No. The shrinkage is due to getting them wet.
Posted on 07/07/2010 9:06:34 PM PDT by smokingfrog
No, silly, that’s the other end of time... a few seconds before the big crunch.
LOL.
Of course.
But that takes all the fun out of it! LOL.
You can't be serious. Have you read the posts?
There are Charm Quarks, and there are Lucky Charms Quarks.
No, but time-space in the region near a black hole does.
I don't think you can say that. The electrons make quantum transitions between orbits, which is emphatically not the case for planets orbiting stars!
Actually (you know what that word means) , it is all four.
The proton is a low-inflated bouncing ball.
Goes from peanut to capsule to sphere to torus, bouncing along the electric highway. The bouncing motion describes a wave path along a straight line.
Not really. I lied. I DO understand it. It’s just my ewoks look at me funny when I try to explain it.
I like the ones that hang like a mobile on a babybed. You know, the one's you wind up and they go round and round?
No. The shrinkage is due to getting them wet.
Well, that all depends on where you mark the point.
Does what?
I'd go back and listen to what I said, but my time machine won't work because they just found out protons are 4% smaller than we thought.
LOLOL!
Maybe they do, maybe they don't.
which is emphatically not the case for planets orbiting stars!
Are you sure?
The point was that the methodology and technology used is almost the same. Just on a different scale. Quantum Theory is just a theory. Doesn't mean it's right. Maybe it's just our limited understanding, and technology that result in us having to readjust the laws we make, because we find out we weren't accurate about the data.
Well, this thread seems to be the place to do that.
I DO understand it.
I promise not to tell.
Are you sure they don’t? Perhaps the quanta are so small relative to the object that they have the appearance of being continuous.
“Or, if the Rydberg constant is correct, the smaller size of a proton could mean the equations in QED theory will fail to work.
That’s ok. We’ll just make up a new theory.”
Which is what separates physics from “global warming” as a science.. if the evidence doesn’t work, then the theory gets tossed.. with GW, it goes the other way around.. Theory doesn’t work? toss all evidence that says it doesnt!
Um...the “spider web” or “chain link” kind?
Spider web fishnets would definitely cheer me up.
And what the heck is the over-sized steering wheel for anyway? For when he gets bored?
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.