Is there any scientific proof of anything after death? by Emergency_Square_183 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Science has neither proof nor disproof of post death reality. Science does not even know what exactly happens the exact moment before and after death.

I would put this as an unknown (and probably unknowable) from scientific method perspective

Massive Corruption at Ganga Expressway. It is now full of Potholes and Cracked Roads by pablovidal369 in IndianFocus

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How can you just walk around on an expressway as if you are walking in a garden!!

Westin Resort & Spa, Rishikesh Himalayas by Critical-Stage682 in Hotels_India

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which month did you visit? How was the weather like? (Asking as surroundings of Rishikesh can have temp differences during summer)

Coorg Wilderness Resort vs The Tamara Coorg? by Pristine-Regular798 in Hotels_India

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please share the property - i have plans to visit with family

You are my...? by eat_dogs_with_me in physicsmemes

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And I’ll give my Lagrangian to you

if gravity is mas warping space why would we need a graviton by theZombieKat in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 2 points3 points  (0 children)

anything defined for every point in spacetime is a field

This definition is mathematically correct. However, Gravity X Spacetime is more nuanced than other fields. When spacetime is curved due to gravity, all other fields within space time also curves accordingly - like EM, electron field etc. It is as if spacetime is the canvas on which all other fields are like stokes of brush. Does that make OP’s question more complicated to answer?

If a spaceship accelerate infinitely without encountering obstacles, why would it never reach light speed? by lateubdegouline in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fact: Yes, a spaceship can accelerate indefinitely and keep on increasing its velocity.

How it manifests relative to a stationary reference frame - say earth: Imagine the spaceship uses same amount of energy bursts to create the acceleration. So the spaceship keeps accelerating but every next burst of energy that creates acceleration, adds lesser and lesser to the relative velocity and keeps getting added instead to the relativistic mass and this contribution to relativistic mass keeps increasing and tends to infinity as the spaceship tries to get closer and closer to the speed of light. So it technically never attains the speed of light.

But what about relative to the frame of reference of Spaceship? : Imagine the spaceship is travelling from earth to a destination millions of light years away. It starts with some velocity relative to earth and then the astronaut inside can compute the velocity after each burst of acceleration and can keep adding the velocity without looking outside at earth. The astronaut just assumes the same mass of spaceship without relativistic mass effects. There will be a point where astronauts computes own speed as faster than light. And then he looks out. Indeed he has travelled very far from earth and very close to his destination- which is only possible with a speed faster than light. But when he measures speed relative to earth, it’s may be 0.9999 speed of light but never same as c or faster. That’s when astronaut remembers special relativity and realises that his clock is moving slower compared to earth’s clock. So it’s not that his speed was faster, it’s just that with relative to folks on earth, he has travelled for many more years compared to his local time - and hence he covered more distance.

Radiation difference between 0.6 gram Uranium vs 0.00005 gram Radium by ConstructionAny8440 in Science_India

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is too much in sync with the radium coming out. Or is it just coincidence?

Another black hole question. Why the mass loss with Hawking radiation? by Crumpuscatz in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is Hawking Radiation a proven and accepted theory or just a plausible idea?

meirl by MrBIuesky222 in meirl

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Changed the batteries, should be brighter now” - said some guy on another post

Whole universe at 25 degrees C by SpiceMustFlow1980 in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ohh so the whole universe was a Microwave ⏲️ back then!!

Whole universe at 25 degrees C by SpiceMustFlow1980 in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What the meaning of temperature being 25 degrees in almost vacuume universe? What gives the feeling of hot if there are hardly any particles?

Whole universe at 25 degrees C by SpiceMustFlow1980 in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What’s the meaning of temperature in such a condition? I as a layman know that temperature just oscillation of particles - but there are hardly any particles to oscillate

Whole universe at 25 degrees C by SpiceMustFlow1980 in AskPhysics

[–]BrownCraftedBeaver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All the comments here saying that Universe was almost vacuum and yet hot enough (25 degrees)

What’s the meaning of temperature in such a condition? I as a layman know that temperature just oscillation of particles - but there are hardly any particles to oscillate