Universe

[Malik Alashter]

-------------- Science
Philosophy-----------
-------------- Religion

In other words Philosophy is Mother of all sciences .

Hi
Science = lab

Philosophy = mere explanation

Religion = belief it may be right may be wrong.

 

[applesauce]

Ooh ok

Info like , what the theory actually is , what is the reason behind the theory and many such info .

oh boy this could get really complicated really fast lol it has to do with string theory and nobody really understand string theory lol
ah hem
well it came really from black hole theories, where, really, really, basically, people wondered where did the information go when matter gets sucked into one. one thing led to another and people started talking about how much information could be held in a given area of space. the holographic principle came about when they did some calculations and realized that nothing says we specifically need three dimensions with the exception of gravity, which they later found that with quantum mechanics gravity could in fact be described as information on a 2d plane so now nothing says we can't be a hologram. but there is a information limit on how much data a space can hold so if we are 2d then there is a limit on information describing where everything is so there must be a limit to how small things can get and that's one way to test the theory is to find the smallest thing ever. which we cant do... so the other way is holographic noise which is a theoretical tell-tale signature you can find, again we don't understand physics well enough or have the tech to test for something like that. so basically, like the 10th dimensional or 15 dimensional string theories, nothing specifically says it CANT be that way, we just have no way of testing it yet.

 

[Spectre]

A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested. So the statement, "A watched pot never boils," is a valid scientific hypothesis because we can test it (and find that in this case it is NOT supported by the evidence).

A theory is a general principle or body of principles that has been developed to explain a wide variety of phenomena. A scientific theory is NOT a wild guess. It must be consistent with known experimental results and it must have predictive power. As new knowledge is gained, theories are refined to better explain the data.

A law is a mathematical relationship that is consistently found to be true. For example, one of the most famous laws in physics is Einstein's e=mc^2.

So what you said about law of physics follows from it's definition. Laws do break when new theories arise though.

For eg c is not constant afterall. Not that it makes much of a difference.

Speed of light not so constant after all | Science News

oh boy this could get really complicated really fast lol it has to do with string theory and nobody really understand string theory lol
ah hem
well it came really from black hole theories, where, really, really, basically, people wondered where did the information go when matter gets sucked into one. one thing led to another and people started talking about how much information could be held in a given area of space. the holographic principle came about when they did some calculations and realized that nothing says we specifically need three dimensions with the exception of gravity, which they later found that with quantum mechanics gravity could in fact be described as information on a 2d plane so now nothing says we can't be a hologram. but there is a information limit on how much data a space can hold so if we are 2d then there is a limit on information describing where everything is so there must be a limit to how small things can get and that's one way to test the theory is to find the smallest thing ever. which we cant do... so the other way is holographic noise which is a theoretical tell-tale signature you can find, again we don't understand physics well enough or have the tech to test for something like that. so basically, like the 10th dimensional or 15 dimensional string theories, nothing specifically says it CANT be that way, we just have no way of testing it yet.

String Theory has it's proponents but as this junction it is too abstract and speculative to be of much use. Plus for every theory there is a equally plausible counter theory. I stopped taking even a rudimentary interest until things firmed up a bit but instead string theory has started loosing steam.

 

[Ragnarok connection]

Another question ;

If Person A lives on Earth and Person B lives on Mars ( Both Humans )
After 20 Earth years the Person B returns to Earth .
Will there be any difference visible in Person B .

or

Age of Man on earth = 100
Will it be 50 on Mars ???
( My questions may be stupid but they give me headaches )

Or something related to biological clock ????

Consider twins A and B. Now suppose that twin B is sent to Mars. The time Dilation effect felt between the two would be negligible due to the low mass and velocity of Mars, meaning that time will go faster for B only by a few seconds compared to A. So there would be no extra ageing effect on B due to gravitational time dilation. However the significantly lower gravity (60% lower than earth), may cause muscle atrophy(google it) and hence B will seem to have aged more than A when he returns after 20 years.
P.s: it would have been a different story if B had gone to a planet near a black hole or an extremely light planet.

 

[applesauce]

For eg c is not constant afterall. Not that it makes difference.

Speed of light not so constant after all | Science News

that's only applicable to group velocities

String Theory has it's proponents but as this junction it is too abstract and speculative to be of much use. Plus for every theory there is a equally plausible counter theory. I stopped taking even a rudimentary interest until things firmed up a bit but instead string theory has started loosing steam.

indeed, its untestable atm. and scientists really don't like "untestable"

 

[Malik Alashter]

Laws do break when new theories arise though.

