Παρασκευή 30 Ιουνίου 2017
Japan Tsunami Caught On Tape | BBC Natural Disasters & Weather Documenta...
Japan Tsunami Caught On Tape | BBC Natural Disasters & Weather Documenta...
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 1/7/2017
Monstrous Tsunami in Kesennuma - Final compilation
Monstrous Tsunami in Kesennuma - Final compilation
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 1/7/2017
Scale of the TSUNAMI Power - Educating Document
Scale of the TSUNAMI Power - Educating Document
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 28 Ιαν 2017
Giant wall of water hit town of NODA - Tsunami Japan 2011
Giant wall of water hit town of NODA - Tsunami Japan 2011
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 22 Μαρ 2014
Why does the Universe keep expanding?
Why does the Universe keep expanding?
VIKTOR T.TOTH , PRO PART TIME PHYSISIST
The universe was born in a state of flying apart.
This flying apart continues unless something stops it.
The
only something that we know of with the power of stopping the expansion
is gravity. If the universe contained enough matter for matter’s
self-gravity to bring the expansion to a halt, the expansion would stop.
But the universe does not have enough matter for this. So the expansion continues.
Τετάρτη 28 Ιουνίου 2017
Tι κρατά τους πλανήτες και τους δορυφόρους στην τροχιά;
Tι
κρατά τους πλανήτες και τους δορυφόρους σε τροχιά;
Όταν ένας πλανήτης περιστρέφεται γύρω από ένα αστέρι ή ένας δορυφόρος περιστρέφεται γύρω από τη Γη, η τροχιακή κίνηση μπορεί να συνεχιστεί για πολύ μεγάλο χρονικό διάστημα, εκτός και αν η τροχιά διακόπτεται από μια εξωτερική δύναμη. Για ένα δορυφόρο της Γης, οι υψηλότερες τροχιές συνήθως διαρκούν περισσότερο από τις χαμηλότερες, επειδή, πιο κοντά στη Γη, οι δυνάμεις αντίστασης της ατμόσφαιρας ασκούνται συνεχώς στο δορυφόρο. Αυτές απομακρύνουν την ενέργεια από τον δορυφόρο, και τον οδηγούν σε ολοένα χαμηλότερες τροχιές προοδευτικά και τελικά να τον οδηγούν να καταρρεύσει στη Γη.
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: Footnote 3 :: Belief based ...
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: Footnote 3 :: Belief based ...
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 9 Νοε 2014
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: Footnote 2 :: Multiple Infi...
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: Footnote 2 :: Multiple Infi...
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 28/6/2017
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: FootNote1 :: Addressing Fal...
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests :: FootNote1 :: Addressing Fal.
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 3 Νοε 2014
Arefinement to my original theory, now the enderchest itself has mass
but only the contents are massless. The mass of the enderchest results
in the enderchest falling and activating pressure plates.
I hope you all enjoyed the last video as much as I enjoyed making it!
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 28/6/2017
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests
Negative Mass and Paradoxical Enderchests
ΑΝΑΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 28/6/2017
Are we dealing with Negative Mass
Are we dealing with Negative Mass
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 31 Μαΐ 2017
Imagining what universes with negative mass and the implications
Gravity and Negative Matter and Negative Energy
Gravity and Negative Matter and Negative Energy
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 28/06/2017
Space Weather, Cosmic Giants, NSWEF | S0 News June.28.2017
Space Weather, Cosmic Giants, NSWEF | S0 News June.28.2017
ΑΝΑΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 28/06/2017
Τρίτη 27 Ιουνίου 2017
EΡΓΟ ΕΛΑΣΤΙΚΟΥ ΚΟΡΔΟΝΙΟΥ ΑΣΦΑΛΟΥΣ ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΗΣ ΠΤΩΣΗΣ
ΕΡΓΟ ΕΛΑΣΤΙΚΟΥ ΚΟΡΔΟΝΙΟΥ ΑΣΦΑΛΟΥΣ ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΗΣ ΠΤΩΣΗΣ -(ΦΥΣΙΚΗ Α ΛΥΚΕΙΟΥ)
27/6/2017 ΑΝΑΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ SCIΕNCEVIDEΟSΙΟΑ
Κυριακή 25 Ιουνίου 2017
why the photons are massless?
why the photons are massless?
