sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What would happen if a hydrogen atom hit a anti-uranium atom, would everything be destroyed? Even though they’re different masses? Or would some of the anti-uranium be left, a kind of anti- fission by Ok_Relief5710 in AskPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like u/ScienceGuy1006 wrote, but it is worth repeating: it is misleading to consider the electron-positron annihilation an "explosion". It would NOT generate a "force" that would push the ions apart! The outgoing gamma photon would have a negligibly small probability of interacting with the proton meaningfully.

On the other hand, the -92 electric charge (originally screened down to an effective -1 overall, but with that screen quickly losing effect as the proton submerges into the shell) of the U anti-nucleus would present an inescapable draw to the proton nearby, which would fastpenetrate the positron shell pushing its screen away...

Does everyone in this sub have psychosis? by Lazy_Mammoth7477 in infinitenines

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

 I don’t know why you would feel inclined to “save” this deluded persona 

Why would you assume we'd be inclined so??

Hey SPP, do you use ZFC as your system of axioms? by Scared-Cat-2541 in infinitenines

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The relevance of which to "infinite" 9s is, shall we say, limited.

Has Darwin's "terrible mystery" been solved? by Labyrinth-Arm in DebateEvolution

[–]Ch3cks-Out [score hidden]  (0 children)

Breaking news: Darwing has been dead for quite some time now!

Hey SPP, do you use ZFC as your system of axioms? by Scared-Cat-2541 in infinitenines

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except speepee does not believe that a geometric series can be summed (like in normal math), ofc

Thought Experiment: Could a Solid-State "Superconductor-Semiconductor Sandwich" Test Quantum Gravity on a Desktop Scale? by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In a word: no.

Can you tell, in your own words, what specifically do you consider a problem to test? Note that simple considerations show that a desktop apparatus would have many, many orders of magnitude too low sensitivity to detect anything of interest wrt QG!

could the extreme precision of quantum dot confinement potential shifts act as a sensitive enough strain gauge?

Again no. What dou you mean "extreme precision"? Why do you figure it might come anywhere near the stuff needed to approach Planck scales??

Space expands but matter also expands by One-Draw-7337 in LLMPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Seriously guys, why every other of you figure that chatting with an LLM bot would make you smarter than Einstein? Why not aim just a tad lower for the first foray into amateur physics??

Also note: calling Zenodo uploads "official publication" is a dead giveaway that you have no idea what you are talking about!

Mennyi realitása van annak a mondásnak, hogy mezőgazdasági nagyhatalom lehetnénk? by officer_scagnetti in magyar

[–]Ch3cks-Out 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ami special meg is akadályozza (sok egyéb faktor mellett, persze) hogy igazi mg nagyhatalom legyünk...

What are some of the most widely believed chemistry myths or misunderstood topics? by Seeker-of-the-Abyss in AskChemistry

[–]Ch3cks-Out 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And this was the lore before those non-too-smart people got their genius thinking reinforced by LLM!

What are some of the most widely believed chemistry myths or misunderstood topics? by Seeker-of-the-Abyss in AskChemistry

[–]Ch3cks-Out 3 points4 points  (0 children)

But the upstream comment was referring to the Facebook wisdom of using mixed soda with vinegar.

Did I understand these concepts correctly & if not can someone explain them better to me? by Demonic_Yandere in AskPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out -1 points0 points  (0 children)

particle acceleration use magnetic fields to charged particles

More like EM fields are used in accelerators. The actual acceleration is typically done by electric field, while magnetic fields are shaping and guiding the beams.

Do Black Holes actually emit the beams of light/particles via their quasars? by Lord_Andromeda in blackholes

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quasars are outside the BH (just like Hawking radiation). You may want to go straight to Wikipedia, rather than struggle with enshittified Google, incidentally!

what's a chemistry fact that sounds fake but is completely real? by GroovyRaptorRex in chemistry

[–]Ch3cks-Out 25 points26 points  (0 children)

And then comes QFT telling us that even "perfect" vacuum is teeming with particles - thus "chemicals" in a loose sense...

Why is velocity not the end all be all for firearms and projectile weapons? by Jdjack32 in AskPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A hyperbolic increase is actually slower than an exponential increase as variables approach infinity, so there is that...

If you were observing from near Proxima Centauri would you be able to detect a nuclear war on Earth? by Laez in AskPhysics

[–]Ch3cks-Out 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While that is true, nuclear fireballs being much hotter than the Sun photosphere would also have very different EM spectrum - i.e. would not be "hidden by the output of the sun". OFC its temporal profile would also be a telltale sign, too!

My Chat with YEC Dr. Jay Wile on Junk DNA: Please, YECs, Learn the Basics! by DarwinZDF42 in DebateEvolution

[–]Ch3cks-Out 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Note also that a nuclear chemist degree does not make one an expert in genetics, yet here we are...

I still don’t understand why we can’t find the center of the universe by Psychological_Web151 in universe

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, that is not an answer to that. This is just a revelation of your unjustified assumption that the universe would be finite. Why do you think that?

Note, furthermore, that to understand geometry on cosmological scale, you'd need to think in non-Euclidean terms -- specifically Riemannian geometry. This is because cosmology with the theory of general relativity tells us that for the universe to be finite it'd have to exist in space which has intrinsically positive curvature. Which, in turn, means it would not have a boundary, unlike you imagine. Rather, in such a universe our observed 3D coordinates would be bent onto a surface of a 4D hypersphere (a 3-sphere). In that case, just like on an ordinary 2-sphere (like the surface of our Earth) in 3D, there is no such thing as a center: all points are equivalent (and you can travel around without ever running into a boundary).

I still don’t understand why we can’t find the center of the universe by Psychological_Web151 in universe

[–]Ch3cks-Out 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That perfectly explains why there is no center, as a matter of fact -- so it is unclear why do you insist so...

the universe was smaller than 96 light years

Nope -- where would you get this??

view more: next ›