Problems In Physics

[Rye]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?
Like there was that big thing about the bumblebee, what was all that about?
So i'd just like to know about problems with our current/recent views of physics that have been answered or are still unanswered.

[InnerBrat]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?
Like there was that big thing about the bumblebee, what was all that about?

Ahh, the bumble bee.
Now, I haven't checked out this myth recently, but as I understand it, it fails to take inot account that the bee is very small. Bascially, the bee couldn't fly if it was scaled up ismetrically

Insects live in completely different world to us, due to having very small Re numbers.

[Trytostaydead]

We are limited, in all sciences, by what we can see (observe) and imagine.

Such as the basic atom. A long time ago it was proposed that atoms make up all living things, took a few thousand years to prove. Then we discovered the atom was made up of smaller particles. Then those particles were made up of smaller particles.. and so on and so on.

We wouldn't have understood neurotransmitters unless one genius had a dream one night about an experiment he had to run, he pulled on a coat and ran to his lab.

Penicillin was an accident and it ushered in a whole new era of medicine.

And the list goes on. What we can learn is limited by what we can imagine. What we can prove is limited by what we can see. What else we can learn is limited by the two above.

[InnerBrat]

Ok, here's one:

in The Globe: The Science of the Discworld II by Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, the authors claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a true law, only an approximation, since it violates Newtons Laws of Motion - essentiallt, 2LoT only applies in one vector along time, while NLM are time-reversible.

How reliable is this account (I didn't understand the book)?

[Trytostaydead]

Ok, here's one:

in The Globe: The Science of the Discworld II by Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, the authors claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a true law, only an approximation, since it violates Newtons Laws of Motion - essentiallt, 2LoT only applies in one vector along time, while NLM are time-reversible.

How reliable is this account (I didn't understand the book)?

Don't ask me, I hate physics

[TheDarkOne]

2nd law of thermodynamics is based on probability. So I would suppose what they're saying is that its only true as time goes to infinity (ie an arbitrarily large number(what a 'large' number would depend on what you're talking about)). Sort of like how the results from a probability experiment will look allot more like the expected value the more times you do the experiment.

[von Neufeld]

Ok, here's one:

in The Globe: The Science of the Discworld II by Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, the authors claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a true law, only an approximation, since it violates Newtons Laws of Motion - essentiallt, 2LoT only applies in one vector along time, while NLM are time-reversible.

How reliable is this account (I didn't understand the book)?

I can't find the exact passage you are talking about so I can't comment on their argument, but the fact the 2LoT is a approximative law is correct.

The limitations of the second law are:
1. Requires that the system is able to reach equilibirum.
2. Requires that there is no interaction between the particles in a system besides those that arise from standard collision interactions. That means no significant long-range interactions and no transformative interactions.

This means ofcourse that the concept of entropy and the 2LoT has no meaning on a cosmic scale.

[DarthBlight]

As far as bumblebees go, from what I heard from a friend of mine a long time ago (so do not quote me on it) is that originally, it was thought that all insects flew the same way small birds fly. And the size of a bumblebee would make such a thing impossible with the wings it had. Later it was found that bumblebees fly in the same manner as a helicopter. The wings (or rotor in the case of a helicopter) lift the body up and direction is determined by the tilt of the body.

[InnerBrat]

As far as bumblebees go, from what I heard from a friend of mine a long time ago (so do not quote me on it) is that originally, it was thought that all insects flew the same way small birds fly. And the size of a bumblebee would make such a thing impossible with the wings it had. Later it was found that bumblebees fly in the same manner as a helicopter. The wings (or rotor in the case of a helicopter) lift the body up and direction is determined by the tilt of the body.

Actually, insects technically don't fly, they swim, becasue air to them is so viscous.

[Wicked Pilot]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?

One of the biggest problems in cosmology is an appearant discrepency between the age of the universe and the age of some stars. Measurements taken indicate that some stars are older than the universe itself. This is quite a big mystery.

[Darth Wong]

The biggest problem with science is the constant state of siege from creationist fucknuts who have no grasp of logic, and who think that any imperfect theory is de facto proof of the existence of God.

[Rye]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?

One of the biggest problems in cosmology is an appearant discrepency between the age of the universe and the age of some stars. Measurements taken indicate that some stars are older than the universe itself. This is quite a big mystery.

That's made the orange curious!

[Durandal]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?

One of the biggest problems in cosmology is an appearant discrepency between the age of the universe and the age of some stars. Measurements taken indicate that some stars are older than the universe itself. This is quite a big mystery.

This problem was resolved a few years ago, if memory serves.

[Durandal]

Ok, here's one:

in The Globe: The Science of the Discworld II by Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, the authors claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a true law, only an approximation, since it violates Newtons Laws of Motion - essentiallt, 2LoT only applies in one vector along time, while NLM are time-reversible.

Except that he forgot that Newton's laws themselves are only approximations. We don't judge theories based on whether they follow Newton's laws anymore; we use the general and special theories of relativity. All of science is approximation. Very few things are said to be exact. Once we have an understanding of reversible time dimensions, then we can revise our understanding of entropy.

Aside from that, the second law of thermodynamics has stood up to numerous tests for its validity.

[AdmiralKanos]

Ok, here's one:

in The Globe: The Science of the Discworld II by Ian Stewart and Jack Cohen, the authors claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is not a true law, only an approximation, since it violates Newtons Laws of Motion - essentiallt, 2LoT only applies in one vector along time, while NLM are time-reversible.

How reliable is this account (I didn't understand the book)?

That doesn't make any sense at all. Newton's Laws of Motion are only 100% time-reversible if you assume 100% efficiency, which is ludicrous and which is precisely what the Second Law of Thermodynamics addresses. Calculations made using that assumption are used for the purpose of idealized scenarios and determination of upper or lower limits.

However, if you simply incorporate an ineffiency term into a realistic application of Newton's Laws of Motion, you will see that a kinematics situation is not completely time-reversible, hence there is no contradiction with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. I don't know what these two authors were smoking, but it must have been powerful stuff.

[phongn]

I just wondered what have been "problems in physics" be them creationist bullshit or whatever, that have now been explained / not?
Like there was that big thing about the bumblebee, what was all that about?

Ahh, the bumble bee.
Now, I haven't checked out this myth recently, but as I understand it, it fails to take inot account that the bee is very small. Bascially, the bee couldn't fly if it was scaled up ismetrically

Insects live in completely different world to us, due to having very small Re numbers.

IIRC, bees also make pit stops on most of the flowers they land on so that they keep enough energy to fly.

[kojikun]

One of the biggest problems in cosmology is an appearant discrepency between the age of the universe and the age of some stars. Measurements taken indicate that some stars are older than the universe itself. This is quite a big mystery.

Excession. O_O