Physicists Suggest All Matter May Be Made Up of Energy ‘Fragments’
Matter is what makes up the Universe, but what makes up matter? This question has long been tricky for those who think about it – especially for the physicists.
More…
>We named it a fragment of energy. For the math and physics aficionados, it is defined as A = -⍺/r where ⍺ is intensity and r is the distance function.
They should have pointed out that only the maths & physics aficionados will glean much from their “fragment of energy”, “flowing energy lines” etc, because these terms are only defined mathematically.
Bubblecar said:
>We named it a fragment of energy. For the math and physics aficionados, it is defined as A = -⍺/r where ⍺ is intensity and r is the distance function.They should have pointed out that only the maths & physics aficionados will glean much from their “fragment of energy”, “flowing energy lines” etc, because these terms are only defined mathematically.
Yes, it does raise the question of what these fragment thingies really are.
My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
The Rev Dodgson said:
My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
Particle parties?
roughbarked said:
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
Particle parties?
Little groups muttering in corners: particle party particles.
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
Really?
And I thought it was just because of my tendency to lecture them on their mis-use of the word “information”.
The Rev Dodgson said:
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
Really?
And I thought it was just because of my tendency to lecture them on their mis-use of the word “information”.
Oh, no, they say that your flaws run much deeper than that.
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
captain_spalding said:It’s why particle physicist never invite you to their parties.
Really?
And I thought it was just because of my tendency to lecture them on their mis-use of the word “information”.
Oh, no, they say that your flaws run much deeper than that.
:)
Probably true enough.
The Rev Dodgson said:
captain_spalding said:
The Rev Dodgson said:Really?
And I thought it was just because of my tendency to lecture them on their mis-use of the word “information”.
Oh, no, they say that your flaws run much deeper than that.
:)
Probably true enough.
Wouldn’t a deep floor be a basement?
Tamb said:
The Rev Dodgson said:
captain_spalding said:Oh, no, they say that your flaws run much deeper than that.
:)
Probably true enough.
Wouldn’t a deep floor be a basement?
Worthy of Wilde himself.
captain_spalding said:
Tamb said:
The Rev Dodgson said::)
Probably true enough.
Wouldn’t a deep floor be a basement?
Worthy of Wilde himself.
The Rev Dodgson said:
Bubblecar said:
>We named it a fragment of energy. For the math and physics aficionados, it is defined as A = -⍺/r where ⍺ is intensity and r is the distance function.They should have pointed out that only the maths & physics aficionados will glean much from their “fragment of energy”, “flowing energy lines” etc, because these terms are only defined mathematically.
Yes, it does raise the question of what these fragment thingies really are.
My favourite hypothesis is that they are standing waves in the fabric of space-time (itself (whatever that is)), but I know that’s not popular.
Why “standing” waves? Why not moving waves?