Recent posts by KingXimana on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Stock market investing -- a TL;DR terms/theories guide and general discussion

Yeah, thats the reason im taking physics classes right now. If i take a year of business and i get bored to tears i wont be behind because of the work im doing no (and the fact that i plan on a math minor)

I truly enjoy business, right now I think I will enjoy it enough that the benefits of a business degree out weighs my slightly greater love for physics and math.

The wages are drastically different in most cases. a quick search gave me $180K a year as the STARTING wage for a investment broker vs a full professor at a top us university getting $127K. So the end result of that is 6 years of business school would make your salary higher then 8 years of school followoed by a entire career of work.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Stock market investing -- a TL;DR terms/theories guide and general discussion

This is the type of thread that makes me remember I made the right choice for next year. I said in the physics thread that i was doing university physics classes in high school, that is just my passion. Next year i signed up for and was accepted into Business administration finance concentration (investment banking specialty) because while I might not enjoy the stock market as much as physics I realized something. If anyone is headed to university i cant say i recommend what I am doing make the choice for your self, we need more scientist and teachers and other highly under paid jobs.

The realization was that every job you have increases the amount of something (in a tangible or intangible way) for example a fisherman is very likely to eat fish much more then the average person, a scientist is much more likely to know more about the nature of our universe then the average person and for business (especially investment banking) you deal with money all day so it logically follows you will have more money. Everyone needs to decide what is the most important thing for them.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

In the case of the phone wouldn’t you need to also have a tachyon phone to awnser the call?
in that case you could only phone as far back as how old the tech is, so thats a good reason why no one has used tachyon phones to call us yet.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

“The photon is the quantum of the electromagnetic interaction and the basic “unit” of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation and is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force."

Electromagnetic

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Originally posted by DarkBaron:

Care to share some of this ‘evidence’?

No because your a object as well, the neurons in your brain have slowed the same amount as your watch because its just as much harder at this velocity to move for your cells as it is for the rocket your inside. What does this mean for you? it means your brain is running slower your cells are aging slower, your blood is flowing slower. EVERYTHING is slower. As far as your concerned your watch is ticking at the same speed it was when you left, because your going just as much slower as your watch.

I have a problem with this. If you’re traveling faster, everything in you is traveling faster. Relative velocities, etc. It isn’t you yourself that’s slowing down — it’s time itself. This means you’re moving at the same speed relative to anyone else (your cells anyway), and 1 second takes longer to complete for you. You appear to be aging the more slowly, but you’re aging at the same rate as anyone else, and the rate here is what’s important. Slower time means that to keep this rate the same, the aging factor must be elongated. Get what I’m saying?

Heres the thing, what I said explains WHY time is slowed. If everything is happeneing at half the speed for the people on the ship then for them time is slowed by half. When your on the ship sure you are traveling faster, but your cells and nerve signals and blood and watch move as well as that speed. Its the same as a person running to the front of the rocket, they cant do it. Your blood moving to your feet would feel the same time dialation effects, so its slowed.

Everything is slowed becuse the reasons I stated, you can think of it as everything moving slower and time moving at the same speed, or time slowing and everything else moving at normal speed its all reletive after all.

Mr Rubix, you know electromagnetic waves ARE light right? Photons are the force carrier for electromagnetism.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Its not that we cant go faster then the speed of light, it goes like this. If you have positive mass you go slower then the speed of light, if you have 0 mass you always go the speed of light and if you have negative mass you go faster then the speed of light. Thus far nothing has been found with negative mass, so thus far nothing goes faster then the speed of light.

How this works, ill try to explain simpling with my limited knowledge.

I will assume you have seen the equation E=MC^2 the mass energy equivalence equation, This directly says that if our energy increase since the speed of light is a constant mass increase proportionality.

Now there is two more important equations 1/2mV^2=Ke thats one half mass times velocity squared equals kinetic energy. the other important equation is F=ma force equals mass times acceleration.

Now we put this all together with some imagery. You have your rocket ship that ways 1 kilogram and your not moving. Your ship begins to accelerate increasing your velocity, if your velocity increases then your kinetic energy is increasing, if your kinetic energy increase your energy is increasing. Earlier we showed that energy is equivalent to mass so now since our mass is higher F=ma shows us that we need a higher force to get the same amount of acceleration.

