Big Bang theory and matters astronomical

[Buddy]

Sorry to pedantic here guys but rest assured the world does not end on Thursday, unless we get hit by a big rock that is. It is actually a few weeks from now when CERN turns on the second partical beam to collide head on with the first beam (which is the one being turned on this Thursday). Nothing happens until then. So you have plenty of time to get some more trades done.

 

[Pat]

Nice little video for anyone interested about the LHC.

http://www.video.news.com.au?vxSiteId=164be818-84c2-4715-b29e-2db589f12564&vxChannel=frontPagePicks&vxClipId=938888&vxBitrate=300

And the one of the main article's on NEWS.com is-

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24317385-5014239,00.html

Death threats... pffft.

 

[spooly74]

Saw these photos on another forum.

Never seen anything like it, looks like the clouds are on fire.

 

[Pat]

Looks like a very nice sunset

 

[Pat]

I've been pondering a potential paradox (in my mind).

At Zero Kelvin (absolute zero.. theorised) all movement stops. I'm going back to yr 11 chemistry here.

However electrons move 'more' freely (without much resistance) at temps close to 0c Kelvin. Do electrons stop moving to at absolute zero?

 

[spooly74]

I guess in theory yes, but then they`d have no energy which can`t happen.

 

[brianlc]

Had to share this website:

http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/

 

[wayneL]

LHC from the perspective of Electric Universe proponents:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/thornhill.htm

 

[xyzedarteerf]

our own curiosity might only bring our own inevitable end.

 

[2020hindsight]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/14/2363914.htm?section=justin

Hackers claim they have broken into the computer system of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the mega-machine designed to expose secrets of the cosmos, British newspapers are reporting.

A group calling itself the Greek Security Team left a rogue web page mocking the technicians responsible for computer security at the giant atom smasher as "schoolkids", the Times and Daily Telegraph reported.

The hackers vow they have no intention of disrupting the experiment at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) on the Swiss-French border, they just wanted to highlight the flaws in the computer system's security.

no intention of disrupting .. phew

(then why do it ... OK they make a point I guess . )

"We're pulling your pants down because we don't want to see you running around naked looking to hide yourselves when the panic comes," they wrote, according to the Daily Telegraph.

James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN, told the Times says there does not seem to be any harm done.

"We don't know who they were but there seems to be no harm done. It appears to be people who want to make a point that CERN was hackable," he said.

PS (on second thoughts) maybe it's a reminder to us all. . For instance, I personally think that those really powerful long range wireless hubs for home computer systems are a mistake .

 

[white_crane]

I've been pondering a potential paradox (in my mind).

At Zero Kelvin (absolute zero.. theorised) all movement stops. I'm going back to yr 11 chemistry here.

However electrons move 'more' freely (without much resistance) at temps close to 0c Kelvin. Do electrons stop moving to at absolute zero?

Absolute zero is theoretically impossible since it requires the presence of a body that is at a temperature below absolute zero.

 

[wayneL]

Absolute zero is theoretically impossible since it requires the presence of a body that is at a temperature below absolute zero.

So the absolute lowest temperature is above 0 kelvin; that would be the de facto absolute zero and ipso facto, absolute zero.

But then that temperature would require the presence of a body that is at a temperature below the ipso facto absolute zero.... which is... impossible?



Why am I wrong with this logic?

 

[white_crane]

So the absolute lowest temperature is above 0 kelvin; that would be the de facto absolute zero and ipso facto, absolute zero.

But then that temperature would require the presence of a body that is at a temperature below the ipso facto absolute zero.... which is... impossible?



Why am I wrong with this logic?

Absolute zero is a theoretical construct. It is the lowest temperature theoretically possible. It is a limit.

Example of a limit: The limit of 1/x, x -> infinity is zero. However it will never quite reach zero (only an infinitely small number).

 

[wayneL]

Absolute zero is a theoretical construct. It is the lowest temperature theoretically possible. It is a limit.

Example of a limit: The limit of 1/x, x -> infinity is zero. However it will never quite reach zero (only an infinitely small number).

I know what AZ is. But have a look at my logic. It's obviously flawed, but why?

 

[2020hindsight]

when you're that cold, your brain doesn't work properly?

 

[Pat]

Absolute zero is theoretically impossible...

It is the lowest temperature theoretically possible.

You speak in tongues Yoda.

I understand zero kelvin is theorised limit, not so sure if you need a body "colder" than zero kelvin, I assumed (I mean I thought I learned) it was an absence of energy... all energy.

And thus my post on electrons and the resistance created by matter at lower temps... You know what I'm getting at?

 

[Pat]

Why am I wrong with this logic?

Because It's before the fact???

 

[wayneL]

Because It's before the fact???

I don't know! LOL

Going on WC assumptions, there seemed to be a loop, like when you have a mirror in front and a mirror behind.

Ignore.

 

[2020hindsight]

Absolute zero is a theoretical construct. It is the lowest temperature theoretically possible. It is a limit.

Example of a limit: The limit of 1/x, x -> infinity is zero. However it will never quite reach zero (only an infinitely small number).

1. Reminds me of the frog who lines up at the start of a 100m track.

In his first jump he jumps 50m,
then half the remainder, (25m),
then half the remainder, (12.5m) etc

Will he ever reach the end?
I mean, he will always have half the remaining distance to go ?

2. Suppose his forward speed is constant (say 50m / min) , so that each jump is made in half the time of the previous one.

In his first jump he jumps 50m, = 1 min
then half the remainder, (25m), = 0.5 min
then half the remainder, (12.5m) = 0.25 min. etc

Will he ever reach the end?


3. But hang on!! lol
If his speed is constant (at 50m/min) - of course he will reach the end !
and it will take 2 minutes

(and 2 mins later he'll be a further 100m etc )

 

[Speewha]

Hello,

Do you guys think that Zero Kevin would be better than Zero Kelvin.

My Brain stops working with one Kevin.


Regards