Notices
Results 1 to 66 of 66
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By MeteorWayne
  • 1 Post By MeteorWayne
  • 1 Post By AlexG
  • 1 Post By tk421

Thread: Range of the electromagnetic waves

  1. #1 Range of the electromagnetic waves 
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.

    Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).


    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Why stop at an arbitrary 1x10^1 meters. They go far longer, the theoretical limit is twice the size of the Universe.

    Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here


     

  4. #3  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Why stop at an arbitrary 1x10^1 meters. They go far longer, the theoretical limit is twice the size of the Universe.

    Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here
    There are a number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe ?

    What do you mean with it? ....

    I stop to 10 exp +1 because that are the larger waves of radio....The waves larger than 10 exp +1 ...what function they have or could have. May we make or detect them?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  5. #4  
    pmb
    pmb is offline
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    482
    ELF (extra low freqency) waves are very very long so as to communicate with submarines working at operating depths. The Russians use a wavelengths of 3,658.5 kilometers. See Communication with submarines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     

  6. #5  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Why stop at an arbitrary 1x10^1 meters. They go far longer, the theoretical limit is twice the size of the Universe.

    Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here
    There are a number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe ?

    What do you mean with it? ....
    Are there more than one light bulbs in the Universe? More than one radio transmitter?

    D'oh!
     

  7. #6  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Why stop at an arbitrary 1x10^1 meters. They go far longer, the theoretical limit is twice the size of the Universe.

    Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here
    There are a number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe ?

    What do you mean with it? ....
    Are there more than one light bulbs in the Universe? More than one radio transmitter?

    D'oh!
    It is clear that yes !!!... every star is a big bulb !!!... but we havenīt detect radio waves from the space ... (?)

    I donīt understand your question...
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  8. #7  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Can we consider the electromagnetic waves energy in themselves, or they are only vibrations (transmitting signal / info)?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  9. #8  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    but we havenīt detect radio waves from the space ... (?)
    So what are all those radio telescopes for? And how was the cosmic microwave background discovered? And pulsars?

    I don't understand what you are saying.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  10. #9  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    but we havenīt detect radio waves from the space ... (?)
    So what are all those radio telescopes for? And how was the cosmic microwave background discovered? And pulsars?

    I don't understand what you are saying.
    OK... so also radio waves are generated in th space?... I thought so, but question of MeteorWayne....seams to say the contrary...I donīt understand his questions....
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    OK... so also radio waves are generated in th space?... I thought so, but question of MeteorWayne....seams to say the contrary...I donīt understand his questions....
    There is obviously some miscommunication going on here. Regarding your original question, the only limit on wavelength is the size of the universe. The only limit on amplitude is the total energy of the universe. MW qualified that last point by saying that the available energy would have to be divided among them if you had more than one signal. Which, in the real world (obviously) we do: there are multiple sources of EM radiation at all sorts of different wavelengths and energies.

    But then you said:

    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    There are a number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe ?
    As if you thought there was just one electromagnetic wave in the universe. Which doesn't make much sense.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  12. #11  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Is it clear that there are "INFINITES" type waves in th Universe...so: If we divide The whole Energy of the Universe (that is finite) by number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe (taht are infinites)...then the result is ZERO !!!

    That is what I donīt understand...
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Is it clear that there are "INFINITES" type waves in th Universe
    Not really. If the universe is infinite then there are an infinite number of EM waves flying around. If the universe is finite then there must be a finite number. And, of course, only a tiny fraction of the universe is in the form of EM waves.

    ...so: If we divide The whole Energy of the Universe (that is finite) by number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe (taht are infinites)...then the result is ZERO !!!
    I don't know why you would want to do that.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  14. #13  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Is it clear that there are "INFINITES" type waves in th Universe
    Not really. If the universe is infinite then there are an infinite number of EM waves flying around. If the universe is finite then there must be a finite number. And, of course, only a tiny fraction of the universe is in the form of EM waves.

