So far most threads here are too far stretched to be discussed at length. Let's go with something simple (and provable, should you feel the need to) for a change

I'll kick it off :

We all know the higher we go, the lower the boiling point for water is due to pressure changes.
My question: does this mean the water has a lower freezing point as well ? (ie: still liquid at -5c ? )

EDIT: It would be nice if we concentrated on one question at a time, until a satisfactory conclusion can be made.

This post has been edited by corad: Jun 19 2009, 12:49 PM

Morning! Intriguing minded indeed!

Okie...we all know (I think we should know by now) under normal conditions, ordinary water freezes at 0°C, or 32°F. Right? However, if you add salt to water, its freezing point becomes lower. As "foreign" particles are put in, it can affect the outcome. In this case, water.

For your case, as humans, we must understand how unique biological and physiological adaptations are essential for survival in one environment but detrimental to survival in another environment and it goes the same way for fishes too.
(What am I doing??!! Comparing humans with fishes...anyway what the heck, eh? We co-existed all this while) MUAHAHAHA~~~Fillet-O-Fish, anyone?

What we need to know is "The Effect of Salt Concentration on the Freezing Point of Water”. Aduiii...I've done this experiment during my secondary school time before and what I've noted was: increasing the salt concentration means that water can stay liquid below 0 degrees Celsius. Hence providing the possibilities of fishes can survive in a cold and harsh environment! Provided yu know how science experimentations can be used in adaptations like I mentioned earlier in to real life (in this case, "fishes" would be more accurate) practicality. MUAHAHAHA~~~

And it may one day prove effective for humans, too--or at least for human organs. By co-opting the physiological strategies fishes/frogs have evolved to survive freezing I think we can find ways to preserve human hearts, livers, and other organs for transplantation in the long term basis.

I want to see the possibilities of my liver can be brought back to live from a frozen state. It would be nice if I can bring dead people back to live! even in a "zombified" state. MUAHAHAHA~~~ (I know this is far fetch but I would like to share my science imaginations and possibilities with all of yu)

Regards, Joey~~~

p.s: Humans and animals have evolved (or use improvise mechanism/methodologies) many ways to survive in extremely cold environments. I can foresee and convinced that long-term organ preservation will come through mimicking the strategies that nature has already devised. I worked in a Medical Centre before and I have read some of the doctor's "written notes" and saw the possibilities of such preservation.

Even if I managed to answer your question, I wouldn't be the next Newton. I'm a noob compare to Newton. (Sir Issac Newton is equivalent to the Frozen Throne in DotA)

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Jun 19 2009, 10:52 AM

@Joey Christensen



you missed the question completely.

Newton is in the title because he saw things everyone else saw, but asked questions nobody else asked. "Why did the apple fall?" would be a famous one.

This post has been edited by corad: Jun 19 2009, 11:11 AM

Thanks for the enlightenment. Joey~~~WTF??!! I swear I saw the word "fish" somewhere in your Thread! I re-read your posting again after my friend said where the heck the fish came from??!! I felt like impaled by Lion the Demon Witch in DotA!

Okie! I admit I did some gaming till 2am yesterday...Oh man! This is really pawning me! I will keep my eyes peeled after this!

p.s: I will use Guinsoo's Scythe of Vyse upon myself! (Izit possible??!!) I apologise upon my "mistake" in addressing your question, Thread Starter. Sorry ya! I felt shitty after this realisation! Became a feeder already...I'm a noob.

This post has been edited by Joey Christensen: Jun 19 2009, 12:02 PM

is it possible to travel faster than speed of light?

Travel faster than light?...
If ur referring to humans...dun tink so...try propagating anything in speed of light n it'll disintegrate...

If refering to some other "things"...nt sure...still nt discovered?

I think tat at higher altitude, the freezing point/ melting point would be lowered as well...the higher the altitude, the lower the pressure, thus making the H2O molecule require lower internal energy (ie lower temperature) to form the crystalline structure of ice...

Pretty much answers the whole topic.




No nothing can travel faster then the speed of light not just humans.

how does teleportation relate to time travel?

No. The speed of light is a relative speed. It's also related to some space-time bending thingamagick that I don't even understand. You'd have to read up on Einstein's Theory of Relativity to learn more.
Conclusion: the faster you move, the faster light be... relative to your speed.

Unless, you can teleport with zero time.

topic will go on as questions come. feel free to contribute !

ahhh ... the elusive 4th dimension, time

to make an illustration of your point : imagine you do manage to travel faster than light. Then you hold up a mirror to yourself. What would you see?

