It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ask any question you want about Physics

page: 9
74
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

The current topic is about quantum mechanics (QM), and whether this quantum mechanical model is an accurate representation of reality or not,


This might surprise you, but I think it's accurate enough to provide functional answers which allow for real world problem solving, which is all that matters in my book.

I still think it is flawed though.

For example, SR forbids infinite point mass particles, which negates black hole theory.

SR can't account for low energy nuclear reactions. MIT recently held a course on this and NASA came out saying its a real phenomena.

SR also has no working theory of gravity, which means its still entirely disconnected from GR (and always will be).

It has its share of problems, but its useful... for now. I think Randal Mills theory is better because it relies on closed form classical physics to explain atomic structure and behavior, allowing him to solve previously unsolvable problems. People can mock Mills and Blacklight Power all they want, but these guys have independent lab proven results.

It's just a matter of time until SR, and its outrageously insane big brother GR, are scrapped entirely.

For the record, I don't think Mills has it all figured out either. I just think his theory is better.



Its very rare i do this but in this case total BS there is no state of hydrogen below the ground state. Think about this if you can figure out a way to manipulate hydrogen like his company claims. You could do it with anything meaning you can manipulate reality itself. This is a scam with alot of people falling for it.




posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur




Ask any question you want about physics


Any?

OK then, here's one for ya...what causes what we call 'quantum physics'..? What is the driver...the initiator...what causes it to be?

Ta.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Can you show the residence time calculation of CO2 in the atmosphere before the industrial revolution and at today's 400ppm level?


edit on 16-7-2014 by jrod because: reword



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

The current topic is about quantum mechanics (QM), and whether this quantum mechanical model is an accurate representation of reality or not,


This might surprise you, but I think it's accurate enough to provide functional answers which allow for real world problem solving, which is all that matters in my book.

I still think it is flawed though.

For example, SR forbids infinite point mass particles, which negates black hole theory.

SR can't account for low energy nuclear reactions. MIT recently held a course on this and NASA came out saying its a real phenomena.

SR also has no working theory of gravity, which means its still entirely disconnected from GR (and always will be).

It has its share of problems, but its useful... for now. I think Randal Mills theory is better because it relies on closed form classical physics to explain atomic structure and behavior, allowing him to solve previously unsolvable problems. People can mock Mills and Blacklight Power all they want, but these guys have independent lab proven results.

It's just a matter of time until SR, and its outrageously insane big brother GR, are scrapped entirely.

For the record, I don't think Mills has it all figured out either. I just think his theory is better.



Its very rare i do this but in this case total BS there is no state of hydrogen below the ground state. Think about this if you can figure out a way to manipulate hydrogen like his company claims. You could do it with anything meaning you can manipulate reality itself. This is a scam with alot of people falling for it.


I bet they come out with a functional self-powered prototype generator that makes use of lower ground state hydrogen by the end of the year. Within 2 years, mass production of the units and global distribution will be well underway.

I've seen the demos, I've read the lab reports, it's a done deal.

It's done.

Arguing that they can't do what they already did is pointless.

They already proved they can do it. The hard part is over. It's a simple engineering problem now to build the generator. How long does that usually take? A few months? Half a year? I think Mills said they had three engineering firms working on flushing out the final design. Mills also said all of the components were off-the-shelf. There are no conceptual design hurdles to overcome.

The generator needs two revolving electrified gears, a DC motor to drive the gears, a hopper and return collection system to recycle the discharged hydride powder, some solar concentrator cells, a power conditioner, what's left? It's a super-simple contraption. It's about as simple as a lawnmower engine.


edit on 7/16/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
OK -- I'll bite. Here's my question:

It matter is energy, and energy is matter, and matter/energy cannot be destroyed only converted from one state to another...

What the heck happens to stuff that falls down beyond the event horizon of a black hole? It has to "go" somewhere or change states, correct?



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom
That's not a problem specifically, when matter falls into a black hole it's still matter so there's matter/energy conservation, but there are other problems with black hole physics.

