Monday, March 28, 2005

New Post on Ask a Physicist.

See title.

posted by InterestingPhysics @ 12:48 PM 

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The following are questions I have:

1. What is the difference between an anti-matter and a anti-particle?

2. What is dark matter and what kind of gravitational effects does it have on the cosmos?

3. Why can't the standard model predicts a subatomic particles mass. Do we know the mass of any subatomic particles or do we only have approximations?

4. How could gravity possibly fit in with the atom, and does there really need to be a gravity force carrier particle in the atom? As such a particle is predicted or theorized to exist but hasn't been detected yet?

5. Why are scientists confused by the decaying process of atoms? Why is it so important to scientists to come up with a formula that will enable them to predict when a atom will decay?

6. Are there some subatomic particles that only human constructed collisions bring about, and that nature or decaying never bring into existence? Which of the particles that exist in the particle accelerators also exist by themselves in nature without human interactions or human intervention? What are their names?
Also scientiest do not even know why 2nd and 3rd generation particles even exist since they do not make up any of the stable matter that is in existence. Do 2nd and 3rd generation particles only exist in the particle accelerator machines, or do some 2nd and 3rd generation particles sometimes also exist out in nature under certain circumstances? Which ones of the 2nd and 3rd generation particles also exist out in nature by themselves sometimes?

7. Could an "orbital theory of the universe" be a possibiltity of how the universe really exists. Such a theory would believe God exists and created the universe in shells, say 10 (something similar to the oribits of our solar system). The outer shell being the largest and the inner shell being the smallest. God then would put so many galaxies on each shell depending on the size of the shell. Plus he could use dark matter between the shells and between the galaxies themselves to help hold all the gravitational forces in place. If the earth was on the center shell closest to the center of the universe, other stars would mostly appear to be moving around the earth. However if the earth was on the outermost shell close to the edge of the universe, then other stars would mostly appear to be moving away from the earth (like an expanding universe), but in actuallity the universe would not be expanding, it would just be having galaxies moving around their orbital shells that might take millions or billions of years to complete the orbit depending on the size of the shell. In your opinion do you believe and "orbital theory of the universe" could be possible?

8. I've developed a theory I call the "pie vector theory" to help either validate or invalidate the big bang theory. Let me know if the theory has rational to it. Draw a big circle and place a dot in the middle of it representing the origin point of the big bang. If a big explosion occured debris and gases would blow out in all directions creating a universe shaped like and "expanding pie". Now draw a line from the origin point of the big bang to the edge of the circle, we will call this the earth's anlge line. Now put a dot in the middle of that line representing the Earth and our Sun. Now any debris, gases or stars that were blown out of the big bang before we were would be ahead of us on that line, and those stars would appear to be moving away from us. And debris, gases, or stars blown out after us in the big bang would be behind us on that line and the stars would appear like they are approaching us. Now draw two more lines from the origin point of the big bang, one on each side of the earth line. And draw the lines at about a 10 degree angle from the earths line. Now all the stars on these other two lines that blew out of the big bang at about the same time as the earth did will appear to be even with out earth and sun and traveling at about the same speed as our earth and sun. But because these stars were blown out of the big bang at a different angle line than we were, they will appear to be slowly moving away from us at their 10 degree angle difference. Now draw a small circle around the dot representing our earth and sun with the edges of the circle just touching the inner boundaries of the two 10 degree angle lines. That small circle represents the only part of the universe that is visible to us. That's probably only 1% to 5% of the universe then that is actually visible to us with our most powerful telescopes. Now using this "pie vectory theory" we should be able to determine from which direction the big bang occurred. Plus if the big bang is correct, then by using our telescopes and measuring the directions of all the stars around the earth, all the stars directions should line up with the "pie vectory theory". If they don't then the big bang is incorrect. Please give me your opinions and ideas on this theory?

Any answers on insights you can give on these questions would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks

Mike

email: experiencedmanager@hotmail.com

11:25 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home