
Greetings! 
Space and Time Discussions on space, time, relativity, physics, and the nature of the universe. 

Thread Tools  Rate Thread  Display Modes 
#16




Possibility:
"mass" involves uncertainty ("a mass of leaves on the ground") i.e. "spread out coherently" (at least one overlap ) "spin" involves certainty (the wheel spins: it is selfreferent) spin = opposite of mass? If: spin = conservation of measurement; mass = measurement of conservation? yes force = fixed angle acceleration = directed distance per time per time = directed distance per anywhere within limits per anywhere within limits, = directed distance per simple distance, = backwards referenceability (or mass carrying) f = ma = fixed angle = mass of mass carry = uncertainty of uncertainty carry = travelling a wider path = ................ oh, I cannot say as it is too valuable a discovery right now (????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????) 
Sponsored Links 
#17




spin is "spread in" so when you pull your arms in while spinning, you spin faster!
this is awesome: (dolphins creating vortexes of air as hulahooplike rings) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMCf7SNUbQ 
#18




Quote:
From a more typical perspective for the universe at large, all matter both moves and spins with little frictional interaction. Where matter does interact due to friction, new vortices form. 
#19




Those bubble vortices that Imagine sent were very interresting  I didn't know these existed and the duration is more than one would expect. You have a point there on the life of a vortex Gort. It would be nice if a vortex particle could be made in water that would duplicate a subatomic particle with proper spins  I still believe energy would have to be fed in though. Opposite spins would bond due to vacuum like two trains pull together when traveling in opposite directions. I believe in vortex theory for subatomic particles though.

#21




That's his secret for courtship ladies. Spin with your hands in to go faster. Right. Apes pat their heads and rub their tummies then use their toes to grip the carpet; then, suddenly they discover ," Wow, no constaints in this thing."
(Very funny, indeed.) 
#23




How do you explain 1/2 spin? 1/2 spin can be demonstrated by taking two pennies  fix one in place and rotate the other coin around the stationary one  it will take two turns of the rotating coin to arrive at the starting position. Try explaining this with a simple vortex.

#24




Quote:
"of the infinite possible angular momentums available to an object, ..." or a group of objects ... Can we actually observe rotation (spin) in singular objects, objects of atomic size and smaller? I think not. The frame of reference is the observed relative position of each object in the group. 
#25




Spin has the same uncertainty as angular momentum.

#26




If I have a circularshaped object such as a tuner dial on a radio; and it has a radius line on it as a reference mark, if I "spin" it so it points to a different external reference mark than what it was pointing to:
I have created an angle. "uncertainty": e.g. "a or b"? "certainty": e.g. "a" How know concept of "uncertainty" i.e. how is it either "a' or "b"? Because have a projected space (room to move to "a" or to "b") ? How know concept of "certainty"? How know "a"? Because the "projected space" is evenly subdivided all options have been "flipped" except one? (Subject identification?) The cat on the mat: "cat" is the subject (Because it has to be a cat or specific item (for the sentence to hang together...?)) (If wrote: the cat or dog on the mat, (cat or dog) becomes in the role of cat in the simpler sentence? Isolation (timefreezing?)(timelessness?) of the subject is what allows it to "rotate around" the range of possible background scenes (e.g. mat, floor, grass, road, etc.) ? How knew "uncertainty" how knew ""a" or "b""? Because all ones have been "flipped" except option? (Object identification?) The cat on the mat: "mat" is the object (Because it needn't be a mat?) By writing "the cat on the mat or floor or grass or road", "mat or floor or grass or road" becomes nearly the subject as it is like the cat is being seen now from different points of view? momentum  mass x velocity mass = uncertainty (I think) like "a mass of leaves" describes e.g. "2030 leaves" (an uncertain amount of the leaves) velocity = directed distance per time time involves "anywhere within limits" (like limits of a clockface or pendulum swing) velocity = directed distance per anywhere within limits = subdivision into two unequal parts per anywhere within limits = juggling room to form ratio = loose intersection of sets = limit on making exchanges between sets momentum = mass x velocity = uncertainty of velocity say = uncertainty of limit in making exchanges between sets = a third set moderating exchanges between sets (?) = "an electron" ? (This has consequences for teleportation!) How can "spin" have "uncertainty" how can "certainty" have "uncertainty"? How can "the subject" become "the "object" as well? A third set moderating exchanges between two sets is both "objective" (can be seen from two points of view from the two sets?) and "subject" ? Everything hinges on it? It forms "a unique" perspective, of 3 two mentions (3D) ? Forming a triangular 'structure' to space (i.e. to 'room to move') ? (If add such a structure (called a "Hamiltonian" in mathematical physics?) you get a chain rule and a D'Alembertian operator? A (fixed) spacetime difference in 3 or 4(more) 'dimensions' a "hitchiker's guide" AS ? "the galaxy" ? (or "the backbone" (communication infrastruture ?) of "the universe" ?) ) Uncertainty in spinning a radiotuning dial: creates an overlap so it points to one station, then is spun to point to either some other station or yet another station. Or the uncertainty could be at the start. Like a third station 'moderates' the other two its floating between the other two if the other two are already floating as sets making exchanges, the third would fix the rate or ratio of those exchanges? Measureable (quantisable) spin = uncertainty of angular momentum? Proof!?: an ice skater spins, then pulls in or throws out their arms. they spin more or less, as they have measured / unmeasured their angular momentum by pulling in or throwing out their arms ? Pulling them in "unmeasures the angular momentum", so spin becomes less defined, so faster? Throwing arms out measures (scales?) their angular momentum, so spin becomes more defined, so slows? Last edited by imagine; 06272010 at 04:09 AM. 
#27




