Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

That Famous Equation and You
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/30/opinion/30greene.html ^ | September 30, 2005 | BRIAN GREENE

Posted on 10/01/2005 8:10:18 PM PDT by GummyIII

That Famous Equation and You

By BRIAN GREENE

Correction Appended

DURING the summer of 1905, while fulfilling his duties in the patent office in Bern, Switzerland, Albert Einstein was fiddling with a tantalizing outcome of the special theory of relativity he'd published in June. His new insight, at once simple and startling, led him to wonder whether "the Lord might be laughing ... and leading me around by the nose."

But by September, confident in the result, Einstein wrote a three-page supplement to the June paper, publishing perhaps the most profound afterthought in the history of science. A hundred years ago this month, the final equation of his short article gave the world E = mc².

In the century since, E = mc² has become the most recognized icon of the modern scientific era. Yet for all its symbolic worth, the equation's intimate presence in everyday life goes largely unnoticed. There is nothing you can do, not a move you can make, not a thought you can have, that doesn't tap directly into E = mc². Einstein's equation is constantly at work, providing an unseen hand that shapes the world into its familiar form. It's an equation that tells of matter, energy and a remarkable bridge between them.

More here...

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Philosophy; Technical
KEYWORDS: albert; einstein; emc2; equation; physics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-157 next last
To: GoLightly
Ooops, I threw a strange shortcut into my previous response to you, which means I left something out as I did an edit down from all of the stuff I wrote. The "he" I was talking about was my older brother. When we were kids, he was always building something, playing with his wires & he'd put me to work finding parts, which I loved to do, cuz he'd put up with my clueless questions.

Thanks. I wondered about that. I just thought it natural "scatterbrain" writing, like what I do. LOL

121 posted on 10/02/2005 8:17:06 PM PDT by phantomworker (Let freedom ring...What? Did you have stupid for breakfast? And I am not ADHD, I just think quickly!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED
Never studied hair in any depth.

I wouldn't say I studied it in depth, but I did study it.

It gets wider and shorter depending on the humidity.

I've seen curly hair made more manageable with a body-wave type perm, which is not anywhere near as damaging as chemical straightening.

122 posted on 10/02/2005 8:19:27 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

I tried a perm once to help manage my curls (Ahem) frizz.

Went for the soft Irish, redhead curls.

Looked good for about a week.

My hair grows remarkably fast.

Had it trimmed at 2 weeks, salvaged it for about another week.

Was so frustrated that I went from hair down the middle of my back to hair about 1 1/2 inches long.

Just cut it all off.


123 posted on 10/02/2005 8:28:54 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (Nagin Cried, People died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
I should have said mirror image in the major and minor axes. The other mirror images can be fixed with a rotation. I gave a circle.

"Picture a bunch of flat ovals stacked on each other, with a slight offset."

There is no slight offset and the ovals are symmetric. There is no way to develop curvature in the long axes naturally.

Hair consists of a bundles of keratin strands contained in dead cells. The only way to develop natural curl is if there's an asymmetric plane that gives a mirror image that can't be fixed by a rotation. That's a D shape. Cells are missing from one area of an otherwise symmetric cross section, because they are never laid down. The generating cells are missing. the papilla is asymmetric.

"I was told that curly hair was oval shaped,"

Curl is curvature of the long axis. The cells being laid consist of keratin strands, all with the same tension in the long axis. To get curvature of the length the normal tension in the cross section must be asymmetric across some plane that can't be corrected/cancelled by a rotation. Since the cells all have the same tension, some area must be missing cells. That means the papilla is asymmetric-D shaped. That D can also be distorted as an oval, or have more, or less D shape to it.

124 posted on 10/02/2005 8:58:33 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: timer
"This is why the HE4 atom has the highest ionization potential(13.6ev)and is the most stable of all elements.

THe 1st IP of He is ~24.5eV. The 2nd is ~54. 13.6 refers to H. He is stable, because it has a full shell. The effect of nuclear mass and spin is on the order of ~0.02%.

3He3 is a Fermion. 4He is a boson. Boson condensates are super fluid.

"t=dKE?"

This indicates c=Hbar=1 and deltat=deltaEkinetic

125 posted on 10/03/2005 12:53:04 AM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
3He3 is a Fermion. 4He is a boson. Boson condensates are super fluid.

Is there a way to build a boson still?

126 posted on 10/03/2005 1:06:03 AM PDT by The Red Zone (Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I typed "nucleotides" when thinking "neutrons" once.

BWAHAHAHA!! Meant to say I typed "nucleotides" when thinking "nucleons."

127 posted on 10/03/2005 8:05:08 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Yes, I got the ionization of H and He mixed up(grabbing from memory)thanks for the correction. Excellent article in Scientific American some 30 years ago on super fluid Helium 3, you might want to read it. Although He3 is as chemically stable as He4 the nuclear magnetic moment means it can flow, as pairs, something like cooper pair electrons. You also got t=dKE right : time is the rate of kinetic energy release. Next step : t=dKE=m, either inertial or gravitational mass; do you know where this is leading?
128 posted on 10/03/2005 9:35:00 AM PDT by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
" Is there a way to build a boson still?"

