No one thing may touch another thing?

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by since93, Sep 30, 2010.

  1. One piece of matter may occupy only one point in the spacetime mesh, therefore no one thing can touch another-this is a common argument, any rebukes?

    Interesting side note: this is what einstein and bohr bickered like schoolgirls over...well, a variant...einstein was like "one thing cannot be in two places at the same time"...bohr said "yes, they CAN be" this case, one piece of matter can occupy two points in spacetime, where in the former, one piece of matter can only occupy one point...
  2. There should be no rebukes. This has been proven. Something like when you feel sensation on your skin, whether it's pain or pleasure, all you're really feeling is the force of the electrons (or whatever) pushing into your body. It's like having a force-field around your body, 'cept damage can still be done.

    I forget where I read this. I remember it getting kind of confusing at one point. :laughing: So yeah, my understanding of this might be distorted from actual fact.
  3. well magnatism keeps things from actually "touching" one another but technically the atoms that make up your hand could pass through the atoms that make up the wall without actually "touching" one another because they are made up of so much empty space.

    here's a question, if you have 2 liquids and combine them in one glass do they occupy the same space? It all depends on what part you are looking at. if you say they change into something else then the answer is no they don't because the combined two are actually something "new" but what if you were one of the two liquids, how would you describe it then?
  4. #4 btd22, Sep 30, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 30, 2010
  5. im really high and this shit just blew my mind...:gc_rocks:
  6. i love thinking on the atomic sucks i have not, for the life of me, gotten a grasp of quantum physics though...:(.....anyone able to explain what quantum physics is about like i was a two year old?
  7. it's the study of particals at the smallest of scales. It's an amazing world that tends to play by it's own rules.
  8. thank you...and while the subatomic level physics bear slight resemblance to newtonian physics, it still does not make me comprehend better...."particles at smallest scales"...yes...i want to know what "spin" is for example...and i think color has a significance in the world of quarks but it just doesnt come together for me...:(
  9. good luck trying to understand all of that. there's something like 30ish different parts if you break it all down. From color to spin to up/down to a whole host of letters and greek symbols, they basicly used everything they could think of to describe all the various parts.

    The one thing I keep in mind is that there are several "levels" to the parts. Each "level" combines in a particular amount to make up the next "level" up. You can combine them and a lot of different variations but each level has a "number" associated with it (so that when you combine x of one level it makes up 1 of the next "level" up/higher).

    in this video the graph that he show's (the main one with dots and rotates) are all the fundamental particals (known and his proposed new ones) and, well yea it's a lot and like he says in the video there's not really a way to break it down to barney level as an instructor I had use to say.

    the video:

    Garrett Lisi on his theory of everything | Video on
  10. that guy on that toe video was reading right off the paper tho...anyway, this is around where you get into the string theories i am next to nothing subatomic kills me....
  11. yea, he's not really a presenter just a thinker lol. Anyways his theory as a whole has generally been disproved or at least large chunks of it have been shown to be not true. The main point was where he talks about the particles, the first grid he shows is the important one that shows all the various particles, the rest you can just ignore.

    string theory is really just a loop or line of "string" that "vibrates" to make up the various particles. Some believe that the "vibrations" are the universal constants that we know of (i.e. speed of light, pi, the golden ratio, etc.)

    But yea, if your not use to the math it's gonna put you to sleep rather quickly. I'm use to a good chunk of it and it still puts me to sleep. That's why there aren't so many people in the more advanced math departments ;p

    To try and answer what you were looking for before (what spin is) it is exactly that, the direction of spin of the element. Usually at that level of physics the names of things are exactly what they are because they are running out of names and only the simple ones or the crazy ones are left.
  12. direction in relation to the magnetic north? whats the origin?
  13. there isn't one, well it's just one direction and then 180 from that direction are the "up" and "down". think of it more as an arbitrary direction and then it's 180 from whatever direction you picked. If it helps you picture it better think of it as up is from your computer screen towards your face and down is away from your face, but it's more of an aid to help us "visualize" it than an actual direction (other than up is one way and down is the opposite way).

    The same with the color ones, they aren't actually that color but the color represents a set of values that that particular particle has (which no other particle has, i.e. it is unique)
  14. say, for instance, leptons or muons or those other funkily named quarks, does every class start their spin from the same point (relative to their class)?...or does ever different muon in the whole class of muons have different starting points for their spins?
  15. i would venture a guess that they are all start from the same point but that's going on the assumption that, like most things in nature, it keeps a symmetry about itself.

    we've covered the depth of my knowledge on the subject ;p this is the point where I usually end up not being able to keep my eyes open while listening to the video that explains all of it. Well that and most of what i find on it is usually papers and at 11pm reading a dry physics paper usually ends with QWERTY across my face :D and are the web sites i look around on for video's, they both have lots of video's covering a whole range of subjects. There's a site where scientific papers are pre-published but I don't have the link, usually find it through
  16. yeah, im into howstuffworks and google scholar but to be honest i havent got to the stage where my reading consists of newly registered ideas published in professional jourmals....though i have a mind to try it someday...
  17. is the site I was thinking of. It's got all sorts of papers therenot just the more advanced stuff. also this might be interesting to ya:

    Particles In Cahoots - Science News

    honestly i just try and read the new stuff and usually it will give links to the older idea's they build on, that's how I usually learn the more basic stuff. I never really have much luck with google, at least on the more technical stuff, I usually end up with either some research students website or some cray guy's site on his theory of how everything works (and it's usually close to right but some fundamental flaw that makes everything else wrong).
  18. yeah, arxiv seems to ring a bell....the thing is with google, you HAVE to filter out nonacademic stuff...and scholar does that...
  19. Is a good one. It's too bad most of his theory has been shown to not be valid. Although the good part about science (and this specifically) is that it still has a chance to be modified into a workable theory. We will get there one day! :hello:

Share This Page