|
Post by greedy on Dec 4, 2004 20:29:09 GMT -5
u know wha they say it's all rellative i am impressed regardless the only math i need to know in the marine corp is 30 bullets 30 kills lol ;D
|
|
|
Post by josh on Dec 5, 2004 0:43:37 GMT -5
one shot, one kill. That's odds I'll take.
Serve with honor marine! And with the thanks of an american.
|
|
|
Post by greedy on Dec 5, 2004 11:20:48 GMT -5
thank u for your support josh we are proud to serve americans like your self and madrid
|
|
|
Post by gretchen on Dec 5, 2004 18:50:18 GMT -5
it's great you guys are... in the military and all, i mean seriously lol i'm not being sarcastic or anything! but if you feel the need to continue this conversation would you mind moving it over to the general board, or getting back on topic? thanks guys.
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Dec 5, 2004 18:58:30 GMT -5
We are umm. whats the topic again, oh yeah Darko Physics. We are relating Darko physics to the military. You see gretchen, Donnie never really joined the military, and the military is afterall full of physics. You have to know the velocity at which bullets will be flying at you in order to creat good and effectvie bullet proof vests. So we are talking in some sort or way in relation to Donnie physics.
|
|
|
Post by gretchen on Dec 5, 2004 23:20:46 GMT -5
mmmhmmm.
take it outside, boys.
|
|
|
Post by greedy on Dec 11, 2004 15:07:48 GMT -5
yes mother lol ;D j/k gretchen is right back to the physics
|
|
¤(ø[¤-{cellar door}-¤]ø)¤
New Member
Sleep is lovely, death is better still, not to have been born is of course the miracle
Posts: 24
|
Post by ¤(ø[¤-{cellar door}-¤]ø)¤ on Jan 1, 2005 9:10:47 GMT -5
[glow=white,2,300]Amen to that[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Jan 17, 2005 0:25:33 GMT -5
So, umm I guess this thread is closed now, so I have nothing to do here.
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Jan 21, 2005 20:32:54 GMT -5
Hi all - I'm back! (I know I wasn't here for long berfore I left, but I'm back all the same ) "Can i plaese remind u that einsteins theory has been disprooven in the instances of black holes " Einstein's theory of reletivity actually predicts black holes so cannot be said to be disproven in the instances of black holes. It is true however that (in theory) classical physics does break down (not work) at the singularity. "in theory a black hole emits infinate energy" Um, this is completely false - there is no theory that I am aware of that states this. There are energy emmisions associated with black holes; The first occurs where there is plenty of matter available to collapse into the black hole. Basically heat caused primarily by friction in the matter orbting and collapsing into the black hole is emitted as massive x-ray bursts. This energy is emitted in two cones in directions at right angles to the eccretion disc. (Note that although these emissions are caused by the black hole they are not emitted from the black hole.) This phenomenon is known as a quasar. The second is known as Hawking Radiation. Quantum theory allows pairs of 'Virtual Particles' to pop in and out of existence - this does not violate the second law of thermodynamics (energy may not be created or destroyed) because each pair consists of a particle and antiparticle, so the total energy of the system = 0 before and after the particles pop into existence. Normally these particles would just annihilate eachother, but at the event horizon of a black hole the antiparticle can fall into the black hole (reducing it's mass), while the normal particle escapes, effectively emitted by the black hole. Niether of these types of emission could be described as 'infinite'. (Gravity is not emitted energy, and even if it was, the gravitational influence of a body is directly proportional to it's mass. Black holes have finite mass, and therefore a finite, albeit potentially very large, gravitational influence.) I would note here that the time travel theories involving FLT (Faster than Light Travel) and wormholes are mutually exclusive. So if you could travel through a womhole, there is nothing to say that you would need to be travelling faster than light to do so. Equally, travelling through a wormhole would not facilitate FLT. It should also be noted that matter is energy, just in a different form, so 'lifeless atoms', implying matter devoid of energy, is a meaningless concept. There you go Madridarko - a kick start for the Physics board! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Jan 21, 2005 20:58:30 GMT -5
Bigboy, thanks for that, and I just have one question that would be great if you could answer it please. You were talking about the subject of gravity between two objects, and how there is no such thing as perpetual energy. I am not triyng to prove any point I am simply asking this because I don't know how this functions. Ok. lets say there are two planets (in space obiously) and well they are emmitting an attraction towards each other (known as gravity). As long as the planets remain there there will be that force of gravity between them. Woudln't that mean that it is perpetual energy? I am just confused and need a bit of light shone upon my eyes. I know it is not perpetual energy, but I don't understand why is it not. along the subject please explain also a bit further more what is gravity, I know about the supositions fo these undiscovered particles of gravitons and that it is the cause of the force of gravity but where does this energy come from or how is it done. Also a much simpler one that is just for fun or trivia, Ok, if there are three objects. Let's name them object A, B, and C. Objects A, B, and C are collinear and object B is between object A and C. Would object's A gravity only affect Object B and not C, or would the gravity would be able to trasspass through B and get to C (eventhough it would be much weaker than the gravity affecting B because of the larger distance) ultimatly affecting both objects. I guess to make it simpler, I am asking if gravity has the capacity of travelling throgh matter.
|
|
|
Post by gretchen on Jan 21, 2005 21:00:01 GMT -5
thanks for getting back on track guys
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Jan 21, 2005 21:41:49 GMT -5
we knew you would enjoy it.
|
|
|
Post by Bigboy on Jan 21, 2005 21:48:20 GMT -5
Hi Mad, Ok, I'll give it a go! As I understand it gravity is not emitted, gravitons (as far as i know) are hypthetical particles dreamt up for quantum theory to propagate gravity, but so far no particle/quantum theory can explain gravity. (This is pretty much the holy grail of physics) The best way (I feel) to explain gravity is to imagine spacetime as a rubber sheet. Now imagine a planet as a bowling ball resting on that rubber sheet. The bowling ball will warp the sheet and any other object on the sheet will tend to fall towards the bowling ball. In a similar way a mass (such as a planet) warps spacetime around it, and you can think of gravity the curvature of space (the rubber sheet) at that point. The best way to visualise it is to do it - plonk a bowling ball on a trampoline, then get a tennis ball and place it on the trampoline and it will roll towards the bowling ball. If you try to give the tennis ball a push to roll it past the bowling ball you can even get a bit of an 'orbit' going (although this 'orbit' will decay because of the friction between the tennis ball and the trampoline). In the example of two planets in space, they are bot affected by the gravitational influence of the other, as expressed by the formula F=GMm/r 2where F= force G= Gravitational constant M= Mass of planet A m= Mass of planet B r= the distance between the centres of gravity of the two planets. In this situation Potential Energy is stored in the system, and as the planets move towards each other (due to the gravitational forces experienced) that Potential Energy is converted into Kinetic Energy. The point here is that gravity itself is not energy. (PE = Fr = GMm/r KE = 1/ 2MV 2, where M is Mass and V is velocity) In answer to your 3 planet situation, it is simplest to say that EVERY mass in the UNIVERSE experiences a gravitational pull from EVERY OTHER mass in the UNIVERSE. Intervening matter does not affect this at all. So while it is true that the Earth has a gravitational affect on you, it is equally true that you have a gravitational affect on Alpha Centaurai, it's just that the distance between you and Alpha Centauai is so large that the force acting between you is insignificantly tiny. Hope this helps!
|
|
|
Post by Madridarko on Jan 21, 2005 22:07:25 GMT -5
Yes, thank you very much, it did indeed help out. So gravity itself is not an energy in motion but an attraction kinda a form of potential energy which somehow turns into a form of kinetic energy which is the actuall movement of the planets towards each other. The rubber sheet/trampoline example was excellnt, thank you very much again.
|
|