    ...so: If we divide The whole Energy of the Universe (that is finite) by number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe (taht are infinites)...then the result is ZERO !!!
    I don't know why you would want to do that.
    I donīt understand first afirmation: ....because you could have infinites amplitudes in a finite universe (?)

    And second: Just because MW says it : "Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here"

    How I can do several QUOTES in the same post?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  15. #14  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    This post is just nonsense, and lay off of the bold a color text. It makes you look like a raving lunatic. If your ideas can't stand on their own in a normal conversation....
     

  16. #15  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    It makes you look like a raving lunatic.
    Perhaps there are times when a book should be judged by it's cover.
     

  17. #16  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo;334143I donīt understand [U
    first afirmation:[/U] ....because you could have infinites amplitudes in a finite universe (?)
    I don't really know what that means.

    And second: Just because MW says it : [I][B]"Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here"
    It was a way of saying there is no limit to the amplitude. If you had a single EM waveform, its maximum amplitude would be to take the entire energy of the universe and put it into that waveform. If you have two EM signals, then their total maximum amplitude would be limited to be all the energy in the universe.

    To put it more simply: there is no upper or lower bound on frequency, wavelength or amplitude. OK?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  18. #17  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    This post is just nonsense, and lay off of the bold a color text. It makes you look like a raving lunatic. If your ideas can't stand on their own in a normal conversation....
    Did you read what the red bold letters says?

    Is a question of how using the QUOTE....(!!!???)... also insulting for askig this?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  19. #18  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    How I can do several QUOTES in the same post?[/B][/I]
    OK. I don't really know what this means either.

    Maybe put [quote] tags around each bit of text you want to appear in a "quote" block?

    Or do you mean quoting from several different posts? If so click the "multiquote" (bottom right corner) button on each post you want to include.

    Or ...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  20. #19  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo;334143I donīt understand [U
    first afirmation:[/U] ....because you could have infinites amplitudes in a finite universe (?)
    I don't really know what that means.

    And second: Just because MW says it : [I][B]"Amplitude is limited by the available energy in the Universe divided by the number of waves and wavelengths present in the whole Universe, so isn't really related here"
    It was a way of saying there is no limit to the amplitude. If you had a single EM waveform, its maximum amplitude would be to take the entire energy of the universe and put it into that waveform. If you have two EM signals, then their total maximum amplitude would be limited to be all the energy in the universe.

    To put it more simply: there is no upper or lower bound on frequency, wavelength or amplitude. OK?
    I see that to use larger waves hasnīt practical sense, but they exist in the universe.

    Can we say that through the universe travel large waves?

    Possibly waves with lengths and amplitudes of millions of kilometers?.. And they are indetectables for us and ours instruments nowadays?

    And are these waves energy?... So we have not detected these energy,...Could be it "Dark Energy"?

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  21. #20  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Can we say that through the universe travel large waves?

    Possibly waves with lengths and amplitudes of millions of kilometers?.. And they are indetectables for us and ours instruments nowadays?
    They probably exist. And we would probably not be able to detect them (it would require an antenna of the same length).

    And are these waves energy?... So we have not detected these energy,...Could be it "Dark Energy"?
    They are energy; electromagnetic energy. Just because we cannot detect them doesn't make them "dark energy"; Dark energy has specific properties which do not correspond to electromagnetic radiation. Otherwise it would be called "undetectable electromagnetic radiation".

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?
    Amplitudes are not measured as a length. I'm not sure it makes sense to talk about anything smaller than the Planck length (as "random" quantum effects dominate).

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    1010 what? 1010 bananas? 1010 pounds/square-inch? 1010 dollars?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  22. #21  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    [QUOTE=Strange;334168]
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    How I can do several QUOTES in the same post?[/B][/I]
    OK. I don't really know what this means either.

    Maybe put
    tags around each bit of text you want to appear in a "quote" block?

    Or do you mean quoting from several different posts? If so click the "multiquote" (bottom right corner) button on each post you want to include.

