The total eclipse is coming up soon

Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
Pogre,

This little diagram from Wikipedia may help:



Classical Mechanics is pretty much what we refer to as Newtonian physics. It works perfectly fine until you try using it to describe/predict objects moving very fast or objects which are very small. Each theory depicted has useful value but, unlike the Ring of Power, there has yet to be "one theory to explain them all" (Theory of Everything).

Have you ever checked out the movie "What the Bleep do We Know?" If you haven't already, I think you will be fascinated, entertained, and have things to think about for days.
Yes, that's what I thought. Classical physics works very well until you start talking relativistic speeds. It still blows my mind that the faster you move through space, the slower your clock runs from someone else's (slower) reference frame.
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
Thinking about why this could be- since Quantum Physics is at such a small scale, it seems likely that the reason we/they can't unify these is because the margin of error in the observations and calculations, which may be incredibly small, it still too large to allow the theories and fact to coincide.
Oh, it goes a bit deeper than the "margin of error" in the observations! In fact, these errors are fundamental to quantum physics and are independent of the measurement device!

Now, we get to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle! In simple terms, you cannot precisely and accurately determine BOTH a particle's position and it's momentum at the same time! As you get better measurements on one, the measurements on the other WILL degrade! Proven mathematically, and perhaps could be considered as an extension of Schrodingers Cat Paradox thought experiment.

Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
Yes, that's what I thought. Classical physics works very well until you start talking relativistic speeds. It still blows my mind that the faster you move through space, the slower your clock runs from someone else's (slower) reference frame.
It is mind-blowing, no doubt. But, when you examine the mathematics and determine that the speed of light is constant and is also the fastest possible speed, then you go through the relativistic thought experiments, it becomes clear that time must slow down.

Furthermore, clock data from satellites vs. earth clocks has measured the phenomena!
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
Oh, it goes a bit deeper than the "margin of error" in the observations! In fact, these errors are fundamental to quantum physics and are independent of the measurement device!

Now, we get to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle! In simple terms, you cannot precisely and accurately determine BOTH a particle's position and it's momentum at the same time! As you get better measurements on one, the measurements on the other WILL degrade! Proven mathematically, and perhaps could be considered as an extension of Schrodingers Cat Paradox thought experiment.

Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
That's why they say a teleportation device is still beyond our reach. Did you know the Starship Enterprise actually had a "Heisenberg Compensator" in their teleporters? Somebody did a little homework for that one!
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
It is mind-blowing, no doubt. But, when you examine the mathematics and determine that the speed of light is constant and is also the fastest possible speed, then you go through the relativistic thought experiments, it becomes clear that time must slow down.

Furthermore, clock data from satellites vs. earth clocks has measured the phenomena!
Yup. Satellite clocks are made to run ever so slightly slower to compensate. GPS would be useless if they weren't.
 
haraldo

haraldo

Audioholic Spartan
It is mind-blowing, no doubt. But, when you examine the mathematics and determine that the speed of light is constant and is also the fastest possible speed, then you go through the relativistic thought experiments, it becomes clear that time must slow down.

Furthermore, clock data from satellites vs. earth clocks has measured the phenomena!
Our feet are actually getting older than our head, because feet are always closer to the center of the earth than our head, that means time goes slower where our feet is located, compared to the head. Not so big difference but there is a difference.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Oh, it goes a bit deeper than the "margin of error" in the observations! In fact, these errors are fundamental to quantum physics and are independent of the measurement device!

Now, we get to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle! In simple terms, you cannot precisely and accurately determine BOTH a particle's position and it's momentum at the same time! As you get better measurements on one, the measurements on the other WILL degrade! Proven mathematically, and perhaps could be considered as an extension of Schrodingers Cat Paradox thought experiment.

Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
I would guess that the Heisenberg Uncertainty has been tested WRT rate of change in position, its starting position and assuming its mass, but that's just me not being a theoretical physicist talking.

So, basically, they can't possibly KNOW they're correct if Quantum Physics relies on error, right?
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Our feet are actually getting older than our head, because feet are always closer to the center of the earth than our head, that means time goes slower where our feet is located, compared to the head. Not so big difference but there is a difference.
What happens when we run?
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
I would guess that the Heisenberg Uncertainty has been tested WRT rate of change in position, its starting position and assuming its mass, but that's just me not being a theoretical physicist talking.

