This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Ununnilium: That graphic
◊ is way too huge.
Citizen: xbox hueg, even. I'm going to replace it.
The Grim Sleeper: The speed of light is 300000 KIL Ometers per second, not the given meter per second (and yes that is a big difference), though the calculation for c^2 is correct. Also perhaps the amount of joules requered to create a kilo of mass could be fully writen out, and a comparison given to how much energy that is. So that would be 90000000000000000 joules for every kilogram of mass. For comparison: lifting said kilo 10 cm of the ground is about 1 joule, or the amount of calories (also a unit of energy, 1 calorie = 4,1868 joules) in about 346153846154000 liters of beer.
Lull The Conqueror: Ooops, left off three zeros when I was writing it out. Fixed now.
Avatar Zero: I love the link (http://ericpoulton.blogspot.com/2007/02/steampunk-star-wars-lord-vader.html)
, but I think just a straight link to Steampunk is better here.
Snoof "[photons] the elementary particles of energy that are officially defined as matter" They darn well aren't. They're electromagnetic wavepackets - zero rest mass, and in the Standard Model are point particles - zero volume. From the article Matter on Wikipedia: "In common usage, matter is anything that has both mass and volume (takes up space)." Also, they're the elementary particles of light/electromagnetic radiation (or if you prefer the Standard Model, the gauge bosons for the Electromagnetic Interaction) not energy. I'm going to go ahead and change this unless someone wants to argue.
rsm109: Whilst we're on points of physics, nuclear weapons don't convert matter into energy. Antimatter weapons (which perhaps thankfully only exist in theory) do. Nuclear weapons work by converting nuclear potential energy into heat, in the same way that conventional explosives convert chemical potential energy into heat.
Uzytkownik: "Energy is formally defined as the capacity to do work" - well I think I disagree. Imagine a universe which have 2 5 Me V photons. Total energy is 10 Me V but no work can be done. "Energy is not something you can, for example, pick up and put in your pocket." since energy is mass (I mean relativistic mass - not rest mass) you can literary pick enrgy (in form of stone) and put in your pocket. Uzytkownik: @rsm109: since the energy is mass than if you 'weight' (ok. find out the mass ;)) the all nucleus before and after in fuel you will notice (given precise instruments) a net loss in mass. Which is equal to energy gain + losses over c^2 (of course the lost mass will appear in form of increase in mass of alpha, beta or gamma particles). Similary Antimatter weapons would 'only' differ in sense they converts total mass into photons. But the mass of gamma particles emitted will be no less no more then the matter and anti-matter destroyed. So "convert matter into energy" occures either in any case of weapon or never.
- ThisMaleTroper: Just a minor technical point, but does the absolute zero thing really count as an example of scientific Research lacking? I mean, it's just about impossible to achieve, but it does in all technicality exist.
