Jump to content
Science Forums

Omnifarious

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Omnifarious last won the day on November 12

Omnifarious had the most liked content!

About Omnifarious

  • Rank
    Thinking
  1. Are you saying we are incapable of understanding some things, not because we don't have sufficient information but because our human brains aren't capable of comprehending it even when we have the background information?
  2. I get that but how much of the science we read and hear about is solid and how much is theory? Are you saying that the certainties I hear about are just people sticking to what works these days? How likely is an earthquake?
  3. But, putting it simply, how solid is our scientific knowledge? What is it like these days? Like how one might ask what Russia is like.
  4. We are drifting away from the question I wanted answered. So many people have made documentaries and written articles saying "this is the way things are" and I can't help but assume they are speaking irrefutable truths because of proven facts, because of science. My question is, basically, when these people or scientists say these things how likely is it they are right? If something is a part of science, how likely is it science might be wrong? Is there any room for doubt? Because in my experience, if it's in a science documentary, if scientists say it, then it's a part of scie
  5. I appreciate the 2 of you responding but I want to make something clear. While I did want to hear about the points, I raised them mostly as examples. The main reason I started this was because I wanted to get a feel for the world of science in general. Is it all as absolute as I think it is? Are we that certain about what we claim to know? When someone says to me "this is true" are they speaking from fact or just over confidence? How likely is it that what we are so sure of now will change? I don't want to believe in these things but I don't know if I have a choice. I know
  6. Is that a no? I don't recognise this clip. You said that the premise is correct, what do you mean by that? I have heard that lightspeed is the absolute speed limit. Even if we build faster ships, the physical effects of going that fast would stop them. Even that there has to be an unbreakable limit, if things could accelerate indefinitely, matter would not be able to exist. They say the FTL might be possible but not by going faster then light but by getting around it. Like a wormhole or an Alcubierre Drive. But FTL is still impossible for anything operating in normal space? Is t
  7. Are you saying it's a known fact that FTL is impossible?
  8. Based on my knowledge, my chain of reasoning works like this... When you want to move a muscle your brain sends an electrical nervous impulse along the chain of nerve cells to the muscle you want to move. A nervous impulse is nothing other then a jolt of electricity, the voltage is uniform and the only difference is the rate the jolts are sent, resulting in faster movement. When a muscle is hit by electricity it's reaction is to contract, this is what creates movement. Given all this, is our movement continuous or quantized? Let's say one jolt moves my finger 1 degree, anot
  9. First off let me say I mean no disrespect. And if I seem brutally honest it's because it's my nature and belief in being forthright. There are a lot of things said in science documentaries and scientifically mined people that upset me. And they always speak with absolute certainty. Like this thing is perfectly well known and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, like gravity. I wanted to ask you weather or not they were really true but then I thought it would be easier to ask you about science and our certainty of it in general. I've heard that scientists are supposed to be open minded
  10. I'm hearing that atoms can change the light they emit when they get hot or have chemical interactions. Is that what makes the spectrum continuous? And is it the only thing? The paint on my walls, heating it or creating a chemical reaction would shift it but what about when it's just there at normal temperatures? Is the continuous spectrum only available to it that way or could you have an object able to give of any wavelength on it's own?
  11. I'm hearing that bands and electrons are fixed but they are also not? Are there some aspects that are quantised and some not? and are the ones that are finite in possibilities? By the way, when I was talking about the possibilities of light, I wasn't necessarily talking about it's wavelength going on forever. But rather weather infinitely variable in it's length.
  12. I'm trying to follow this. As I understand it, electrons are either in one band or another, in that way they are quantised. But they can exist anywhere within the band they occupy, in this way the electrons are not quantised. The space inside the band is not quantised. Plus bands can shift their positions and bands can vary from atom to atom, even if they are the same element. Is that right?
×
×
  • Create New...