    Or ...
    Both things I cannot do it !!!

    What I have to do?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  23. #22  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    "1010 what? 1010 bananas? 1010 pounds/square-inch? 1010 dollars?"

    Meters likes the previous question,,,,(10 exp -35 is the Planck lenght s!!!)

    Strange... are you from the staff or a moderator?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  24. #23  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Both things I cannot do it !!!

    What I have to do?
    If you want to quote something; hit the "Quote" button under the post. This will show the post with [QUOTE] tags around it.

    To include several posts in one reply, click the "multi-quote" button.

    Why can't you do this?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  25. #24  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    "1010 what? 1010 bananas? 1010 pounds/square-inch? 1010 dollars?"

    Meters likes the previous question,,,,(10 exp -35 is the Planck lenght s!!!)

    Strange... are you from the staff or a moderator?
    Amplitude isn't measured in meters.

    And no.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    You should at least learn that even ordinary AM radio waves are as long as about 600 meters at the low frequency end of the range, so your estimate of 10m is already too low. And as others have pointed out, the wavelengths can be as large as the scale of the universe. And it's "Planck", not "Plack", btw.
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Fort Lee, NJ, USA
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.

    Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    Why are you asking these questions?
     

  28. #27  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    This thread really doesn't resemble physics, it's more like a pile of spilled pasta on the floor.
    Strange likes this.
     

  29. #28  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    QUOTE]Why can't you do this?[/QUOTE]

    Weīll se if only appears only one sentence....

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Strange... are you from the staff or a moderator?
    Amplitude isn't measured in meters.

    And no.
    Are yo a moderator or staff..or only an usser like me=

    Which is the measure for the amplitude?

    Do you say that doesnīt exist amplitudes over 10 exp +10 meters?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  30. #29  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    You should at least learn that even ordinary AM radio waves are as long as about 600 meters at the low frequency end of the range, so your estimate of 10m is already too low. And as others have pointed out, the wavelengths can be as large as the scale of the universe. And it's "Planck", not "Plack", btw.
    I know it....but I se you donīt know my question:

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?

    Escuss my tips mistake...I know you never do any !!!
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  31. #30  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    This thread really doesn't resemble physics, it's more like a pile of spilled pasta on the floor.
    The problem icould be that you doesnīt understam my questions...do you?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  32. #31  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by kowalskil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.

    Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    Why are you asking these questions?
    To know more about EM waves...and I see that nobody know the answers !!!..do you?

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaller of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  33. #32  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    There are no theoretical limits to wavelength or amplitude. Obviously, greater amplitude means more energy and there is a limited amount of energy in the universe.

    And, no I am not a moderator. Although I don't know why that matters.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  34. #33  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    This thread really doesn't resemble physics, it's more like a pile of spilled pasta on the floor.
    The problem icould be that you doesnīt understam my questions...do you?
    Actually the problem is that your questions are gibberish, misusing terms, and with so little background knowledge that they make little sense. So we do our best to decode what we think you are trying to ask.
    Strange likes this.
     

  35. #34  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    You should at least learn that even ordinary AM radio waves are as long as about 600 meters at the low frequency end of the range, so your estimate of 10m is already too low. And as others have pointed out, the wavelengths can be as large as the scale of the universe. And it's "Planck", not "Plack", btw.
    I know it....but I se you donīt know my question:

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?

    Escuss my tips mistake...I know you never do any !!!
    This has been answered several times, in different threads, on this and other fourms where you post the same question.

    Do you read any replies?

    Why do you keep posting the same question over and over?
     

  36. #35  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaller of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?
    Yes, if not ruled out by the yet to be formulated theory of quantum gravity.

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    Yes.

    Now you have your answers - happy now ?
     

  37. #36  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    There are no theoretical limits to wavelength or amplitude. Obviously, greater amplitude means more energy and there is a limited amount of energy in the universe.

    And, no I am not a moderator. Although I don't know why that matters.
    No..it doesnīt matter....only because I see you very active in a lot of threads...and it is very good....but didnīt read that you were staff, moderator, expert,...
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  38. #37  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    This thread really doesn't resemble physics, it's more like a pile of spilled pasta on the floor.
    The problem icould be that you doesnīt understam my questions...do you?
    Actually the problem is that your questions are gibberish, misusing terms, and with so little background knowledge that they make little sense. So we do our best to decode what we think you are trying to ask.
    It is not obligatory for you and anybody to answer me...

    I prefer to discuss with people that could understand my questions and ideas...and is they are not good to give clever and frindly answers.

    I donīt like people with narrow looking and disrespectful.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  39. #38  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    You should at least learn that even ordinary AM radio waves are as long as about 600 meters at the low frequency end of the range, so your estimate of 10m is already too low. And as others have pointed out, the wavelengths can be as large as the scale of the universe. And it's "Planck", not "Plack", btw.
    I know it....but I se you donīt know my question:

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?

    Escuss my tips mistake...I know you never do any !!!
    This has been answered several times, in different threads, on this and other fourms where you post the same question.

    Do you read any replies?

    Why do you keep posting the same question over and over?
    I donīt have any answer from you ( of this and other questions and proposals) ...do you know it?

    Just say blunders and discrediting are comming for you.

    Really I donīt what any think from people like you.

    I would be grateful if you ignored me.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  40. #39  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaller of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?
    Yes, if not ruled out by the yet to be formulated theory of quantum gravity.

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    Yes.

    Now you have your answers - happy now ?
    Thaks very much, really.

    Finally I obtain some response. It was not so rare the questios (???) if some body knows the answers.

    Why are so annoyed with my questions? What's wrong?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  41. #40  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I would like to know the range (of lengths and amplitudes) of the electromagnetic waves known and theoretically possible.Could be between 10 exp -35 meters (Plack Dimension) and 10 exp +1 meters (radio waves).
    You should at least learn that even ordinary AM radio waves are as long as about 600 meters at the low frequency end of the range, so your estimate of 10m is already too low. And as others have pointed out, the wavelengths can be as large as the scale of the universe. And it's "Planck", not "Plack", btw.
    I know it....but I se you donīt know my question:

    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaler of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?

    Escuss my tips mistake...I know you never do any !!!
    This has been answered several times, in different threads, on this and other fourms where you post the same question.

    Do you read any replies?

    Why do you keep posting the same question over and over?
    I donīt have any answer from you ( of this and other questions and proposals) ...do you know it?

    Just say blunders and discrediting are comming for you.

    Really I donīt what any think from people like you.

    I would be grateful if you ignored me.
    How many times and by how many people do you need the correct answers?

    I would be grateful if you stopped posting the same things over and over, but I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen.
    MeteorWayne likes this.
     

  42. #41  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post

    I prefer to discuss with people that could understand my questions and ideas...and is they are not good to give clever and frindly answers.

    I donīt like people with narrow looking and disrespectful.
    Then you're pretty much out of luck, since as stated above, your posts don't really make any sense.

    Perhaps you'd have better luck in the Trash Bin, rather than the Physics forum, where clear questions aid the conversation about the subject of the forum.
     

  43. #42  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Really, how many times do you need to read the same answers, dapifo? Finally you accept them.
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Why are so annoyed with my questions? What's wrong?
    What's annoying and wrong is that you repeatedly ignore answers that are given. Judging from your behavior in the ridiculous Ouija board thread, it appears that you are not sincerely interested in the truth. Rather, you seem to ask over and over again, in hopes of getting an answer that confirms your own prejudices. Your "Q&A-Roulette" is both annoying and also wrong for a science forum. Why is that not hard to understand?
     

  45. #44  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Really, how many times do you need to read the same answers, dapifo? Finally you accept them.
    If we was able to detect and register EM waves with amplitudes and lenghs longer that 10 exp +20 meters...could it be an evidence that are comming from out of Our Universe?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Really, how many times do you need to read the same answers, dapifo? Finally you accept them.
    If we was able to detect and register EM waves with amplitudes and lenghs longer that 10 exp +20 meters...could it be an evidence that are comming from out of Our Universe?
    Here is a good example of how you ignore answers given to you. Amplitudes of E&M waves are not measured in meters, so your question makes no sense. Please pay attention. It is rude to ignore answers provided by these volunteers.
    MeteorWayne likes this.
     

  47. #46  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Really, how many times do you need to read the same answers, dapifo? Finally you accept them.
    If we was able to detect and register EM waves with amplitudes and lenghs longer that 10 exp +20 meters...could it be an evidence that are comming from out of Our Universe?
    Here is a good example of how you ignore answers given to you. Amplitudes of E&M waves are not measured in meters, so your question makes no sense. Please pay attention. It is rude to ignore answers provided by these volunteers.
    OK...so only the lengh.....
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  48. #47  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Could exist waves with amplitudes and lengths smaller of 10 exp -35 (Planck Length)?
    Yes, if not ruled out by the yet to be formulated theory of quantum gravity.

    And with amplitudes and lengths larger than 10 exp + 10?
    Yes.

    Now you have your answers - happy now ?
    And there are methods and technology to detect and register them?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  49. #48  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Are you trying to argue that if we can't detect them they might exist and therefore your theory must be right?

    We don't have any methods or technology for detecting invisible pink unicorns. Maybe you should assume they exist as well.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  50. #49  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Are you trying to argue that if we can't detect them they might exist and therefore your theory must be right?

    We don't have any methods or technology for detecting invisible pink unicorns. Maybe you should assume they exist as well.
    Yes,...you are a very clever person.


    If we could detect any wave with a lengh larger than 10 exp +27 meters (dimension of Our Universe) then this wave has to be generated Out of Our Universe...or not?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  51. #50  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    If we could detect any wave with a lengh larger than 10 exp +27 meters (dimension of Our Universe) then this wave has to be generated Out of Our Universe...or not?
    Well, if we could detect pink unicorns they would be a very lovely sight indeed...
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    If we could detect any wave with a lengh larger than 10 exp +27 meters (dimension of Our Universe) then this wave has to be generated Out of Our Universe...or not?
    Not necessarily.

    There are several profound difficulties here, some experimental, others conceptual. One is that an antenna needs to be of the same order of length as the wave to be detected, so you'd need the universe to act as your antenna. That might be hard.

    Another problem is that, even if you were somehow to make use of the entire universe as your antenna, it would be difficult to rule out sources of spurious signals. Subharmonic generation can occur in both nonlinear and parametrically-varying media, so you'd have to devise some method for ruling out long waves created by those effects in our own universe.

    Creating pink unicorns is easy by comparison.
     

  53. #52  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    I see that you donīt know how to do it...thank you !!!

    Follow looking for pink unicorn...it is easyer and you will be more sucefull.....
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  54. #53  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    If we could detect any wave with a lengh larger than 10 exp +27 meters (dimension of Our Universe) then this wave has to be generated Out of Our Universe...or not?
    I assume that figure is roughly the size of the observable universe. The entire universe is almost certainly very much larger than that. So much larger wavelengths may be possible, within our universe (even if undetectable). The trouble is, none of the multiverse ideas I have seen hypothesized have any way of interacting with our universe, or being detected, even in principle. So the question is rather irrelevant.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  55. #54  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    If we could detect any wave with a lengh larger than 10 exp +27 meters (dimension of Our Universe) then this wave has to be generated Out of Our Universe...or not?
    I assume that figure is roughly the size of the observable universe. The entire universe is almost certainly very much larger than that. So much larger wavelengths may be possible, within our universe (even if undetectable). The trouble is, none of the multiverse ideas I have seen hypothesized have any way of interacting with our universe, or being detected, even in principle. So the question is rather irrelevant.
    STRANGE....I have a maxim in my life: That something has not been done or written before, is not an insuperable barrier to me.

