So I am in AP Physics as a Junior at my Highschool. Took it a year early since I have the required math already, and holy shit is this a hard class. I absolutely bombed(and hated) the first semester which was mostly motion related stuff.
Now, in second semester, we are doing fluid dynamics and temperature and heat. At this very moment, I'm working on heat expansion problems. Its really easy compared to last semester, and I really enjoy this stuff! The math is enjoyable and I have a better understanding of it so I hope to get an A and not a C this time around
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39478863]I am hurt that you have misled me by making me have a poor memory[/QUOTE]
Here have my setup for hologram creation as compensation.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/QX8P87z.jpg?1[/IMG]
My physics dick just grew 1 inch.
Mmm. Holograms are neat.
I'm not hurt anymore.
[editline]4th February 2013[/editline]
I should not make a habit of doing my quantum mechanics homeworks the night before. 'Specially when there's ugly integrals and differential equations I don't wanna do. (Which is always.)
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39479017]Mmm. Holograms are neat.
I'm not hurt anymore.[/QUOTE]
Oh by the way, we did a two exposure of the same metal cuboid shaped cup (you see it in the picture) but the second one with a tiny bit more water inside it.
The result was this awesome interference pattern appearing on the finished hologram as during the second exposure the cup changed in size, only some nanometers but still measurable.
Very cool indeed.
Make a porn about it called double exposure.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39478844]I have a geologist friend and she is bad at math and also I laugh at her while she stands in the cold and rain and sleet staring at rocks while I am in a warm toasty well lit lab letting a detector detect muons or whatever marvelous physics adventure I am up to from week to week[/QUOTE]
You discover particles we discover dinosaurs
So yeah ok
dinosaurs are made of particles
checkmate atheists
Just wondering, what would an object with an alcubierre drive look like going into ftl.
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;39479147]Just wondering, what would an object with an alcubierre drive look like going into ftl.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://tobias-lib.uni-tuebingen.de/dbt/volltexte/2001/240/pdf/09warp.html[/url]
From a more rigorous standpoint I remember reading a paper not too long ago examining the lensing and redshifts of particles hitting an Alcubierre drive warp bubble mathematically. I'll see if I can find it when I have time.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;39478835]Hah I wish I was a physics student. I'm a computer science and engineering student. But we and the engineering physics students have some courses together.
I was thinking about applying for physics. But I literally lacked [B]one[/B] A, so I didn't bother (still might have gotten though). A good friend was going to apply for CS&E, which has quite a bright future in terms of job and development so I went with that too.
But hey, I don't mind being listed as a physics student ;) Physics is awesome, I love it.
I'm not taking any physics related course at the moment, and I probably won't be able to since our school limited each section to their own set of course, which sucks dick. Earlier anyone could take thermodynamics or mechanics and so on as long as you fulfilled the mathematical requirements. But not anymore...
I'm taking this Probability Theory and Statistics course atm, probably most related to physics among the courses I'm currently reading.[/QUOTE]
Aw, I'm jealous. At my school, Computer Science and Computer Engineering are two separate degrees.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39479238][url]http://tobias-lib.uni-tuebingen.de/dbt/volltexte/2001/240/pdf/09warp.html[/url]
From a more rigorous standpoint I remember reading a paper not too long ago examining the lensing and redshifts of particles hitting an Alcubierre drive warp bubble mathematically. I'll see if I can find it when I have time.[/QUOTE]
alright, i was mainly wondering what it would look like from the point of view of seeing it go from a standstill to ftl. the look of the drive starting
Couldn't tell you that. Haven't studied it very closely. Try googling for more visualizations, maybe there's one of an accelerating warp drive. Not sure.
[editline]4th February 2013[/editline]
Parity: simplifying my integrations since... I dunno, a long time ago.
Got my B.s. in physics. Preformed research in photonics and ultra short pulse generation in erbium doped fiber optics all with heavy emphasis on medical applications. Waiting to hear back from graduate programs right now.
I secretly wanted this thread to exist ever since I saw the math chat thread.
Didn't we have a science chat thread?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39478400]Pop sci books are great for getting into the subject. I think my love of physics began with reading Michio Kaku's [I]Hyperspace[/I] and [I]Parallel Worlds[/I], though I loved science in general since I was very young.[/quote]
Funny, my initial spark in science came from a video of Michio Kaku on the Big Think.
[editline]5th February 2013[/editline]
Also on a physics test I just took, I got this question:
If you double the momentum of an object, by what factor will the kinetic energy change?
a. 1/4
b. 1/2
c. 2
d. 4
So I just wrote all of the above.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39480252]Funny, my initial spark in science came from a video of Michio Kaku on the Big Think.
[editline]5th February 2013[/editline]
Also on a physics test I just took, I got this question:
If you double the momentum of an object, by what factor will the kinetic energy change?
a. 1/4
b. 1/2
c. 2
d. 4
So I just wrote all of the above.[/QUOTE]
D
Momentum = Mass * Velocity
Kinetic Energy = (1/2)(Mass * Velocity^2)
User algebra to solve
KE = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2
KE' = 1/2 * Mass * (2 * Velocity)^2
= 1/2 * 4 * Mass * Velocity^2
4 * KE = KE'
[editline]derp[/editline]
Oh never mind, i noticed "doubled momentum", not "doubled velocity"
[QUOTE=Ramses;39480305]D
Momentum = Mass * Velocity
Kinetic Energy = (1/2)(Mass * Velocity^2)
User algebra to solve
KE = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2
KE' = 1/2 * Mass * (2 * Velocity)^2
= 1/2 * 4 * Mass * Velocity^2
4 * KE = KE'
[editline]derp[/editline]
Oh never mind, i noticed "doubled momentum", not "doubled velocity"[/QUOTE]
Are you my teacher? That was the answer he wanted until I complained.
[img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png[/img]
I feel obliged to post this, as a math major.
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;39480422][img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png[/img]
I feel obliged to post this, as a math major.[/QUOTE]
Go back to your thread.
[QUOTE=Falubii;39480434]Go back to your thread.[/QUOTE]
Hey now, other people talked about chem/bio earlier.
Besides, I love physics too. Just not as much as math.
Actually, why isn't there a subforum for the sciences?
fuck that's actually a really good idea
[editline]5th February 2013[/editline]
then i can get my science on and all that shit
we can have a quantum sciences megathread where we just kind of say things that look really smart but realize we're totally wrong
[QUOTE=Falubii;39480495]Actually, why isn't there a subforum for the sciences?[/QUOTE]
I'm actually not sure how popular scientific topics actually are on Facepunch. Each time an article shows up it's usually the normal "fuck yeah science" posts with only a handful of people understanding its real meaning and contributing to the thread.
A section would sure be cool, just not sure how popular it would be. Since I assume it's going to be more than just popsci articles.
If escape velocity within the event horizon of a black hole is greater than the speed of light? How is hawking radiation plausible?
Is it the conclusion that quantum mechanics are allowed to 'break physical laws'?
Physics BA here, my BA thesis was about tight binding for impure crystals yo.
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;39480422][img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png[/img]
I feel obliged to post this, as a math major.[/QUOTE]
I wonder where engineers are on that line
[QUOTE=aridpheonix;39481781]If escape velocity within the event horizon of a black hole is greater than the speed of light? How is hawking radiation plausible?
Is it the conclusion that quantum mechanics are allowed to 'break physical laws'?[/QUOTE]
I have no clue but here is Wikipedia :
[quote]A slightly more precise, but still much simplified, view of the process is that vacuum fluctuations cause a particle-antiparticle pair to appear close to the event horizon of a black hole. One of the pair falls into the black hole whilst the other escapes. In order to preserve total energy, the particle that fell into the black hole must have had a negative energy (with respect to an observer far away from the black hole). By this process, the black hole loses mass, and, to an outside observer, it would appear that the black hole has just emitted a particle.[/quote]
[QUOTE=download;39481864]I wonder where engineers are on that line[/QUOTE]
Probably next to biologists.
[QUOTE=Firefox42;39481891]Probably next to biologists.[/QUOTE]
I'd say on another branch from Physcisists, next to Chemists, but then again it can vary depending on what kind of engineer you are. Sometimes, it's next to Biologists as the above said.
[QUOTE=aridpheonix;39481781]If escape velocity within the event horizon of a black hole is greater than the speed of light? How is hawking radiation plausible?
Is it the conclusion that quantum mechanics are allowed to 'break physical laws'?[/QUOTE]
My understanding, which may be incorrect, is that quantum effects allow the particles that are near enough to the event horizon to spontaneously "jump" out of the black hole.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.