I don't think so. He forms the only liquid condensates I know of. The rest are gasses.

129 posted on 10/03/2005 10:35:30 AM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: timer
Right, spin paired 3He is superfluid.

"do you know where this is leading?

No.

130 posted on 10/03/2005 10:42:18 AM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: GummyIII

One day (hopefully before 2014 when the big cloud gets here)you'll close the door to your space ship - have a glass of orange juice and open the door on Mars or somewhere in the Andromeda Galaxy. Light speed to the travelor is instant.


131 posted on 10/03/2005 10:44:17 AM PDT by sandydipper (Less government is best government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

You seem to be well versed in physics, thus someone I can have an intelligent conversation with. t=dKE=m in words is : time is delta kinetic energy is mass, either inertial or gravitational. Can we agree on that? Or as I say in my "time prize" offer : $1000 cash to the first person to demonstrate a time event that is NOT a kinetic energy event. In 20 years of asking, no winners yet... Ok then, do you know what MATTER WAVES are? No, NOT bose-photon electromagnetic waves, the waves that accompany every fermion; hidden, invisible MATTER WAVES, or the "wave function" that physicists often obliquely refer to. That's the next link in the chain. Also, why are the terms "delta momentum" and "rest mass" oxmorons?


132 posted on 10/03/2005 12:28:40 PM PDT by timer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: JustDoItAlways
and the acceleration is simply the speed of light (the speed of the electro-magnetic spectrum) squared.

Please post your reponses to my previous inquiry about the units in which acceleration is measured, and the units in which the speed of light squared are measured to the thread; I'm not looking for a personal FReepmail dialog, thank you very much.

If you don't post your response, I'll be happy to post your Freepmail to me here on the thread, in lieu of a reply from you. Unless you post otherwise here on the thread, I will assume I have your consent.

133 posted on 10/04/2005 10:34:44 AM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

Actually, very little of the plant mass (actually an unmeasurably small amount) comes from direct conversion of solar energy to mass. Most of the increase in plant mass comes from the conversion of carbon dioxide and water into sugars which the plant uses for growth.


134 posted on 10/04/2005 11:34:34 AM PDT by stremba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

Go ahead.

And post whatever criticism / counter-point you have as well.


135 posted on 10/04/2005 7:19:32 PM PDT by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: JustDoItAlways; RightWhale; Doctor Stochastic; PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer; snarks_when_bored; ...
This was your response via Feepmail to my reply #79 to you:

From JustDoItAlways | 10/04/2005 9:17:48 AM EDT read

C Squared is a measure of Acceleration.

C = 186,000 miles / second

C^2 = 186,000 miles / second * 186,000 / second

C^2 = 34,596,000,000 miles / second^2

C^2 = 34,596,000,000 miles / second / second

(which is a measure of acceleration)

Which doesn't seem to make sense does it? The E Energy which pushes light, also accelerates it at the speed of light. How can the speed remain constant when it constantly accelerating as well?

Maybe another way to look at it is light is actually a quantum wave. The Photons jump from wave peak to wave peak. Perhaps light is actually constantly being accelerated from position A (wave peak 1) to position B (wave peak 2) at the same speed of light.

Perhaps I just broke new ground by tying quantum physics to Einstein's physics to Newton's physics.

F=MA = E=MC^2 in the quantum world.

By the way, I have a degree in Math.

Rather post my own comments at this time, I'm simply going to post a little something off the web for you to think about and reflect upon in light of your response to my homework assignment.

The Quantity Calculus
The basic principle necessary for the meaningful use of real physical quantities in algebraic equations is called the quantity calculus, although it has no connection with the mathematical procedures of the differential and integral calculus. The principle of the quantity calculus is this:

Whenever physical quantities are used in algebraic equations, all mathematical operations are performed alike upon the quantity and upon the unit.

If this principle is followed correctly, then the result of the mathematical operation will always produce an answer which has both the correct quantity and the correct unit.

source: www.psigate.ac.uk/newsite/reference/plambeck/chem1/p01019a.htm

I know reiterate your original statement, as well as my questions in response:

...and the acceleration is simply the speed of light (the speed of the electro-magnetic spectrum) squared.

Homework assignment:

What units is speed measured in?

In what units is acceleration measured in?

If you square a speed, what units is speed measured in?

Would you care to make any corrections at this time?

136 posted on 10/04/2005 8:27:30 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
know => now
137 posted on 10/04/2005 8:29:14 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

The pion-beam cancer therapy machines also confirm the equation. (And time-dilation, to boot.)


138 posted on 10/04/2005 8:32:03 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone

You might refer to Ronald Reagan's movie, "Bedtime for Bosons."


139 posted on 10/04/2005 8:36:48 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

It's called a "calculus" because "calculus" means "pebble" in Latin.


140 posted on 10/04/2005 8:39:10 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-157 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson