Physics - June 2006

Perhaps massless means it does not exist as a mass? I try so hard to make sense out of it. Its soo confusing and I dont get straight answers out of teachers. Is my question logical or imaginative.?

2006-06-16 01:11:29 · 3 answers · asked by goring 6

2006-06-16 01:06:16 · 7 answers · asked by vhex ... n_n 1

What about Louie Debroglie"s Hypothesis that any massive particle behave as a wave. but no mention of masseless particles what ever substance they are supposed to be?

2006-06-16 01:05:03 · 2 answers · asked by goring 6

The effect of the 2 slit experiment can also be explain by particle. The particle would create the same interference distribution as if it was awave as well. Did any thinking scientist ever realize that?

2006-06-16 01:00:02 · 1 answers · asked by goring 6

2006-06-16 00:45:04 · 1 answers · asked by goring 6

if we fire a bullet perpendicularly upwards then when it comes down .....will it have the same velocity at the same point when it was fired ??

Please explain why(if so)!!!

2006-06-16 00:32:41 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-16 00:31:59 · 1 answers · asked by Ole Jube 1

Such glasses I believe works on the same principle as like the
X-Ray machines installed at airports to check contents of luggage.

2006-06-16 00:22:38 · 4 answers · asked by joe 1

actually i wanted to know about them in respect to general relativity and quantum theory?

2006-06-15 23:13:22 · 3 answers · asked by ankitd 3

2006-06-15 23:00:53 · 9 answers · asked by valdirsoares 2

2006-06-15 22:52:08 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-06-15 22:12:03 · 13 answers · asked by mithilesh g 1

2006-06-15 21:15:54 · 18 answers · asked by nikkelbubble 2

2006-06-15 21:00:10 · 3 answers · asked by GEORGE M 1

2006-06-15 20:50:59 · 12 answers · asked by isaac a 3

2006-06-15 20:10:52 · 9 answers · asked by salar_toti 1

this is question from gravity.

2006-06-15 20:05:48 · 5 answers · asked by salar_toti 1

2006-06-15 19:43:38 · 22 answers · asked by milldoc 1

What is the paradox to John Wheeler's split beam experiment? How is it related to the distant stars and their existence? Can someone explain in layman's terms?

2006-06-15 19:00:09 · 1 answers · asked by citylegend 2

I have had this doubt since i saw the film Jurassic Park.In that film the little boy is thrown off from a HVDC line.Whereas in the case of Low voltage AC people are struck to the line.Does the picture signify the truth.If yes what is the possible reason?

2006-06-15 18:59:15 · 7 answers · asked by benix 1

Here's mine:
Beyond our perception is the base substance of all existence:
(Think of it like a perfectly smooth pond)
This substance is absolute nothing. No motion, no time no energy. But infinitesimally small vibrations within this substance give rise to relativity, because of difference. Difference in location, and time.
(A tiny ripple in the pond)
The frequency of difference in turn gives rise to interaction of differences, which are the fundamental forces of the universe.
(Interference patterns in the ripples)
These frequency differences add up to create everything in the universe, all matter and energy, including us. So we are simply massive chaotic interference patterns in a perfect nothingness.

2006-06-15 18:49:53 · 7 answers · asked by Jason H 3

This is a little crazy but here goes. I met an individual who had his own theory of why electrons can not fall in the nucleus. Here is what he said; as we know electrons are attracted to the nucleus because of electromagnetic force. We also know that they never reach the nucleus except in extreme occasion like a dying star. He thinks that the reason why this is the case is because of strong force. We don't know much about the characteristic of strong force only that it is able to overcome the effects of repulsion between two positive charged particles and that it ranges of effect is very small. So he thinks that when the electron enters in to the inner most orbital that the strong force keeps it back from actually going into the nucleus. I couldn't give a reason why that can't be possible so I looking for answer from someone that can explain why that is not possible.

Thanks

Brad

2006-06-15 18:35:29 · 3 answers · asked by Brad25 1

the image formed formed by the plane mirror is virtual, erect and laterally inverted? what is meant by virtual image erect image and laterally inverted? because i see my replicated image in plane mirror that is i appear real in mirror then how can one say the image is virtual?

2006-06-15 18:19:22 · 5 answers · asked by aparna 1

what is phase difference and path difference? please help because i often found the term in subjects dealing with light

2006-06-15 18:15:54 · 1 answers · asked by aparna 1

My question si totally hypothetical (of course notwithstanding that you would be burned by the flames, etc). I mean, you couldnt fall all the way though the planet and end up in china which is what my dad used to tell me. In actual fact, I imagine that you would get to the centre of the earth and then you would just hover there and be stuck? So would you float in the space?

2006-06-15 17:49:23 · 21 answers · asked by ronicolake 1

2006-06-15 17:19:27 · 10 answers · asked by bimal 1

2006-06-15 16:44:10 · 12 answers · asked by poky4life 1

2006-06-15 16:39:28 · 14 answers · asked by curious_289 1

What are the other dimensions they are talking about ? Dimensions 5 through 10 and in some cases 11 ?

What proof do they have to believe this ?

Personally it sounds like fabricated nonsense used as a scapegoat made up to make their theories work to keep their jobs/grants going and also as a means to save face from being embarrassed for not having answers to important questions.

I hate scams and this surely sounds like a scam to me.

Grrrr.

2006-06-15 15:19:27 · 19 answers · asked by MNevara 1

How do we explain this in terms of physics?

2006-06-15 14:47:48 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous