The total eclipse is coming up soon

[Pogre]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[haraldo]

What happens when we run?

The faster you run, the older you get, but not by much

 

[Pogre]

What happens when we run?

The effect is there, but so minute as to be inconsequential. The closer you get to relativistic speeds the more exaggerated the effect.

 

[highfigh]

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'.

 

[highfigh]

The faster you run, the older you get, but not by much

Woo hoo! I'm not gonna get old because I don't run!

 

[slipperybidness]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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