really basic physics question - what am I missing

[John Goodin]

Could there be a little more to the question or the choice of answers? Since the person is moving a 240 m per minute, which would equate to a total of 480 m in 2 minutes.

[Ian Moone]

I am the Alpha and the Omega - the Beginning and the End.

Alpha = 1/137th
Omega = Infinity.

Time on an atom passes much faster than time at the earth level does.
Why is it that in the "time zone" of the nucleus of an atom, "time" seems to "slow down" so that the "measured velocity" of the electron appears to be only 1/137th the speed of light?
But the electron's behavior seems to be that it is everywhere around the atom at the same time (electron shell), or has a "virtual velocity" of infinity?.
The physical constant alpha turns out to be equal to 1/137.

So ahh Whats the speed of light in an atom?

& more importantly, at the atomic level, if a person covers 2 meters per second, for a period of 2 minutes what distance will they cross?

& Will it be the same distance on Mars and Pluto?

All good questions huh?

Why would we measure "distance" in relation to gravitational spins of the earth (seconds or fractions of a 24 hour rotation of the earth about its own axis)?

If the earth spun 2 times faster, than it does now, what distance would be covered then in 2 minutes? Answer - 240 meters not 480 meters.

The question makes absolutely no sense...

It's like kicking your cat, coz your dog won't stop barking!

It's like asking "If I travel 100km/hour in my car, how tall am I?"

Like I said - what is Time?

Answer THAT riddle before attempting to work on speed & distance calculations!.

What if in that question in the first minute - the guy walks up to the international date line &crosses it at exactly 60 seconds... and for the duration the second minute he walks onwards in a totally new time zone... how far has he walked in those two minutes now @ 4 meters per second?, if the new time zone is Perth, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, time +8 hrs and 30 minutes ahead of GMT time that he started out in for the first of the 2 minutes?

He COULD have walked for a period of 8 hrs and 32 minutes or 1024 meters if he crossed a time zone!.

How far did he go if he walked against the direction of spin of the earth?

The question is not a question - the question is in fact as stupid as the incorrect answers given.

How would you consider velocity to be something that's a factor of distance and gravity?

If the guys was a victim of "honey I shrunk the kids" - time passes on the nucleus of an atom at only 1/137th the rate so instead of 240 meters - he'd only cover 1.75 meters in the allotted time!

The problems not that the answers wrong the problem is that the question is wrong.

Einstein and Michelson - Morley between them with the analogue light speed experiment "experimental design flaw" and non peer reviewed mathematically incorrect "special relativity theorem" have led science astray for over 100 years now.

It's "Time" to wake up....

What does God promise the faithful? Everlasting life / immortality?

Whats prophesied to come at the end in revelations...?

The time of the end?

or

The end of "Time" (and its dominion over mankind)?

If we truly understood time (and the energy contained therein) - would we not become as "time lords" of the Dr Who variety? (Hint Immortal?).

Clues have been there all along.

Alpha (1/137).
Omega (infinity).
End of "Time" (and its dominion over mankind) i.e. immortality!.

Who'd a thunk it eh?

All it takes is "understanding"!

To Master time you would first have to understand what time is.... and as long as we continue to confuse time with gravity (in energy terms) because we measure it with clocks - the longer we will remain mortal & earth bound due to gravity.

Yet most people can't even "see" the gravity of the situation.... in effect "time is running out" to grasp the true reality state!.

Einsteins "emperors invisible new clothes" still has most everyone fooled!.

'Cept a few of us of course. Mostly those of us who "furthered their physics education" sitting on the bench outside the principles office for being disruptive in physics class!. Probably some of the best pondering time I ever spent - the teacher actually did me a favor... course telling her (in front of the class) that I wasn't going to take any more of her "metaphorical urinating down my leg - while telling me its raining" crapola about Einstein & his special relativity bunkum, didn't endear me any to the teacher!.

Principle was pretty good about it tho.... coz all I asked was him to disprove me... Eventually he and I played Golf together during those weekly physics classes!. We agreed to disagree & decided it was better use of Both our time, than me sitting on the bench outside his office and him pretending to chastise me every week!.

You know to this day I believe that:-

Those who can! - do!
Those who can't? - teach!

[Dan Hintz]

I am the Alpha and the Omega - the Beginning and the End.

Alpha = 1/137th
Omega = Infinity.



So ahh Whats the speed of light in an atom?

& more importantly, at the atomic level, if a person covers 2 meters per second, for a period of 2 minutes what distance will they cross?

& Will it be the same distance on Mars and Pluto?

All good questions huh?

Why would we measure "distance" in relation to gravitational spins of the earth (seconds or fractions of a 24 hour rotation of the earth about its own axis)?