The photon is the gauge boson of an unbroken gauge symmetry (the U(1) symmetry of the electromagnetic interactions). As such, it is exactly massless: there is no way to add a mass term for the photon to the Lagrangian describing electromagnetism without breaking the gauge symmetry. This is the same reason why the gauge bosons of the strong nuclear force, the gluons, are massless. They are gauge bosons of an intact SU(3) symmetry.
As others have noted, all experimental evidence is consistent with the photon's being exactly massless. As a quick mnemonic, photons from the farthest reaches of the universe come to our telescopes. This points to the electromagnetic force as having an infinite range (corresponding to zero mass for the photon).
Inside a superconductor, due to local interactions within the material, the U(1) symmetry is broken, leading the photon to behave as if it has a mass (the Meissner effect).
αναδημοσιευση απο το QUORA 26/6/2017
Πέμπτη 22 Ιουνίου 2017
Gravitational Waves (extra footage)
Gravitational Waves (extra footage)
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 22 Απρ 2016
Gravitational Waves Discovery - Sixty Symbols
Gravitational Waves Discovery - Sixty Symbols
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 21 Απρ 2016
The Absurdity of Detecting Gravitational Waves
The Absurdity of Detecting Gravitational Waves
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 5 Ιαν 2017
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 23/6/2017
Quantum Physics 101 - Double Slit Experiment
Quantum Physics 101 - Double Slit Experiment
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 9 Μαρ 2012
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 23/6/2017
Explained ! The Double Slit Experiment
Explained ! The Double Slit Experiment
Ανέβηκε στις 18 Ιουν 2010
Single Photon Interference
Single Photon Interference
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 13 Μαρ 2013
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 23/6/2017
This Is The Only Place Antimatter Can Survive In The Universe
This Is The Only Place Antimatter Can Survive In The Universe
Δημοσιεύτηκε στις 1 Απρ 2017
Τετάρτη 21 Ιουνίου 2017
What is string theory? How can I gether a clear concept about the string theory?
What is string theory? How can I gether a clear concept about the string theory?
ΒΑRAK SHOSHANI
Graduate Student at Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics
So you've read in popular science literature that string theory describes the universe as the string section of a cosmic orchestra, with each note played on the strings corresponding to a different particle. As much as you enjoyed this beautiful analogy, even a layman such as yourself cannot help but feel that there's something fishy going on here. What are strings, what are they made of, and most importantly, if they're like tiny violins floating around, then who the heck is "playing" them?
Well, you've come to the right place.
Why is a "Theory of Everything" (TOE) desirable?
Why is a "Theory of Everything" (TOE) desirable?
Richard Muller
Prof Physics, UC Berkeley, author "Now, The Physics of Time"Keep in mind that nobody proposes a Theory of Everything that would actually cover everything. The theory of everything hopes to combine the standard model of particle physics with gravity. It would not account for the unpredictable nature of radioactive decay. It would not advance our understanding of solid state physics, of superconductors, of biological processes, of material science, or of the cause of the Big Bang, or anything having to do with biology, human behavior or interactions of nations. So the title is a bit presumptuous, like the name that Leon Lederman playfully gave to the Higgs boson (he called it the "god particle") or the name that some people proposed for the top and bottom quarks (they suggest they be called "truth" and "beauty").
So beware the physicist who uses a dramatic name for a theory. Sometimes they are just trying to please their mothers by generating attention that gets their names into the newspapers.
ANAΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ QUORA 21/6/2017
What are some cool facts about the Universe?
What are some cool facts about the Universe?
Here are some mind-blowing facts about the Universe!