No experiment can prove this, but physicist generally agree that it'll be your own reflection in the mirror. Hence, the light reflecting off the mirror will still be faster than you (while you're already traveling at light speed )

What happens when you add temperature or heat something up? it melts right ? You heat up ice cube, it became water... u heat up plastic , it melts...

but when u heat up Egg, it becomes harden instead of melt...

Doesn't make sense right? Why when heat up protein it becomes harden leh ? why? So in the case of kebakaran, the firemen just shoot proteins liquid instead of water... will it help? works better than sand right?

When heated, the protiens form crosslinks with one another. Pretty elementary chemistry this is.

no. as speed builds up mass gains weight. unless our body breaks into atomic particles and reaching the speed of light then comes together forming our body into original form when we stop.

the protein structure has been denatured by heat
i tink coagulation occured, so tats y become harden lor
i oso guessing, forgot jor, hahahaa


eehh, harga telur veli expensive u know
afterward cook up so many scrambled eggs in the fire who wan to eat it up ?
u telan all kar ?

Lol protein liquid to put off fire? Yeah it might work, who knows? But who's going to clean up the mess after that?

everything would break down traveling at the speed of light.

Is protein the only substance that will harden when applied heat?

we can always derma to those orang miskin kat bosnia.. they are soooo thin and no food, protein is what they really need right?

maybe with some research, we can have a 'protein-magnet' kind of thing that will suck all the protein in a single shot... so it;s reusable.

There are all sorts of substances which react differently to heat. To wide to go through one by one.

No, once protein's are denatured, you cannot reuse them. Simply like, you cannot uncook the meat you just cooked.

This post has been edited by befitozi: Jun 20 2009, 01:38 PM

yeah ! u are right LOL.... we couldn't 'melt' protein.. i guess only human body can convert protein... ok donate to bosnia kids la =P

Conversion of protein is a simple chemical process, certainly not restricted to humans.

just thinking.. is it possible to convert protein back into its original untangled form? using chemical process.

Cannot. There are certain configurations in protein, which is made from many processes. And these are biological processes in a cell, very-very difficult to replicate them using chemical processes.

Protein is a source of energy. If you add it into fire, you'll cause the fire to keep burning.

here's another one !

Imagine you're in space (no gravity) , and threw 2 food cans, 1 full, the other empty... which would travel furthest ?


I'm just plucking questions I got from my interview years ago, so I don't know what the answers are either

No,as pressure is not a factor in solidification of water.It solidify based on the average energy of each molecule.

The water will still solidify at 0.

---

Added on June 22, 2009, 1:41 pmI think the full can of food would go further,as it will have higher momentum.

Momentum = Mass x Velocity

Mass up,momentum up.

Just my 2 cents.

This post has been edited by Cheesenium: Jun 22 2009, 01:41 PM

There's alwaiz a catch! Vacuum? Mass doesn't comes into the equation, right?

From my understanding,relativistic quantum field theory makes a very clear distinction between what I would intuitively understand to be an ABSOLUTE VOID and what we experience as the VACUUM of space. Therefore, mass has no effect on the velocity an object is travelling via vacuum condition.

I'm skeptical too since yu brought the matter up for discussion. I need enlightenment too.

Regards, Joey

Weight doesnt come into the equation,not mass,as mass is a measure of matter in a body and it's not affected by gravity.We can have a 1 unit mass object at earth.The same object would still be 1 unit mass in Mars.

I think your first sentence is sufficiently self explanatory. Thank yu.

Since we are on the topic of 2 different cans (one is empty and another one is full) traveling through vacuum. The question is Momentum = Mass x Velocity applicable in Vacuum/Absolute Void condition? In layman's term: WEIGHTAGE of a certain object (the two cans) affects the travel speed, in a sense, right?

Regards, Joey

p.s: "Cheesenium", thanks for the enlightenment. I knew the difference between mass and weight but it didn't came to me as I addressed the reply. MUAHAHAHA~~~

Momentum should apply i think,just that,both cans will never stop,if it's in a complete vacuum.

vacuum = no friction
therefore, i think the correct answer is both will travel the same distance (ie: infinity unless it hits something) however it will take more energy to throw the full can instead of the empty can (F=ma) at the same speed as the empty one.

hi,some question here.
is that possible "time" can be stopped or reversed?

read stephen hawking's books. he has some weird theory regarding that. and what you refer to as "time" is really not "time" but an illusion of time

Theoretically........if I'm vibrating at Planck length near the speed of light. I'm near immortal right?

This post has been edited by slacker: Jun 23 2009, 12:59 AM

Yeah, time does stop, but your cellular activities are not. So you will die somehow, someday.

if you dug a hole straight down - from one end of the earth to the other end, would you be able to fall from this hole all the way to the other side?

You probably be dead digging such a deep hole.

What i think is,you'll probably on a harmonic motion between both holes.

You'll probably get stuck in the middle of the earth. You will certainly not reach the other hole. As you fall down you will loose momentum due to air resistance making it impossible to reach the original distance from the centre of the planet that you started from. If you see people bungee jumping, they can never reach the same height that they leap from. Instead of a bungee rope which pulls you back up, you have gravity which pull you toward the centre of the earth.

You would melt in the middle.

But if some one figured out how to overcome this small mishap, you still woudn't be able to "fall" to the otherside due to the gravitational pull of the Earth. Nobody can fall up can they ?

Actually you can fall up in this particular scenario as the person will still have momentum from falling into the hole. You will continue to "fall" pass the centre of the earth because of this momentum until a certain height before you truly begin to fall back to the centre of the earth. Depending on how much energy you loose from air friction, it could take a few cycles of this before you stop at the centre.

okay, i deem this answer logical n precise~ btw, if there is tunnel connecting 2 ends, passing the earth center..how will the gravitational force be like that we experiencing? because i remember the G is derived from the mass of 2 objects and the radius of the objects right? ...and, upon the "falling" to the earth center..the atmospheric pressure at certain depth would have crushed us right?

the 1st question of the latent energy i adopt the saying the m.p. will be lowered..if pressure down, m.p. still remains 0 degree...then when it comes to a pressure level where b.p. = 0 and m.p still remains 0...the water (*sorry, should be ice) will sublime at 0 degree? hmm...mayb i should brush up my elementary chemistry

the 2 cans question...i reckon the 2 cans require different initial forces to put them into same speed...since F=ma...

for the light speed question...if one's travelling faster than light...where does the light reflecting on the mirror come from? because the direction you running is towards another light source so literally bump into it? lol..this makes me want to ask the behaviour of light..as a photon and wave...does it travel at certain direction? or scattered? will the travelling speed be reduced gradually due to friction and eventually stop and how does the speed of light measured?

This post has been edited by Eved9: Jun 24 2009, 09:22 PM

This is a trick question. Disregard of speed or force, if time is not a contraint, both can will travel endlessly because there is no friction in space! Just that one may reach earlier than the other (which was not specify in the question).


This is one massive mystery yet to be solved. There are many theories. If we could actually dig a hole and test it, scientist would solve one of the biggest physic mystery ever!!

lol, many fun question can be had by manipulating numbers until infinity

erm,some interesting question again,
regarding big bang theory states that universe is keep expanding, however since speed of light is the fastest,will it possible light travel pass through beyond the expansion of universe?

another question,
is there any exact smallest thing in universe?
e.g (arraging according to size)atom-->proton-->electron-->a->b-->c-->like there is no smallest particle?

as it is now, the string is the smallest in theory

Q: if metabolism is a process that generates/renews cells in our body, why are we ageing anyway?

...1st engineering technology problem, as now, human race doesnt hv such equipment to dig such hole...ie 90 degree straight into another side of earth.

yes, if u can make the tunnel vacuum ... u accelerate to the centre, after bypass the centre, u decelerate and then u reach another end

Q: How'd they get all the ice in a bottled water through that little tiny hole?

This post has been edited by mylife4nerzhul: Jun 25 2009, 07:35 AM

Cells have a built in self destruct mechanism. They stop replicating after a number times.

Damage to the dna can occur due to environmental factors. When the dna is damaged, it is very likely that the resulting cell created from it will not be working as it was originally intended.

that is an interesting one. I've not come across a question regarding the expansion of the universe & light before. Totally clueless

the smallest particle we know of now are quarks. quarks make up atoms.

a theory can't prove anything. models can

our DNA is coded to age, so we're just following orders.

by freezing it after the water is in the bottle ?

The answers is yes


Einstein was the one who said speed of light was the ultimate limit. At speed of light, the relative time with respect to the observer stops and the mass of the object becomes "infinite".
But you see.. you have to go beyond Einstein.



New scientists keep coming out every century or so.

Before Copernicus, Galileo.. the so called "scientists" at that time believed that the Sun revolved around the Earth. Not to mentioned that way before that, the Earth was thought to be flat. Drop that.

But the outlook of the people changed as new scientists come every century and prove new theories.

It is very hard to convince people.
For instance, before Wrights brothers, flying was an impossibility. Going to space or other planets was thought to be more than impossible!
Breaking 100km/h barrier was again impossible

Every century, we break new limits and bring totally new theories

Newton thought "time is like an arrow.. from start to the end, everything is predetermined"

Then Einstein came later and said "time is like a river.. can slow down.. can speed up.. and can fork"


Einstein is the scientist of the 20th century.

Who is coming after Einstein with a whole new concept?

Who is coming 5000 years from now with a totally new concept that breaks every physics law stated in every textbook written today??

Every theory has limits. Einsteinium theory breaks Newtonian limits.


Going beyond speed of light is impossible up to Einsteinium Law. But what's after Einstein?



The point is... don't simply say impossible.
Your great grand children could probably be laughing at you in the future for saying now that speed of light is the ultimate speed

This post has been edited by prolog: Jun 29 2009, 04:22 PM

Why do we dream? What is the soul?

This post has been edited by Deadlocks: Jul 2 2009, 04:45 AM

It can't. The compressibility of water is a function of pressure and temperature as the pressure is increased the compressibility decreases. . At 0 °C in the limit of zero pressure the compressibility. The low compressibility of water in particular, leads to it often being assumed as incompressible.

i remember watching discovery science about this.its possible to go to anywhere on earth on 40 mins by underground train.digging a hole at one point through the earth and the next hole on the other side can be at any point on earth.time taken to travel to anywher around earth will still be 40 mins.the tunnel is vacuum so the train wont lose momentum due to air friction.but in reality its still impossible to execute this

Nope..
The core is the densest part. At the center of the core, you would feel weightless.
But there would be enough momentum to overshoot the center point.
You would stop start decelerating as soon as you've passed the center point of the sphere.


You would swing back and forth like a pendulum..
Assuming no friction (no air), it would be an endless swing.

Assuming friction, you would be brought to rest after some time at the core..
Since earth is covered by atmosphere, there would indeed be friction.
Moon has no atmosphere. So it would be a complete vacuum on the moon.




To understand the concept, try attaching an iron ball at the end of a long thread and swinging it. This is only from my A-Levels physics knowledge (I took in 2004)








ps:

It's just a common sense
Why everone cannot answer this?
It is not unsolved like some people claimed

By the way, the Earth's inner core is liquid.
It is impossible to dig a hole.

But it might be possible on our moon and other planets

This post has been edited by prolog: Jul 12 2009, 01:33 PM

Funny... No one puts quotations for what they say wan... For this question, check this out-
Water State in Space

I like this topic.. And I found 3 questions to answer so far that intrigued me.

To answer your question simply.. NO, water will not have a lower freezing point at lower pressure. But it will have a lower freezing point at HIGHER pressure. Boiling and Freezing are in fact 2 states of matter.. gas and solid. So To turn something into gas we need less pressure(or increased energy to loosen the bonds) and to turn something solid we would need more pressure(or reduced the energy to compact them together). Under extreme low pressure bonds between molecules are more easily severed(loosened) allowing them to move around more[GAS], and under extreme high pressure space between molecules decrease not allowing them to move much[SOLID]

I hope my explanation was clear. I'm not a very good teacher..haha

2nd Question was
I might not be able to answer your question but I will tell you something quite related to what you were asking. You mentioned the word "fall" in your question. Now falling is the pull of gravity on a certain object, and gravity is actually the space on which an object with mass has distorted. So in theory if you could dig to the center of the earth, you would not be able to dig back out. Gravitational pull increases as you reach the center, and lets assume you dont get crushed, you wouldnt be able to dig out because you would have to use force > gravity.

Another answer not constructed very well. =P
CLICKME Just to add a little extra fun to this topic. See where you end up if you dig from your own backyard. (Malaysians end up in Peru)


Last Question was
Why are we aging? Lets see if I can explain this..
When we are born, we are not born perfect. Our DNA is not perfect. We are born with flaws, tiny flaws that we dont see when we are young, but each time our cells regenerate we make a copy from the already flawed design, and as times goes by and the process repeats countless number of times we are able to see those flaws more clearly. That, in essence is what we call aging. Here's an example, take an original printed copy of a book, photocopy it(1), then photocopy(2) the photocopy(1), and photocopy(3) the photocopy(2), and repeat. What you will get is a blur. And that is what happens to our cells as well, only difference is that we have a much better quality photocopier machine.
But also take note, that not all of our cells renew themselves, and those cells are subject to wear and tear, so they deteriorate.


I had fun replying to this post. But I dont really have any questions yet. I'll be back as soon as I have any ^^

This post has been edited by Mesosmagnet: Aug 26 2009, 06:17 PM