/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16116647
>virtual particle

>>15182671
Fuck he beat me to it.
>>15182668

>Temperature isn't a field.
Lets have fun;

"What's a field?"

>>14977544
>If I want more electricity from a hydro damn, I either need more fans or more water to make it spin faster.

Do you think it's water and steam being sent down a solid copper line? Do you think anything you just said has anything do do with a geomanced set of magnets and a copper archform manifesting a archaic herzian waveform?

>>14840774
>It is moving, whenever it's not being absorbed/emitted.
Is light not an emission?

>Because?
It's a contradiction

>speed of light
>in a vacuum
How can it "be a vacuum" when you have light there, negating the fucking vacuum?

>No, aether is a proposed medium for light.
Well you sound like you're just re-describing it using "quantum foam". A bit misleading, especially when you can't even explain what space actually is that causes light to do what it does.

>Tell me what they have in common.
On is the coping mechanism for the other, based on a null result of some experiment that never proved anything.

>That's not what he said.
So what is the testable "Space" being spoken of? Or is this false reification?

>>14840779
>You cannot possibly be this retarded
You cannot possibly show me a property space has that allows it to "separate events". It's "curved", yet they cannot show how. And no, "distance" is not a property, it's a measurement.

>>14839431
>the implied requirement was this to be a base 10 notation
Protip: It doesn't matter what base you use because the problem persists in all of them.

>>14839445
>I accept your full concession
You bots need a new phrase.

>>14839452
It does not represent "undefined",
It is specifically used as a symbol/expression because of such
>it represents a number just like 2 does.
2 is quantified. 1.14.....I can't even tell you the quantity you see? It's undefined. I can estimate and use symbols, but that's simply a glorified coping mechanism.

>How?
Re read the post I quoted.

>>14839455
>quantify your education pls
For the benefit of all the alleged mathematicians I'm schooling right now, I won't.

>>14839472
>but it being irrational does not imply that it is not a number at all.
Does it not though? You cannot determine the quantity and a "quantity" refers to a SPECIFIED AMOUNT. The amount here is never "specifiable", it cannot even be used as a number is.

>>14708165
Using a camera, a ferrocell and a magnet. Or are you talking about the digital rendering in the corner of the pic?

>>14560925
>its finding the shaded area in blue
There's no actual numbers/quantities to work with other than an irrational if I'm to assume that it's a "perfect circle" being dealt with.
I choose "Undefined" because it's literally the only correct answer you can give. I could go on and on to use cosign and whatnot, but what's the point given that it would still be an approximated and wrong answer?
Furthermore it doesn't tell me if O or P is the midpoint of these circles.

>>14521491
For a GED equivalent only to go to college and not have it affect anything else. It's almost as if those 4 years you spend are just adult daycare full of C average students as the caretakers.

>>14522295
>This will stop the delays and famine
Nothing is going to stop the delays and famine because the book learned morons that rule your society that initially caused said delays and famine with their useless viral regulations have already determined what gets shipped where. Even if all the weenies doing contract tracing jobs and getting unemployment start going to an actual job and doing actual work today, you're still fucked. Good thing all those people are the first to die when shit hits the fan.
But you're so much smarter than those people which is why you took the time early this year to plant victory crops so you won't have to worry as much about that famine amiright?

>>11627887
You speak of time being nothing specific, further negating that time is something.
>>11630087
>Time is based on time
lol

>>11627211
"Time" and "Space" were conventions and placeholders used. Eventually they got confused for being actually something that does something. Neither are something, nor do they act on something else or have they properties to be measurable, yet physicists insist there is actually something of note to be discussed about them. Now you might say:
>but it's just a model

But it still fails to provide evidence of what's being modeled. Assumptions? Cool story bro. Maybe if I can woo an audience with a description of a painting that doesn't exist, they'll buy my description of the painting and treat it as if it were as valuable as the painting that I never showed or even proved exists.

>but space and time do exist!
and only circular reasoning, 0 empirical evidence, and 0 scientific experiments have been provided for them.

>>11631754
>Like the strength of electromagnetism.
Light is a form of electromagnetism.


>>11628634
>prove a description doesn't work
It's one thing to see something and describe it, and another to explain why it is the way it is. "Spooky action" doesn't cut it unfortunately, but it's not an incorrect description! It is indeed "spooky", since we're superstitious about things we don't understand. In fact "spooky action at a distance" sounds like a description that a homeless person would give me. Does that make it wrong? Would that mean if I described Einstein as a fuzzy haired crackpot whom a homeless person could outdo in descriptions, that it's automatically right since I described it accurately?

>>11092282
>>11092284
>>11092285
>>11092287
>>11092291
>>11092293
An absence is uncaused and has no parts. That would also make God absent. It's also an unmoved mover and nothing specific that exists as something (as it is absent). This is common knowledge for anyone that understands how a straw works. Much like the concept of god, that which is "absent" is equally omniscient. Such as the absence of food and the absence of your will to go get some and keep living. Or the fact that you are slowly becoming absent of the phenomenal world.

>>11039711
>No. If it was just that, you could increase the intensity of the red light and you would pull out electrons.

Increasing the intensity of red light does not decrease the spacial footprint of it.

>However, that's not what happens

Because you're still doing the same thing, only with more power. Kind of like how you'll never be able to clean a sidewalk as well with a 1600 psi pressure washer as opposed to a 3000 psi pressure washer. Even if you increase the volume of water to the 1600psi it doesn't matter because it's still being shot at 1600psi in the same amount of space and will never clean as well as the 3000 despite the fact that the 3000 uses less water.

>>11039736
Which is precisely why fields and waves don't exist you moron.

>>11039832
>by experiment, we know that water and air are comprised of particles called atoms.

There is no empirical evidence of any particle, photon, electron or otherwise.

>>11039772
>>11039758
A wave is what something does, not a thing. Stop perpetuating this falsehood. It's "made" out of anything. It's an action.

>>11039772
You're full of shit and there is no proof for this. It's WHAT SOMETHING DOES YOU MORON. IT LITERALLY CANNOT BE "MADE" OF ANYTHING.

>>11039817
>Learn to fucking read. Discontinuous solid regions = particles. Oh, and solid means indivisible.
>Discontinuous solid regions

So which is it you moron? Why do you think a contradiction defines something specific? Shit literally makes zero sense, explain it to me.

>>10841294
"I don't know what causes magnetism so I'll continue to describe the effects".

Wonderful, doesn't really explain anything but hey at least we have another person who can tell you what magnets do but not how they do it.

>>10841051
"if you get two magnets you can feel this push, turn them around and they attract. What is the feeling between those two magnets".

Moron who restates the premise of the question:
"well what do you mean there's a feeling? Of course there's a feeling, they repel each other".

"Well why are they doing it? How?"

Moron in a chair squirming because he knows he can't answer:
"Well uh, the problem is that you can't ask why because you'll never get an answer".
"Aunt minnie slipped on ice, and then something else, and then something else yadayada"

Proper answer for someone that doesn't fully understand:

"Well first, let me start by warning you that I nor most branches of science can answer that question in full detail. However I can provide an analogy in order to help explain at least the difference between a magnet and other matter that does not do what a magnet does. Let us start with the most simple analogy using magnets themselves.
"What is the difference is between a magnet and a chunk of metal of the same quantity/mass/composition?", you might ask.
The only difference seems to be the alignment of the subatomic makeup of the magnet. All the atoms/irons filings have been induced so that their polarities are working together and facing the same direction. They are more coherent than the other unmagnetized chuck.
However magnets and iron themselves as we know are not the only cause of magnetism. Out planet has a magnetic field, and one can make an electromagnet with copper and a battery. So using these analogies, we can safely assume that the cause of magnetism has something to do with coherency of atoms/electrons and of course electricity since all three of those things seem to be required for magnetism.

>>10693968
>Metaphysics?

Mm-m-magnetism?

>Is it a legit science

It's the source of science you knucklehead.

>>10518387
>I'm looking to make permanent magnets. I've read that certain specialized alloys remain permanently magnetized after being placed in a field.

Correct. The problem is that modern day magnets have so many materials in them that you'll need a series of specialized furnaces, mixers and fluxes to make an alloy. Magnets use a mixture of iron/nickle/boron and even copper and aluminum sometimes. What will make a magnet "strong" is the coherency of the crystalline structures formed in it.

>>10492659
>Sound is air vibrating and smell is funny chemical thing
And magnetism is just spin!

>>10450424
There is absolutely no explanation to the cause of magnetism, however the fact that it exhibits polarity and responds to the planets polarity is proof that it is three dimensional. For where would 2 poles go on 1 surface?

>>10429186
waves of what?

>>10396047
>is there such a thing as a warning before getting banned? how does this show?

Like I said, some butthurt faggot reported me. The mods normally don't give a shit unless enough whiners call on them. The captcha notifies you before you post an you gotta read the digital penis the mods send you before you post again.

>>10395974
It's also not "mine". "It is" regardless of what manner I describe it, not because I'm a faggot and refuse to give proofs but because "it is"

"Unreifiable"

That doesn't mean "it is not". Fields certainly exist, they're self similar, and point non-specific. Meaning there is no "point" I could give to you that is the exact "cause" of that field. It is a mediation with no locus.

>>10356778
>The earth is a flat torus in 3-sphere
"4 corner days, Cubes 4 quad earth- no 1 day god"

>which is compatible with the magnetic field
"Compatible" implies it is not inherent to begin with. Magnetism is a conjugate of matter, meaning matter cannot even exist without it.

>>10356825
>Space isn't a vacuum.
Ah, so it is indeed "filled space" and what fills it is what's being "curved".

>>10287931
>Mass and energy warps space-time, we know this happens, we observe it.
>we observe a shadow, measure it, feel it, say it's a thing, even though it's the absence of something.

Shit doesn't explain itself. What property does "space" let alone "spacetime" have that makes it "bend".

>Depends on what you mean by cause, you can always be super regresssionist and always ask why
Really makes you think. It's almost like that's the purpose of science. Perhaps if there's no cause to be found then maybe you should look at how things are ordered and related.
>But through general relativity we get a great and intuitive understanding of why things fall, and how they do it
>We don't even understand what light or gravity is but we know what it does.

You clearly don't understand what I'm denying.

>>10078741
>feedback is a meme

>>10035028
>What are some of the effects of quantum physics we can observe in day to day life? Everything except gravity.

>It so happens that quantum mechanics reproduces classical physics in the appropriate limits, but they're all fundamentally quantum. A basketball bouncing is a quantum effect because it's made up of molecules all obeying quantum rules, and all those molecules just happen to add up to a basketball.

>Decoherence sets in at very fast time scales in the sorts of thermal environment where humans live, and Planck's constant is too small for quantum numbers to ever be small for, say, a hamster. By carefully controlling the environment, we can start to see some such effects in places like gravitational wave detectors, which need to be extremely sensitive.

Thanks for the daily side orbiter.

>>10031571
>Can everything be quantified?

What is the quantitative difference between a magnet and a piece of ceramic/iron of the same mass/composition?

>>10024515
>free

Nigger, the ether still has to be churned. Can you even tell me how a magnet works?

>>10024502
>>10024505
>>10024508
>>10024510
>>10024511
Hippolyte Pixii invented the first AC motor, but had absolutely no fucking clue what he was dealing with. Tesla later perfected with help from Charles Proteus Steinmetz and a few other electrical engineers.