City vs. Village/Streets vs. Tours

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Re: before you seek out a village gi..., posted by Cain on Oct 18, 2001

If you had been around awhile, you might understand a little better why I did it. But as a newbie, you are unfamiliar with some of the interaction of rather excited particles around here.

Steve

[Bob S.]

... in response to Re: Re: before you seek out a village gi..., posted by Cain on Oct 18, 2001

"I wasn't aware of the association between sub-atomic particles and 'astro-physics,'"

[geek alert]
Oh yes!  Astronomy is more than "what is out there."  It is also about "how it works".  To understand what powers the stars, what causes gamma ray burst events, or what creates Hawkings radiation at the event horizon of a black hole requires knowledge of sub-atomic physics or Quantum mechanics.

See also:
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/index.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/faq.html

[/geek alert]

[Cain]

... in response to Stars & Physics, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

Yeah yeah,

Everything is based in the smaller discrete packets of matter, whatever they may be.  I was in the middle of a longer reply to this post, but I lost my dial-up connection(dial-up is the best, well, better than two cans attached by a string, usually)...so I'll make this short.  The reason I posted that message was to point out the stupidity of flexing-nuts about your intellect in a forum like this.  It's a waste of time to try to show off your intelligence, especially on a discussion board.  I wasn't attacking Quasi, I was just pointing out something because I had nothing better to do at the time.  I study the interactions of quarks too, if you want to look at it that way, my field is mechanical engineering.  The only way I choose to argue about my intellect is to say "I'm not stupid, or I hope not anyways; if I was I would probably go through life ignorant to that fact."  

-Cain

Don't worry, I sound the geek alert too, especially in person.

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Re: before you seek out a village gi..., posted by Cain on Oct 18, 2001

I forgot to say something about Quantum mechanics.

Just a little experiment: Well, I am running back and forth across the living room near the speed of light, while carrying my keyboard typing away. Now why don't you quantatatively explain my "state" (position and velocity) with complete accuracy. Perhaps you can talk to Schrodinger about it.

[Bob S.]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Quantum physics, posted by Quasimoto on Oct 18, 2001


If you are moving at near the speed of light, it should take you days to reply to posts as your typing would slow down to a crawl relative to our time frame. :-D
BTW, it's Heisenberg, not Schrodinger, that concerns position and velocity, and it is only relative to subatomic particles.  Though both subatomic particles and macroscopic objects are subject to the laws of General and Special Relativity.
Schrodinger was the one with the cat. :-)

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Quantum physics, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

Now here is someone that knows what he is talking about. Bob S, who are you and what do you do? I am impressed. I see here that you mentioned Schroedinger's cat. Thanks!

Steve

[Bob S.]

... in response to Re: Re: Quantum physics, posted by Quasimoto on Oct 18, 2001

"who are you and what do you do?"

Oh, just an over-educated aerospace engineer waiting to get laid off (you'll note the .boeing. in my server address).  I enjoy lurking over at the badastronomy.com discussion board with my fellow science and astronomy geeks (who spend way too much time flaming hoax believers who think we never landed on the moon).  But some of them are real physicists and astronomers, and when they get going it gets way over my head.  Their discussions of Gravitational Red Shift of the light of distant galaxies leaves me stumped.

"I see here that you mentioned Schroedinger's cat."

Yeah, and in a way it is applicable to this pursuit.  In Schroedinger's thought experiment, you have the cat in a box and drop inside a poison food pellet.  If it eats the pellet, the cat dies; if it doesn't eat it, it lives.  So is the cat alive or dead?  It is both and neither till you open the box to find out.  In the same way, you may be writing to some girl but not know for sure if she is the real deal or a scammer/opportunist.  You may never know until you "open the box" and get over there to meet her in person and spend quantity face-time together.

