Recent content by jocarren

I apologize, i don't mean to cuestion the work of physicist on the subject, just to place my concerns (which can be failures on my behalf). What I mean by "a lousy name" is that is misleading: about "dark", it's low (or no) interaction can be better described as "translucid", and "matter" (which...

That is tranquilizing. It could be a goose (i think DM it's a lousy name) Narrowing down the definition it's important in the "non-interaction" part, if the definition of something is "you can't observe it", experimental work becomes increasingly hard. Again, good to know.

I have a methodological objection about DM. Such objection doesn't mean that i reject the DM hypothesis nor all of the observations that support it, but to express concern about the following: 1.- The difficulty for detection. 2.- Reluctancy to postulate new physics. Since the existence of DM...

Well, the measurement is made in the present, but the information transferred in that interaction always comes from the past. I believe the uncertainty of a distant past event should be the same as a closer one. The information when measured might be more ofuscated though (entropy increased...

For me, this has to do with determinism and the very definition of "observation". In the broadest possible meaning, observation is an interaction, an exchange of information between the phenomena and the observer. In that sense, there are some phenomena which cannot be observed, for instance...

I tend to think along this lines, spacetime seems to be a phase space of all (or a subset of) degrees of freedom in a system.

Thanks for your answer :)

That is pretty much what I'm asking. I constrained it just to c, because changing the fine structure constant would affect many more things (actually, all of them) and I'm only interested in mass (and also, because I'm not a physicist and I get a lot of things wrong, I really thank you for...

I'd like to ask an specific question. If c changes (for whatever reason*), does the rest mass of a given particle changes, asuming E is conserved? Let's say, for a given particle, the following initial condition: Placed in a vacuum**. Rest mass m0. Particle's energy E. Propagation speed of...

Yes, I forgot to account for the big big mass. "It won't help" should be the title of this thread.

Careful there, current in a home outlet is alternating not continous. You are right though, it's probably a loose connection.

The problem is that any massive proyectile would require A LOT of energy to accelerate near c, adding a massive bar to exert centripetal force on the proyectile would only increase the energy requirement. That's (part of) why the guys at the LHC don't use a slingshot to accelerate particles...

Is Adamantium massless? Otherwise: no.

Missed that point, you are right. I apologize.

I'm aware of that, just sharing a baseless speculation.