AnarchoCapitalist mentioned one problem which is that relativity predicts a singularity of infinite density, but few think this is what really happens. What's missing is a theory of quantum gravity which would bridge the gap between quantum mechanics and relativity and such a model is not expected to have a singularity in the black hole but some type of quantum state of extremely high, but not infinite density.

Also debated has been the information paradox of whether information is lost in a black hole, whether it really has an event horizon, whether Hawking radiation can be experimentally confirmed, and so on, so there's a lot we aren't sure about with black holes, but it does appear they exist based on observations of stars orbiting an "invisible" spot at the center of the milky way in such tight orbits that we think the only object they could possibly be orbiting is a supermassive black hole. From my perspective, a lot of the other debates are unresolved due to insufficient observational confirmation.

a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist
Here's my prediction of some of your thoughts on your death bed hopefully many decades from now:

"dang, Arb was right after all, I never lived to see any useful product from Randall Mills and Blacklight Power".


originally posted by: MysterX
Any?

OK then, here's one for ya...what causes what we call 'quantum physics'..? What is the driver...the initiator...what causes it to be?
Did you read the opening post? I suggest you do that and watch the video in the opening post by Sean Carroll, which explains there is really no consensus on this. Then feel free to ask follow-up questions if you want based in what the video says, etc.

a reply to: jrod
That's not really a question about physics.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I knew that is what you would write. It would demonstrate a working knowledge of the math behind such a calculation, something that does apply to all forms of physics. Really, it's been a few years and I just need a refresher on residence time calculations.

The concept is extremely important for understanding high level physics problems.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

A quantum theory of gravity, that agrees with GR, is not possible. It's not just a "hard" problem to solve, it's an impossible problem to solve. It's impossible to solve because GR is so wildly disconnected from reality that it's not even describing ANYTHING real at all.

GR is a mathematical description of spacetime. There is no such thing as spacetime. Spacetime, as a physical entity, does not and cannot exist. It is ONLY a mathematical construct.

GR has no existence theorems that prove multiple black holes could exist in the same universe. This was proven by McVittie back in 1978.

It's also been proven that variable r in the so-called Schwarzschild solution strictly plays the role of the inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature of the spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of “Schwarzschild” spacetime and so does not itself denote any distance whatsoever in “Schwarzschild” spacetime.

I say "so-called" because Schwarzschild's original solution was regular in all of spacetime, which leaves no room for the BS of Black Holes.

GR is so retarded that it makes Ptolemy's epicycles look like a joke by comparison.

You want a theory of quantum gravity? That will ONLY come about if GR is tossed and a theory of gravity is built from the ground up using nothing but atomic level physics. Of course, that means you have to dump black holes, dark matter, and all the rest of the crazy BS that GR proclaims exists.

So what does that leave you with? Plasma cosmology as the only viable alternative to GR.


edit on 7/16/2014 by AnarchoCapitalist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: KrzYma
So this confirms two things:
1. The opposite polarization means the same thing as cars going north on one side of the track and south on the other side of the track, but they are only going one direction in the loop, say, counter-clockwise, like in the transformer flux diagram.
2. Disconnecting one of the coils still allows the PMH to work. This confirms that the flux is all one direction in the sense of say, a counter-clockwise flow.

If the operation of the PMH depended on opposing flux directions as you wrongly claim, then disconecting one of the two coils would not permit continued operation of the PMH. The experimental results that "only one coil is sufficient for normal operation of PMH" confirm my interpretation and reject your interpretation about the importance of the direction of the other coil. You don't even need the other coil.


YEH, you must be right because you think so....

circulating flux you say...

I still stand by the statement you talk about a different device than I do.

Can your transformer/electromagnet do this ?


OH... I think you will say it stops working on the end of the video, sure, the wave I was talking about was destroyed.

