One for FWL - Quantum Physics

[mildmanneredjanitor]

Wow, a bit of an off the wall conversation for a DIY forum. I am wondering where mildmannered is going to work particle physics (and quantum physics) into his new pricing policy!

For particle or quantum physics, I will use ball 'quark' figures!


For everything else I use chaos theory like every one else!

 

[AdamW]

Geologists have the shear gall to mock a true science..hethan bar stewards

You're right there, geology doesn't even have proper sums in it!

You know what, in a few hundred years from now a typical home power supply probably will need someone equivalent to a physics professor to work on it. Not withstanding IEE/EU wiring regs of course!

Just think how many qualifications a fully qualified electrician has now compared to 100 years ago!

Rocks will all still be the same, mind

 

[AdamW]

For particle or quantum physics, I will use ball 'quark' figures!

... Now that is a tachy(on) joke if ever I heard one

(Do I keep my prize for worst joke on DIYnot? )

 

[mildmanneredjanitor]

For particle or quantum physics, I will use ball 'quark' figures!

... Now that is a tachy(on) joke if ever I heard one

(Do I keep my prize for worst joke on DIYnot? )

No, cos you 'lepton' my bandwagon!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

How strange....

 

[mildmanneredjanitor]

All known leptons have a negative or neutral charge. There are 6 types of lepton, 3 of which are negative, the other 3 neutral.

 

[AdamW]

I have a "strong" feeling that I should give up in the "gravity" of this situation. I am afraid I was "delta" "weak" hand when it comes to Physics jokes and could never "beta" pro such as yourself! I have been laughing so hard I now have "Higgs"-ups. (That one just works!)

So I am going to give up and stop busting my "GUT" on this one. Plus I was doing some DIY earlier and got "gluon" the floor so need to wash that off.

Electromagnetism (there, got all 4 fundamental forces into it!)
(GUT = Grand Unified Theory)

 

[Big_Spark]

Well this is turning into a Dark discussion, I think many here are simply trying to be Macho with their responses.

 

[mildmanneredjanitor]

Gotta hand it to ya!

It was only a 'matter' of 'spacetime' you would 'string' a 'relative'ly good comeback.

So I can 'wave' goodbye to having the worst joke, although that's difficult to 'quanta'fy... and stop 'meson' about.



You do win!

 

[securespark]

In yet another previous life, I was a food technologist working in the labs at a dairy.

There may be no such things a centrifugal force, but boy oh boy, the samples I put in the centrifuge sure came out looking like they were well-separated!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Of course. That is because the centrifuge applied a given amount of centripetal force to the stuff. So naturally the parts of the stuff with more mass could not be accelerated inwards as much as the parts with less mass, so they ended up further out than the less massive parts.

Simple really.

 

[Big_Spark]

Of course. That is because the centrifuge applied a given amount of centripetal force to the stuff. So naturally the parts of the stuff with more mass could not be accelerated inwards as much as the parts with less mass, so they ended up further out than the less massive parts.

Simple really.

Ban, I think you may have misread or misinterpreted the idea of centripetal force. An object can only be effected by centripetal force if it has something acting upon it that is connected to the centre of a rotating body (in simple terms)

Centripetal force does no attract objects to the centre in the that you post implies.

The reason a centrifuge works is because the of energy imparted into the objects by the rotation of the centrifuge.

Newton first law must be obeyed by these object, however as there is NO centripetal force acting on them, they move outwards and as a result they try to continue in a straight line in accordance with the conservation of motion. The wall of the centrifuge prevents them from doing that, so the energy imparted into them by the motion of the centrifuge acts to break them apart and mix according to mass.

Whilst there is no such thing as centrifugal force, it is true to say there is such a thing as centrifugal motion. This being the motion imparted on an object by the centrifuge

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ban, I think you may have misread or misinterpreted the idea of centripetal force. An object can only be effected by centripetal force if it has something acting upon it that is connected to the centre of a rotating body (in simple terms)

Like the end of the vessel in which the stuff has been placed, which IS connected to the centre of a rotating body, and which applies force to the stuff so that it is accelerated inwards?

Centripetal force does no attract objects to the centre in the that you post implies.

I didn't say it attracts it, I said it accelerates it inwards.

The reason a centrifuge works is because the of energy imparted into the objects by the rotation of the centrifuge.

Newton first law must be obeyed by these object,

Indeed, and I'm pretty sure that if you draw a force diagram, you'll find one force acting tangentially in the direction of motion, and one acting radially towards the centre of rotation.

however as there is NO centripetal force acting on them, they move outwards and as a result they try to continue in a straight line in accordance with the conservation of motion. The wall of the centrifuge prevents them from doing that,

The only way that an object can be "prevented" from obeying Newton's first law is if it is subject to a force.

"Any motion in a curved path represents accelerated motion, and requires a force directed toward the center of curvature of the path. This force is called the centripetal force The name comes from the Greek for "center seeking" force."

If the radial force required to stop the stuff from continuing in a straight line is not transmitted through the wall of the vessel, where does it come from?

And how has a post entitled quantum physics, (originally containing a question about particle physics however), come to be discussing Newtonian Motion? Is there a Unified Digression Theory to explain it?

 

[securespark]

me and my big gob!

 

[mildmanneredjanitor]

I wouldn't be suprised if this thread ends up in some students dissertation one day!

It's certainly been an educational journey for me