No They don't prove. Scientists theorize these things and no proof whatsoever.
2006-08-13 15:10:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dr M 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Quantics and math explain critically with phase algorithms and factoid grammar relativity is but a exploit of grammar and a need of response with no further attitude for science or performance, therefore it does not attain to energy, which is the intuition of element divided by the perception of time in gravity, intuition of element is a bar of laurentium at 32 amperes multiplied by the atomic weight of an atom of such element, perception of time in gravity on earth is 9.7 jules.pascals.pascals.
In these conditions provided by quantum lapse gravity colapse is proven by quantum phisics in a simple manner, simple mass of matter divided by perception of time in gravity times common gravity pull. This is to be proved in laboratory, it is true, it figures to me true, I see it happening.
You want to know where I am from, I am peruvian.
2006-08-13 07:15:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Manny 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
RE: Quantum Mechanics vs. Relativity? I rather have those days reread "a short background of Time" by utilising Stephen Hawking and interior the e book, he states that quantum mechanics and relativity are contradictory to a minimum of one yet another and for this reason can not the two be maximum dazzling. I understand that at contemporary physics lacks a unified concept that includes the two yet in...
2016-12-17 10:10:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I assume you're referring to the gravitational collapse preceding a supernova or formation of a black hole. If so, the answer is, "partially".
Much, if not most, of the explanation comes straight out of Newtonian physics. When you have enormous mass in a relatively small volume, you have extremely high densities.
To deal with that, you have to consider the forces holding atoms together, then the strong nuclear force holding atomic nuclei together. After the explosion, then there is the pressure and temperature thresholds for nucleosynthesis -- the "cooking" that forms new elements.
Stephen Hawking is a leading relativity theorist on the formation of black holes, so it follows that relativity plays a leading role in their formation.
2006-08-13 09:29:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by bpiguy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
As in the theory that eventually the universe's mass will pull so hard on itself it will colapse into nothingness?
Hasn't been proved yet, nobody knows the curvature of the universe.
2006-08-13 14:27:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by adklsjfklsdj 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Both goring and manny belong in the "Science & Math Graffiti and Non Sequitur Hall of Fame".
I might have insulted graffiti artists by suggesting your question/answer are in the same category. Sorry.
2006-08-13 07:40:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kitiany 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. The extent that space is warped and the resulting attractive forces vs. the total mass and their kenetic energy - that is what will determine gravity collapse.
2006-08-13 13:40:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
0⤊
0⤋