100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: Laws of Physics differ by locale | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100909004112.htm
"After measuring alpha in around 300 distant galaxies, a consistency emerged: this magic number, which tells us the strength of electromagnetism, is not the same everywhere as it is here on Earth, and seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis through the universe," Professor John Webb from the University of New South Wales said. It is interesting that we think arrogantly that laws are set and fixed. What else is not? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100909004112.htm "After measuring alpha in around 300 distant galaxies, a consistency emerged: this magic number, which tells us the strength of electromagnetism, is not the same everywhere as it is here on Earth, and seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis through the universe," Professor John Webb from the University of New South Wales said. It is interesting that we think arrogantly that laws are set and fixed. What else is not? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do they use the term electro-magnetism? Thank you for posting! Because it encompasses the five forces. Not only that but electricity and magnetism are related. Electricity can be increased by increasing the inductive field: E.g. the new inductive chargers you place your phone on without plugging them in. Vis-Visa Inductive fields can be increased by increasing electric throughput. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the science threads.
Beware the internet trolls! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do they use the term electro-magnetism? Thank you for posting! Because it encompasses the five forces. Not only that but electricity and magnetism are related. Electricity can be increased by increasing the inductive field: E.g. the new inductive chargers you place your phone on without plugging them in. Vis-Visa Inductive fields can be increased by increasing electric throughput. But do the magnetic Fields in Space qualify to be Electromagnetic? 
Or would Magnetic Fields be sufficient? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do they use the term electro-magnetism? Thank you for posting! Because it encompasses the five forces. Not only that but electricity and magnetism are related. Electricity can be increased by increasing the inductive field: E.g. the new inductive chargers you place your phone on without plugging them in. Vis-Visa Inductive fields can be increased by increasing electric throughput. But do the magnetic Fields in Space qualify to be Electromagnetic?
Or would Magnetic Fields be sufficient? Electric fields and magnetic fields are part and parcel of the same thing. You really can't have one without causing the other. There is a formula that equates them similar to the one that equates matter and energy. That is why if you apply electricity to an electric motor, the motor is turned by magnetic fields. If you turn the shaft on an electric motor it's magnetic fields produce voltage and becomes a generator. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100909004112.htm "After measuring alpha in around 300 distant galaxies, a consistency emerged: this magic number, which tells us the strength of electromagnetism, is not the same everywhere as it is here on Earth, and seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis through the universe," Professor John Webb from the University of New South Wales said. It is interesting that we think arrogantly that laws are set and fixed. What else is not? What arrogance are you talking about? We don't assume or insist that the laws are fixed. We observe overwhelming evidence for their consistency, and little or no evidence that they aren't. When new evidence comes to light suggesting otherwise, we consider it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sterling_2012
on
Sun 04/08/12 07:26 PM
|
|
What arrogance are you talking about? We don't assume or insist that the laws are fixed. We observe overwhelming evidence for their consistency, and little or no evidence that they aren't. When new evidence comes to light suggesting otherwise, we consider it. It is a law of human nature that states that prejudices are often strongly held and kept rather than accept the possible benefits of a person or persons. I take your question simply to mean that you may not have experienced this or learned this part of humanity as a society. Life is full of stuff and not everyone learns how to ferment bacteria and do gel tests. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is interesting that we think arrogantly that laws are set and fixed. What else is not? What arrogance are you talking about? We don't assume or insist that the laws are fixed. We observe overwhelming evidence for their consistency, and little or no evidence that they aren't. When new evidence comes to light suggesting otherwise, we consider it. It is a law of human nature that states that prejudices are often strongly held and kept rather than accept the possible benefits of a person or persons. I take your question simply to mean that you may not have experienced this or learned this part of humanity as a society.
I'm simply asking you to be more specific in your original statement. Who is 'we' ? Everyone? Every subculture? I wanted to be sure you were not wrongly accusing the modern scientific community of a particular form of arrogance from which they do not suffer. Scientists marvel at the possibility that laws may not be as uniform as they otherwise appear to be. Many scientists actively look for evidence that they are not. Some paradigm changing theories of cosmology have been based on the notion that certain in certain circumstances were not consistent. Based on your response, it looks like your accusation of that specific form of arrogance wasn't directed at the modern scientific community. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sterling_2012
on
Sun 04/08/12 09:02 PM
|
|
It is interesting that we think arrogantly that laws are set and fixed. What else is not? What arrogance are you talking about? We don't assume or insist that the laws are fixed. We observe overwhelming evidence for their consistency, and little or no evidence that they aren't. When new evidence comes to light suggesting otherwise, we consider it. It is a law of human nature that states that prejudices are often strongly held and kept rather than accept the possible benefits of a person or persons. I take your question simply to mean that you may not have experienced this or learned this part of humanity as a society.
I'm simply asking you to be more specific in your original statement. Who is 'we' ? Everyone? Every subculture? I wanted to be sure you were not wrongly accusing the modern scientific community of a particular form of arrogance from which they do not suffer. Scientists marvel at the possibility that laws may not be as uniform as they otherwise appear to be. Many scientists actively look for evidence that they are not. Some paradigm changing theories of cosmology have been based on the notion that certain in certain circumstances were not consistent. Based on your response, it looks like your accusation of that specific form of arrogance wasn't directed at the modern scientific community.
Thank you. I wasnt exactly sure what you meant and didnt want to jump to any conclusions so I thought there was some kind of misunderstanding somewhere in what we were talking about. Many people draw conclusions who are not part of the scientific community. I aim to mean people whos passions sway the sentiment of the general public. But, I did not say that! So you were right to question me further about it. :D When I was writing what I did I was thinking about a scientist I read about who studied different species of pomegranate throught the world and on Socotra Island. Because of what could be implied by his life work, people chose to ignore or antagonize him in which he reflected upon humanities prejudices. Aye, some times there is a big difference in what you are thinking about and what is said. Most can't read thoughts and if they can it might not be perfect lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The laws of nature are descriptive, not proscriptive.
Find an exception. The community will love you for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do they use the term electro-magnetism? Thank you for posting! Because it encompasses the five forces. Not only that but electricity and magnetism are related. Electricity can be increased by increasing the inductive field: E.g. the new inductive chargers you place your phone on without plugging them in. Vis-Visa Inductive fields can be increased by increasing electric throughput. It is used in that Context! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do they use the term electro-magnetism? Thank you for posting! Because it encompasses the five forces. Not only that but electricity and magnetism are related. Electricity can be increased by increasing the inductive field: E.g. the new inductive chargers you place your phone on without plugging them in. Vis-Visa Inductive fields can be increased by increasing electric throughput. It is used in that Context!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most things are relative.
That law didn't fail yet..lol |
|
|
|
|
