• Theoretical Breakthrough: Generating Matter and Antimatter from Nothing
    85 replies, posted
So they're separating virtual particle pairs? Cool beans.
[QUOTE=Timebomb757;26583424]Fixed. *Cue Bill Nye theme* This is pretty major, considering it pretty much violates the Conservation of Mass law doesnt it?[/QUOTE] Not entirely. It's not really making particles out of nothing, it's more "bringing them back". Imagine a rabbit being pulled out of a hat, but the rabbit is a particle, the hat is a vacuum, and the magician's hand is a high-energy laser.
By that logic: + = 1
It has to come from something, I mean I can't really comprehend something coming from nothing, maybe there is more to this story than we can figure out?
[QUOTE=BenJammin';26594929]It has to come from something, I mean I can't really comprehend something coming from nothing, maybe there is more to this story than we can figure out?[/QUOTE] A wizard did it.
[QUOTE=superdinoman;26594949]A wizard did it.[/QUOTE] [img]http://img.ngfiles.com/store/KenStar-1.jpg[/img]
I'm getting the feeling that Einstein may have been wrong. What he said worked with what we knew, but if you look closer, there always seems to be more going on. I feel that you truly can't annihilate matter, and that energy and matter aren't as interchangeable as we think. There may be something linking the two together that is too small and untraceable to detect with our current technology. And by the way WHERE THE FUCK IS THE GRAVITON? I would say it is about time we had solved this age old force that has been dicking with us forever. [editline]9th December 2010[/editline] I want hover boards.
Provided it doesn't cause a quantum vacuum collapse.
[QUOTE=Hesychasmos;26586082]So nothing is actually something + antisomething?[/QUOTE] 1 + -1 = 0 0 = 1 + -1 oh god
[QUOTE=thebadboy91;26585561]Most of you are posting "love science" when in reality you're no older than 14-15 (and if elder, probably suck in physics/math). If you really like science, get interested in it and do it well in school folks. Not saying that everyone here is bad in science, just to some of you out there....... Chemistry and biology biased, what the heck? I had the same picture before I went out of HS, there they made sharp differences between the diff. science subjects - but when you start at university you will understand that everything is related. For example, now as I have chemistry there's ton of physics in it - some of it I learned back in my physics classes in HS![/QUOTE] Thank you lieutenant obvious for this current information. After all we would never have realised that all science is, is other sciences being applied to a new problem. And what's wrong with saying "I love science, it improves out lives and makes life generally more interesting and allows the man on the street to see the shadows in our universe be vanquished by the light of wisdom and knowledge" In fact you're right, no one can love science other than a scientist :downs: [editline]10th December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=BenJammin';26594929]It has to come from something, I mean I can't really comprehend something coming from nothing, maybe there is more to this story than we can figure out?[/QUOTE] Nothing isn't what you think it is, nothing has a basic fabric, nothing is a tangible thing, we can test for nothing and then break nothings fabric and release a little bit of energy. Nothing in science, isn't the traditional idea of nothing where there is literally nothing in a space (for example a jar) in theoretical and advanced physics the jar is filled to the brim with nothing, it's fucking swimming in it, and we can split that nothing. Read about vacuum energy, that might clear things up.
So much science lately, it's like the cold war without a cold war. [editline]10th December 2010[/editline] :iia:
Great. Now lets stop giving money to talk show hosts and sports stars and use it to fund this stuff. Someday I dream of a world where televised scientific events are the most watched thing on television. I like to think science like this, the stuff that helps us understand the universe, is the most important thing. More important than anything. If we don't understand what our purpose for being here is, we shouldn't commit ourselves to anything else until we figure it out.
[QUOTE=doggyalt;26590893]No. That's impossible.[/QUOTE] Nuclear energy.
[QUOTE=thebadboy91;26585561]Most of you are posting "love science" when in reality you're no older than 14-15 (and if elder, probably suck in physics/math). If you really like science, get interested in it and do it well in school folks. Not saying that everyone here is bad in science, just to some of you out there....... Chemistry and biology biased, what the heck? I had the same picture before I went out of HS, there they made sharp differences between the diff. science subjects - but when you start at university you will understand that everything is related. For example, now as I have chemistry there's ton of physics in it - some of it I learned back in my physics classes in HS![/QUOTE] And yet you can't figure out how to change your avatar.
[QUOTE=RayDark;26602341]Nuclear energy.[/QUOTE] Saying "nuclear energy" in response to the claim that the conservation of energy can't be broken is as useful as saying "magic" or "God can do it" would be.
[QUOTE=RayDark;26602341]Nuclear energy.[/QUOTE] So nuclear energy is >100% efficient? Kick ass, why did no one else know this?
Take that, creationists.
[QUOTE=Lord Hayden II;26584476]No longer need to pay for my food [b]because I can create it out of fucking nothing now.[/b][/QUOTE] [B]Computer, coffee, black.[/B] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRlrsxk4ImQ[/media]
[QUOTE=aVoN;26591521]Vacuum is defined as a field-free volume of spacetime, hence there is no "removeable" energy in it. Call it the "lowest energy-state possible" or simply the ground-state. Still, the ground-state of any physical system contains a certain amount of energy called zero-point-energy according to Quantum Mechanics. This energy can't be "taken out" to current physical knowledge, since there is no lower state below the "ground-state" per definition. Still, due to Heisenberg's Uncertainty relation, you can borrow an arbitrary amount of energy out of every quantum system just if the time you borrow it is small and very precise (small deviations) enough ([img_thumb]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?\Delta E \dot \Delta t >= \hbar/2[/img_thumb]). This is why you have vacuum noise even in "empty space": Spontaneous pair-antipair creation and annihilation due to Heisenberg. This experiment now shows, that you can borrow energy from the vacuum and create the particles (my best guess is, that the strong laser-field is used to accelerate and therefore separate the two particles from each other so the can't annihilate anymore). But since you borrowed the energy, conservation of energy must be fulfilled so the "missing energy" will be taken from somewhere else such as the laser-field. Ok, we create particles from vacuum or "out of nothing" but not "for free. [editline]9th December 2010[/editline] Actually it's [img_thumb]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?E = \frac{m c^2}{\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}[/img_thumb] since fast moving particles are involved. Never forget about special relativity. But in principle, you are right, but you are missing another fundamental "law": Conservation of energy.[/QUOTE] Won't these particle antiparticle pares have energy, they are virtual which appear in closed loops, and therefore there will be infinite amount of pairs and infinite amount of energy but surely will bend space time infinitely?
K write this down; Anti-Matter and Matter together doesn't do shit except destroys each other but if they are put into a motherfucking electromagnet field they create more shit!
whoisjohngalt
[QUOTE=Rct33;26671733]Won't these particle antiparticle pares have energy, they are virtual which appear in closed loops, and therefore there will be infinite amount of pairs and infinite amount of energy but surely will bend space time infinitely?[/QUOTE] They disappear just before you can actually measure them. That's why they are called virtual. But their effect is visible e.g. in semi-conductors (noise). To the infinite energy: This is currently a problem if I remember correctly and still investigated (or has been solved - I don't know).
This thread, it blinds me with science. [editline]13th December 2010[/editline] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fI8834iCgo[/media]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.