Protons an neutrons are made of upquarks and downquarks and if quarks were made of x,y,z pusating opositing in a fase sequence the orbit speed of the electron would be multiples of the distance from its center. The first orbit would be 1 the second would be 2 and the third would be 3 and so on. However, I guess to Shrodingers equations, bosons are considered units of evennumber of spins and fermions units of odd number of spins  1/2, 3/2, 5/2 .
I guess calculations of the speeds of electrons around orbits in an atom are 1/2 at the first orbit compared with the same speed of rotation of electrons traveling, at the speed of light, around a loop of wire of a given length. I sure would like to know more about this so I could get to the bottom of what spin is. I can't believe that from a starting point around an electron it would take 2 turns to arrive back at the starting point. What is special about the starting point and the second orbit of an analyzer to show the exact point you started from? 
#28




idea:
measurement: involves item and ruler; (2 roles); and ruler must have at least one division giving item (1), ruler part a (2) and ruler part b (3) so 3 roles? Conserve measurement; now item seen again (so two views) and ruler seen again (so 2 parts of ruler, seen again) so 6 roles (gives "6 quarks"?) and one has a constant angular separation: a constant crossing over between item and measuring material = a floating parameter pertaining to the partly unseen item (a universal difference swap or space cohering view of the item (a view of the item as two bits stuck together, as "a gluon")(so to see "quark" AND "gluon" you need "quark uncertain" (a change capacitor)). If I point my arm at a cup on a bench and rotate it to point to another cup to one side, I have created an angle. If I treat the pattern as also having a beginning and an ending (thanks spacedout), then this angle has 'separation' (it is braced both forwards and backwards (this idea is the key?)). Now it is called "spin". Maybe: the sweep of one's arm creates a triangle of at least 2 units perimeter to 1 shoulder; so "measurement" (or difference?), the bracing creates "conservation of measurement" (Or swapping difference, so floating boundaries, or "spin", i.e. "another way of looking at something"). If one rotated one's arm 360 degrees, the bracing (the remainder in 360 of a less than 360?) would be absorbed, so a second 'orbit' is needed to keep space as a factor? a prime number is a 'space factor', a "spin"? an even number greater than 2 is a factor space, or "mass"? rrrr: measure is the 2 r's, conserve is rr to rr; measure conserve is r r to r r, r r ("mass")("spread IN")("factorising" ?)(so mass factorise is topsy turvy (holograph?) ) conserve measure is r r, r r to r r ? ("spin")("spread OUT")("normalising") ....................... (When spin, one keeps getting tangents, i.e. "normals", right angles to the arm that is rotating.) every mass is comprised of at least 2 spins (2 views of something) ? (Goldbach Conjecture: every even number greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two prime numbers) ? Last edited by imagine; 06292010 at 07:32 AM. 
#29




what would happen to the electric field of a magnet
if you spun it at extremely high velocities? (10% light speed) would the north pole start to attract the south pole as the electric field lagged slightly behind the magnet? what about 50% lightspeed? could this result in 99.9999% perpetual motion? perhaps even a mechanism to create a vortex that amassed an ever increasing amount of energy >>> woooomf <<< just got sucked in a black hole <>
__________________
The Principles of Flight (in full) http://www.poseidons.net/flight/Principlesofflight.htm 
#30




Spinning an electric field at high speeds produces field pulses that travel at a constant speed (that of light). This means that there is a medium that propagates the waves which can act on free electrons in metals or such to produce a voltave sine wave. Spinning a magnet will also produce a wave that travels at the speed of light and will act on the magnetic charactoristic of electrons in conductors. Somehow, these two fields are different and the medium knows how to propagate each at the speed of light. The question is how this is done  magnetism seems to be a vortex of field paarticles and an electric field seems to be just the interraction of nonvortex field particles both of which propagate at the speed of light. Very interresting, because a field vortex should travel slower than the speed of light because it is in a spin mode  and curiosly waves do have a sine wave of energy. Therefore, it seems that wave propagation has a fluid vortex of field particles. Some paradox.

Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  Rate This Thread 


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
From birth to postschooling: It’s all Spin  coberst  General Philosophy  1  07312008 12:33 PM 
The Gods  Garry Denke  Religion  2  05292008 07:19 PM 
There is no Time  whizkidz  Space and Time  91  12132007 12:09 AM 
Old story, New names  Garry Denke  Religion  12  08222007 12:42 AM 
Fair and Balanced?  0ddity  Politics and World Events  49  05052007 06:35 PM 