So, basically, they can't possibly KNOW they're correct if Quantum Physics relies on error, right?
So, in classical physics, if you know the position of an object and the velocity and forces acting upon that object, then you can predict the future position and velocity of the object for any given time. In classical physics, you can indeed know the position and velocity of an object.

In quantum physics, you cannot know both the position and the velocity of an object (i.e. electron, etc), so therefore you cannot accurately predict a future position and velocity of the object.

That's where you start getting into probabilities, Shrodinger's wave equation, electron orbitals, etc.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
In quantum physics, you cannot know both the position and the velocity of an object (i.e. electron, etc), so therefore you cannot accurately predict a future position and velocity of the object.
Why not? Velocity is a vector quantity and therefore, the direction of future travel is known. If the direction changes, either some force acted on the object or its rate of movement can't be called 'velocity', so it must be called 'speed'.
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
Why not? Velocity is a vector quantity and therefore, the direction of future travel is known. If the direction changes, either some force acted on the object or its rate of movement can't be called 'velocity', so it must be called 'speed'.
You seem to have misunderstood the statement here.

For Quantum Physics:
You can accurately and precisely know a particle's location.
OR
You can accurately and precisely know a particle's velocity
BUT
You cannot accurately and precisely know a particles location AND velocity At the same moment in time! Therefore, you cannot accurately predict the future state of the particle.

As your confidence in location improves, your confidence in velocity degrades, or vice versa. This is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and has been proven mathematically.

A little further down the thought process here--How would you most accurately measure a particle's location? Well, you would need a very short wavelength of radiation to impinge upon the particle. Short wavelength = high frequency = high energy. So, the measurement itself for location will alter the particles velocity tremendously.

How would you most accurately measure the velocity? You would need a low energy radiation to impinge upon the particle to avoid altering the velocity. Low energy = long wavelength = not good for making a location measurement.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
You seem to have misunderstood the statement here.

For Quantum Physics:
You can accurately and precisely know a particle's location.
OR
You can accurately and precisely know a particle's velocity
BUT
You cannot accurately and precisely know a particles location AND velocity At the same moment in time! Therefore, you cannot accurately predict the future state of the particle.

As your confidence in location improves, your confidence in velocity degrades, or vice versa. This is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle and has been proven mathematically.

A little further down the thought process here--How would you most accurately measure a particle's location? Well, you would need a very short wavelength of radiation to impinge upon the particle. Short wavelength = high frequency = high energy. So, the measurement itself for location will alter the particles velocity tremendously.

How would you most accurately measure the velocity? You would need a low energy radiation to impinge upon the particle to avoid altering the velocity. Low energy = long wavelength = not good for making a location measurement.
I wasn't thinking 'small' enough.
 
NINaudio

NINaudio

Audioholic Samurai
I wasn't thinking 'small' enough.
For all intents and purposes that's where the quantum effects happen, at the level of "really small," where particles also behave as waves. If you're interested in some reading on it, look up info on the DeBroglie wavelength.
 
speakerman39

speakerman39

Audioholic Overlord
Well it appears that if I watch the upcoming eclipse here at home, then I will see ~ 97% of the full event. As such, there is no real need for me to drive close to Hoptown, KY just to gain 3%. Will just watch it from home which is good enough for me. :):):)


Cheers,

Phil
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Warlord
Well it appears that if I watch the upcoming eclipse here at home, then I will see ~ 97% of the full event. As such, there is no real need for me to drive close to Hoptown, KY just to gain 3%. Will just watch it from home which is good enough for me. :):):)


Cheers,

Phil
The experts say, "if it ain't 100% then you don't know what you are missing".

I understand the desire to avoid the crowds. But if I lived that close, then totality would be a no-brainer for me.
 
speakerman39

speakerman39

Audioholic Overlord
The experts say, "if it ain't 100% then you don't know what you are missing".

I understand the desire to avoid the crowds. But if I lived that close, then totality would be a no-brainer for me.
You make a good point. Hoptown is only 76-miles fro me. Certainly gives me something to think about. Will keep it in mind. Thanks! :):):)


Cheers,

Phil
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
It starts in about a half hour here in Az. By 10:30 we should be at maximum, which is 70%.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top