Time's Up, Einstein

Discussion in 'ten-forward' started by ronjor, May 26, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Primrose

    Primrose Registered Member

  2. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Attached Files:

  3. beetlejuice

    beetlejuice Registered Member

    After very carefully studing this thread, I (as an amateur scientist) have come to the only obvious conclusion.

    You all have way too much time on your hands.
     
  4. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    As a garbologist, I understand your viewpoint. :D
     
  5. Devilin

    Devilin Registered Member

    ronjor C. Universal constant / speed of light.was only the closest thing to a constant scientists could come up with at the time.pardon the pun
    A. more accurate concept of a universal constant would be D=T2.death equals taxes squared. :cool:

    Primrose.Einstein wasn't that bright.in comparison with Newton.ok Newton was also as mad as A. Fish.but his insights into the working of the universe were truly out of this world :D .and Newton invented gravity.without which we'd all be floating around weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
     
  6. Primrose

    Primrose Registered Member

    Newton did the gravity thing o_O Are you sure ? ronjor told me there as no such thing as the Center of gravity.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  8. Primrose

    Primrose Registered Member

    Oh that Center :D Isn't that the one in Belgium that makes anti-gravity beer that taste like dishwater ? :p


    Anti-bubbles in Beer from Belgium
    By: Joe Andersen -- Physics.About.com

    "Physicists from Belgium have published a theory that explains the formation and movement of anti-bubbles. Anti-bubbles are the exact opposite of regular bubbles: where bubbles are thin surface of fluid in air surrounding a pocket of air, an anti-bubble is a thin surface of air in fluid surrounding a pocket of fluid.
    Although first observed and studied almost a century ago, no one until now has been able to determine how they form.
    They also observed anti-bubbles in Flemish beer, proving that the beer from Belgium is almost, but not quite, the same as dishwater."


    Joe Andersen -- Physics.About.com Guide
    learn how to make anti-bubbles in your kitchen with soapy water --


    http://physics.about.com/cs/bubles/a/antibubbles.htm
     

    Attached Files:

  9. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

  10. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  11. Devilin

    Devilin Registered Member

    1) Water

    2) Clear bowl or tank

    3) Dishwashing liquid/detergent

    4) Beaker, jug or squirt bottle (tomato sauce or mustard bottles tend to work well)

    What to do

    1) Fill the clear bowl to the very brim with water with a few squeezes of washing-up liquid in it)

    2) Keep some more of this liquid in the jug for the next step

    3) Gently pour (or squirt) the liquid from the jug (or bottle) onto the surface of the bowl.

    4) Watch beneath the surface as you pour and vary the speed at which you pour. If you are using a squirt bottle, you can also vary the angle you squirt at.

    ; 5) When you find the right speed, you will see antibubbles form as the stream of water breaks up beneath the surface.

    6) You can now watch these antibubbles move and sink downwards and they will eventually burst.
    http://physics.about.com/cs/chemphysexp/a/antibubbles.htm

    Newton.for every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction. bubble antibubbles. time antitime.gravity antigravity.me antime (Devilin has just disappeared in a puff of logic )
     
  12. Devilin

    Devilin Registered Member

    Primrose ? singularity
     
  13. Cochise

    Cochise A missed friend

    If Newton 'INVENTED' Gravity why didn't he, and everyone else fall off the World before he thought of it....answer me that?.....I'am now holding you all in an ancient Chinese throat grip using only my infinite knowledge embedded in my knee, that prevents you uttering any kind of cogent response.


    CoCogentchise, :cool: (Master of the Oblivious).
     
  14. Primrose

    Primrose Registered Member


    Many physicists believe that gravitational singularities are "unphysical", meaning that general relativity ultimately ceases to be an accurate description of gravity somewhere in the vicinity of what would otherwise be a singularity. It is generally assumed that a theory of quantum gravity - a theory that unifies general relativity with quantum mechanics - will provide a better description of what actually occurs where general relativity predicts a singularity. However, as of 2005, no theory of quantum gravity has been experimentally confirmed.

    I have only experience that one time. :ninja: I was driving out to see ronjor on Route10. It was the middle of the night and the people from Area 51 were returning a MOO MOO that would not give milk. That was the same day Newton let his patent expire on Gravity and no one was sure how it was all going to end up.

    :'(
     

    Attached Files:

  15. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  16. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  17. Devilin

    Devilin Registered Member

    Centrifugal force :D of course
     
  18. Devilin

    Devilin Registered Member

    Primrose I'm not entirely convinced about the concept of a singularity.but in a massive gravity well like a black hole.you would have a pretty central gravity point.Space Time stretched to its absolute extreme.very much like the point of a cone giving a defined point of everything.
     
  19. Cochise

    Cochise A missed friend

    Centrifugal Force throws things outwards......Earth spinning at over a 1000 miles per hour!!??.......that means that Newton would have had to have his boots firmly nailed to something big....... :D :D :D

    Ergo.....Centrifugal Force, no go.....

    Now if you take into account Centri'Google' Force, you may have something there.... :D

    What was the question again Ron?....I wasn't paying attention.......


    Cochise, :cool:
     
  20. Primrose

    Primrose Registered Member

    In the case of circular motion: as the centripetal force is causing deviation from moving in a straight line inertia is manifesting itself, but it does not prevent the centripetal force from maintaining the circular motion.

    When examining the effects of rotation from the perspective of an observer rotating along with the system, the action of the centripetal force shows up as an apparent force term acting in a direction radially away from the center of rotation, and this is the manifestation of the centrifugal force. This term is often called a "fictitious force" because it is actually a manifestation of inertia which only appears as a radially outward force when observing the system from within a rotating reference frame, whereas from a non-rotating frame it is simply observed as the centripetal force producing a circular motion.


    centripetal force and centrifugal force
    centripetal force and centrifugal force, action-reaction force pair associated with circular motion. According to Newton's first law of motion, a moving body travels along a straight path with constant speed (i.e., has constant velocity) unless it is acted on by an outside force. For circular motion to occur there must be a constant force acting on a body, pushing it toward the center of the circular path. This force is the centripetal (“center-seeking”) force. For a planet orbiting the sun, the force is gravitational; for an object twirled on a string, the force is mechanical; for an electron orbiting an atom, it is electrical.
    http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0811114.html

    For Cats and Dogs it is longtails; For Microsoft it is Longhorn, For Ben Franklin it was shortkitetail, For Cochise it is shortsmokesignal of the OE and for ME it is the "fictitious force" tool bar in MS Word that circulates all the time.

    :p
     

    Attached Files:

  21. big ed

    big ed Registered Member

    Hi People,

    I have read w/great interest most of the posts here. I totally agree w/all of the statements and mis-statements offered. As I am sure that all of you have many more comic books to get your facts from than I do I plead for your expertise.

    If someone is mooning out the window of an auto traveling @ 80mph (or a bunch more kph) would a silent fart stink?

    I am confident that one of you stalwarts will rise to the occasion!

    Sniff on, big ed
     
  22. Cochise

    Cochise A missed friend

    Lo big ed,

    Welcome Home.....

    Just so that you can rest easy in your quandary...YES IT WOULD.....it comes under the same category of the tree falling in the Forest, if there is nobody there to see it fall, would it still make a noise.....YES IT WOULD.......although, with regard to your question, and depending on the velocity attained, at the moment of the release of the said F++t, whether it be silent or not, according to Newton it would still be affected by the 'Doppler' syndromic equation, which simply means that people sleeping peacefully in their beds in that particular neighbourhood, would be suddenly awakened by a smell totally unknown to them, causing probable major panic.


    Cochise, :cool:
     
  23. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  24. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

  25. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice