Thread: Recycling batteries

Yes - e=mc^2 works well enough for near earth space, for all intents and purposes!

However that doesn't make it "right"! Had Mitchellson Morley not had a experimental design flaw in their linear light speed experiment, in all likelihood Einstein - might well have used his fine structure constant ALPHA (value 1/137) (from his nobel prize winning photoelectric effects paper - his relativity paper was never peer reviewed before publishing) instead of C (erroneous speed of light) constant - in deriving his relativity theory.

And whats the significance of Alpha? (1/137)?

Look back at one of my earlier reply's to this thread!

Time on an atom passes much faster than time at the earth level does.Why is it that in the "time zone" of the nucleus of an atom, "time" seems to "slow down" so that the "measured velocity" of the electron appears to be only 1/137th the speed of light? But the electron's behavior seems to be that it is everywhere around the atom at the same time (electron shell), or has a "virtual velocity" of infinity?.

The physical constant alpha turns out to be equal to 1/137.

(Insert light bulb emoticon here).

Had Mitchellson Morley not messed up with their linear light speed experimental design, (be reflecting the light beams back upon themselves from 100%silvered mirrors before returning them to the interferometer) & had not Einstein fallen for it, - and instead used Alpha in his 21 equation Maxwellian derivation of relativity e=mc^2....

He WOULD most likely have discovered his long sought GUT (grand unification theorem) and we wouldn't STILL have such difficulty NOW with electrons not quite behaving as we might expect... (i.e "electron shells", and Photons propagating across inertial space as a waveform, i.e. traveling paradoxically east and west at the same time).

The answers here... most just can't see it is all!.
Just as most don't recognize heat as the absence of cold & vice versa... or dark being the opposite of light and so on!.
See - there's method to my madness.

Unless you go back to the fundamental building block principles of physics, and correct the earlier mistakes (like MM's experimental design flaw in their linear light speed experiment) - everything else later built upon it's foundation, can then come crumbling down like a wall structural collapse!.

The original physics needs to be constructed upon a sound foundation.

e=mc^2 is a wall OK and seems to work well enough for most purposes, just don't go marching around and around it repeatedly blowing a trumpet loudly is all.

But - the experimental design flaw of MM's linear light speed experiment is another topic, best suited for another day and place perhaps.

My head hurts

This thread is way off topic.

Please quit the ramblings and
return to something remotely like the topic
before I have to shut it and do some cleaning
up of the bovine fecal matter.

If the sun really is a dark Sucker then it fails to explain the fine structure in the spectrum of sunlight.

Whilst Albert Einstein was arguably a genius theoretical physicist, he was weak at mathematics. You will find that his (second) wife (a mathematician) did most of his mathematics for him.

Why does a photon of light need to be travelling in 2 directions at the same time to satisfy any of Einsteins theories? Clearly it can't.

I was always under the impression the the equation E = mc2 was an approximation to the energy yielded in the release of nuclear binding energy from an atom.

Speed of light (in a vacuum) is no longer an hypotheses. It has been proven. Same same with length dilation/time contraction.

The twin paradox is a paradox because it messes with your mind. Your mind can only cope with 3 maybe 4 dimensions (if you include time) it's no fault of the special theory of relativity if your mind can't cope!

Next you will tell me that the mass of an object does not increase as it approaches the speed of light? it increases and becomes infinite at the speed of light. I say in fact because this too has been proven. Yes, photons have mass too. But the rest mass of a photon is zero. ie photons only exist while they are moving, once they stop (after a collision for example) they cease to exist and their energy is transfered into the system to conserve energy.

Also, as I stated in a previous post. Forget about trying to approach Relativity (speeds approaching C) or Quantum (small objects) by the use of your knowledge of newtonian Mechanics. It will not work.

If you want to really mess with your head, study up on the Hysenberg Uncertainty Principle. Even Einstein could not cope with it. "I refuse to believe that god plays dice with the universe" I think were his words when he read about it. All since been proven. Schrodinger also did some amazing theoretical experiments. Read about his theoretical cat experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger's_catif you can be bothered. It explains the perils of trying to explain these theories with "conventional" thinking.

One that always did my head in: Quantum tunnelling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia yet this theory has not only been proven but has been used in practical applications in semi conductors & superconductivity. Yet, in the "real world" that we know of, it would be impossible as the particle would have negative energy whilst travelling through the barrier.
It's a jungle out there!

Cheers,

Simon

Oops. one last rambling!

Simon

Originally Posted by simonl

Oops. one last rambling!

Simon

Yes one last rambling from me too

Timeless, you are obviously quite passionate and interested in physics, me too, I love learning about this stuff.

But some of the questions you raise are best answered by others better qualified than me, and probably there are better forums for that this is not the best place for that discussion.

Regards
Ray