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Physics, Cats, & RW, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

I knew you had to have some aerospace, aviation, or astronomy connection. No one could know those facts without being connected somehow. I appreciated your expertice. I hear the "no landing" theory all the time. I like conspiracies, but that one takes the cake. I hope you don't get laid off, but if you do, you will have more time to post here and on the badastronomy.com board. Astrophysics is an interesting thing for me, because it is mostly theory. I read where Pulsars are thought by some to be composed of "strange" category quarks, because nothing else big enough (a few kilometers diameter) could emit that much energy, while turning at 24,000 rpms. And yet, neither have we ever seen a Pular as far as it's matter is concerned, nor have we ever seen a quark. It is kinda like looking in the box, finding no cat or any other creature, but a little scatt on the floor, and assuming it was left by the cat. How do you know it was a cat that left the scatt if you didn't see it? And what happened to the "cat" as well? A theory based on a theory. I hope you don't build airplanes that way. But if you do, let the Al-Queada know.

Steve

[Bob S.]

... in response to Re: Physics, Cats, & RW, posted by Quasimoto on Oct 18, 2001

Pulsars are definitely among the strangest things a galaxy has to offer.  If you find that interesting, you might get a kick out of NASA's Astronomy Picture of the Day.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010913.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010905.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap980905.html

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Re: Physics, Cats, & RW, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

Thanks,

We are going to get our butts kicked for talking about this stuff, but anything to do with pulsars, quasars, and black holes facinates me. I just learned recently that larger black holes have less gravitational pull, or tidal force, than a smaller black hole the size of our sun. I can not quite grasp this. If you have an idea, perhaps you could send me an email. I can only conclude that the infinite singularity of a black hole is constant or something, and that the energy of the tidal force or gravity is distributed over a larger event horizon. What do you think?

Steve

[Bob S.]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Physics, Cats, & RW, posted by Quasimoto on Oct 18, 2001

Intuitively it doesn't feel right.  But when we're talking about singularities, Relativity, and Quantum mechanics, intuition sort of has to take a holiday. (Does not compute... brains oozing out ears... uugh!)

Before we get yelled at by Patrick who has been very patient with us so far for cluttering up his bandwidth, I'd suggest you post your statement over on the BadAstronomy.com discussion board.  The real astronomers and physicists might have a better grasp of what you are talking about.  If you happen to also have a source of where you heard that (Sky & Telescope, Scientific American, etc.), that would help.  If you don't, dont worry.  Somebody there might.

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Physics, Cats, & RW, posted by Bob S. on Oct 19, 2001

Will do, and no I don't remember. Just puzzled!

Steve

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Quantum physics, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

I was talking about Schroedinger's cat, and his argument that you can not give a exact definition of laws not applying to larger physical things just as you said. He was European, but I do not know from where. You were exactly right. I do not apply to the laws of Quantum mechanics, nor can I move at the speed of light. It was intended as a joke and a little test. His theory also was that if you can not see it, you can not give an exact definition of it's properties.

Steve

[SteveG]

... in response to Re: Quantum physics, posted by Bob S. on Oct 18, 2001

If he were really moving at the speed of light, he wouldn't be posting at all.  He would be too busy putting out the fire in his underwear due to friction with the air in the room!       I have serious doubts that the keyboard could survive the stresses associated with stopping and reversing direction when he reached the other side of the room anyway.   LOL     (I always wanted to give smart-alec answers to the questions on my Physics tests…..now’s my chance!)

 How do these "I'm smarter than you" discussions get started anyway?  Why does knowing some obscure technical crap or some snooty boring cultural trivia make you a better person?  Truthfully it just shows insecurity.

                               SteveG

[Quasimoto]

... in response to Re: Re: Quantum physics, posted by SteveG on Oct 18, 2001

You are so right. But the point was made to see if Cain recognized an important figure in Quantum physics named Schroedinger. The origins of my point were that I am intelectually demanding of a woman to some degree. She must be a thinker and intelligent, and not some "hick" from the sticks that village girls are made to be. You might not be able to find a cherry in every village girl, but my point is that some of the best cherries can be picked there.

Steve