Recent content by Voltz

thank you very much for your explanation. I'm sorry such a reductionist argument was required for me to understand

so the pylons would be pushed backwards a minute amount?

I understand the whole closed system concept and I appreciate the gravitational example, the momentum gain of the falling object is canceled by the planet 'falling' towards the object with zero net momentum change. So if I consider the electrons and the E field source as a closed system how does...

What I am getting at is that before the application of an electric field, i.e. a voltage the drift velocity of the electrons is zero and therefore their momentum is zero, then after the application of the voltage the drift velocity of the electrons is non zero and therefore there is an increase...

so what physical entity cancels out the momentum given to the electron?

thanks for the reply I am not familiar with the concept of a field having momentum. how is this quantified when a field has no mass? also just to clarify the question I understand that the electrons will collide with the conductor ions but I am talking about the 'recoil' of the original...

My question is about what I believed to be one of the stronger conservation laws - the conservation of momentum. I heard that electrons propagating through a wire travel at a speed similar to the flow of honey and electrons having mass naturally led me to conclude that they had a finite...

Ok then, how does the electron cause a heating of the atom through it's excitation? And does this mean that much of light energy falling on a surface is turned into heat or is it just a nominal amount. And can any wavelength cause a heating effect - e.g. a focused gamma ray burst will cause...

Lot of incorrect postulations here. The universe is actually expanding FASTER than light but due to relativity (and this addresses the c+c = 2c) it doesn't matter what speed a photon is emitted at or what speed you are going at when you observe a photon (unlike conventional mechanics) the speed...

Lot of people talking about binding energies of nucleons but I believe the OP is talking about the binding energy in elementary particles - that is the bound energy in the strong force holding quarks together to form protons and neutrons. Mass and Energy are two sides of the same coin, anything...

In the case of a metal if the electrons are delocalized then how can they be promoted?

I think you're getting confused. If you ignore the reduced friction caused by weaker gravity on the moon then a block is just as hard to accelerate (has the same inertia and mass) on the moon as on the Earth so you're first post is inaccurate. A football would fly further and higher on the...

What determines this mass parameter then?

If the Higgs theory is correct doesn't this unify Inertial and Gravitational mass? And if so empirically determined negative mass would display properties of both being gravitationally repulsive to positive mass objects and being accelerated by a force in the opposite direction it is applied?

Thanks I understand now, didn't think about binding energies but a free neutron has a binding energy of it's 'system' - (which is just itself) of 0 so therefore any other state has a higher binding energy and so is preferred?