    If you always did pay attention to what is assumed, not advance ever.

    STRANGE....The questions are....

    - It is possible that EM waves up to 10 exp +26 meters lengh could go through Our Known Universe?
    - Could we detect and register then in anyway?
    - If we could detect them...It will mean that other Universes there are outsides Our?

    It is like the EM radio waves (10 exp 1 meters) go through an atom !!!!...Do you see?
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    It is like the EM radio waves (10 exp 1 meters) go through an atom !!!!...Do you see?
    Multiple exclamation points, followed by "Do you see", don't count for much. Sorry to be blunt, but you are incredibly ignorant of physics, and you would benefit greatly from repairing that deficiency. In this case, a 10m wavelength wave would go through/past/around the atom without the atom knowing. I've already told you that an antenna needs to have dimensions on the order of the wavelength in order to be effective, but you seem not to have understood. It's much as if you were the atom, and my post was a 10m wavelength signal.

    That something has not been done or written before, is not an insuperable barrier to me.
    Seal yourself in a vacuum chamber with no equipment. Note what happens as the pressure gauge drops. I think you will discover that there are insuperable barriers, regardless of whether you acknowledge their existence.

    The laws of physics don't give a whit about your feelings. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
     

  57. #56  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    It is like the EM radio waves (10 exp 1 meters) go through an atom !!!!...Do you see?
    Multiple exclamation points, followed by "Do you see", don't count for much. Sorry to be blunt, but you are incredibly ignorant of physics, and you would benefit greatly from repairing that deficiency. In this case, a 10m wavelength wave would go through/past/around the atom without the atom knowing. I've already told you that an antenna needs to have dimensions on the order of the wavelength in order to be effective, but you seem not to have understood. It's much as if you were the atom, and my post was a 10m wavelength signal.

    That something has not been done or written before, is not an insuperable barrier to me.
    Seal yourself in a vacuum chamber with no equipment. Note what happens as the pressure gauge drops. I think you will discover that there are insuperable barriers, regardless of whether you acknowledge their existence.

    The laws of physics don't give a whit about your feelings. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
    tk431 ...I am sorry but your opinions doesnīt have any interest for me....because I see you are only an rude boy that is playing to be scientific.

    First at all learn education and manners...till this...please .... Forget me !!!!
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  58. #57  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    When you post the sillyness you do, you will not be ignored, especially as long as you continue to post in in the Physics forum. If you'd like, I can move you to another forum where the standards are not quite as high...
     

  59. #58  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    When you post the sillyness you do, you will not be ignored, especially as long as you continue to post in in the Physics forum. If you'd like, I can move you to another forum where the standards are not quite as high...
    You can do what do you think is the best for the forum...because you are moderator.

    I would like to talk with educate persons who would like discuss about science... and in this case about this proposal I do.

    If this forum is not for this...please, tel me another forum could be better....for this kind of discussion.

    And let me tell to you that the standars you are talking about they arenīt so high ...They are so academic and very few creative.

    For me..to be high...means to try to go beyond the state of the art... and not only be closed to the academic knowhow

    The problem that I see in this forum is that only moderator and staff answer...there are few people and scientifics to be able to have an open discussion ... to be able to brainstorming...inprovig ideas...

    To give you a positive critique...In this forum is missing innovative aim !!!
    Last edited by dapifo; July 3rd, 2012 at 06:05 PM.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post

    And let me tell to you that the standars you are talking about they arenīt so high ...They are so academic and very few creative.

    For me..to be high...means to try to go beyond the state of the art... and not only be closed to the academic knowhow
    The fundamental problem is that you don't understand that science is an exercise in creativity within constraints. You don't like the constraints, so when they are pointed out to you, you react badly. You are, in essence, rejecting the entire scientific method. You are of course free to believe as you wish, but you must also understand that this is a science forum (note the name of the Forum, in case you haven't bothered to do so). It's not called the "Imagine the universe the way you fantasize it to be."

