That's where the quantum gravity issue comes in. It is not clear how general relativity and quantum mechanics interact.
Laws of conservation have to do with this because there is no logic behind "running out of photons" otherwise.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
NO ONE SUSPECTS THE LAMP!
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
x4 Well, not all of the photons will get bent by the gravitational pull; assuming a finite-sized object, the photons travelling the direct path between the centre of the object and the observer will not be bent since the effects of the black hole's pull would get cancelled out.
Of course, following that line of thinking, it would necessarily mean that you wouldn't be able to see that part of the object once it reaches the event horizon, and you'd be able to see less and less of the object's apparent area as time goes on, but parts of it would still be visible to us forever since the last photons would reach us at infinite time.
If I knew how I know everything I know, I'd only be able to know half as much because my brain would be clogged up with where I know it from
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
- The law of conservation of energy says that energy cannot be created ex nihilo or destroyed (notwithstanding scientific proof of the existence of an omnipotent entity — such as the Abrahamic God — that can violate this law, of course); ergo, like all forms of energy, electromagnetic radiation (henceforth referred to as "EMR") has to have a source, whether it's a star, a lamp, or a fire.
- There is no such thing as "infinite energy" in the absence of an "infinite energy source". And as far as science knows, an infinite energy source is purely a thing of the imagination that is only useful for thought experiments involving ideal conditions.
- We see objects because EMR hits the objects and a portion of it is reflected off it (in the human eye's case, EMR obviously has to be in the visible part of the spectrum).
- The smallest quantifiable unit of EMR is the photonnote The energy carried by each and every photon in existence
has an explicitly finite value that is equal to h multiplied by v, where h is Planck's constant and v is the photon's frequency (which is the inverse of its wavelength).
- From the previous points, it's evident that at any given instant, there is a finite quantity of photons (and thus a finite quantity of EMR) hitting an object at any given time, no matter how large or small that amount is. The quantity of photons reflecting off this object is similarly finite, and is only effectively infinite if you manage to acquire an infinite source of photons and ensure that the photons keep hitting the object for an infinite duration of time. If you remove the object from the photons' path (as would happen once its pulled by a black hole past the event horizon), the photons that have yet to make contact with the object will just continue onwards with no change whatsoever (until they encounter something else that induces a change), while the finite amount of photons that were the last to hit the object will continue on the path that was taken by their predecessors.
edited 19th Feb '17 11:17:59 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Sire, please read my previous post with the "finite energy" bit. There is no "minimum energy content" for a photon, as they get redshifted their energy content drops.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Yes, the energy of each photon drops due to redshift, but that's because it's climbing up out of the gravitational well of the black hole (in this particular example). That does not mean that the energy emitted/reflected from the target object is distributed across a larger number of lower energy photons. So the lower energy of each photon ultimately does not effect the number of photon/quantity of light emitted or reflected by the targeted object.
Other than lasers, have we develop other non-physical projectiles?
edited 22nd Feb '17 2:32:34 AM by HallowHawk
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
Microwaves. Weaponized microwaves are used to debilitate large crowds of people. This technology is apparently still being tested and has not been fully implemented yet.
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
Also found out about plasma weapons. It's a for a story of mine, but how do I differentiate between lasers and plasma weapons?
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
The most obvious difference is that plasma inherently has quite a bit of an electric charge, so significantly more electromagnetic effects in general than even electrolasers. At the very least, anything hit by a plasma blast had better be well-insulated against electricity, otherwise any delicate electronics will probably be fried even if the blast only directly hit the external armor.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Ragna the Bloodedge
What kind of clothes are best suited to wear when you are anticipating a battle against someone who can generate an electric charge which happens to be about the strength of an illegal tazer? Also would gold be a hindrance?
I am the white void, I am et cetera, et cetera... THE END HAS COME!
Gold is a better conductor than copper. So, unless that gold is supposed to conduct charge away from principal areas, forget it: burns aren't fun.
Any insulation would be good, but rubber between the character and the ground would be an absolute must. Remember... it's not the charge itself that kills you, but incautious closing of the circuit in which you form a component which does it. 
edited 14th Mar '17 2:53:05 PM by Euodiachloris
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
Metal armor that touches ground but is insulated from the wearer would actually be idea. So a rubber jumpsuit underarmor underneath metallic armor of any kind would work.
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
There's of course what is arguably the most important issue with insulators: No insulator is perfect, and part of the imperfection is that the material will heat up as long as it's resisting an electric current's attempts to conduct through it, which will inevitably lead to the insulator melting down should enough time be allowed to pass under such conditions (inversely proportional to the strength of the current). In other words, make sure that the actual insulator is not only not in physical contact with your body, but is separated from said body by another material that can protect the latter from the former's melted state in the worst-case scenario.
edited 15th Mar '17 7:06:37 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
Or create a path-of-least-resistance. An outer skin of conducting material that touches some large piece of metal or ground.
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
As long as the insulator can dissipate heat fast enough (and there won't be that much heat if it's a good insulator), it's not going to melt no matter how much time passes.
Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore
A question that I can't find the answer for on Google: Is there some kind of formula or diagram that compares the average insolation of a given area over a year - or photovoltaic energy output over a year - to the insolation at a given hour and day of the year?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Ignoring the effect of clouds, the average insolation would be given by the integration of the insolation over a year.
Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore
Divided by the bounds of integration, I presume.
EDIT: Why ignore the effect of clouds, tho?
edited 20th Mar '17 5:36:07 PM by Victin
Well, technically it also work when accounting for the clouds, but you can't make that calculation a priori. Without clouds, it's just geometry.
Worldbuilding is fun, writing is a chore
@Septimus Heap: The relevant theorem is the mean value theorem. Although, really, the idea here is that you can approximate the area under the graph of insolation over time (of a given, fixed place in the world) by a rectangle with one of the sides having the same lenght of the amount of time considered. The mean value theorem simply tells you that there's at least one day of the year had insolation equal to the average insolation, if the conditions of the theorem are satisfied, of course.
Ok, seems like I formulated the question incorrectly. I don't have data on how much insolation - accounting for clouds and the lack of such in a dry summer climate, think interior California - occurs at given days and hours. That is the information I am searching, along with a yearly average.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
Physicists observe 'negative mass'
In this state, particles move extremely slowly, and following behaviour predicted by quantum mechanics, acting like waves.
They also synchronise and move together in what's known as a superfluid, which flows without losing energy.
To create the conditions for negative mass, the researchers used lasers to trap the rubidium atoms and to kick them back and forth, changing the way they spin.
When the atoms were released from the laser trap, they expanded, with some displaying negative mass.
"With negative mass, if you push something, it accelerates toward you," said co-author Michael Forbes, assistant professor of physics at WSU.
He added: "It looks like the rubidium hits an invisible wall."
The technique could be used to better understand the phenomenon, say the researchers.
"What's a first here is the exquisite control we have over the nature of this negative mass, without any other complications," said Dr Forbes.
This heightened control also gives researchers a tool for exploring the possible relationships between negative mass and phenomena observed in the cosmos, such as neutron stars, black holes and dark energy.
If true, that's a major discovery.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
"With negative mass, if you push something, it accelerates toward you"
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
edited 19th Feb '17 3:42:46 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.