Altering a Structure Without Changing Its Chemicasl Composition

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the possibility of altering the size of non-biological objects without changing their chemical composition using quantum mechanics and thermodynamics. Participants conclude that quantum mechanics does not permit the alteration of subatomic particle size, as it is inherently impossible. The idea that cooling a substance can reduce its size is acknowledged, but manipulating size at the subatomic level is deemed unfeasible. The conversation emphasizes that attempts to change particle size would not result in a stable state, as it would lead to energy conversion. Ultimately, the thread is locked due to its divergence from mainstream scientific understanding.
Pranav Nair
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
My question is that can we use properties of quantum mechanics and thermodynamics to alter size of a non biological object such that properties like its density,optical activity, conductance etc remains same...
For instance we know that cooling down a substance considerably reduces its size and vice versa but if we could somehow do this process at subatomic level using quantum mechanics it could be possible to decrease or increase the size of an object as whole...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, quantum mechanics itself doesn't allow us to do such a thing.
 
Drakkith said:
No, quantum mechanics itself doesn't allow us to do such a thing.
That means we cannot alter the size of subatomic particles further in any method as it would be instantly converted to energy,...am i going right? however thank you for your answer...
 
Last edited:
Pranav Nair said:
That means we cannot alter the size of subatomic particles further in any method as it would be instantly converted to energy,...am i going right?

No. It means we cannot alter the size of subatomic particles because that is inherently impossible. It has nothing to do with anything being converted to energy.

Since this is well beyond mainstream science I'm afraid I'm going to have to lock this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top