1.There is a mass reservoir of water floating in space that is 100,000 times bigger than our sun and holds 140 trillion times more water than all of our oceans.
Two teams of astronomers, each led by scientists at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), have discovered the biggest water reservoir in the entire universe that is at a distance of 30 billion trillion miles. The water reservoir is at least 140 trillion times that of all the water in the world’s oceans combined, and 100,000 times more massive than the sun. The reason has been attributed to a black hole that is steadily consuming a surrounding disk of gas and dust and in the process is spewing out water vapors.
Τρίτη 20 Ιουνίου 2017
Scientists Want to Insert Bionic Sperm Into Women's Vaginas
Scientists Want to Insert Bionic Sperm Into Women's Vaginas
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 21/6/2017
Michio Kaku - Current News & Quest for Immortality
Michio Kaku - Current News & Quest for Immortality
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 21/6/2017
Solar Alert, Quake Watch Peaks, Yellowstone | S0 News June.20.2017
Solar Alert, Quake Watch Peaks, Yellowstone | S0 News June.20.2017
ANAΡΤΗΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ YOUTUBE 21/6/2017
Why do we care what's inside of a black hole? What can we learn from it?
Why do we care what's inside of a black hole? What can we learn from it?
VICTOR T. TOTH I.T. PART TIME PHYSISIST
First of all, Interstellar is a piece of fiction. When the movie was released, it was lauded for its scientific accuracy, so I had high expectations. My expectations were shattered by the absolutely nonsensical “science” of the movie. So please, do not rely on Interstellar as a reference on black holes.
How large is the universe in Planck lengths?
How large is the universe in Planck lengths?
Easy, I’ll let you work it out. The Planck length is 10−33
centimeters.
A light year is a years’ worth of seconds (about π
centimeters per second.
Our observable universe particle horizon is 45 billion light-years.
So how many orders of magnitude, 33, plus 7.5, plus 10.5, plus 10.6 is ….
It turns out to be a rather interesting number since it may relate to the 120 or so orders of magnitude by which dark energy is much weaker than the straightforward particle physics first estimate. Take the square root of 10120.
It
is a curious cosmic coincidence that may have something to do with the
fact that space is quantized, tiled, and in fact an emergent property of
quantum entanglement of particles and fields.
ANAΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ Τ Ο QUORA
21/6/2017
ΜΗΠΩΣ ΕΧΕΙ ΑΠΟΔΕΙΧΘΕΙ ΟΤΙ Η Η ΘΕΩΡΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΧΟΡΔΩΝ ΕΊΝΑΙ ΛΑΝΘΑΣΜΈΝΗ;
ΜΗΠΩΣ ΕΧΕΙ ΑΠΟΔΕΙΧΘΕΙ ΟΤΙ Η Η ΘΕΩΡΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΧΟΡΔΩΝ ΕΊΝΑΙ ΛΑΝΘΑΣΜΈΝΗ;
Zane Jakobs, B.S./M.S. Aerospace and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder
No. String Theory can’t be proven wrong yet because it hasn’t really made any quantitative predictions about reality.
In short, there are five different String Theories, all of which exist in at least 9+1 dimensions (the so-called bosonic string theories exist in 26 dimensions). This presented a problem: which, if any, describes reality? That was solved by Edward Witten, who proved that they’re all just different limits of the same 10+1-dimensional theory, which is called M-theory.
Is there even a slightest proof that multiple dimensions exist?
Is there even a slightest proof that multiple dimensions exist?
Richard MullerProf Physics, UC Berkeley, author "Now, The Physics of Time"
Whew, this is a tough one—but I’ll give it a go.
A proof of the existence of multiple dimensions:
In this work, I will demonstrate the irrefutable existence of multiple dimensions.
To achieve this, I will present multiple images, as follows:
Image A:
Remote control on a carpet, UK.
Image B:
Remote control on a carpet—translated 30cm in direction denoted by “dimension 1” from its position in image A.