In short the more we accelerate the more force it requires to accelerate.

Now on top of all that the closer to the speed of light we get, time effectively slows down. Time slowing down happens on the same basic principles of what I described above. What you probably didn’t think of is its not just the ship thats speeding up its everything in the ship including you. That watch your wearing no longer has a mass of a couple hundred grams it 4000 kilograms and the mechanisms driving it haven’t gone any faster. Your watch is no longer ticking once per second its ticking once per day.

But wait! wouldn’t i notice everything slowing down as I sped up to the speed of light and i could just run to the front of the ship and thus break the speed of light.

No because your a object as well, the neurons in your brain have slowed the same amount as your watch because its just as much harder at this velocity to move for your cells as it is for the rocket your inside. What does this mean for you? it means your brain is running slower your cells are aging slower, your blood is flowing slower. EVERYTHING is slower. As far as your concerned your watch is ticking at the same speed it was when you left, because your going just as much slower as your watch.

Your engines and their fuel are moving slower as well, so as time slows your engines produce less thrust, and we showed they need to produce more thrust to accelerate at the same rate because of the mass increase.

In closing because of both these factors (they really are the same factor) the faster you get the more your mass increase and the more your force decreases, F=ma so as this happens acceleration nose dives. your acceleration keeps dropping the faster you get, so (number pulled out of thin air) While you went from 98% of the speed of light to 99% the speed of light in one second (of observer time) you might only go to 99.5% in the next second then (9.6% then 99.65% and so on) you could continue this until the universe dies a heat death your result would just keep getting closer and closer and closer to the speed of light, but becuse your acceleration is dropping you will never reach it.

(I appreciated any responses to this, If the ways of explaining it using more imagery that i did, broke the universe tell me. I also didn’t plan this out before I typed it so its likely I forgot a few important facts but it should suffice for most viewers, Tell me what i missed and ill update the post maybe)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Its a really really good thing if you can understand the concepts on the other hand you need to know no matter how well you know the concepts once you get into school to learn this stuff you will realize with the math its completely different. Its really the same thing but, for me at least i realized my “strong understanding” of the concepts was really shallow, i could talk the talk but not walk the walk.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

The issue with just learning “new” physics is (and i did do this myself) you get a distorted idea of what physics is. you learn about all these great things with out a real understanding, then you go try and get a physics degree and very quickly the dreams of just looking at the universe care free vanishes and you realize you didn’t actually know anything and to know anything you got to put in wayyyy more time.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

When you say new in physics do you mean the things that seem hugely important or the minor details? I think i can safely say your thinking about the big ideas so you have the classical things that the media grabs hold of: Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Dark Flow, Where does mass come from, Is matter stringy or loopy, do tachyons exist, do gravitons exist, quantum computing and more and more and more and more……

If your interested in learning physics outside of structured classes I could be of assistance but i need more details about what you know and what you want to know. do you want a intuitional view or a mathematical one (with the math you get the intuition as well, and probably stronger). If you want to learn the maths how much do you know about math and physics?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Basically what you were saying is that you prefer a hidden variable theory instead of one with uncertainty akin to the theorem i was talking about.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Hrvoje Nikolic wrote a few essays on how it doesn’t break relativity, again i dont know if he is bullshitting but his arguments in this one seem sound and i cant find his other ones on the subject.

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1002/1002.3226v2.pdf

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Thats the crux of what we are talking about, you have to either break locality or be random. so far there is no explanations that are local and deterministic.

There is a couple theories that are working on making B-B theory mix with relativity better. Again this is a bit above me but so I cant tell how possible or likely it is the succeed (or if they have?)

(two page toppers in a row lol)

I wouldn’t say that what Awesome said doesn’t belong so much as he could provide any substance so it is just philosophy and not physics.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

The De Broglie–Bohm theory makes the same predictions for the Bell test experiments as ordinary quantum mechanics. The issue here is that its non local. Non locality isnt something I have entirely worked out, I understand most people dont like it. At this point I haven’t quite grasped what the true problem with it is.