If the earth spun 2 times faster, than it does now, what distance would be covered then in 2 minutes? Answer - 240 meters not 480 meters.

The question makes absolutely no sense...

It's like kicking your cat, coz your dog won't stop barking!

It's like asking "If I travel 100km/hour in my car, how tall am I?"

The distance being asked for is in terms of a relative frame of reference. I cannot recall anyone I know (from middle school dropout to multi-degreed engineer) making an assumption otherwise and trying to first determine how the frame of reference is moving.

Forest for the trees.

But I think I'll stop replying, or even reading, as I can see the questions being asked always assume the most obtuse possible options as the question's premise.

[Malcolm McLeod]

I live on earth. And since I am blissfully unaware of human travel to Mars, to Pluto, to atoms, or even to some rapidly spinning fictional neo-earth, so may I safely (& blissfully) assume the OP, the test questioner, the test taker, and even the person executing the walking (as stated at many orders of magnitude less than light speed) also live here. Using this earthly frame of reference, we can safely negate sub-atomic quantum effects and the time bending properties of galactic scale gravity - - and calculate the change in position of our subject person at the requested deltaT.

Newton's equations work very well to estimate position-velocity-acceleration relationships on this level. Sometimes 'close enough' is allowed.

I can only guess where Mr. Moone's cat and dog live. Or, how tall he is.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Anybody here made a perpetual motion machine lately?

!!ROFLMAO!! Priceless.

[John Stankus]

You know to this day I believe that:-

Those who can! - do!
Those who can't? - teach!

..........must not respond......mmph..... must not respond.......

John

"Don't try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it irritates the pig" Anthony de Mello, S.J.

[Frederick Skelly]

[QUOTE=John Stankus;
"Don't try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it irritates the pig" Anthony de Mello, S.J.[/QUOTE]

Great one John - ROFL - because it's sooo true on so many levels.

(Pigs especially hate physics, BTW. )

[Barry McFadden]

Ian Moone

• View Profile
• View Forum Posts
• Private Message
• View Blog Entries
• View Articles
• Add as Contact
• Send Email

Member


Join DateNov 2013Posts17

What medium are they moving at a constant speed of 4 meters per second in?

For example - moving upstream at 4m/second, in a river flowing downstream at 2 meters per second - would equal a "speed over ground" of only 2 meters per second!


I'M no Physics scholar but I disagree with this statement...If you are moving at 4m/sec over the ground it doesn't matter that the water is moving at 2m/sec against you...the ground isn't moving so you are still moving at 4m/sec...if you were on an escalator that was going at 2m/sec against you then that would be a different story

[Ian Moone]

moving upstream at 4m/second, in a river flowing downstream at 2 meters per second - would equal a "speed over ground" of only 2 meters per second!

&

I'M no Physics scholar but I disagree with this statement...If you are moving at 4m/sec over the ground it doesn't matter that the water is moving at 2m/sec against you...the ground isn't moving so you are still moving at 4m/sec...if you were on an escalator that was going at 2m/sec against you then that would be a different story

You have altered what was said then argued in favor of the altered statement.

Maybe try reading it again, the problem here, isn't with the math, it's with the 3 r's (Readin', ritin', and rith-ma-tic) (or maybe comprehension).

IN a vessel, (boat / ship) speed (knots) doesn't always equate to 'speed over ground' (ocean bed/stream bed/river bed) - first you have to add or subtract the effects of wind, waves, current & tide etc to get the resultant SOG (Speed Over Ground).

The original statement never had 'speed over ground' of 4 meters/second, it just had a stated speed.

You added that bit - which changes the statement completely.

If indeed there is an ether of space, and if indeed space is a seething mass of varying energy densities - then you'd have to do the exact same with the question of the OP... first determine the relative velocity of the space ether your moving thru - to determine the SOG.

Michellson Morelys linear light speed experiment, didn't do this, due to experimental design flaw of returning light beams 180 degrees along their own pathway by employment of 100% silvered mirrors, which as the 2 speedboats in a flowing river example shows - cancels out any velocity of the river effect on speed over ground (and thus the same with space ether - if it indeed exists)!.

I am still listening - have provided plenty of supporting discussion & yet thus far no one has dis-proven one thing I have suggested.

Patronizing statements like hundreds (thousands) of scientists would have discovered this before now, or I am a physics school teacher and you should study to understand the topic better don't wash!

If your a physics teacher (etc) - disprove what I've posted!

[Dan Hintz]

I think the OP has had his question answered... probably time for this one to be put to bed.

[Pat Barry]

I agree. When simple mathematics becomes a black hole, something has gone incredibly askew.

[Steve Schlumpf]

I believe this thread has run its course.