Image C:
Remote control translated −10cm in dimension 1, translated −40cm in another dimension (denoted dimension 2), and +40cm in a third dimension (denoted dimension 3, or “the vertical dimension”), from the position in image B.
Image D:
Remote control translated along a vector (−70,200,30), and rotated about an axis, such that it lies at rest inside a coniferous perennial plant, decorated to match the cultural norms of this time of year.
As we can see, in order to describe the motion of the article (the remote control) through the various scenes, we required a three dimensional system of coordinates.
Thus, we can conclude that at a local level, space is three dimensional.
Further testing (involving counting the angles in a triangle) reveals that, to a good approximation, this three dimensional space is Euclidean.
Therefore, we conclude that we have sufficient evidence to assert that there is more than one temporal dimension—and indeed, that there are at least three spatial dimensions.
Jack Fraser, et al., 2016.
For corrections to this paper, please send them to:
Kris Kringle,
1 Penguin Avenue,
The North Pole
I hope that this very rigorous scientific treatment helps you to believe that there is more than “a slightest proof that multiple dimensions exist”.
Whew, this is a tough one—but I’ll give it a go.
A proof of the existence of multiple dimensions:
In this work, I will demonstrate the irrefutable existence of multiple dimensions.
To achieve this, I will present multiple images, as follows:
Image A:
Remote control on a carpet, UK.
Image B:
Remote control on a carpet—translated 30cm in direction denoted by “dimension 1” from its position in image A.
Image C:
Remote control translated −10cm in dimension 1, translated −40cm in another dimension (denoted dimension 2), and +40cm in a third dimension (denoted dimension 3, or “the vertical dimension”), from the position in image B.
Image D:
Remote control translated along a vector (−70,200,30), and rotated about an axis, such that it lies at rest inside a coniferous perennial plant, decorated to match the cultural norms of this time of year.
As we can see, in order to describe the motion of the article (the remote control) through the various scenes, we required a three dimensional system of coordinates.
Thus, we can conclude that at a local level, space is three dimensional.
Further testing (involving counting the angles in a triangle) reveals that, to a good approximation, this three dimensional space is Euclidean.
Therefore, we conclude that we have sufficient evidence to assert that there is more than one temporal dimension—and indeed, that there are at least three spatial dimensions.
Jack Fraser, et al., 2016.
For corrections to this paper, please send them to:
Kris Kringle,
1 Penguin Avenue,
The North Pole
I hope that this very rigorous scientific treatment helps you to believe that there is more than “a slightest proof that multiple dimensions exist”.
ANAΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ QUORA 20/6/2017
Δευτέρα 19 Ιουνίου 2017
ΜΠΟΡΕΙΣ ΝΑ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΙΣ ΤΗΝ ΘΕΩΡΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΧΟΡΔΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΓΙΑΤΙ ΑΥΤΟ ΕΊΝΑΙ ΔΥΝΑΤΟΝ;
ΜΠΟΡΕΙΣ ΝΑ ΕΞΗΓΗΣΕΙΣ ΤΗΝ ΘΕΩΡΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΧΟΡΔΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΓΙΑΤΙ ΑΥΤΟ ΕΊΝΑΙ ΔΥΝΑΤΟΝ;
Jess H. Brewer
Physicist, fisherman, gourmand, Neal Stephenson wannabe.
All I can do is give you a layman’s synopsis, which is probably wrong in some essential ways:
Lots of people on Quora ask if elementary particles are all “made of something”. String theory is as close as we have to an answer. Suppose all the particles were different vibrational states of little loops of some kind of fundamental string. For reasons I can’t explain, this doesn’t work in 3 spatial dimensions + time; but if you postulate that spacetime has 10 or 11 or 26 dimensions, the predicted finite spectrum of allowed vibrational states matches up pretty well with the particles we know in the Standard Model. It also predicts some other particles we’ve been looking for at the LHC (unsuccessfully so far).
Now, you will probably wonder, “Where are all those other dimensions?” Well, they sort of “curl up” so that they are undetectable in our 4-dimensional spacetime. That’s what I’m told. Don’t ask me how it works.
