Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Science Energy, Principle of Energy
|
lin00b
|
Sep 8 2010, 07:24 PM
|
|
QUOTE(KeNGZ @ Sep 7 2010, 02:34 AM) in physics however, there's a limit whr we can explain things. for example, we know mass exhibit gravitational pull , or charges exhibits electrical forces, but why so? we can't explain. =) hope i helped. gravitation: think about your flat mattress, put a bowling ball on it. see it sag down, then put a tennis ball nearby, see it roll towards the bowling ball. bowling ball = big mass, tennis ball = small mass, mattress = space
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 12 2010, 08:18 PM
|
|
QUOTE(ScrewBallX @ Sep 11 2010, 02:44 PM) FAIL .. Earth is Hollow. Logic not accepted. huh? what talking you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 13 2010, 01:10 AM
|
|
QUOTE(ScrewBallX @ Sep 12 2010, 08:30 PM) Science is theorize by thinking but proof is made available until experiment is conducted. Some proof require experience before theory. As the case for "made man of science", they have first experience it before they theorize it. I will ask you, what is underneath the earth? You might like to picture it as science would .. core, mantle and crust, nothing else. But have you ever gone inside a cave? Read stories which have connection about the earth. Ill give you the story of Admiral Byrd and Olaf Jensen. It does have connection with the Jules Vern "Journey to the center of the earth". Logic theory require proof but some proof have logic in it which we will never understand and denied it. I stand with the human science once before, but too many loop holes it provide and some are coverd by just "make-up" science, i turn into Nature science of logics. "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" - Carl Sagan
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 13 2010, 10:09 AM
|
|
QUOTE(ScrewBallX @ Sep 13 2010, 08:44 AM) KeNGZ, Advance life form, Another world .. who knows maybe. But mostly i focus is the inner sun. The traverlers refer as crust about 800 Miles thick and hollow with a small sun. I would not belived it but some actual science is applied do make sense to me.. Take a raw egg and spin it then stop it immedietly and release it .. It still spin a bit .. Take a hard boil egg .. spin it and stop it .. it will stop without any movement at all. Like all motion mechanics, there is a force to move it. Just like a ball rolling, either it must be kick which use impact force or push on a slope area which use gravity as its force. In order to have motion, one must pull and one must push. How does the earth spin? Sun provide our earth with a large rotation which we rotate around the sun.. so what makes our earth rotate? "Earth seems to have a heart beat called the Schumann Resonance where it has been observed that the earth's magnetic field resonates with a heart beat of 7.83 Hz from electromagnetic resonances in the cavity of our hollow earth. These resonances were first discovered by Nicola Tesla in 1899 which he used to develop a method of transmitting electricity through the air and the earth. The earth's magnetic field is generated by the earth's shell with a negative charge rotating about the inner sun with a positive charge similar to the way a common dynamo generates a magnetic field." - a science person. boy is this going OT, anyway, a simple google turns out this: why does the earth rotateanyway, i would argue that the earth is more like a raw egg than a hard boiled egg. as the mantle is liquid. your hollow earth is more like an empty egg shell. try spinning that and see what the result is like
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 13 2010, 09:27 PM
|
|
QUOTE(ScrewBallX @ Sep 13 2010, 02:07 PM) Simple Children science webpage ... neat.. havent seen it for a long long time. Let me simplify to you.. Egg have yolk and liquid surrounding the yolk, shell as skin protective and to hold it together. Earth have inner sun (yolk) and dense atmospere (liquid) protect by crust also hold it together(shell). how is that in anyway different from a metal core, a liquid mantle and a solid crust? and the sun, is it hollow too?
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 14 2010, 12:38 AM
|
|
QUOTE(Aurora @ Sep 14 2010, 12:08 AM) All the energy in the world and universe must have origin from a single source, otherwise the theory of energy would not be valid. Scientists have reasons to believe that big bang was the source of our universe. In layman terms, big bang is like a massive explosion, which occurred at extremely high temperature, along with a lot of energy. As the universe expand and cool down, these energy particles become highly unstable at lower temperature, and transform into mass. The mass later coagulate and became larger particle, and soon enough, all the sun, planets were created. It's like how mass cannot be created (in general terms). We slice an apple in half. We blend half of it, put it into a cup, then add the other half and weight it. It would maintain the same weight as earlier. Same goes to energy. Only that we cannot see how it happen. is big bang the source, or is big bang the limit of our observation/calculation/equation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
lin00b
|
Sep 14 2010, 03:03 AM
|
|
QUOTE(Aurora @ Sep 14 2010, 01:57 AM) Yup, visible universe, as in the space we are living now. The visible universe that hold the energy. Parallel universes theory is rather pre-mature and still very shallow, too many assumptions. I like the idea, but I find it difficult to believe in.  then why say big bang created energy and matter (and thus inferring that energy and matter needs to be created)? Energy/matter may well exist before big bang, but we cannot observe/calculate it.
|
|
|
|
|