Recent content by intel

Why are mass and energy related by c^2? What connects mass and energy? Why is c^2 the constant between them?

Marcus - can observational data from particle accelerators not be used to support or disprove a multiverse theory?

How far as thought progressed with M-theory and a multiverse of continusly existing universes being born out of continuous bangs, some expanding into a big freeze and others collapsing into black holes (amongst other high density outcomes) Is the answer not then, always existing and coming...

Can it be specified where the expansion of space happens? It is not at the boarder, as there is none? Can space we occupy be expanding faster than c? Is it that relativity exists as a framework inside a framework whose rules are different?

All maths and physics tells us that the SOL is the barrier, how can something be an exception to what is an axiom? Inflation is a neat response to so much but is it based on the assumption given by mathman above??

hi I may have missed something very simple here, but does inflation not suggest that in the very short time inflation lasted the universe expanded faster than the speed of light? thanks intel

It generates hardware to replica a machine with its own processing power to carry out computer processes. In doing so, do the computing resources required by the host machines use more computing power than that that is generated by the virtual machine? Judging from VMware's success on and...

hey In its most basic form virtualization creates computing power from existing machines. In the process of creating additional resource it uses - i would imagine a vanishingly small amount of energy, is this a reasonable assumption? If so how is virtulization described in terms of...

Thanks for the reference I am getting hold of it - should be here in a couple of days! But i would still like to know if such a question (maybe not this one in particular) is askable of maths/physics and if I can expect a definitive yes, no or don't know. The question I asked was...

Can I take this and say that spacetime, space and time are the direct result of particles or any matter which came into existence at t=0, the big bang?

If this is so - particles make spacetime. Then what makes the gravitational field? I believed large masses were their cause, but small particles make big masses - so it still leaves what makes the gravitational field?

If they are a necessary and suficient condition for each other, it gives an immense continuity that all and everything goes through - the scale of it blows my mind

Not sure, but that sounds like a yes to me? Taking it a step further - is there a reason I can not say time is a necessary and sufficient condition for space? The next step would be that space is a necessary and sufficient condition for time, but find this intuitively harder to suppose.

I do not understand but do appreciate the complexities of time as a dimension. I am asking if it is technically correct to say given a 3d space, time necessarily acts on all space? If so - can I say that time is a necessary condition for space?

Relative to where one is in the classical sense - what am I missing? Can I say without going into GR that time necessarily acts on all space (except a black hole)?