Right im sorry, i guess i was looking to much on perpetual motion and forgot about the machine part.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Have you heard of the De Broglie-Bohm theory of quantum mechanics? Its deterministic, it uses a series of hidden variables to describe the so called random effects of other theories. (on a side note right now its my favorite theory because I struggle with the fact the universe can be random)

Also you will notice, I covered the definition of work. I also said you could (in theory not in practice) create a machine that moves forever but since there would need to be no heat loss you could not extract energy from it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Yeah, its horrible. Unlearning should never have to happen, there has to some happy medium. Currently im only a grade 12 student but I teach the grade 12 physics course (I have no idea what happened to the teacher that is supposed to be teaching it but she got me to teach one class then another, now she shows up like once a week…) Hardest thing for me is not brining calculus into the classes, or even relativity into the gravity unit, I mean I plan on mentioning them but there just isnt enough time to tell them whats really happening. It saddens me :(

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Understandable, I had a bad experience in grade 7 when my science teacher told me there was no relation between how static electricity works and how magnetism works. Ever since im over sensitive about making sure there is no misinformation.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Im sorry about all that it was late, and i came off like I was trying to be better then everyone.

im sorry player i guess i was more talking about how you nearly implied black holes are a constant size. For me the size of the singularity is irrelevant if all the mater was right on the very edge of the event horizon or if its in a singularity in the very center, dosnt effect anything. Blackholes are generally talked about as everything contained in the event horizon.

Dark baron, for the law of motion one, thats just my biggest pet peeve. When some one obviously knows what they are talking about but they leave something out like the fact that objects in motion would stay in motion unless acted on my a force (they are always acted on my a force thats the second law of thermodynamics). I didnt mean to say you were wrong so much as if you say that “any object at rest stays at rest unless acted on by a force” would make a uneducated person think of Aristotelean logic (things dont move unless you push them if you stop pushing them they instantly stop)

oh yes, the calories in our food is in the form of adenosine triphosphate (unless your a crazy arsenic bacteria). Its almost always in the form of glucose, then occasionally fats and carbohydrates and least commonly proteins. So you were correct energy can come from proteins.

On the planet falling into the sun, i understand where your coming from. We are always falling in towards the sun the issue is that we fall so much into it that our tangential velocity causes us to move away from the sun faster then we are falling into it (yet we are still falling into it). If you think of falling as only happening when you are moving closer to a object you are correct, i call falling any time when centripetal force is causing a object to accelerate towards another body. difference of definition.

All in all im sorry about my wording guys, Ill try to help out more and be more civil about it.

ps. Again to the above, Perpetual motion doesn’t say anything about energy, if you were in a perfect vacume (not even space is perfect) you would move forever but have no force acting on you other then the initial push, you would also have done no work (work is force*distance). Perpetual motion is only practically impossible, because its impossible to have no heat loss.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Yeah they did the double slit with a Fullerene molecule, thats 60(?) carbon atoms.

Magnets basically work the same as electricity (if you really look at it they are the same thing).
a current flows through the magnet and creates a field around it flowing from north pole to south pole (or viseversa). I could go more into it but, i dont know how much you want.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Ask Physics Questions Here

Originally posted by DarkBaron:

Perpetual motion makes energy out of nothing. You must generate energy somehow, and perpetual energy violates this. One of Newton’s Basic Laws — his first in fact: An object at rest stays at rest unless acted on by an outside Force. This means that an outside force (energy) must be exerted to give an object momentum (energy).

In other words, you need energy to make energy, and if no energy is pumped, you will produce no energy. Matter is energy, so things like your cells produce energy that you use on a daily basis by breathing, walking, and analyzing lights with your eyes — all by burning (proteins?) Energy must be created from energy. Perpetual energy violates this, as it generates Energy from nowhere.

What happens to the light the mirrors don’t reflect?

Absorbed! Ever wonder why windows get hot the more light they let through?

oh god…. first the law is objects at rest stay at rest and objects in motion stay in motion unless acted on by a outside force, there for this law alone does not prove a perpetual motion machine wrong it in fact implies one.

Second you dont burn proteins you burn calories, a calorie is a unit of energy. the rest about how perpetual motion cant happen becuse its generating energy is i guess right by extension but the true fact is the second law of thermodynamics makes it not possible. Its not that you need to generate energy to keep moving forever thats not true, its just that its impossible to not LOSE energy.

Next person

Originally posted by Redem:

2) Classical Physics- Why is a perpetual motion machine impossible? If I had a really large star and I placed a planet around it so it creates an orbit, would the planet not keep going indefinelty? Why is perpetual motion impossible then?

