I'm not trying to be arrogant.
This is exactly why I'm asking why such possibilities have not been considered. What could be the fundamental reason to dismiss this idea without consideration?
Is it simply because the visible mass is sufficient to account for the velocities of outer stars, so...
Thanks for the response.
To explain the velocities of outer stars, scientists propose the existence of dark matter, uniformly distributed throughout galaxies. However, why not attribute all this mass to a supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy instead? This could also potentially...
To make it as simple as possible. I am wondering: Why when we look at the galaxy rotational curves, our first reaction is to say: "oh, the outer stars are way too fast" and not "oh, the inner stars are way too slow"..
The existence of dark matter was initially proposed to address discrepancies between observed galaxy rotation curves and the expected behavior dictated by our current understanding of gravity. Typically, it's argued that stars at the edges of galaxies rotate faster than expected, leading to...
Thank you for your response. Its very helpfull.
Would you have any
Hi again,
Looks like my last message didn't go through properly. Once again, thank you for your response.
I'm on the lookout for any papers that talk about the limitations we're discussing. I couldn't really find any...
Hi,
Thank you for your reply.
I read in some papers about the radical trap methods developed because short-lived radicals are impossible to detect using ESR. Below, you can find a couple of them.
But I can't understand the exact reason:
- Is it because with short-lived radicals the...
Hello,
I have a question regarding the limitations of Electron Spin Resonance (ESR). I've read somewhere that ESR cannot detect radicals with short lifetimes.
I'm trying to understand why is that?
For example: a highly dynamic system like liquid sulfur at high temperatures, where sulfur...
Hello everyone,
I am seeking some clarification regarding a question related to thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. My understanding is that when we combine two identical boxes with the same ideal gas by removing the wall between them, the resulting system's entropy stays the same...
Sorry. My mistake.
I intended to say that first we derive ##E^2=(m_0c^2)+(pc)^2##
From this point we just play with some terms and we can get the ##E=m_0/\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}##. We don't need to make any assumptions about ##m_0## to do that, right? So the non-zero ##m_0## is not an assumption but...
Does Lorentz invariance of Maxwell equations tell us that speed of photons must be exactly Equal to ##c## (critical speed)? Or it can be "very" close to it in order to get things to work?
Once we have the assumption about the invariant critical speed. All other velocities become invariant...
I'm really not against the idea of using ##E^2=(m_0c^2)+(pc)^2## .
I just can't understand why this expression is considered as general one? It is exactly the same as ##E=m_0/\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}## . We just played with the terms in order to get ##p## there, for practical purposes.
My question is...
As I mentioned before we don't need to assume that photons travel at the speed of "light" to derive ##E=mc^2##. For that we only need to assume that there is some critical speed in the universe (c = critical speed).
In this case you don't have to divide your expression by zero. Since the speed...
Sorry for that.
But do we really need to assume that photons travel with the "speed of light" to derive our equations? If I'm not mistaken we can just assume that there is some limit speed in the universe (not necessarily the speed of light).