I know we may talk about the same physics, they equal for everyone,
but if I understand your language of physics, why don't you try to understand my ?
edit on 16-7-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



www.youtube.com...
edit on 16-7-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma
YEH, you must be right because you think so....
I didn't say it was right because I think so, I provided evidence that it works just the same with one coil.


but if I understand your language of physics, why don't you try to understand my ?
I don't think you're trying. You haven't admitted that the PMH works on one coil therefore all that stuff you claimed about the second coil was wrong. It doesn't even need a second coil to function and you've evaded that completely in your reply and diverted to some other gadget. This is not resolving any discrepancy, it's switching topics.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Do you believe spacetime is a real physical entity, that has tangible physical properties, that act upon matter?

Do you believe we are held to the Earth by the bending of this aether-like substance?

Just curious.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: KrzYma
YEH, you must be right because you think so....
I didn't say it was right because I think so, I provided evidence that it works just the same with one coil.


but if I understand your language of physics, why don't you try to understand my ?
I don't think you're trying. You haven't admitted that the PMH works on one coil therefore all that stuff you claimed about the second coil was wrong. It doesn't even need a second coil to function and you've evaded that completely in your reply and diverted to some other gadget. This is not resolving any discrepancy, it's switching topics.


answer my question
Can your transformer/electromagnet do this ? -- watch the video I've posted

BTW


You haven't admitted that the PMH works on one coil therefore all that stuff you claimed about the second coil was wrong. It doesn't even need a second coil to function and you've evaded that completely in your reply and diverted to some other gadget. This is not resolving any discrepancy, it's switching topics.


PMH does, but not Leedskelnin's device I know
edit on 16-7-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur
look, this is what I said



what happens here
... you say Leedskelnin's apparatus is nothing else than a magnet maker.
... I say it is not
... you say Leedskelnin's apparatus works like a power transformer
... I say it is not, give you the explanation and point out the opposite directions of the flux
... you tell me I'm wrong and don't understand this device, I don't understand the transformer function electricity and magnetism
... I tell you again this device works different than you think
... you tell me about cars in a race as example of how the flux is or should be going around ...


and now I will add
... I show you a function your device can not do, this alone is the prove you talk just stuff people told you, repeat and repeat, ....
... you tell me, I am wrong... you don't even think to consider someone's arguments, and what gadget are you talking about ?

explain please why Leedskelnin's device can hold a magnetic momentum after removing the holder and even only on one end of the U-form ?
and how is it you can switch between the ends ???

this circulating flux is the wrong one


edit on 16-7-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma
answer my question
Can your transformer/electromagnet do this ? -- watch the video I've posted
I referred to a machine in a magnet making factory. I don't have access to it right now. He doesn't really explain what he's doing though he says "oops I messed up, sorry about that", and the video isn't that clear because you can't see what the wires are connected to, off the top of the screen, etc. So I don't know if I can duplicate what he's doing because I'm not sure what he's doing exactly. I see some paper clips sticking and then falling off, yeah I can do that with electromagnets.


PMH does, but not Leedskelnin's device I know
It's the same thing, Leedskalnin's PMH, he said he made it exactly to Leedskalnin's specifications! If not what do you think the difference is?



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

LETS IGNORE THE BIG PINK ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Astyanax
It is often said that gravity and centrifugal 'force' aren't really forces, although they act like forces.

So what are they, then?
Gravity is a force, which is one of the three or four fundamental forces (depending on how you count them, the electro-weak force can be counted as one or two).

Centrifugal force is a "fictitious" or "apparent" force, but what they say about it not being a real force is the correct view according to physicists. The basic concept is "an object in motion tends to remain in motion", so when your car goes around a corner fast, you feel like you're flung to the outside of the turn by a "centrifugal force", but it's really just your inertia trying to keep you going in the same direction, and inertia is not a force, it's inertia.

en.wikipedia.org...

