.epsrc.ac.uk...

www.dpreview.com...

It is apparently a strontium atom trapped in an ion trap, the neat part being that it is trapped so well that it's movement is highly confined. The photograph is a long exposure, illuminated with a UV lamp. The electrons in the strontium atom are absorbing the UV light and re-emitting it in all directions at higher wavelength (shifting from UV to visible)

There is such little light that it has to be long exposure. The little spot in the middle represents the approximate location of the atom as it floats about in the trap.

Pretty neat In reality the strontium atom is not visible to an optical instrument in this manner.

originally posted by: ErosA433
It is apparently a strontium atom trapped in an ion trap, the neat part being that it is trapped so well that it's movement is highly confined.

Highly confined, but it moves. I wonder how much? For all I know the image could be much larger than the size of the atom; I didn't see any specifics about that in the articles.

Thanks for the sources but I don't see where either of them says "First ever image taken of a atom" as spy66 claimed, and as I said, even the earlier 2009 images didn't make that claim.

It is an interesting photograph and it won a contest, but I don't think it shows we can "see" a single atom; as you suggest it's more like a history of where the atom has been as it floated about in a confined area for a long period of time. Long time exposures of moving objects are often not very accurate representations of the objects.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: ErosA433
It is apparently a strontium atom trapped in an ion trap, the neat part being that it is trapped so well that it's movement is highly confined.

Highly confined, but it moves. I wonder how much? For all I know the image could be much larger than the size of the atom; I didn't see any specifics about that in the articles.

Thanks for the sources but I don't see where either of them says "First ever image taken of a atom" as spy66 claimed, and as I said, even the earlier 2009 images didn't make that claim.

It is an interesting photograph and it won a contest, but I don't think it shows we can "see" a single atom; as you suggest it's more like a history of where the atom has been as it floated about in a confined area for a long period of time. Long time exposures of moving objects are often not very accurate representations of the objects.

Yep exactly, its more like... this is the confinement 'sphere' of an ion made to glow using UV. image taken over a period of.... a few seconds.

Technically a really cool photo, pedantically hard to really say its a photo of a single atom... though is likely the best that can be achieved in optical range due to the comparative dimension of the object and the wavelength of photons.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

yes definitely the image is much larger than a single strontium atom, for sure

is it just me or is the millennium falcon geometrically an awful shape for stuffing cargo of any reasonable payload into it?


I wanna know what you physics guys think. wouldn't it make sense to have the falcon be more like a space tug trailer type of configuration. like a galactic version of Jack Burton's porkchop express. I dunno the space big rig makes more sense to me plus Han and Chewie are more like some scoundrelous space version of BJ and the Bear.

just wanted to get your thoughts from a physic perspective should Disney make a Han solo remake with a space big rig called Big Trouble in Little Nar Shadaa.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
is it just me or is the millennium falcon geometrically an awful shape for stuffing cargo of any reasonable payload into it?

You say that like it's a bad thing. If it was used for smuggling, I think that would be a good thing, right? Who would expect a ship that doesn't look like it's designed to haul cargo to be smuggling things?


The smuggling compartments make good hiding places too, when the empire is out to get you.

I disagree with a lot of mainstream scientists and their nonsense. I will give the scientists credit that I sent personal emails to with a question. Most all of them gave their honest opinions and were glad to help. A++++ to the non mainstream scientists.

I have a question, Does a photon in its precise moment of creation go through an acceleration phase to reach the speed of light or is it instantaneous as it appears to be? If so what energy accelerates the photon to the speed of light right after the moment of creation? Considering the photon being a particle and not a wave...

a reply to: BASSPLYR

At 34.75 meters it has a lot packed into it!

Designed by the Corellian Engineering Corporation (CEC), the highly modified YT-1300F is reliable, durable, modular, and is stated as being the second-fastest vessel in the Star Wars canon.

Wikipedia - Millennium Falcon.

After winning the ship from Lando Calrissian in a card game (sabacc) (same source), the Nerf herder began transporting contraband for various clients. Why does he need a semi rig when he is moving a kilo of spices for Jabba? Or some fine water that he dumps into space when boarded by the Empire? Maybe he's moving some fine ewok stick for wookie clients which is why they are so cool. Until they lose at holo chess and rip your arms off! Wookies are known to do that!

Besides, if you watch Star Wars: Rebels, you know that pirating is where it is at. Just watch as Hondo pulls the reverse-Han-Solo move and attaches to the space semi shipping containers, to get past the Emperial blockade. You let them do the heavy lifting, and take things here and there to make a living.

When it comes to being a space mercenary, it is not the volume of what you move, but the quality and discreteness that gets you paid! She's big enough for you kid.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

yes but the YT3000 is a model of cargo ship designed to hull cargo.

I dunno star wars is weird sometimes. like a star destroyer or a Mon cal cruiser is a good shape for a capital ship. but the nebulon b frigate is a retarded design. x wing awesome design. a wing great. but the tie fighter stupid premise. I mean don't get me wrong the tie interceptor and advanced models are excellent designs. also slave 1. who designed that it makes no sense.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

A wing in space? (*eyes roll*), and an engine to push it from behind (snicker).

Sitting in front of a turbo engine on a land speeder? Uh, that is a great design. I think I am going hop in with the Jawas on this trip, okay? Maybe hitch a ride with the sand people and travel in single file to hide our numbers. The back end would be so heavy it would tilt up and become an air foil and flip backwards like a speed boat on a lake.

Design choice is not done by an engineer. Or even a person that has put thought into how it might actually work.

Which is maybe why Star Trek is more interesting from a technological perspective. TNG had been doing some thought provoking QM stuff then it kind of sputtered out. But even ST gets it wrong. I mean, "inertial dampeners"??

The whole sci-fi needs more of the sci and less of the fi to be interesting anymore.

originally posted by: ATSAlex
I have a question, Does a photon in its precise moment of creation go through an acceleration phase to reach the speed of light or is it instantaneous as it appears to be? If so what energy accelerates the photon to the speed of light right after the moment of creation? Considering the photon being a particle and not a wave...

A photon is a so called massless particle, so it does not accelerate.

ques a weebit hypothetical.

what info can you glean from reflected visible light photons?

a reply to: Hyperboles

quite a lot, but the question is a weebit open ended and ambiguous

Lets say you shoot photons at a light source in the sky which you can see, but your photons are reflected back to you lock stock and barrel. so what info if any can you glean from the photons that came back to you, about the distance they travelled and the medium thru which they travelled?