Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Put down the gun PWB!!!! You have too much to live for!!!!!
Anyway, it is difficult to predict the "when" for any major development unless that "when" is going to happen in the next few years. That is what bothers buisnessmen the most about science, you can't SCHEDULE breakthroughs, so you cannot depend, or market them ahead of schedule. This is not Sid Meyers universe here!
One set of books I would recommend for ALL of you on this thread would be Red Mars (and its sequels) by Kim Stanley Robertson. Some interesting feasable scientific advancements are woven into the story as the scientific, and political, world of Mars is developed. One of the best reads I have had on the (fictional) subject.
Actually, the whole thing is the wave-partical duality thing. The fact that particles, even released one at a time, will produce interference patterns on walls when projected through a grate.
Leads me to believe that "time" is not a dimension anymore once you reach light speed. I am not talking about distention and all that other funky stuff, but simply that time may be the thing that gives the other dimensions their meaning....
I gotta stop thinking philosophical science at work!!!!
I mean the cat in the box paradox also applies to particles i.e. quantom whatever...LOL(mechanics).....at least for this moment cause you can't be sure about it...... I remember doing that light experiment at Penn State in Physics 252(or a similar number..LOL) Lab course.
Pit, engineer here (Modern Physics was not my forte, classical is what propelled me).
But the one other thing I remember being talked about somewhere was something like splitting a particle. When one half was taken somewhere else, anything that was exposed to the one half effected the other faster than even light was supposed to travel.
Forgive my own crossing fact with well written fiction, but have you heard of this too? This may not help us with, as I said before, moving our definition of mass around, but it may make communication instantaneous regardless of distance. THAT would be incredible. Real-time remote control of landers and probes with no need to point the antenna at the required object.
Down side? One remote, one control, that's it. Lose it, or the particle in question......
My economic point is REALLY simple..... It has been 30+years to get to where we are now.... It will take another 30+ years before, IMHO, to reach the point where utility companies can make a profit from a fusion energy plant. The only other option would be to shove a massive rate hike down the throats of the consumer.
I have no interest in your age. No, really, I don't care how old you are. And since you object, well then I withdraw my wish and blessing for you to have a long and healthy life. I was attempting to be polite and offer you my wish that you live long enough to see fusion power on America's power grid. I know I won't live that long, Period. It ain't going to happen in my lifetime.
I apologize for getting hot....however I meant, as you know, energy break-even. I do not put a price on such important research.And I was not referring to economic factors.
Pit, engineer here (Modern Physics was not my forte, classical is what propelled me).
But the one other thing I remember being talked about somewhere was something like splitting a particle. When one half was taken somewhere else, anything that was exposed to the one half effected the other faster than even light was supposed to travel.
Forgive my own crossing fact with well written fiction, but have you heard of this too? This may not help us with, as I said before, moving our definition of mass around, but it may make communication instantaneous regardless of distance. THAT would be incredible. Real-time remote control of landers and probes with no need to point the antenna at the required object.
Down side? One remote, one control, that's it. Lose it, or the particle in question......
I remember reading in a journal about the instaneous communication...I think you are about right with the particle and/or wave duality and that with quantum mechanics may make that possible; and I could very well have this wrong.
I work in Nursing, but originally went to university for Earth Science/Geography. I just love science, especially Cosmology and Fusion Power(explains my overaction; but come on...LOL)
I am positive however that it is theoritically possible. Engineer....can't compete with that.....you must be good at math...i.e. Calculus....though the Algebra, to solve the Calculus equations, got me every time.....LOL. I added #4 FUSION POWER LINKS in a previous post.
Last edited by PITTSTON2SARASOTA; 10-16-2009 at 08:37 PM..
Here's a movie of a test ignition of a Tokamak design; the sequence takes place inside a torus(hollowed out doughnut...LOL)... YouTube - 4mn 25s world record discharge . There are also other Fusion Power Reactor designs. And you saw it here first......LOL.
Last edited by PITTSTON2SARASOTA; 10-16-2009 at 11:27 PM..
My economic point is REALLY simple..... It has been 30+years to get to where we are now.... It will take another 30+ years before, IMHO, to reach the point where utility companies can make a profit from a fusion energy plant. The only other option would be to shove a massive rate hike down the throats of the consumer.
I have no interest in your age. No, really, I don't care how old you are. And since you object, well then I withdraw my wish and blessing for you to have a long and healthy life. I was attempting to be polite and offer you my wish that you live long enough to see fusion power on America's power grid. I know I won't live that long, Period. It ain't going to happen in my lifetime.
You are referencing quantum entanglement and the EPR paradox. Let say a particle decays into two other particles. Each of these two particles must have equal and opposite spin. However you don't know the spin at the time of decay, but you measure the spin of one particle after the two particles have been traveling for some time. The question is did the measurement of one of those particles cause the other particle to collapse to a known spin or did the spin of each particle exist at the moment of creation.
The most likely reality is quantum entanglement(instant communication) is a non-existant phenomenon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Engineer....can't compete with that.....you must be good at math...i.e. Calculus....though the Algebra, to solve the Calculus equations, got me every time.....LOL. I added #4 FUSION POWER LINKS in a previous post.
