We'll get it out of the forest.
Hello, I gave the following formula. T = 2*pi*sqrt(m/D) w(omega) = (2*pi)/T I am now asked to say how the period T changes when the mass doubles. And I can't quite figure out how to do that. Sure, I can plug it in and see how the mass changes, but I did that and the…
A child slides down a swimming pool slide. He exits horizontally and hits the water 4.5 m below, 2 m horizontally away. Calculate the velocity with which the child exits the slide. The result is that the "throw" takes 0.55 seconds and the speed at which the child exits the slide is approximately 3.63 m/s….
I'm supposed to get the unit volt by converting the units of phi and deriving it. I already have Vs (volt-second), if my steps so far are correct. Now I don't know how to derive volt-second, or how to get rid of the second.
https://www.laenderdaten.info/iq-nach-laendern.php Below IQ = 70 … What's the difference then? Biodiversity?
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
We are in the field of speculation physics when answering your question. The following consideration:
The term is used to describe changes in space. If the space coincides with a point (major size), there are no changes in space anymore and thus no time.
In the general theory of relativity, space and time are connected. This is called the time of space. The time then appears only as a system-dependent variable.
Addendum: The general theory of relativity ART assumes that the location and impulse of a micro-object can be determined as precisely as desired. The extrapolation of the ART on orders of magnitude of the Planck period is therefore speculative physics and possibly leads to contradictions to quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics, time is a universal parameter.
plain plausible
Thank you.
As long as a space-time continuum has a diameter, it will be full and therefore also be subject to time, I think.
No one can make a statement for one with a diameter smaller than the Planck length.
The scientific statements all sound quite conclusive, but at the latest, when we arrive at a singularity, are increasingly unsatisfactory.
The time (only) is an illusion and is born out of ours, or at least from my consciousness, may have little to do with empirical science, but whoever has ever combined DMT and Salvia Divinorum A may gain the ability to grasp time as something holistic not only, but actually experience it for the moment. Past, present and future are only separated from one another by the spirit. In “truth” (I have not patented or leased it, not yet) they form a single existence at every moment. Like a cluster of time that encompasses everything that is, was and will be. With or without an observer.
That means Schrödinger’s cat is dead. Unfortunately. It could of course also be alive, but either one or the other. Although the probability is 50:50, there is only one reality and that is absolute.
From this point of view, everything seems not only predetermined, but already and still real and existent. Sounds quite materialistic. But in all likelihoods that can occur – blur relation back or forth – will ultimately only a actual scenario and thus to the now, or to the once. Neither for the past nor for the present there are any probabilities. They’re fixed. What happened has happened, there’s nix to shake. The same is true for what we call the future, ‘only’ one absolute value, a reality, a actual scenario. Nothing was and nothing becomes. Everything is.
Sorry for dizzying. I just tried to answer the question as best as possible after my understanding. I think the answers to the most fundamental questions of pysic may be expressed in numbers and formulas, but may hardly be fully understood without the psychological experience. Perhaps one will eventually be able to bring empirical science and subjective mysticism to a common path. …even if that were totally unemotional.
Imo: Time does not exist as an independent effect. Time is merely the order of events, of “cause” and “effect”.
There is no time in a completely empty universe as nothing happens in it. One second or 1 million. Years – “fees” are identical.
In a universe, we say 3 objects: Object A moves towards B and collides with it. As a result, B is accelerated so that it meets object C. There are thus 2 events: collision AB and collision BC. For B, AB takes place and later BC. These events did not take place at the same time, there was an order. We say, “It’s time past.”
The whole thing becomes exciting when we bring Einstein’s theory of relativity into play – but that is then a completely different subject. Only so much: if there is still an observer D that observes the collisions, it is now possible to consider scenarios where D can have been the order of events completely reversed …
edit: or another example: in another universe there are objects A, B, C and D. A and B colliding, C and D colliding. Is there time between the two collision events? We cannot judge this because this depends on the observer (not present here) …
I think time is caused by movement. If something moves, it produces time. Without movement in the universe, there is no more time.
In this notch also beats my answer. 😉
Yeah, right.
That’s exactly what I thought about 5 decades ago: time depends on movement. No time without movement. But to move it also needs space. Without space no movement and no time.
Therefore, I am always skeptical when I hear the Big Bang is due to a “fluctuation (Latin “fluctuare” = “throw up and down”” has been triggered, because without space and time “throw up” by definition is simply not possible.
How should this go when space and time only N should the fluctuation have arisen?
Not at all. Time is illusion. It is the extremely sensitive consciousness that is able to perceive tiny changes of states (movement) and to create the illusion that time has passed.