    My suggestion would be for posts such as this one to move rapidly to the trash can. Unless you develop a rational mindset, there's no point in your posting in any other subforum here. You just keep hoping for someone to give you an answer to support your preconceived fantasies, and act rudely when we don't oblige. Science is hard. You don't want to live within the rules of that world. So please consider posting your silliness in some other forum. This one's for science.
     

  61. #60  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post

    And let me tell to you that the standars you are talking about they arenīt so high ...They are so academic and very few creative.

    For me..to be high...means to try to go beyond the state of the art... and not only be closed to the academic knowhow
    The fundamental problem is that you don't understand that science is an exercise in creativity within constraints. You don't like the constraints, so when they are pointed out to you, you react badly. You are, in essence, rejecting the entire scientific method. You are of course free to believe as you wish, but you must also understand that this is a science forum (note the name of the Forum, in case you haven't bothered to do so). It's not called the "Imagine the universe the way you fantasize it to be."

    My suggestion would be for posts such as this one to move rapidly to the trash can. Unless you develop a rational mindset, there's no point in your posting in any other subforum here. You just keep hoping for someone to give you an answer to support your preconceived fantasies, and act rudely when we don't oblige. Science is hard. You don't want to live within the rules of that world. So please consider posting your silliness in some other forum. This one's for science.
    So science for you is only all what you can read in the books...(???)

    Please, leave to talk other persons...I understand that this is an open forum...or not?

    Is this forum a place to ask and wait a answer of the moderators?...and when you donīt like (or donīt know) the question...to throw it away to the trash?

    It is not science to try to detect EM waves with lenghwave longer than 10 xp +16 meters or smaller than 10 exp -35 meters ?

    Why because these are not in the books?..Because you donīt know?...Because you says it is not possible?

    Let than other Experts and not Experts as well answer....if not you are creating a Dictatorial and Closed forum !!!!
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  62. #61  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    If you asked intelligible questions, it would be a lot easier to conduct an intelligent conversation. Between that, and your flawed and/or nonexistant knowledge of physics, and your inability to listen to the answers that the experts do give you, it indicates that the Physics forum is not the right one to pick.
     

  63. #62  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    If you asked intelligible questions, it would be a lot easier to conduct an intelligent conversation. Between that, and your flawed and/or nonexistant knowledge of physics, and your inability to listen to the answers that the experts do give you, it indicates that the Physics forum is not the right one to pick.
    I have been reviewing my first thread about M-Dimension..and always there are the same persons answering...with any spirit of helping...only thinking in trash...

    I think that will be good to heve an open and free forum space to be able that other persons could talk....

    If you donīt know one question is not necessary to through it to trash...let other persons aswer it !!!!
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I have been reviewing my first thread about M-Dimension..and always there are the same persons answering...with any spirit of helping...only thinking in trash...

    I think that will be good to heve an open and free forum space to be able that other persons could talk....

    If you donīt know one question is not necessary to through it to trash...let other persons aswer it !!!!
    You've been given answers. Repeatedly. The problem -- again -- is that you simply ignore the answers that you don't like. You don't know when you've been "helped." And your dismissal of those answers is rude, aside from irrational.

    As I've said before, science is quite a different enterprise from what you want it to be. You have fantasies. Science says that there are certain things that simply are not so. You reject that concept. Sorry to disappoint, but if you cannot accept that the real world conforms to certain rules ("you will die if I suck out all of the air from around you"), then you are not a rational thinker, and a science forum is not for you. What you consider an "open and free" forum is actually a "place to believe in magic without the uncomfortable intrusion of reality." Humanity has -- thankfully -- moved a bit beyond the 15th century. Why don't you consider getting some education? You have catching up to do.
     

