Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 301 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#3795 11/11/05 01:45 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
And it was really Cambridge Ontario Canada ... not Cambridge England.


DA Morgan
.
#3796 11/11/05 04:19 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
A
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Rob: Actually, when I spoke to the lecturer, I didn't use the rubber band example, What I really I said to him was; "But then you could divide the strings into smaller strings." Secondly, I must point out that he didn't actually 'agree' with me, he just said "I suppose so."

Obviously he's not a string physicist then.

#3797 11/12/05 01:44 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Perhaps a rubber- band physicist. ;-)


DA Morgan
#3798 11/14/05 12:38 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
can you find a number that can't be sub divided?
and zero is not a number, it's an abscence of numbers. point proved (hopefully).

#3799 11/14/05 03:12 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Probably absolutely nothing-a void

#3800 11/16/05 01:15 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
a void is what zero is.

#3801 11/16/05 01:16 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
how can anything that exists have an abscence of mass?

#3802 11/16/05 01:17 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
It can't. It just can't.

#3803 11/16/05 07:08 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Except, of course, for photons.

Case closed.

You need to distinguish between mass and rest mass. Anything can exist without rest mass. Perhaps everything fundamental actually does. The problem here is that you are assuming that you know what mass is ... an that is something I doubt so lets examine what it is.

Mass is the resistance of an object to accelleration: Nothing more. Put your hand into the air and wave it about. Now do the same thing in a bucket of water. Feel the resistance to accelleration? Did your arm experience a corresponding increase in mass? I hope not.


DA Morgan
#3804 11/22/05 11:23 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
ok then, just pretend that all the times I said mass, I was actually saying matter. Therefore, nothing that has no matter can exist.

#3805 11/22/05 04:51 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Depending on how one defines "matter" you may or may not be correct.

Are photons matter?
Are phonons matter?

One of them definitely is not. The other arguably not.


DA Morgan
#3806 11/24/05 01:57 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Grrr, all these technicalities are annoying. Ok, look, MY own personal definition for matter which is the one I am going to be using from now on is this; Matter: something with weight.
Now you could say a photon has no weight, but look at it this way. A feather would appear weightless on a scale designed to weigh elephants.
YET AGAIN, I go back to my original point; nothing can be said to exist unless it has WEIGHT.

#3807 11/24/05 07:16 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Your personal defintion of anything is irrelevant.

If you wish to communicate with this planet's other inhabitants you need to use a common language. And guess what ... in physics ... it isn't whatever you decide it is.

I did not say a photon has no weight though that is true as weight does not exist. The question is mass and the question specifically is with respect to rest mass.

Weight is not a concept with any meaning thus you don't have a point to return to. You really should either stop posting on a science site or learn the value of staying awake in school.


DA Morgan
#3808 11/25/05 03:30 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
I don't go to school.
Let's go back to numbers YET AGAIN. Divide infinity by two infinity times but you'll never get to zero. That's the point I've been trying to make since I GOT HERE.

#3809 11/25/05 07:14 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Rob wrote:
"I don't go to school."

Obviously!

Rob wrote:
"YET AGAIN, I go back to my original point; nothing can be said to exist unless it has WEIGHT."

then Rob wrote:
"YET AGAIN. Divide infinity by two infinity times but you'll never get to zero. That's the point I've been trying to make since I GOT HERE."

Compare the two paragraphs above? Go back to school and this time concentrate on getting an education. Alternatively learn to ask "Do you want fries with that?"


DA Morgan
#3810 11/25/05 08:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 44
R
Ric Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
R
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:

Alternatively learn to ask "Do you want fries with that?"
hehehe laugh


"The first Human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization." -Sigmund Freud
#3811 11/26/05 11:32 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
Rob, let me ask you something. Consider the polynomial fraction (x-1)/[(x-2)(x-3)]. What is the value of this fraction as x becomes infinitely large (in the dedicated lingo as x tends/goes to infinity)?

#3812 11/29/05 02:30 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Pasti, hold on one second

DA Morgan,
?Obviously!?
Yawn, how predictable.

"Compare the two paragraphs above? Go back to school and this time concentrate on getting an education."
Compare the two paragraphs above? I don't see your point.

Forget infinity; divide the number 1 by 2 forever and you still wont reach zero, EVER! Do you need an education to realise that?

#3813 11/29/05 05:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Wow Rob ... you've proven you have a junior high school level education if one assumes a C average.

No doubt Pasti, working on his degree is physics, is marveling at your grasp of the elementary. But you didn't respond to the question he asked: Why?


DA Morgan
#3814 11/29/05 06:14 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
"Forget infinity; divide the number 1 by 2 forever and you still wont reach zero, EVER! Do you need an education to realise that?"

Slight miscommunication.

It doesn't have to reach. It "tends to" zero, in the jargon. That's why in math, we use the limit:

lim (x-c)/[(x-a)(x-b)]
n->inf

What is it "in the limit," regardless of whether that limit is ever reached. As n "increases without bound," the value of the function approaches zero. (This should be intuitive, but you can also use L'Hopital.)

OTOH, there is a semantic gap in that mathematics doesn't necessarily have to correspond to our physical reality - and vice versa.

I disagree with your assertion that nothing exists unless it has weight. I think that's far too specific a definition. A slightly better one might be that nothing exists unless it is capable of producing "some (putatively) observable effect on something else."

Yours is a dangerous assertion in that there's no justification for it. We might as well declare that nothing can be said to exist unless it's made of peanut butter.

The argument about not having an instrument fine enough to measure (either weight or mass) of a photon is also flawed (not just on lack of evidence, but of even being scientifically legitimate) unless you can propose an experiment that might prove you're wrong, if you are wrong.

Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokW
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5