Comic Genesis Forums

No problem.

That is a relief. There is just something about drinking that really gets me into QM, but I am told I can be slightly unpleasant as well...

Wait, booze encourages me to learn? I went to the wrong kind of school. Though that explains why I had a dream where they managed to put an infinite number of blades on a razor ending the world with the Shick Singularity.

Dustman wrote:If you look on the Enterprise--and probably any other federation vessel--you see a lot of windows along the outside. Not just little tiny porthole windows, not viewscreens: big freaking windows. So you combine a lot of large-area glass breaking up an otherwise solid metal barrier between pressurized atmosphere and the vacuum of space, and diffusion starts getting unhappy. I'm sure a few hundred years of materials science makes a difference--I understand they developed transparent aluminum, right?--but those are still serious weak spots. Especially when you put stress on the frame, like in those broadside battles that seem to be so popular with the kids nowadays.

Oh, is that all? I geuss it's a little silly, but in the context of Star Trek "physics", I thought silly was going to be something worse.

I know this thread is long dead, but it turns out I made a mistake, and generally have a compulsive need to set right any misinformation I have unintentionally spread.

Narf, you were right. There is something that could be thought of as the absolute smallest amount of space. The Planck. And, it is very essential for countless calculations in quantum physics. When you look at particles and their movements at the smallest, eventually, you encounter a phenomenon known as "Quantization". Basically, when you look at as small of a scale as possible, movement is observed in fixed intervals rather as having a continuous range. This fixed interval is the planck.

So, sorry for doubting you there, Narf.

Wait, so you're telling me that the universe is actually digital? Dude! O.O We're all running on God's laptop!

One post wonder wrote: So, sorry for doubting you there, Narf.

So you should be. I am always right.

Except for the half of me that's left.

Wait, so you're telling me that the universe is actually digital? Dude! O.O We're all running on God's laptop!

Alan Dean Foster wrote a story based on that idea...He gets far too little credit as one of sci-fi's greater writers - Although the 'Start of the Commonwealth' novels aren't all his best, in my opinion.

Lunaroki wrote:Wait, so you're telling me that the universe is actually digital? Dude! O.O We're all running on God's laptop!

I am not sure to be honest. Particles do not appear to move in a continuous range. What that says about space though, I have no idea.

Given that there is probably a time intervel between said position changes, it would be interesting to know where they are when not located.

From what I understand, this transition takes place in an instant. But keep in mind that these are particles that are moving at the speed of light, so direct obesevations may be flawed.

If the transition took place in an instant, either particles would move at infinite speed or there would be a pause time before or after position change.

There is a pause. if there were not, then as you pointed out, they would move move an an infinite speed, and thus be unobservable. Quantization as I understand it means that the particle is at one location, then instantly appears at the next with no range of movement in between. Though, this is at distances many times smaller than the particle itself is.

That leads to the question of what it is doing in between position changes.

Narf the Mouse wrote:That leads to the question of what it is doing in between position changes.

Dancing

We tend to say 'The backstroke' to questions like that, after the joke 'What is this fly doing in my soup?'.

I cannot really say. but from what I have read, there probably is no time spent between positions. Or atleast if there is, it never came up in that wikipedia article lol

Not between positions; between position changes.

There is no temporal or spacial delay between position changes. It was in one position, then another. Its that simple.

Let me rephrase: Between one position change and another.

Oh. That is when it does what we know particles to do. Though it is basically just sitting there, it still has velocity. It is just that this velocity simply decides how quickly it will move to the next position.

Is it me, or do I make less and less sense the more I type? Oh well. "Just sitting there with velocity" is really the only way I can describe it.

...Hmm...Building up a 'velocity charge'?