So what can break the law of gravety this is firm.

Second theory can't break law that's impossible show me where they could break a law with theory.

 

[Kashmiri Pandit]

Consider twins A and B. Now suppose that twin B is sent to Mars. The time Dilation effect felt between the two would be negligible due to the low mass and velocity of Mars, meaning that time will go faster for B only by a few seconds compared to A. So there would be no extra ageing effect on B due to gravitational time dilation. However the significantly lower gravity (60% lower than earth), may cause muscle atrophy(google it) and hence B will seem to have aged more than A when he returns after 20 years.
P.s: it would have been a different story if B had gone to a planet near a black hole or an extremely light planet.

Oh thanks !
If B had gone near Black hole and returned , There would be a huge age /time gap . RIGHT ???

 

[Providence]

For eg c is not constant afterall. Not that it makes much of a difference.

Speed of light not so constant after all | Science News

.

Wow this is path breaking stuff. I am glad I chose my words correctly in post #50 of this thread.

Actually the limit which we talk about is the limit of causality and speed of light follows from that.

All theories are fallible only for a new one to emerge. That's the beauty of science.

As for the newtonian physics, it was trashed ( hats off to Newton nevertheless ). Newtonian physics predicted infinite speed of light which is now proven wrong. There is a limit to the speed of causality which is 'c'.

One implication of relativity theory was, if two objects are moving at the speed of light in the same direction, and if the second object directs a light beam towards the first, it will traverse the distance between them at 'c'. The light beam if reflected by first will again reach back to the second one at speed of light. All this while, both objects were travelling at the speed of light. This is impossible in newtonian physics.

Also, Newton treated gravity as a force. Relativity doesn't treat gravity as force but as curvature of space-time.

 

[Spectre]

that's only applicable to group velocities



indeed, its untestable atm. and scientists really don't like "untestable"

Even group velocities should be constant right as C is constant? doesn't matter if the group velocity is nth degree complex function, C would stand out as a constant but the fact it doesn't even under controlled laboratory condition is a thing to ponder on.

Wow this is path breaking stuff. I am glad I chose my words correctly in post #50 of this thread.

Actually the limit which we talk about is the limit of causality and speed of light follows from that.

Yes, I was impressed when you stuck to the precise definition not the commonly used one. Kudos!

 

[Tipu7]

defence.pk/threads/40-maps-that-explain-outer-space.405068/

You astronauts May love it ........

 

[applesauce]

Even group velocities should be constant right as C is constant? doesn't matter if the group velocity is nth degree complex function, C would stand out as a constant but the fact it doesn't even under controlled laboratory condition is a thing to ponder on.

no, in theory, group velocities of light could even be negative.

 

[Malik Alashter]

My point is hypothesis becomes a law after experimentation but such laws don't always stand the test of time.

Again no way sir they can't just make any thing a law unless it is firm it doesn't accept any change.

like the of water it is always liquid in specific heat temps and it is evaporate in a specific heat temps see you can't change that what so ever.

 

[Ragnarok connection]

Oh thanks !
If B had gone near Black hole and returned , There would be a huge age /time gap . RIGHT ???

Yep, exactly like interstellar.

 

[Spectre]

no, in theory, group velocities of light could even be negative.

Kindly pass on the some reading matter on this if you have the links handy.

The researchers produced pairs of photons and sent them on different paths toward a detector. One photon zipped straight through a fiber. The other photon went through a pair of devices that manipulated the structure of the light and then switched it back. Had structure not mattered, the two photons would have arrived at the same time. But that didn’t happen. Measurements revealed that the structured light consistently arrived several micrometers late per meter of distance traveled.

AFAIK the above was responsible for effect, which says it has to do with structure of light. I would anyway like to learn about group velocities.

 

[Providence]

So what can break the law of gravety this is firm.

Second theory can't break law that's impossible show me where they could break a law with theory.

You should understand what is meant by law.

Anything which is a law would not have been in the first place if it was breakable.

You can google search for laws which have been broken though. Most are advanced theories outside the scope of this thread. One example which I have already cited in the thread is the law of galilean relativity. It fails to explain the postulates of special theory of relativity.