Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Addendum to the Neutron

Not sure where to put this thread so I'm really sorry if this is the wrong place.
I've written a piece on an assumption about the neutron in atoms. I did it mostly to get a better understanding about physics along the way, I was hoping that maybe someone here could take a quick look at it and critique it? I don't have the extensive knowledge or background on physics as the members on here do so I was hoping that perhaps I could get some insight from someone on here. I don't assume that anything I wrote was accurate, just wanted to check up with someone who would know better than I would about these things. If you're willing, please take a look and leave a comment.
You can read my post over at http://potassiumbenzoate.blogspot.ca/

Thanks!
:P

It's nonensical from the outset I am afraid.

Start at the begining you need to define negative energy?

I can define energy in layman terms as a quantity or unit of something that is needed to make anything happen or occur.

So now try and define negative energy in those same terms

a quantity or unit of something that is needed to make anything UNHAPPEN or UNOCCUR ???????????

Even a simple wiki search will show you the problem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_energy

The only real entry comes from negative mass that is if E = MC2 then -E = -MC2

However I still dispute that even that is negative energy it's simply a minus sign to signify a direction on a relativic mass and the mass in the equation is relativistic not absolute.

In the same way we have negative and positive DC voltages but it doesn't mean you have negative energy just because you have negative voltage.

In electricity E = Vq (V= Voltage q = charge)

Just because we have a negative voltage or a negative charge does not give us negative energy it simply is a reference sign but we still call it positive energy.

So I can't even get past the first sentences unless you can specify what negative energy is.

Would I be right in thinking that negative mass is purely speculative; the sort of stuff you would need, if you could find any, to prop open a wormhole, if you could find one?

Bill S you are getting very very good at understanding

Under GR/SR yes if you opened a wormhole to 2 different time locals and then view from one direction because time is backward we would have negative energy. The negative term however as you deduce is indeed simply directional because of time.

Lets now move to QM and bring in the higgs if we say mass is produced by interaction with the higgs as like a drag (which is how it is viewed) then if you had something that was repulsed by the higgs it would appear to have negative mass and because of that negative energy but again it is simply directional.

So now lets really stretch you and the original poster think hard about this question

IS ENERGY ACTUALLY REAL?

Initially that may sound like a very unscientific argument but we have another thing in our everyday that works very similar we call it money on curreny.

If I was to ask you what currency is and what it's value was you will find you end up in a tricky answer that currency is nothing more than an intrisinc value we agree upon to trade. It has no real value and no definition other than that which we give it and it simply enables us to measure and quantify transactions.

You will note with currency we end up talking of forms of currency and derive equations for equality of the various forms.

Now think about it energy is exactly the same I can't show you raw energy what I can show you is forms of energy and derive equations for the equality of those energy forms.

Without getting into very complicated mathematics and science I hope I have shown you that energy is no more or less real than currency it is only real in a human sense of quantifying transactions.

It's also interesting you can't have negative currency, you either have currency or owe currency the negative sign is simply a direction statement.

Many have probably not thought about energy in this way but I think you can see it is none the less accurate.

Watch it Orac. Next thing you will be getting weird too. Up until now I have been completely sure what energy was. Well, I was completely sure that energy is what drives the universe. Now you are trying to take even that assurance away from me.

Bill Gill

Oh it's as certain as the income you earn and spend but thats a very different question to is it fundementally real and intrinsic :-)

It is a very interesting question isn't it and one I have been grapling with for a while now.

So feel free to make your argument that energy is or isn't real and intrinsic quantity ... I am interested.

Well, I used to figure that there was matter, and space, and time, and energy. Then they told me matter was just a form of energy. They they merged space and time to be space-time. Then somebody said maybe time isn't real. Now you are taking away energy. Does that mean that nothing is real except space? I know you will probably come back and tell me there is no such thing as space. Then I will be floating around here in nowhere and no-time and I won't even exist.

Bill Gill

Who would have thought that the Beatles would be at the forefront of modern physics.

Bill Gill

Space, mass and the speed of light and perhaps QM time.

look at the formula E = MC2

I can measure the speed of light in some quantity I define we call it meter per second. I can measure mass in some quantity I define say grams or kilograms.

Space is a 3D combination of the meter part we defined to measure the speed of light and the mass definition we used.

The jury is out on time as I have been discussing with Bill S time in QM is far different from time in GR/SR it is an intrinsic quantity that is required for the probability waveforms it is not airy fairy like in the GR/SR sense.

To put it back into our currency situation the world economy is not driven by currency it is driven by fundementals, currency is simply a measure of the economy and for any exchange you can quantify it to a currency value.

The question that is being asked by QM is energy the currency equivalent of the real universe.

When you look at like this I think you will see it hasn't really changed anything you already believed except energy has simply become a currency and can't be a driver now you need to look at the fundementals.

I know , thats kind of weird isnt it?
it makes me wonder if that was just a yellow submarine or
if they didnt think that yellow time machine sounded good enought.

we all live in a yellow time machine
a yellow time machine yes a yellow time machine.

hmmm

Now see Paul you managed to do that without being offensive or insulting anyone and dare I say it was even funny.

Congratulations now keep it up.

practice what you preach!

How great to see the Beatles again-- Thanks paul... AND I understood the bit about the currency and the economy---that lead to the question about matter etc!

I'm having a good day!

Ellis

here have a

AWWWAH! SO CUTE!!

They look so sweet with their skinny little legs and goofy grins.

Thanks Paul---we were all so young and happy then! It's cold and rainy to-day--- where's that Yellow Time Machine when you need it!

I have no idea where it is today , or who is using it.
but hopefully they wont mess things up too badly.

did you ever watch star trek the series?

the one where a planets sun was going alpha and they had a time machine that would allow the inhabitants of the planet to pick a point in time to travel to and start a new life?

then the other one where bones injected himself with a drug
overdose by mistake that caused him to be instantly irrational , then he became paranoid and ran through a time gate.

and he met a woman who was intertwined with the destruction of the world if she were to live.

I believe that when we do travel in time we should go way into our future in a vehicle that can be our life support systems just in case theres no natural life support.


and just in case we arrive in space or inside a mountain or something like that.

have you ever wanted to see what our future looks like?