1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A Good Read About Physics

Discussion in 'Nerd Out Zone' started by Potatocat, Jan 13, 2016.

  1. Potatocat

    Potatocat Back Into Space

    • Member
    http://www.blazelabs.com/n-perpetual.asp

    Stumbled upon this piece of writing when searching for information on how micromechanichal systems break the laws of thermodynamics. Gives insight on things I didn't know about before involving the way we define the universe.
    Anyway, have you ever felt cramped inside your puny three dimensional world? Are you tired of all the limits other, "smarter" people put on you? Or just have an itch about what people say about physics that you desperately need scratched? Then this is the article for you! Written in "you can tell I thought about this for months" format, so you know it's trustworthy, the article defines some things you may not have considered before, in detail.

    So read it, and tell us what you think! <end/over-sell>
    Thomas988 likes this.
  2. NeonSturm

    NeonSturm Back Into Space

    • Member
    I often think about heat as "omnidirectional kinetic energy" in form of moving/bouncing atoms.
    A shame that this energy can't get harvested by things known to the ordinary peoples by machines that small that this energy form isn't omnidirectional anymore but axis-aligned.

    Most interesting till now is this:
    OK, summary: Einstein's theories are only correct if neither mass of an object in motion changes nor vacuum-energy influences your experiments nor time changes to be constant.
    Quite many exclusives.

    How to change mass? Objects appear heavier the faster they move.
    How to change time? The faster you move, the more energy you require to speed up. Also time-dilation takes it's toll. Time-dilation might change how fast you accelerate, meaning it slows down further at relative speeds.

    How to change the influence vacuum-energy has on your experiment? If light speed depends on the energy of space-time and 2 close plates deflecting quantum radiation, any 2 atoms may do the same to space inbetween them (explaining attraction) and giving a hint how to increase/decrease it's influence by changing the density of matter. Maybe compress/decompress gasses/fluids.​

    The one problem I see is to increase the efficiency enough for motion friction to be negligible or low enough to notice and effectively use the effect.

    Super-conductors might work, but are not available for layman.
    Neither are low-friction wheels nor enough equipment to build isolated systems an option for many who just start experimenting and thinking about improvising.
    Personally, I lack space to assembly things myself. 23qm isn't much and pretty frustrating to work-around tables, seats, etc. (4qm kitchen and 10qm floor (walk-through-space) included).
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
    NeonSturm, Jan 19, 2016
    Last edited by NeonSturm; at Jan 19, 2016
    #2
  3. Potatocat

    Potatocat Back Into Space

    • Member
    Well, if you can design an experiment, you could post it here for all of us to try, then we could post back the results (if you are willing to put that much effort into this). And if you do, you will need to explain to us what exactly should be going on so we can make a proper conclusion. That is, if you can make a proper hypothesis as well.
    Potatocat, Jan 19, 2016
    Last edited by Potatocat; at Jan 19, 2016
    #3
  4. NeonSturm

    NeonSturm Back Into Space

    • Member
    Here two experiments which should be possible with today-tech:
    1. "force = acceleration * mass / seconds_squared" can this be used to determinate the absolute zero speed in your inertia frame?
      • I tend toward yes.
      • I am not sure because of time-dilation effects hiding the differences.
      • Idea: 5*5=25, 6*6=25+5+6=25+11, 4*4=25-5-4=25-9
        • There is a "fixed difference of 2" and a "magnitude of 25" 2/25 is the ratio of dv_doubled/v_squared from which you can derive v. Theoretically.
        • This could be used to not just get your current acceleration but also your current speed relative to the zero-speed in your inertia frame.
      • Note: IRL, v could be anywhere between zero and light-speed, which causes dv (dv= difference of speed in the "rule-of-three") to be relatively small compared to v.
    2. Could "Inertia drives" make use of the fact that the inertia grows when you start spinning a wheel?
      • I tend toward yes.
      • I am not sure whether the efficiency of such system would be worth building it or if there is some detail missing (time-dilation, a gyros own magnetic field counter-acting this, etc)
      • Idea: 1x spin (XY) + 1x movement (Z-axis) = 1.4x total velocity according to the Pythagorean theorem.
      • Note1: to experience the effect, something has to take ONE 180° turn (start,end of Z) without spinning, the OTHER turn while spinning, effectively changing it's stored inertia.
      • Note2: Atoms contain Electrons,Protons,Neutrons. These contain Quarks. Quarks also move and could thus have inertia stored. Mass could derive from this. (mass =?= stored inertia)
    #1 is a test about time-dilation and how constant time is.
    #2 is a test about varying-mass and may serve as validation for some assumptions used in #1 too.
    NeonSturm, Jan 20, 2016
    Last edited by NeonSturm; at Jan 20, 2016
    #4
    Potatocat likes this.
Similar Threads: Read Physics
Forum Title Date
Nerd Out Zone PC Help Thread Jul 14, 2016
Nerd Out Zone Development/Mechanics Ideas Thread Oct 20, 2015
Nerd Out Zone Kingdom Hearts Fanboy thread Aug 31, 2015
Nerd Out Zone PC Specs Thread Feb 18, 2014
Nerd Out Zone [Physics] Questions about inertia drive, absolute rotation changes without thrust... May 20, 2015

Share This Page