In a word, entropy. You confuse two things here, btw. A planet orbiting a star is not a machine, and thermodynamics deals with machines. Essentially, every time energy is used to do work, some is lost to entropy so that the final state of the system contains less energy available to do work. In order for a machine to run forever, a perpetual motion machine, there must be absolutely zero energy lost in the process of doing work, this is simply practically impossible.

I’m curious, I looked over another thread recently, how does quantum mechanics disprove determinism, if it does?

It implies that at base the universe is government by probabilities. Determinism requires everything to be inevitable.

In a word, entropy talks about everything. Planets dont fall into the sun because they are getting energy in the form of gravity from the sun, thus they are always falling into the sun.

Quantum mechanics doesn’t disprove determinism, in fact some schools of quantum mechanics are deterministic. the common ones imply that it would be hard/impossible for US to determine the future, but that does not mean the future isn’t pre determined.

Originally posted by player_03:

No. They have protons and neutrons, which are quite different from black holes. (Though I guess enough protons and neutrons could form a black hole, but atoms don’t have that many.)

It’s true that the matter in a black hole is compressed so tightly that it would fit within the radius of an atom’s core, but if there actually was one in the core of an atom, the atom would be absorbed.

This is all wrong, well they do have protons and neutrons but the rest is wrong. They are not so different fro black holes in actual fact Einstein among others has put papers out saying electrons could be black holes.

Please never say the size black holes are again, the black hole at the center of the milky way is about the size of Uranus’ orbit and there are black holes that are plank scale in size. Basically black holes can be any size they feel like it just depends how much matter is in them. Also if a black hole was inside of the atom it would evaporate fast like 10^-15 seconds fast the parts of the atom wouldn’t even have time to fall in before it would be gone (that number is probably close to right but i did not do the calculation, its late sue me)

(im sorry i should have read the rest of the responses before i posted this but my brain exploded, i am also sorry if i came of as a meany any question asked is a step forward, i am glad this thread is here)

 
Flag Post

Topic: General Tyrant Discussion / "Tyrant Trolls" official recruitment!

Im in, ill finish up my missions and occasionaly help with the wars until i finish up.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Proof that Japan has been downplaying their nuke problems.

Originally posted by KingXimana:
If anything the damage in a understatement and the time im typing this the radiation level in Tokyo is 0.106μSv/h
a United States citizen receives an average total dose from background radiation (radiation dose from natural background sources; from natural radioactivity in the Earth, and cosmic rays from space) that’s equal to 0.354 μSv/h.

So people in the US get over TRIPLE the does on a regular year as they are getting right now

Per year vs. Per hour.

You will notice both my units were in hours, they are still getting 1/3 the US dose

(edit messed up the quote but you get the idea)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Proof that Japan has been downplaying their nuke problems.

If anything the damage in a understatement and the time im typing this the radiation level in Tokyo is 0.106μSv/h
a United States citizen receives an average total dose from background radiation (radiation dose from natural background sources; from natural radioactivity in the Earth, and cosmic rays from space) that’s equal to 0.354 μSv/h.

So people in the US get over TRIPLE the does on a regular year as they are getting right now

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How do you make your own political party in the UK?

semi relevant only

Open source Party, you might find this relevant to your idea(ls)

Open source party article

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / A Debate on Free-Will (Reborn)

Personaly i am a firm beliver that much like it dosnt matter whats in a black hole, it dosnt matter if free will exists or not.

In both cases (for black holes and freewill) i believe the same thing would happen either way. If you dont have freewill it would just be becuse you would always choose the same future if you were given the same circumstances.

a deterministic universe wouldn’t be predictable with 100% degree of accuracy (with my current understanding of the universe) because you would have to account for everything in a simulation of the universe, including the simulation of the universe (recursion anyone?). (also my current understanding because of Heisenberg uncertainty principle, it could end up being wrong or maybe i just dont understand what im talking about at all…)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / New Planet?

Just thought i would shout out that this specific planet is by no means the best candidate we know of.

Kepler semi recently found over 1200 planets, some earth sized some in the habitable zone and some that are both. A earth sized planet in the habitable zone would then cancel out any problems that might occur from the above average gravity, changes in plate techtonics or other things i cant think of at this time.