Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

She Blinded Me With [Science] Thread

11516171820

Posts

  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I'm trying to imagine something with negative mass and utterly failing

    Instead of gravity, it would have antigravity (repulsive instead of attractive) IIRC

    White-hole vs Black-hole sort of mechanic

    Ladies.
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    I'm trying to imagine something with negative mass and utterly failing

    Instead of gravity, it would have antigravity (repulsive instead of attractive) IIRC

    White-hole vs Black-hole sort of mechanic

    Yeah, but I mean more visually, though the white/black hole concept helps somewhat.

    Because if you can see something then it has mass, right? Light is bouncing off it, so it has a physical presence, which means it has at least some mass. So if something has negative mass, what does that look like? Can we see it or perceive it?

    camo_sig2.png
    PSN: AuthorFrost
    mageofstorm.png
  • DepressperadoDepressperado I just wanted to see you laughing in the pizza rainRegistered User regular
    edited August 9
    I don't care if we never get FTL so long as I can go



    it is one of my fondest desires that maybe someday I'll get to liquidate all my assets and buy a little freighter and do the trip from Earth to one of the Lagrange Stations and then to Luna-2 (my favorite lunar city), and haul Helium 3 back to Earth.

    maybe when I get tired of that, I can stock up on dehydrated food and carbon scrubbers and go to Jupiter and slide into atmosphere and look at my wake in the gas and then fly down as far as I can go before the pressure crushes Icarus (that's what I named my freighter).

    Depressperado on
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    I'm trying to imagine something with negative mass and utterly failing

    Instead of gravity, it would have antigravity (repulsive instead of attractive) IIRC

    White-hole vs Black-hole sort of mechanic

    Yeah, but I mean more visually, though the white/black hole concept helps somewhat.

    Because if you can see something then it has mass, right? Light is bouncing off it, so it has a physical presence, which means it has at least some mass. So if something has negative mass, what does that look like? Can we see it or perceive it?

    I don't think mass is an indication of sight, air is a thing but we can't "see it" but liquids and gases interact with light still. Antimater will still have a mass too because you're just changing the charge of particles, antiprotons and positrons wouldn't be this negative matter thing.

    Might be easier to conceptualize how you feel around positive and negative pressure to kind of feel how negative mass and positive mass would be in terms of each other?

    I'm definitely not a physics anything so I'm sure someone better can answer these questions.

    Ladies.
    MadicanShadowen
  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    visibility is just a matter of "does this interact with photons in any way"

    BahamutZERO.gif
    bowenDepressperadotynicMadicankimeShadowen3clipseDuke 2.0NeveronHappy Little MachineSolarPeewi
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Madican wrote: »
    I'm trying to imagine something with negative mass and utterly failing

    Instead of gravity, it would have antigravity (repulsive instead of attractive) IIRC

    White-hole vs Black-hole sort of mechanic

    Yeah, but I mean more visually, though the white/black hole concept helps somewhat.

    Because if you can see something then it has mass, right? Light is bouncing off it, so it has a physical presence, which means it has at least some mass. So if something has negative mass, what does that look like? Can we see it or perceive it?

    Photons specifically bounce off the electric charge of atoms, not the mass.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
    tynicMadicanbowenTynnanShadowen3clipseCurly_BraceHappy Little Machine
  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    also gravity affects photons a little tiny bit as seen around black holes so negative gravity would also

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I'm trying to imagine something with negative mass and utterly failing

    Give me a quality pepperoni stromboli and I will demonstrate

    Captain Inertia
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    I wonder what the ramifications for violating causality actually will be if we ever find out it's not set in stone.

    Time travel maybe?

    Ladies.
  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited August 9
    bowen wrote: »
    I wonder what the ramifications for violating causality actually will be if we ever find out it's not set in stone.

    Time travel maybe?
    q7b5gwppb4ac.gif

    Xaquin on
    Captain InertiaEvilCakeMvrck
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    This graphic on Wikipedia illustrates how an object with negative mass would react around other objects with negative mass or regular mass

    Basically two objects with negative mass would repel each other, but if you pair an object with "regular" mass and one with negative mass, the regular-mass object would be repelled and the negative-mass object would be attracted

    The problem with all of this is that mass is not an intrinsic quality of particles, this is for example why antimatter doesn't have negative mass - mass is an emergent property and negative mass would be like pulling something towards you by pushing against it

    bowen
  • BroloBrolo Broseidon Lord of the BroceanRegistered User regular
    man

    I can't even comprehend that

    XaquinStiltsBrovid Hasselsmofvalhalla130Andy Joe
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    I can kind of comprehend it, but wouldn't that essentially make for perpetual motion as they attract and repel each other while never touching?

    camo_sig2.png
    PSN: AuthorFrost
    mageofstorm.png
    kimeCaptain Inertia
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Brolo wrote: »
    man

    I can't even comprehend that

    It has to do with basically getting a double negative. The force of gravity is reversed, but so is the acceleration (because F=ma).

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I can kind of comprehend it, but wouldn't that essentially make for perpetual motion as they attract and repel each other while never touching?

    Yes it would

  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    Platy wrote: »
    This graphic on Wikipedia illustrates how an object with negative mass would react around other objects with negative mass or regular mass

    Basically two objects with negative mass would repel each other, but if you pair an object with "regular" mass and one with negative mass, the regular-mass object would be repelled and the negative-mass object would be attracted

    The problem with all of this is that mass is not an intrinsic quality of particles, this is for example why antimatter doesn't have negative mass - mass is an emergent property and negative mass would be like pulling something towards you by pushing against it

    Yes, but in a purely mathematical sense antimatter does have negative mass, because when you add it to matter, you get less matter.

  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    No this is not how it works because there is no change in the total mass-energy

    SolarElvenshae
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    Basically it's

    E=mc^2

    and m in this case would be the masses of the matter and antimatter particles, they're added to each other, not subtracted

  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    I was under the impression that adding antimatter to matter is like adding dynamite to a block of ice

    camo_sig2.png
    PSN: AuthorFrost
    mageofstorm.png
  • JedocJedoc Take a look. It's in a book. It was always in a book, you fool.Registered User regular
    Nothing even matter

    GDdCWMm.jpg
    XaquinSlacker71kimeElvenshaeDarmak
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    Jedoc wrote: »
    Nothing even matter

    Only in the end

    camo_sig2.png
    PSN: AuthorFrost
    mageofstorm.png
    EvilCake
  • BroloBrolo Broseidon Lord of the BroceanRegistered User regular
    Madican wrote: »
    I was under the impression that adding antimatter to matter is like adding dynamite to a block of ice

    QaGUVvx.jpg

    as long as the anti-matter is kept in a tube of some sort (plastic will do, but glass is probably better for safety) anti matter is perfectly safe to play with, even for very young children

    Slacker71Duke 2.0ElvenshaeEvilCakeTofystedeth
  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    Antimatter and matter particles that touch each other turn into pure energy, which translates into an explosion. They both have normal, positive mass. Energy and mass are equivalent, you can convert mass into energy and energy into mass under the right conditions (such as an anitmatter-matter reaction). So the total amount of energy and mass combined remains constant in the universe.

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • SiliconStewSiliconStew Registered User regular
    Negative mass is basically just another one of those byproducts of the math not actually ruling it out. However, as mentioned, it would result in odd behaviors, the biggest being the runaway effect. Negative mass would repel both positive and negative masses, and when you combine that with positive mass attracting both positive and negative mass, putting a positive mass near a negative mass would allow both to accelerate away up to the speed of light with no energy input and zero momentum. Basically, you've just created a perpetual motion machine. And if the two equal but opposite mass particles interacted, they would annihilate each other, but release no energy, yet would leave a surplus of momentum, which isn't allowed by our current understanding. The implications of the runaway effect mean it's unlikely negative mass exists.

    Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    Negative mass is basically just another one of those byproducts of the math not actually ruling it out. However, as mentioned, it would result in odd behaviors, the biggest being the runaway effect. Negative mass would repel both positive and negative masses, and when you combine that with positive mass attracting both positive and negative mass, putting a positive mass near a negative mass would allow both to accelerate away up to the speed of light with no energy input and zero momentum. Basically, you've just created a perpetual motion machine. And if the two equal but opposite mass particles interacted, they would annihilate each other, but release no energy, yet would leave a surplus of momentum, which isn't allowed by our current understanding. The implications of the runaway effect mean it's unlikely negative mass exists.

    At least if inertial mass and gravitational mass have to have the same sign, but...

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    Polaritie wrote: »
    Negative mass is basically just another one of those byproducts of the math not actually ruling it out. However, as mentioned, it would result in odd behaviors, the biggest being the runaway effect. Negative mass would repel both positive and negative masses, and when you combine that with positive mass attracting both positive and negative mass, putting a positive mass near a negative mass would allow both to accelerate away up to the speed of light with no energy input and zero momentum. Basically, you've just created a perpetual motion machine. And if the two equal but opposite mass particles interacted, they would annihilate each other, but release no energy, yet would leave a surplus of momentum, which isn't allowed by our current understanding. The implications of the runaway effect mean it's unlikely negative mass exists.

    At least if inertial mass and gravitational mass have to have the same sign, but...

    This idea kinda breaks my brain, but if we roll with it, it wouldn't really change anything because we'd still end up with negative energy

    Captain Inertia
  • discriderdiscrider Registered User regular
    edited August 10
    Negative mass is basically just another one of those byproducts of the math not actually ruling it out. However, as mentioned, it would result in odd behaviors, the biggest being the runaway effect. Negative mass would repel both positive and negative masses, and when you combine that with positive mass attracting both positive and negative mass, putting a positive mass near a negative mass would allow both to accelerate away up to the speed of light with no energy input and zero momentum. Basically, you've just created a perpetual motion machine. And if the two equal but opposite mass particles interacted, they would annihilate each other, but release no energy, yet would leave a surplus of momentum, which isn't allowed by our current understanding. The implications of the runaway effect mean it's unlikely negative mass exists.

    Momentum is mv though.
    So speeding negative mass up with positive mass should have no net momentum change.

    discrider on
    Steam Community page: http://steamcommunity.com/id/discrider/
    Oh hey! A knife!
  • valhalla130valhalla130 13 Dark Shield Perceives the GodsRegistered User regular
    edited August 10
    Have we ever been able to make antimatter, or is it still theoretical?

    valhalla130 on
  • BrainleechBrainleech Registered User regular
    Have we ever been able to make antimatter, or is it still theoretical?


    We have trapped it and studied it but not made any

  • Brovid HasselsmofBrovid Hasselsmof [Growling historic on the fury road] Registered User regular
    Have we ever been able to make antimatter, or is it still theoretical?

    She's real, she just doesn't come to the forums any more

    PlatyKayne Red Robewebguy20Shadowenchrishallett83TynnantynicMvrckSkeithKwoaruDouglasDangerTofystedeth
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    We have made like, 35 anti-hydrogen atoms for a second and suchlike

    But to be fair this is very useful for laboratory work

    Duke 2.0Tofystedeth
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    Positrons (anti-electrons) are used in medical imaging

    Also android brains

    PSN: AWATTT66| XBox Live: AWATTT66| Steam: AL-WAT| Battle.Net: ALWATTS #1320
    Origin: aiwatt| Switch: SW-8499-0918-5960
    Tofystedeth
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    Antimatter also occurs naturally and we can find it in cosmic rays

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    edited August 10
    particle accelerators can create a tiny amount of antimatter I think? I might be mixing up video games with real life though. It's definitely a real substance that exists in the universe and has been experimented with.

    BahamutZERO on
    BahamutZERO.gif
    Duke 2.0Tynnan
  • TheStigTheStig Registered User regular
    The problem with that is you start trying to make antimatter with a particle accelerator and next thing you know some alien head crab thing is eating your face and that one quite dude has to save you. I may be mixing that up with videogames, but in pretty sure that's what I read in a textbook.

    bnet: TheStig#1787 Steam: TheStig
    furlionElvenshaeBahamutZERODisruptedCapitalistTynnan3clipsekimeSolar
  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning Registered User regular
    A new idea has been put forth as to how the first problem in emergence of life was overcome. I'm not gonna spoil it, I'm just gonna give the problem.
    First, the easy bit. Early cell membranes were built from fatty acids—molecules that look like lollipops, with round heads and long tails. The heads enjoy the company of water; the tails despise it. So, when placed in water, fatty acids self-assemble into hollow spheres, with the water-hating tails pointing inward and the water-loving heads on the surface. These spheres can enclose RNA and proteins, making protocells. Fatty acids, then, can automatically create the compartments that were necessary for life to emerge. It almost seems too good to be true.

    And it is, for two reasons. Life first arose in salty oceans, and salt catastrophically destabilizes the fatty-acid spheres. Also, certain ions, including magnesium and iron, cause the spheres to collapse, which is problematic since RNA—another key component of early protocells—requires these ions. How, then, could life possibly have arisen, when the compartments it needs are destroyed by the conditions in which it first emerged, and by the very ingredients it needs to thrive?

    BahamutZEROcB557MvrckElvenshae3clipsekimePolaritietynicNeveronfurlionTofystedeth
  • JedocJedoc Take a look. It's in a book. It was always in a book, you fool.Registered User regular
  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    edited August 14

    BahamutZERO on
    BahamutZERO.gif
  • PeasPeas Registered User regular
    edited August 14
    Turning Earth Into a Telescope | The Terrascope

    29:51
    When it comes to telescopes, bigger is better. That's why we're investing billions of dollars into a new generation of "extremely large telescopes", such as the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT). But is 30 meters truly extreme? Could it be possible to ever build a telescope on the scale of a planet? In a new research paper by our very own Professor David Kipping, a solution for turning the Earth into a "Terrascope" is presented. Join us on a journey though the history of telescope inventions as well David's own personal journey to devising this new radical approach to the telescope.

    Peas on
  • honoverehonovere Registered User regular

    Skyfall is an insane and horrible and deeply unsettling idea, like project Pluto/SLAM.

    valhalla1303clipseCurly_BraceBahamutZEROSeal
Sign In or Register to comment.