The centrifugal force is what is usually thought of as the cause for the outward movement like that of passengers in a vehicle turning a corner, of the weights in a centrifugal governor, and of particles in a centrifuge. From the standpoint of an observer in an inertial frame, the effects can be explained as results of inertia without invoking the centrifugal force.



originally posted by: skunkape23
I've always thought the Shroedinger's Cat riddle was a little funny. Put a cat in a box. I can give you a definitive answer after about 3 months. The cat is definitely dead.
Finally, an unambiguous answer to the riddle, or a modified version of it anyway!



originally posted by: tencap77
What's the point? iT DOESN'T prove ANYTHING! and your scientist, so your just going to talk down to us anyway. IIt's like talking to politicians, or democrats or republicans. Again. Pointless. I used to LOVE science. Now I realize that Science, Politics and Public Education all have one thing in common. They are all USELESS and should be discontinued. Then the planet will devolve into what it is supposed to be. A comfy little creche were angry monkey can wait out his days, waiting for the Sun to die. Without the perversions of science, politics or public education,this would be a groovy place. But your saying "without us, nothing in life would be worth while and nothing would work" Yeah. Can do without the arrogance also.
As I said in the OP:


So as an introduction to this topic of asking questions about physics, I think it's worth noting that as admitted in this video, scientists don't have all the answers and don't claim to.
I think people who think scientists are arrogant don't know that many real scientists. Sure a few people are arrogant in every field, and science is no exception. But most scientists are pretty honest about what they don't know, which is still quite a bit. They also admit that what they think they do know can be falsified or revised by a new observation or experiment, and this is the very definition of science, and to me it's not nearly as arrogant as say, some religious doctrines.

If it weren't for science, you wouldn't have been able to make that post, or have internet access.


Perhaps silly question, how gravity is a force when Einstein said it is due to space time curve when physical body with mass present?

thank you.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: KrzYma
answer my question
Can your transformer/electromagnet do this ? -- watch the video I've posted
I referred to a machine in a magnet making factory. I don't have access to it right now. He doesn't really explain what he's doing though he says "oops I messed up, sorry about that", and the video isn't that clear because you can't see what the wires are connected to, off the top of the screen, etc. So I don't know if I can duplicate what he's doing because I'm not sure what he's doing exactly. I see some paper clips sticking and then falling off, yeah I can do that with electromagnets.


PMH does, but not Leedskelnin's device I know
It's the same thing, Leedskalnin's PMH, he said he made it exactly to Leedskalnin's specifications! If not what do you think the difference is?





he said he made it exactly to Leedskalnin's specifications! If not what do you think the difference is?


I think there is a lot of good, useful, cheap technology, but somehow it get's suppressed.
the reason is obvious and don't need to be pointed out, I think

you say you can not conform the experiment, how can you the others?

you ask me what I think how it works ?
I already told you about the standing wave that builds up by powering.

To how it powers back its energy losses by the Eddy Current and resistance of the wire...
I was thinking about the magnetic field. it propagates with C to the convention
the distance it propagates is larger then this for the E field ( actually the other way around if you consider the length of the wire ) but it doesn't matter I think, we know electrons are `just` the charge carrier, they don't move very much, E field propagates.
Insulator around the wires stops the current from the discharge, but it doesn't force the E field to follow the wire!
I see the current flowing UP the coil, the electrons do follow the wire and generate the magnetic field, sure...

can you see the wave building up out of arrival time difference between E and B ?
and you need two coils with opposite polarity other wise the wave turns into a flow, like in the auto magnet that looses its power

edit on 16-7-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:28 PM
link   
"I think there is a lot of good, useful, cheap technology, but somehow it get's suppressed..."


What I think, it's not the case. Wishfully thinking. Subconsciously you wish for a better, greed free world. Free of definition of debt.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: KrzYma

Hes playing with an electro magnet not sure the point of the video. Im not sure hes sure of the point of the video he kept messing up the positive and negative from his battery. Remember how i said if you try to have flux going in opposite directions it doesnt work thats what happened when he messed up. ground out an electro magnet it stops working funny huh.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: darkorange

I believe the concept of debt and compounding interests give strong circumstantial evidence that technology that does NOT benefit the oligarchy is hidden and if possible destroyed. This has happened time and again in human history.




top topics



 
74
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join