Search results

Exactly! Which is the "Copenhagen outcome". Why shouldn't it be different for a QM of gravity? I believe, it should be the same.

Isn't this the picture Schrödinger tried to establish, before the Copenhagen picture was accepted? Now in the gravitation world? Why shouldn't we say that we have a pure wave effect where gravitons doesn't play a role? I think we shouldn't go to the past to save the picture of a wave build by...

Would you say that there is another predictive theory avoiding problems at the Planck scale?

Oh, sorry about the confusion. I wanted to ask: What are the accurate predictions of the Feynman quantum gravity which have been measured so far?

Which accurate prediction has been measured to be true so far?

We'll never find out. One of my favorites in Futurama was (not literally, I can't find the citation) "even the sound in the vaccum was better in earlier times":wink:

True, but if the theory is non-renormizable it can never be used at high energies, or in other words: It does not describe gravitation correctly. Right?

Somewhere in outer space. A mutiny happened on a spaceship. As a death sentence the commanding officer and the scientific officer have been thrown out of the airlock. The commanding officer says: "!!!" The scientific officer responds: "..."

I changed it to GTR, you are right. In Germany we write ART, this is where the confusion came from. Sorry.

Hi Dave, I am mostly working in Python and my advise would be: Ask in Stackoverflow - that's the place where the nerds are running around (not sure about JS). Best wishes, Jens

I have some questions regarding the expected exchange particles for gravitation. From my understanding the following was valid: We can linearize the equations of GTR for weak fields "Quantum mechanics" (Schrödinger, Dirac equations) are linear Those linear equations allow eigenstates and...

I understand very well your point but nevertheless, it appears to me more like a citation problem. I think it is not a good advise to cite or even rely on a "moving target" - and this is not specific to your original question.

... because this is the infinitesimal generator relative to an virtual z axis? Is your question like "why is the Taylor expansion of the e function is at it is.."?

Please help me in understanding the history of physics regarding the atomic or non-atomic, say continous, structure of physics. In my years at school I grew up with physics of ultimate simplifications. Everything was a point "particle", like the moon revolving around the earth. Like the apple...

I think so. For such a small case a closed formula doesn't make sense to me and for very many passive circuit elements like resistors, capacitors or coils I am quite sure to not have a closed mathematical formula at all - plus, there is no usage for such a general case.

Ahhhh I got it, sorry. Absolutely right. Thanks. Maybe I watched too many movies where I thought afterwards that rotation is a nice alternative to gravitation but it is not. So clear. My fault.

Oh, okay, shame on me. 😊 I really thought that something which is actually called a force could be called a force. I know the laws from mechanics, we have $$ \vec{F}_z = -m \vec{\omega} \times (\vec{\omega} \times \vec{r})$$ and that this has for example the name "centrifugal force". I mean...

I am speaking about local measurements in spacetime. Is it just wording? Say, you have a cylinder with a quite huge radius, rotating. You are inside and grown up inside and you can't see the other side, no curvature, nothing. You jump and you fall back. You call it, whyever, centrifugal force...

:biggrin: I very well remember that a prof told me the same. "This is not a force!" Well, to be honest: If it feels phyisically like a force and I could measure it as a force it is force - for me.

Awesome, hard to read but explains a lot. Thanks.

Hi, Congratulation. I did an N-body simulation (yours is N=3) some time ago. It is really not easy nor it is dead, in my eyes. Perhaps you are interested in the following material: N-Body Have fun!

Hi, I believe that I have an acceptable level of understanding where SRT, GRT, QM and QFT come from. This is not true for me regarding the "good old stuff". Newton, okay, this is relatively (:wink:) clear to me but do you know something about the historical motivation for Lagrangian and...

Nice hardware. I just have an 4'' refractor but better than nothing. Thanks, this makes very much sense. I understand, this is a good hint for observation. Psychology plays a big role for visual perception, for example. Yeah, I believe that Uranus is really felt as sort of the underdog in our...

What diameter had your lens or mirror? Would you describe as a darker blue or more a light tone?

Personally, I would say I am a Neptune fan. This planet is extreme. Temperature, wind speed etc. I love this beautiful deep blue light from so many fotos. Some white clouds on the top, so lovely. My question: How real is the picture I got? What if I am as a human 1 million kilometers away, how...

Do you remember when you had this kid? Just asking because the technology I used for electronics was different. What you used is sort of a fixed modular arrangement and if I see how the synth Moog Grandmother looks nowadays (sort of such a pseudo modular thing) then the colors and basic idea...

I currently restarted coding some ASM. What a difference with 2022 tool chains compared to 1980s :-D Believe it or not but my favourite for some coding is Commodore C16. It was my first love. I loved that "all-in-one", coding it in machine code (you are reading right, not some top notch...

I would like to mention this link: https://ledlightinginfo.com/why-do-light-bulbs-glow-when-switched-off It should clearly be said that white hot light bulbs definitely take a short time to cool down when you still can see the light dimming from orange to red. Naturally, for LEDs it is a...

Yeeaaah, my first own Pentium with 100MB (?) hard drive (or was it already 1 GB, I can't remember). What I remember very well is that always when a friend or me got a new hard drive (even for 80MB) the reaction was identic: "Woooow man, you will never get this full! " 😁

😁👍 me too... in pharmacies 40 years ago agent mum bought for me chemicals for my kits, she was an angel. Was me the devil that coal powder, sulfur and saltpeter was on the list? 😉 As written above, guilty, too, in all points! Nevertheless, with your sugar rockets and the vortex ring gun I...

Not sure about your brain but where did you read that I had such a master level? Having been a chess master of a (pretty small) city in a youth league means for you that it needs to be sort of master level? Hey calm down, expert. [Post edited by a Mentor]

Nice. I coded the c64 in assembler, too, that was fun :smile: but I never coded any assembler for the 80x86 generation. What did you code for the PC? There the high-level languages appeared to me more natural but I didn't spend much time in programming until I was studying physics and computer...

Aha okay, I had just one and I found it fascinating. Being young where I have been told that radio works in a sense that energy is transported via waves this was the prove I needed to believe the story. I found it awesome 😃 PS I think you got a bad kit. Mine always have been pretty versatile.

I was very ambitious as a child. I had a friend and he asked me to play chess against him. He completely crushed me because I didn't know anything about openings, middle game and end games. So I begun to study books, first one: Bobby Fisher teaches chess :biggrin: this is only scratching the...

I just came across a glass supplier which offers everything, and I saw laboratory supply like Erlenmeyer flasks etc. I remembered my childhood when my parents completely supported me in my scientific hobbies (around 40 years ago). I loved science where I got support from my parents in...

What puzzles me is that you hadn't an introduction about this subject in classical mechanics, the first theoretical course studying physics. Hopefully it is clear that I don't mean this snotty in any way - perhaps I had just luck with my prof who was really brilliant. It doesn't even need to go...

Where you mention Zee: "Einstein Gravity in a Nutshell" (a nutshell yeah sure :-D ), chapter 1.3, page 39 out of around 860, "Rotation: Invariance and Infinitesimal Transformations", foot note: "If you don't know rotations in the plane extremely well, then perhaps you are not ready for this...

First, my apologies for my answer before. Reading my own answer it sounds not informative nor motivating. It is just that I was puzzled for a simple reason: I was introduced in the basic terms already in classical mechanics. SO(3). Basically you can compare the magic with solving a linear...

I would be puzzled if you take QFT before standard QM... and then perhaps relativistic QM (but for classical solid state physics for example relatvistic QM is not necessary). I took QFT naturally after standard QM and long, long before group theory was already introduced - at least in an "all...

I am not sure about that. I would even say it is a bad idea. For a simple reason: It makes a lot of sense to introduce Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics as soon as possible to "understand" the real laws of nature. It makes no sense to speak about the conservation of mass. It very much makes...

Hey, from Germany: We have a quote now around 75% vaccinated as far as I know. Vaccinate yourself and things will go better, that is my opionion. PS: The government does change now the rules. Not the number of infections per time will count but the number of persons who need the intensive care...

A particle met a wave. Particle: Plop. Wave: Slosh!

Sorry but physics is made from principles, called laws of nature. In this case it is mainly the conservation of momentum. Why shouldn't we referr to the laws, to the principles? I personally like them.

You will very likely have found this: Quanta Magazine Collatz Conjecture I think it is a very interesting approach to think about SAT instead of our beloved decimal numbers. Nevertheless, I am a bit sceptical if this has a future (which basicaly doesn't mean a lot because I am not an expert in...

Depends on the definition. "Science itself" (and I am not a Philosopher) is independent from any religion. As soon as you believe that things can't die or disappear or change you may have a problem - as a scientist. Again, as an example: I believe that you can send a spaceship into a black...

Oh, that is pretty simple. Unfortunately I know such cases. If the pain is that big that you don't care if there is something later, a life or whatever after your death, you just want get away then you will do that. I would recommend to speak about things where you have some experience with.

My point is more that science just carefully goes over to break some rules, if at all. It is mostly not to be at odds. As an examply, you might have stared to the stars as a child, "ohh, is this infinite? Is there a dublicate of mine?". Nowadays it is partly popular to believe in multi...

Hi, I think that history shows a constant: - nobody wants to die - this introduces several versions of fiction (like religion) - science is influenced by this fiction Probably you can imagine several examples where the idea of immortality influenced or influences science? What do you think...

@FactChecker, @Baluncore , @jedishrfu Navier-Stokes seems to me not that natural for a quantum computer... let us see (as far as I can see it is on the plan but perhaps in 15 years). So, what do you think about Lattice-Boltzmann for CFD? I mean it goes at least in the direction of QT (it is an...

Okay, but what is "the problem"? If I have an aerodynamic problem then I want to have for example the friction. I could use a simulation with Navier-Stokes for example. Or DNS. Or LES and what about moving boundary problems etc. Can this quantum computer solve a problem which I define or does...