Correct Use of The Word Energy

Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
I cant believe I gotta convince you like minded people that everything is energy lol that video proves nothing my friend, he only says the light is both a particle and a wavelength and not the proton... Im not saying hes wrong, Im saying hes not talking about what Im talking about... Hes talking about how manipulated light reacts with a proton.
 
missnu

missnu

Well-Known Member
Well if all that is true...then would negative energy loosely translated also mean the ability to do negative work?
 
missnu

missnu

Well-Known Member
No...it is hard enough to convince people with facts, let alone anything with spiritual undertones...
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
I cant believe I gotta convince you like minded people that everything is energy lol that video proves nothing my friend, he only says the light is both a particle and a wavelength and not the proton... Im not saying hes wrong, Im saying hes not talking about what Im talking about... Hes talking about how manipulated light reacts with a proton.
Click to expand...
e=mc2 or "everything is energy" is different to the heisenberg uncertainty principle

you not doing well at any of this "convincing2 that you speak of
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
and I dont get my thoughts about atoms from spiritual documentaries... How ever there is science to spirit, they go hand in hand, heres a video of spiritual science that you might like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7GJ-8SY068

You might not believe the last bit, but it definitely tickled my imagination.

ahh imagination, people choose to put limits on it for some reason =)
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
I said convincing was the wrong word to use, and that I wasnt convincing no one, but Im guessing you were busy making that message when I said that... But I'll just shut up now, if I continue it will only bring a false sense of superiority to you when you try to disprove me.
 
Chief Walkin Eagle

Chief Walkin Eagle

Well-Known Member
"In Einstein's hypotheses, energy and mass are analogous. That is, mass can be simply expressed in terms of energy and vice-versa. Consequently, there are only two known mechanisms by which energy can be transferred. These are particles and waves. For example, light can be expressed as both particles and waves. This paradox is known as the Wave–particle Duality Paradox.[SUP][4][/SUP]Through the work of Albert Einstein, Louis de Broglie, and many others, current scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature.[SUP][5][/SUP] This phenomenon has been verified not only for elementary particles but also for compound particles like atoms and even molecules. In fact, according to traditional formulations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, wave–particle duality applies to all objects, even macroscopic ones; wave properties of macroscopic objects can not be detected due to their small wavelengths.[SUP][6][/SUP]
Interactions between particles have been scrutinized for many centuries, and a few simple laws underpin how particles behave in collisions and interactions. The most fundamental of these are the laws of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum, which enable us to make calculations of particle interactions on scales of magnitude that range from stars toquarks.[SUP][7][/SUP] These are the prerequisite basics of Newtonian mechanics, a series of statements and equations in Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica originally published in 1687."

Gotta love that wiki .... NOW I shush =X
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
I think you should study these modern findings on matter, atoms and energy, the people at the large Hadron Collider should be able to give you some insight... An interesting experiment was held there, scientist were trying to prove if atoms were an energy wave or a particle, the ones supporting the particle viewed the atom as a particle, and the ones supporting the energy wave viewed the atom as an energy wave, and they concluded that its eye of the beholder that decides what it is... We have more control over things than we know.
Click to expand...
Chief Walkin Eagle said:
"In Einstein's hypotheses, energy and mass are analogous. That is, mass can be simply expressed in terms of energy and vice-versa. Consequently, there are only two known mechanisms by which energy can be transferred. These are particles and waves. For example, light can be expressed as both particles and waves. This paradox is known as the Wave–particle Duality Paradox.[SUP][4][/SUP]Through the work of Albert Einstein, Louis de Broglie, and many others, current scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature.[SUP][5][/SUP] This phenomenon has been verified not only for elementary particles but also for compound particles like atoms and even molecules. In fact, according to traditional formulations of non-relativistic quantum mechanics, wave–particle duality applies to all objects, even macroscopic ones; wave properties of macroscopic objects can not be detected due to their small wavelengths.[SUP][6][/SUP]
Interactions between particles have been scrutinized for many centuries, and a few simple laws underpin how particles behave in collisions and interactions. The most fundamental of these are the laws of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum, which enable us to make calculations of particle interactions on scales of magnitude that range from stars toquarks.[SUP][7][/SUP] These are the prerequisite basics of Newtonian mechanics, a series of statements and equations in Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica originally published in 1687."

Gotta love that wiki .... NOW I shush =X
Click to expand...

good now show the part that backs up the bolded underlined part
 
tyler.durden

tyler.durden

Well-Known Member
Heisenberg said:
On an unrelated note, but since this is my thread...

I start college this week! In 4 short years i'll have a philosophy degree and actually be qualified to speak on these subjects.
Click to expand...
Hey, Heis! How are you enjoying those college classes? You must be breezing along so far. Are you taking them online or actually going to class?
 
Corbat420

Corbat420

Well-Known Member
Correct use:
These batteries have no energy.
These batteries have no ability to do work.
This old house is giving off a lot of negative energy.

Incorrect use:
This old house is giving off a lot of negative ability to do work.
Click to expand...
^ fixed it. the Physical use of the word energy refers to indirectly observed quantity. the Physical measurement for energy is Quanta, or a single Quantum. Entropy is a measure of disorder in a system and environment, An increase in Entropy is what causes a reaction.... Such as light degrading the paint on a house. Bond forming reactions result in a decrease in entropy within electron orbits.. When the light degrades the paint it bonds the Quanta of the light to the Quanta of the paint, changing the total Entropy of the object in question. < The second law of thermodynamics.....

the entropy of a gas is greater than the entropy of the liquid or of the solid. Why? The particles aren't moving around NEARLY as much in the solid or liquid as they are in the gas. They aren't as random. They are more rigid, and thus, have more order to them, and lower entropy. Let's say that I take a bag of bouncy-balls and let them go...with them bouncing everywhere, and in a random order, this would be high (positive) entropy in the bouncy-ball system.

1. Ice Melting (Solid to Liquid)--Positive
2. Liquid Ammonia Vaporizes (Liquid to Gas)--Positive
3. Solid sugar dissolves in Water (Solid to Liquid)--Positive
4. A CO2 gas is converted to dry ice (Gas to Solid)--Negative.
5. Dew forms on grass. (Condensation...Gas to a Liquid)--Negative.

I'm sorry if i lost anyone, this is basically a lot of PHYS 121, and 122 summed up in a small summary....

There is NO Philosophy to this, only science. Source? University.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Quanta are not the usual physical measure of energy. Joules, calories and ergs are much more commonly quoted/used.

However some respect needs to be paid to colloquial uses of the word energy. For a person to experience "low energy" doesn't usually signify an absolute deficit in the capacity to produce work. It usually signifies a lack of will or enthusiasm. This sets the wedge into the semantic seam, allowing the eventual application of the word "energy" to matters of psyche andor spirit. cn
 
Corbat420

Corbat420

Well-Known Member
Quanta are not the usual physical measure of energy.
Click to expand...
Actualy a Single Quantum refers the the smallest possible packet of energy, which exists at 1.0x10(-32 power)... Quantum refers to a larger portion, or multiple Quanta.....

In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction.
Click to expand...
Quantum are the reason we can have Elementary particles (the particles which make up electrons, protons and neutrons.) Quarks, Leptons and Bosons are all physical measurments of Quanta. CERN Physicly Measures Quanta. a Joule is a packet of Quanta, or Quantum......

If CERN isn't using the Usualy measurment for energy and Physics (Which it now is, BTW... catch up on the times... CERN = The new standard in Physics..) then who is? because i cant figure that one out....

P.S: if your talking newspaper defignition the just stop because you obviously dont understand ...........the media is around 25 years behind.... pick up a Scientific american, American Scientist or Science MAG and you will see just how far ahead we have actually come.... only high schoolers use Joules as a measurement......
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Corbat420 said:
Actualy a Single Quantum refers the the smallest possible packet of energy, which exists at 10(-32 power)... Quantum refers to a larger portion, or multiple Quanta.....



Quantum are the reason we can have Elementary particles (the particles which make up electrons, protons and neutrons.) Quarks, Leptons and Bosons are all physical measurments of Quanta.

CERN Physicly Measures Quanta. a Joule is a packet of Quantum...... there for Quanta.....
Click to expand...
When I think of 10 to the minus 33rd power, I think of the Planck-Wheeler length in cm. That is much much smaller than a quantum and addresses the de facto "graininess" of spacetime. I do not see however how it applies to measuring energy on any but the tiniest scales. CERN isn't the only agency that measures energy. My power co. does as well, and they favor kWh as units.

The quantum concept was first discovered/formulated by spectroscopists ... electronic transitions proved to be sharply bounded/defined (= quantized). However these quanta were much much bigger than 10E-32 electron volt. The ones in the visual range are a few eV in size. The rather softer microwave/radio transitions are still in the micro-to millielectron volt range. Nuclear state transitions give us sharp lines in the MeV range ... cn
 
Corbat420

Corbat420

Well-Known Member
The ones in the visual range are a few eV in size. electronic transitions proved to be sharply bounded/defined (= quantized).
Click to expand...
Actualy, this is another disambiguation. considering that you now have to take into account the MEANIGN of the word Quantized.

In Physics, quantization is the process of explaining a classical understanding of physical phenomena in terms of a newer understanding known as "Quantum Mechanics". It is a procedure for constructing a quantum field theory starting from a classical field Theory

One also speaks of field quantization, as in the "quantization of the "electromagnetic field", where one refers to Photons as field "quanta" (for instance as Light Quanta)..
Click to expand...
When you take into account Field Quantilization almost anything can be Quantized, even something the size and complexity of a planet..... it doesn't take away from teh fact that SPACE IT SELF is made up of energy, this energy is referred to as QUANTUM.

When I think of 10 to the minus 33rd power, I think of the Planck-Wheeler length in cm. That is much much smaller than a quantum and addresses the de facto "graininess" of spacetime.
Click to expand...
wow LMFAO.... What do you think &#8467;[SUB]P [/SUB]refers to? the speed of light in a Vacuum, The gravitational constant and...... wait for it...... the Planck constant....... a Physical Constant reflecting the sizes of energy Quanta in Quantum Mechanics.....

Edit: just for the record...
CERN isn't the only agency that measures energy. My power co. does as well, and they favor kWh as units.
Click to expand...
Yea, and your power company doesn't create the defignitions the new physics, or get paid 7 Figure salleries like some of the CERN tech's... Whens the last time your power Tech had an interview with Scientific american?.... so i dont see what your point is... ignorance is bliss?
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
Corbat420 said:
^ fixed it. the Physical use of the word energy refers to indirectly observed quantity. the Physical measurement for energy is Quanta, or a single Quantum. Entropy is a measure of disorder in a system and environment, An increase in Entropy is what causes a reaction.... Such as light degrading the paint on a house. Bond forming reactions result in a decrease in entropy within electron orbits.. When the light degrades the paint it bonds the Quanta of the light to the Quanta of the paint, changing the total Entropy of the object in question. < The second law of thermodynamics.....

the entropy of a gas is greater than the entropy of the liquid or of the solid. Why? The particles aren't moving around NEARLY as much in the solid or liquid as they are in the gas. They aren't as random. They are more rigid, and thus, have more order to them, and lower entropy. Let's say that I take a bag of bouncy-balls and let them go...with them bouncing everywhere, and in a random order, this would be high (positive) entropy in the bouncy-ball system.

1. Ice Melting (Solid to Liquid)--Positive
2. Liquid Ammonia Vaporizes (Liquid to Gas)--Positive
3. Solid sugar dissolves in Water (Solid to Liquid)--Positive
4. A CO2 gas is converted to dry ice (Gas to Solid)--Negative.
5. Dew forms on grass. (Condensation...Gas to a Liquid)--Negative.

I'm sorry if i lost anyone, this is basically a lot of PHYS 121, and 122 summed up in a small summary....

There is NO Philosophy to this, only science. Source? University.
Click to expand...
Ahh, so when a ghost hunting psychic says a house has negative energy, someone with your training hears a statement about entropy? Just as they are not using energy in any meaningful scientific way, neither are they using term negative.

Perhaps my point would have been better demonstrated as "This old house is giving off a lot of demonic energy".

I do appreciate your informative input, but I don't feel it detracts from the point of this thread.
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
tyler.durden said:
Hey, Heis! How are you enjoying those college classes? You must be breezing along so far. Are you taking them online or actually going to class?
Click to expand...
I had to drop the two classes I was in for trivial reasons. Because the school is restructuring from quarters to semesters, I have to wait till fall now. Thanks for asking, I am sure i'll have plenty to bitch about, er report, once I start. ;)
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Corbat420 said:
When you take into account Field Quantilization almost anything can be Quantized, even something the size and complexity of a planet..... it doesn't take away from teh fact that SPACE IT SELF is made up of energy, this energy is referred to as QUANTUM.
Click to expand...
I can only argue with what i understand. I can't figure out what the above construct means. Can you provide a link for the idea that space is made of Quantum? cn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top