  65. #64  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post

    And let me tell to you that the standars you are talking about they arenīt so high ...They are so academic and very few creative.

    For me..to be high...means to try to go beyond the state of the art... and not only be closed to the academic knowhow
    The fundamental problem is that you don't understand that science is an exercise in creativity within constraints. You don't like the constraints, so when they are pointed out to you, you react badly. You are, in essence, rejecting the entire scientific method. You are of course free to believe as you wish, but you must also understand that this is a science forum (note the name of the Forum, in case you haven't bothered to do so). It's not called the "Imagine the universe the way you fantasize it to be."

    My suggestion would be for posts such as this one to move rapidly to the trash can. Unless you develop a rational mindset, there's no point in your posting in any other subforum here. You just keep hoping for someone to give you an answer to support your preconceived fantasies, and act rudely when we don't oblige. Science is hard. You don't want to live within the rules of that world. So please consider posting your silliness in some other forum. This one's for science.
    So science for you is only all what you can read in the books...(???)

    Please, leave to talk other persons...I understand that this is an open forum...or not?

    Is this forum a place to ask and wait a answer of the moderators?...and when you donīt like (or donīt know) the question...to throw it away to the trash?

    It is not science to try to detect EM waves with lenghwave longer than 10 xp +16 meters or smaller than 10 exp -35 meters ?

    Why because these are not in the books?..Because you donīt know?...Because you says it is not possible?

    Let than other Experts and not Experts as well answer....if not you are creating a Dictatorial and Closed forum !!!!
    When you say an open forum, you seem to mean one where you can post anything you want, regardless of it's merit. This is a science forum. There are many other forums where anything goes, but here there must be an element of science in the discussion.

    Try this place, I think you'd fit in better. Unexplained Mysteries - Paranormal Phenomena and the World's Greatest Unexplained Mysteries
     

  66. #65  
    Universe Supervisor dapifo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dapifo View Post
    I have been reviewing my first thread about M-Dimension..and always there are the same persons answering...with any spirit of helping...only thinking in trash...

    I think that will be good to heve an open and free forum space to be able that other persons could talk....

    If you donīt know one question is not necessary to through it to trash...let other persons aswer it !!!!
    You've been given answers. Repeatedly. The problem -- again -- is that you simply ignore the answers that you don't like. You don't know when you've been "helped." And your dismissal of those answers is rude, aside from irrational.

    As I've said before, science is quite a different enterprise from what you want it to be. You have fantasies. Science says that there are certain things that simply are not so. You reject that concept. Sorry to disappoint, but if you cannot accept that the real world conforms to certain rules ("you will die if I suck out all of the air from around you"), then you are not a rational thinker, and a science forum is not for you. What you consider an "open and free" forum is actually a "place to believe in magic without the uncomfortable intrusion of reality." Humanity has -- thankfully -- moved a bit beyond the 15th century. Why don't you consider getting some education? You have catching up to do.
    You can forge this thread .. I got very good answers in other forums...Thanks a lot....We heve been more time discussing for nothing and swearing that really arguing and reasoning in a serious adult.
    "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking". George S. Patton
    "Science does not know its debt to imagination". Ralph Waldo Emerson

    "Why settle with the known models and patterns (but not underlying laws) of Our Universe , if we might understand them better if we could puzzle out them from outside its limits?"
    (The common sense)
     

  67. #66  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    As requested...closed
     

Similar Threads

  1. electromagnetic waves
    By chimanrao in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 12th, 2011, 09:06 AM
  2. electromagnetic waves
    By chimanrao in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 12th, 2011, 09:06 AM
  3. Delta Waves frequency range.
    By termina in forum Biology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 19th, 2011, 06:35 AM
  4. how generate electromagnetic field in the microtesla range?
    By Lapis_Lazuli in forum Electrical and Electronics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 8th, 2010, 02:47 PM
  5. What amplitude range for seismic P-waves?
    By flash_os in forum Earth Sciences
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 24th, 2008, 12:15 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •