The complicated Science thread

[richandgem]

Are there many who marvel about Physics, Chemistry etc, and complicated stuff like that???

I read Focus and Sky at Night magazines, and of course, all the stuff Brian Cox does

Taster for you:



That's the kind of thing I love. Nuclear Physics, Astronomy and Molecular science I love.

Anyone got any complicated science questions/answers/facts that are interesting???

Very interesting little bit of info. I love sciene. I've just completed a cetificate in contempary science through the OU which was really interesting, The modules on nuclear energy and the universe were really good.

 

[jostheboss]

Can anyone explain how diffs work?

I can rebuild them, change ramps and preload, and I know kinda what they do, but seriously, its got to be witchcraft or something!

 

[Fernandez]

Can someone explain this:

In space there is no gravity so when you are flying along in your spaceship there is no rightway up, so how come in every sci-fi programme or film when another spaceship comes across another spaceship they are both the same way up, surely you would see many other craft flying what you thought would be upsidedown or on it's side??? Epic fail there by Hollywood I think.

 

[richandgem]

Can someone explain this:

In space there is no gravity so when you are flying along in your spaceship there is no rightway up, so how come in every sci-fi programme or film when another spaceship comes across another spaceship they are both the same way up, surely you would see many other craft flying what you thought would be upsidedown or on it's side??? Epic fail there by Hollywood I think.

Yes this is kinda true. When in space astronauts use something called a gimble which tells them the orientation of the vessel, so they have a 0,0 or horizon if you will. You'd argue though that this might only be calibrated to our species so if we met up with some Klingons for example there 0,0 might be different

 

[richandgem]

Can anyone explain how diffs work?

I can rebuild them, change ramps and preload, and I know kinda what they do, but seriously, its got to be witchcraft or something!

Just a standard diff?

 

[Fernandez]

Yes this is kinda true. When in space astronauts use something called a gimble which tells them the orientation of the vessel, so they have a 0,0 or horizon if you will. You'd argue though that this might only be calibrated to our species so if we met up with some Klingons for example there 0,0 might be different

Cheers Rich, I knew someone would have the answer but I thought a Gimble was the little old bloke from BBC's morning space filling pish Heir Hunters

 

[jostheboss]

Just a standard diff?

An lsd.....

 

[Mike]

Higgs Boson thingy today! Fascinating!!

Looking forward to having a read up of this

 

[jaik]

An lsd.....

As in, how do the mechanics of the LSD make it lock, or how does the locking affect the behaviour of the car?

In terms of locking it depends on the type of LSD. The easiest ones to understand are viscous ones, which essentially work in the same way as a torque converter in an automatic car. Each driveshaft has a plate, close to each other but not physically connected. Between them is a fluid which "stiffens" when agitated, so when the plates move at different speeds, it provides more friction, making the faster plate drag the slower one round. I think these are only used for the centre of part-time 4WD cars?

Clutch pack LSDs work like the clutch in a manual car, whereby a difference in speed between the driveshafts overpowers a spring, forcing a set of clutch plates together between the shafts and equalising the speeds. I don't know how the plates are physically moved.

Torsen LSDs are very clever and hurt my head to think about Just watch this video:

[YOUTUBE]Z9iPqIQ_8iM[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Fernandez]

Higgs Boson thingy today! Fascinating!!

Looking forward to having a read up of this

Iv been thinking about this and reckon there are 2 possibilities:

No 1: they will discover that there is something else inside and it's all just an infinate russian doll.

No 2: they will discover another universe inside, just like ours with galaxies, planets, stars and stuff confirming that our own universe is in fact inside a tiny particle in the cosmic quantam soup loop of reality that is just an illusion.

 

[Willis]

Iv been thinking about this and reckon there are 2 possibilities:

No 1: they will discover that there is something else inside and it's all just an infinate russian doll.

No 2: they will discover another universe inside, just like ours with galaxies, planets, stars and stuff confirming that our own universe is in fact inside a tiny particle in the cosmic quantam soup loop of reality that is just an illusion.

Yes, my thinking exactly!!!

Only had a brief look on BBC News on my phone, but I'll have a good read or the paper tomorrow onc it's all in print. I'm edging more towards it being Number 1 there though, it seems that everytime we advance in machinery we find anbother layer to the Onion. Number 2 would be quite cool though, we're actually being stored on a Cats collar.

 

[Paul]

Can someone explain this:

In space there is no gravity

That bit is wrong too (unfortunately), there is gravity everywhere and it interacts with everything with a mass, how do you think planets orbit the sun, the solar system follows the Milky Way and the galaxy will undoubtedly follow the central point of the big bang (whenever (and when ever)) than might be...

 

[Paul]

Iv been thinking about this and reckon there are 2 possibilities:

No 1: they will discover that there is something else inside and it's all just an infinate russian doll.

No 2: they will discover another universe inside, just like ours with galaxies, planets, stars and stuff confirming that our own universe is in fact inside a tiny particle in the cosmic quantam soup loop of reality that is just an illusion.

My theory is the end of Men In Black; our galaxies are all in marbles being played with by a giant alien...

 

[theederv]

Ok so a question I have been saving for when I randomly hopefully bump into Brian Cox at some point in my life. Maybe someone here knows the answer? This is going to be hard to explain; bear with me!

Ok, so now the most powerful radio telescopes are able to detect and receive radio from 13.1 billion years ago right at the edge of our universe. This radio was produced relatively quickly after the big bang. Ok, but for those radio waves to be 13.1 billion light years away from the telescope they would have to have travelled AWAY faster than light...right?! Because if they didn't, they would be closer than 13.1 billion light years away. This is really hard to explain. If the light/rays/photons etc were created during or shortly after the big bang at the centre of the universe, then they would not be able to travel 13.1 billion light years away from the epicentre.... I'm not sure I'm explaining my point very well... Erm, if I was on my PC I would draw a diagram. Bloody iPhone!


13.1 billion yr old light--------13.1 billion light years (distance)-------->observer

Big Bang ----------------------13.1 Bil Yrs (time)------------------------->Present

???? Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say, I've confused myself now lol

 

[theederv]

Oh my GOD!!! I just solved my boggle, ive been thinking about this on and off for years, but the answer is so simple I feel like a plonker now!!! So my theory was that the light being observed was 13.1 billion light years away, which it is. BUT that is 13.1 billion light years away from the observer, NOT the epicentre of the big bang. And of course, the big bang did not happen in our section of space!! So when we look at this light, we are actually viewing it from the opposite side of the location of the big bang?!

13.1 Bil year old light -------10 bil lghtyr distance-----Big Bang Epicentre ----3.1 Bil lgtyr distance--------Observer

Eureka!!!!!!

 

[Mike]

Oh my GOD!!! I just solved my boggle, ive been thinking about this on and off for years, but the answer is so simple I feel like a plonker now!!! So my theory was that the light being observed was 13.1 billion light years away, which it is. BUT that is 13.1 billion light years away from the observer, NOT the epicentre of the big bang. And of course, the big bang did not happen in our section of space!! So when we look at this light, we are actually viewing it from the opposite side of the location of the big bang?!

13.1 Bil year old light -------10 bil lghtyr distance-----Big Bang Epicentre ----3.1 Bil lgtyr distance--------Observer

Eureka!!!!!!

Do you actually realise how often I think of this exact problem!?! LOL!! You are a legend!!!!

 

[Paul]

You need to factor in that the universe is expanding at an ever slowing rate ever since the big bang and you find that the edge of the universe isn't 13.1 billion LY's away.

You are correct in stating that light travelling from the big bang will have travelled 13.1billion LY's, however we aren't situated at neither the centre or the edge of the universe therefore will never be able to 'view' the full 13.1bn LY's distance.

As you say light is a wave, just at a different spectrum for the detection of radio waves. As with all waves what will be being detected is a echo of those waves that have reached the edge of the universe and returned to our position, just as you don't actually see light, only its reflection off other objects. These waves will be reflected off the edge back towards the centre to be picked up by our radio telescopes, as these waves travel at different speeds the image they will produce will be different at varied wavelengths depending when they have reached the edge and returned, equally the same wavelength will change over time.

Big Bang--------------------------->Earth---------------------->Leading Edge
(Centre) Radio Wave<----------------------

Hopefully that makes sense and restores faith in Newton's laws?

It is just my perspective though and I am happy for someone to offer an alternate explanation.

 

[Paul]

Oh my GOD!!! I just solved my boggle, ive been thinking about this on and off for years, but the answer is so simple I feel like a plonker now!!! So my theory was that the light being observed was 13.1 billion light years away, which it is. BUT that is 13.1 billion light years away from the observer, NOT the epicentre of the big bang. And of course, the big bang did not happen in our section of space!! So when we look at this light, we are actually viewing it from the opposite side of the location of the big bang?!

13.1 Bil year old light -------10 bil lghtyr distance-----Big Bang Epicentre ----3.1 Bil lgtyr distance--------Observer

Eureka!!!!!!

Not too sure I follow your train of thought, so your assumption is that there was light prior to the big bang to pass from one side of the universe to the other? Light follows a straight line (mostly, unless bent by gravity), much in the same way as time. Both would radiate from the centre of the big bang, but at different rates.



The image above might explain. The waves created at the time of the big bang bounce off the edge of the universe and reverberate around the expanding space left behind. As the size increases slower than the waves travel this will always continue. Say we live on the line T1, the waves have passed by and returned making them viewable, this is the only way to 'see' the edge of the universe and also explains the reference to 'echo of the big bang' used by many astronomers. It does get more complicated the more you think about it. If you think in a linear fashion as I posted earlier there would have only been one split second in time where this could be seen - as the echo passed back past Earth. It is much more complex and this wave continues around the universe getting weaker, however is still picked up.

I think LOL ;/

 

[Webby]

I'm on the phone so I'll keep this short and to a couple of points to think about

- light isn't just a wave, it's particles as well.
- regarding the expanding universe/big bang - Hubbles work (re:redshift) confirmed the ever expanding universe and i believe a paper around 1998 talks about dark energy as an idea to explain the universe expanding at an ever faster rate (big rip rather than a big bang). Also have at look at Turok's work on dimensional branes as a cause of the big bang
- I also think that a recent satellite helped confirm that mass also effects in the fourth dimension. Imagine you're an ant living in a 2d world, which is like the surface of a trampoline. Place a bowling ball on the trampoline and watch 'space/time bend around it. This becomes so interesting around this Higgs Boson news!

 

[Paul]

WTF!?!? LOL!!

Love it Adam!