Is it possible that consciousness can effect...
Here are two:
1. Measuring the position of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment. The object neither gains nor loses energy, but only changes its position.
2. Measuring the rotation of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment. The object neither gains nor loses energy, but only changes its orientation.
Motion and position of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment are not dependent on energy. Only when a change in velocity (e.g., speed or direction) occurs does a change in energy take place.
This is classical mechanics, by the way, as described by Newton's First Law of Motion, and is not relevant in a quantum-level reference frame.
Here are two:
1. Measuring the position of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment. The object neither gains nor loses energy, but only changes its position.
2. Measuring the rotation of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment. The object neither gains nor loses energy, but only changes its orientation.
Motion and position of an unaccelerated material object in a frictionless, zero-gravity environment are not dependent on energy. Only when a change in velocity (e.g., speed or direction) occurs does a change in energy take place.
This is classical mechanics, by the way, as described by Newton's First Law of Motion, and is not relevant in a quantum-level reference frame.
Define frictionless zero-gravity environment. It's a postulate that doesn't exist within the framework of reality.
Material Objects always lose energy due to entropy and radiation.
The questions themselves are flawed.
Non inertial frames of reference in a universe outside of spacetime. or something. Fictitious forms of motion. You're measuring not the motion of the objects themselves but using them as a frame of reference to external forces, The box moves around the cat so to speak. So measure the momentum of the box.
I see what you did there.
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,184
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
TIME IS - MOTION, FLUX, MOMENTUM, DECAY, ENTROPY, RESONANCE. Without energy there is no time.
I hate to jump into a tiff but, here's the problem with that logic: without matter you have nothing to relate oscillation or movement back to - therefore using that same train of thought you could also argue that time is matter.
_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin
TIME IS - MOTION, FLUX, MOMENTUM, DECAY, ENTROPY, RESONANCE. Without energy there is no time.
I hate to jump into a tiff but, here's the problem with that logic: without matter you have nothing to relate oscillation or movement back to - therefore using that same train of thought you could also argue that time is matter.
According to Einstein they're interchangeable so yes. e=mc^2 yes? Not the first time the universe doesn't make sense.
But that's the whole point. Momentum is a property of matter also, and it's also energy.
TIME IS - MOTION, FLUX, MOMENTUM, DECAY, ENTROPY, RESONANCE. Without energy there is no time.
I hate to jump into a tiff but, here's the problem with that logic: without matter you have nothing to relate oscillation or movement back to - therefore using that same train of thought you could also argue that time is matter.
Space-time?
No, Space-Energy. Or I think Matter-Energy describes it more accurately.
After all, what else is there really?
I should really go to bed.
What a boring universe to want to live in eh?
I like my definition better.
The Cosmos consists of mass-energy and space-time together. Mass tells space-time how to bend. Space-time tells mass how to move.
ruveyn
Mass doesn't go anywhere without Gas.
If time is energy, then...
- How is it generated?
- What is its wavelength?
- What is its exchange mechanism?
- What is its velocity of propagation?
- What material is used to store it?
- What medium is used to transmit it?
- By what mechanism does it convert to other forms of energy?
Explain these properties, provide links, show the math, or admit that you are wrong.
- How is it generated?
- What is its wavelength?
- What is its exchange mechanism?
- What is its velocity of propagation?
- What material is used to store it?
- What medium is used to transmit it?
- By what mechanism does it convert to other forms of energy?
Explain these properties, provide links, show the math, or admit that you are wrong.
Time has a wavelength that fluctuates infinitely
It has the same exchange mechanism as the EU
The speed of light
It is stored in timinos (undiscovered as yet)
It is transmitted through the 4 th dimension
Nuclear fusion converts it
BTW - I answered your pshycic challenge on the other board
If time is energy, then...
How is it generated?
Excitation at or below the quantum level. I don’t know what animates the universe, do you?
What is its wavelength?
100Mm+/- to 1pm
What is its exchange mechanism?
Planck’s constant.
What is its velocity of propagation?
c
What material is used to store it?
Z
What medium is used to transmit it?
Z0
By what mechanism does it convert to other forms of energy?
EM, nuclear, weak, strong.
All of these are properties of energy. If time is energy, then it will have these properties.
Time and Energy are synonymous. Time is an invention, it bears no resemblance to reality.
Explain these properties, provide links, show the math, or admit that you are wrong.
#
I’m not a mathematician, I’m a visual thinker and artist. Tell me my variables are wrong, I know some of them have to be, but for you Fnord, I’ll give it a shot.
Evidence, Please?
Evidence, Please?
Evidence, Please?
Evidence, Please?
Evidence, Please?
Evidence, Please?
Then you did not follow instructions, and have thereby failed the challenge.
How is it generated?
Evidence, Please?
This email traffic statistic has nothing to do with the question.
Planck's Constant is a scalar value, not an exchange mechanism.
Evidence, Please?
Are you referring to the atomic number of a particular element? (i.e., the the atomic number of Helium is 2 = Z(He))
Are you referring to the Z Boson, which is electrically neutral, has a half-life of about 3×10^25 seconds, and is associated with only the weak force?
A particle can mediate only one force, and can not change which force it mediates.
Then you are saying that energy is an invention, and that it has no semblance to reality. By extension (e.g., application of E=mc^2), you are saying that matter itself is an invention, and this it also bears no resemblance to reality.
I say that the only thing lacking any semblance to reality is your understanding of physics - chronodynamics in particular.
That is not an answer, it a pound sign.
You'll never hit the target as long as you keep shooting blanks. Go back to your crayons and leave science to us professionals.
By the way ... would you please explain why your answers conflict with those of Robdemanc? Are you calling him a liar?