Strings aren’t the only topological species in this theory; there are also “branes” (an N-dimensional analogue of 2D membranes embedded in 3-space) — our spacetime may be a 4D hypersurface embedded in 10- or 11- or 26-dimensional space, something a mathematician or a SF fan will have no trouble visualizing but most others find a little daunting.
Next you may ask, “So what experiments have confirmed this theory?” Well, there’s a problem: most of the predicted phenomena that would test string theory occur at energies so high that it would take an accelerator the size of the Solar system to reach them. So for now we have an army of theorists trying to find more subtle tests that could be performed in ordinary laboratories, another army of theorists trying to refine string theory to make it more elegant, internally consistent and better matched to what we do see, and a third army of skeptics declaring string theory to be a hoax, a waste of time, or “not science” because it can’t be tested.
Lots of people on Quora ask if elementary particles are all “made of something”. String theory is as close as we have to an answer. Suppose all the particles were different vibrational states of little loops of some kind of fundamental string. For reasons I can’t explain, this doesn’t work in 3 spatial dimensions + time; but if you postulate that spacetime has 10 or 11 or 26 dimensions, the predicted finite spectrum of allowed vibrational states matches up pretty well with the particles we know in the Standard Model. It also predicts some other particles we’ve been looking for at the LHC (unsuccessfully so far).
Now, you will probably wonder, “Where are all those other dimensions?” Well, they sort of “curl up” so that they are undetectable in our 4-dimensional spacetime. That’s what I’m told. Don’t ask me how it works.
Strings aren’t the only topological species in this theory; there are also “branes” (an N-dimensional analogue of 2D membranes embedded in 3-space) — our spacetime may be a 4D hypersurface embedded in 10- or 11- or 26-dimensional space, something a mathematician or a SF fan will have no trouble visualizing but most others find a little daunting.
Next you may ask, “So what experiments have confirmed this theory?” Well, there’s a problem: most of the predicted phenomena that would test string theory occur at energies so high that it would take an accelerator the size of the Solar system to reach them. So for now we have an army of theorists trying to find more subtle tests that could be performed in ordinary laboratories, another army of theorists trying to refine string theory to make it more elegant, internally consistent and better matched to what we do see, and a third army of skeptics declaring string theory to be a hoax, a waste of time, or “not science” because it can’t be tested.
ANAΣΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ QUORA 20/6/2017
What is the holographic principle? Does it mean that "our universe is a hologram"?
What is the holographic principle? Does it mean that "our universe is a hologram"?
JOSEPH WANGPh.D. Astrophysics
That "our universe is a hologram" is perhaps one of the greatest physics-related misconceptions of recent years. Let me write a clarification in bold so that it will be absolutely clear:
No, our universe is NOT a hologram! It's just a metaphor used to describe some property we think the universe might have. It has absolutely nothing to do with actual holograms, or with "living in a simulation".
Okay, now that we've got this covered, let me explain what the holographic principle actually means.
If you freeze all atoms in the universe, does it essentially mean that you've stopped time?
JONATHAN DEVOR P.h.D. Astronomy, Harvard University (2008)No.
You don’t need atoms to have time. In fact theoretical Cosmologists often discuss the space-time properties of various hypothesized universes, without any matter in them at all. Putting in matter just makes the equations much more messy…
Think about it like this. You can probably quite easily imagine a 2-dimentional universe as a curved sheet (i.e. a manifold), like the image seen below. You could place matter within the sheet, which will cause additional distortions, or you can simply choose to leave it empty with its “default” shape. To this you can add a third spacial dimension and/or a time dimension to your model. Doing this will make it much harder to imagine intuitively, but the mathematical techniques of general relativity, used to understand these universes, are essentially the same. So mass is very much an optional component you can choose to have or not, depending on what you’re trying to calculate.
ANAΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΣΗ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ QUORA 20/6/2017
Εγγραφή σε:
Αναρτήσεις (Atom)