• Why did Einstein invent relativity?

    Time was doing just fine before he came along and bent it with his gravity machine and screwed up the whole flow of things. The speed of light wouldn't be relevant to frame of reference either. It would just do what it does best- shine at 186,000 mps, no questions asked. Sometimes scientists just just leave... show more
    Time was doing just fine before he came along and bent it with his gravity machine and screwed up the whole flow of things. The speed of light wouldn't be relevant to frame of reference either. It would just do what it does best- shine at 186,000 mps, no questions asked. Sometimes scientists just just leave well enough alone.
    22 answers · 3 days ago
  • If everything was invisible, what would we see?

    By "everything was invisible", I mean absolutely EVERYTHING. This includes subatomic particles, physical objects and even light itself.
    By "everything was invisible", I mean absolutely EVERYTHING. This includes subatomic particles, physical objects and even light itself.
    9 answers · 16 hours ago
  • What is spin of a particle in quantum mechanics?

    Best answer: No one really knows. It has certain mathematical similarities to the rotation of a body which is where it picked up the name spin, but it is not really spin, that is more of an analogy. It just another of those QM things we can'r really interpret beyond saying it is another degree of freedom that particles have.
    Best answer: No one really knows. It has certain mathematical similarities to the rotation of a body which is where it picked up the name spin, but it is not really spin, that is more of an analogy. It just another of those QM things we can'r really interpret beyond saying it is another degree of freedom that particles have.
    8 answers · 2 days ago
  • How far does a cord reach?

    Best answer: never quite enough to activate something
    Best answer: never quite enough to activate something
    10 answers · 4 days ago
  • How to pet the schrodinger's cat?

    5 answers · 9 hours ago
  • Physics help?

    A cardboard box of unknown mass is sliding upon a mythical frictionless surface. The box has a velocity of 4.56 m/s when it encounters a bit of friction. After sliding 0.6 m, the box has a velocity of 3.33 m/s. What is the coefficient of friction of the surface?
    A cardboard box of unknown mass is sliding upon a mythical frictionless surface. The box has a velocity of 4.56 m/s when it encounters a bit of friction. After sliding 0.6 m, the box has a velocity of 3.33 m/s. What is the coefficient of friction of the surface?
    4 answers · 2 days ago
  • Question on circular motion below?

    A stone attached to a string in rotated. During motion, the radius increases i.e tangential velocity decreases. By simple mathematics, how can one show that it decreases both in magnitude and direction?
    A stone attached to a string in rotated. During motion, the radius increases i.e tangential velocity decreases. By simple mathematics, how can one show that it decreases both in magnitude and direction?
    5 answers · 22 hours ago
  • What makes a body move with constant speed around a circle?

    Best answer: "What makes a body move with constant speed around a circle?" A constant magnitude resultant force directed towards the centre of the circle (so the force acts radially inwards, always perpendicular to the direction of the body's instantaneous velocity). The force is referred to as the centripetal... show more
    Best answer: "What makes a body move with constant speed around a circle?"

    A constant magnitude resultant force directed towards the centre of the circle (so the force acts radially inwards, always perpendicular to the direction of the body's instantaneous velocity).

    The force is referred to as the centripetal force.
    6 answers · 2 days ago
  • Which is more important theory or experiment?

    Best answer: Both, + more. We need all approaches and attempts to understand
    Best answer: Both, + more. We need all approaches and attempts to understand
    5 answers · 1 day ago
  • Why do scientists(especially astronomers and physicians) usually prefer to use the way “a * 10^n “to express numbers in their studies?

    Rather than using words like million, billion, trillion
    Rather than using words like million, billion, trillion
    7 answers · 4 days ago
  • Help with physics please! Will reward best answer!?

    A 16.9 kg monkey is swinging on a 5.32 m long vine. At the bottom of its swing, it is moving 11.3 m/s. To what height does it swing?
    A 16.9 kg monkey is swinging on a 5.32 m long vine. At the bottom of its swing, it is moving 11.3 m/s. To what height does it swing?
    5 answers · 2 days ago
  • Why are we able to see things the way they are according to physics at the atomic/subatomic level?

    Best answer: Physics has nothing to do with this. We see colours because of human evolution and biology. It is advantageous to our survival to be able to differentiate some things. Of course you might have meant "why do different materials emit different colours". Newton went into a lot of detail in his book... show more
    Best answer: Physics has nothing to do with this.
    We see colours because of human evolution and biology. It is advantageous to our survival to be able to differentiate some things.

    Of course you might have meant "why do different materials emit different colours".
    Newton went into a lot of detail in his book "Optiks".
    Describing the importance of domain sizes on the reflected colours. Rather than being controlled at the atomic level at all.
    It is the structure of the larger portions of the material that predominantly determine colour.

    As a demonstration you can take silver or steel. A shiny substance. Yet when you look at grease or oil in which small amounts of worn metal exist that becomes black.
    The very fine particles of the metal do not have the same colour as the material in bulk.

    A soap bubble has many colours. They change. It isn't the atoms doing this. It is the thickness of the film.

    A rainbow has many colours. It isn't the atoms of the water doing it. It is the refraction within the small droplets.
    Yet a cloud looks white or black. Even though it is also made of water droplets. They are simply smaller droplets.

    So the structure of the material, not the atoms, is the primary cause of the colours that you see.
    4 answers · 2 days ago
  • How fast does water absorb into a material?

    As a towel for example, How fast would you have to put it in and out of water so that the towel does not absorb any of the liquid ?
    As a towel for example, How fast would you have to put it in and out of water so that the towel does not absorb any of the liquid ?
    8 answers · 5 days ago
  • What does dipole mean, like electric dipole or magnetic dipole?

    Best answer: "di" means two. So dipole is two poles. An electric dipole has positive and negative poles. For magnets, we call them north and south.
    Best answer: "di" means two. So dipole is two poles. An electric dipole has positive and negative poles. For magnets, we call them north and south.
    4 answers · 2 days ago
  • The space-time-bus ride?

    Best answer: the magic school bus
    Best answer: the magic school bus
    8 answers · 5 days ago
  • Do you believe there are infinite world of infinite possibilities?

    Best answer: The many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics - all possiblities occur in an ever expanding decision tree (whether conscious choice or environmental interaction) is one of many possible reality interpretations of quantum mechanics. It is popular because it avoids some of the conceptual difficulties such as... show more
    Best answer: The many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics - all possiblities occur in an ever expanding decision tree (whether conscious choice or environmental interaction) is one of many possible reality interpretations of quantum mechanics. It is popular because it avoids some of the conceptual difficulties such as wave function collapse, indeterminacy, etc. Howver, there is not a shred of evidence that it occurs even at the quantum level. Any one of the other reality explanations of quantum mechanics may be correct and they do not require ‘many worlds’.

    At a more realistic level, it has always been a thorn in the side of quantum mechanics to explain why the macroscopic world doesn’t show quantum behavior which we KNOW occurs in experiments at the atomic level. Decoherence is the usual explanation. A macroscopic object cannot be insulated from environmental interaction like a sub-atomic particle. This is like tossing two rocks in a pond and seeing clear interference of the two waves vs dumping a million rocks in the pond and seeing something totally different. There also can be internal interactions that results in decoherence of quantum effects. It’s also been proposed that once an object gets to a particular size, gravity will cause decoherence.

    The bottom line is that many worlds is just an idea to explain away some of the problems with our understanding quantum reality. No evidence supports it.
    13 answers · 7 days ago