- #1

- 152

- 0

I want to hear things that i never thought were possible.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter um0123
- Start date

- #1

- 152

- 0

I want to hear things that i never thought were possible.

- #2

- 182

- 0

the most mind-blowing physics idea i've heard of is string theory, in all of its aspects. the idea of 11 dimensions, 3 dimensions of our space, one of time, and a 7-dimensional calabi-yau manifold thing, is so crazy. and inside these calabi-yau manifolds exist tiny rubber bands, strings, whose properties (frequency, primarily, and energy) define it to behave like a particle of the standard model. like, an electron is really a string that vibrates like

i hope the actual string theorists here do not regard me as spewing nonsense :) my knowledge of string theory is just the result of my readings of brian greene, lisa randall, and leonard susskind.

- #3

- 2,268

- 7

supersolids

- #4

atyy

Science Advisor

- 14,698

- 3,179

Either the declaration that at least one inertial frames exists.

Or the Clausius and Kelvin statements leading to notion of a state function called entropy, which is given by dq/T under some conditions.

- #5

- 32

- 0

well, take this new statement from me -

"matter and wave are the same thing."

i bet, one day you'll read or hear of it somewhere else too.

- #6

- 555

- 23

From BC do not now what year.

All matter is formed out of tiny parts, and if we would ever be able to destroy those parts we would have the power to destroy the world.

It is a bit philosophical but reminds me of the ongoing atomic age.

- #7

- 3

- 0

the fact that nothing can move faster than light

and that the faster you move the slower time moves for you.

- #8

- 96

- 0

There are billions of neutrinos passing through your fingernail every second.

- #9

- 3,042

- 15

F = ma

- #10

- 19

- 0

Everythingis derived from this one equation. It is the most powerful equaiton in all of physics, and it's absolutely non-intutive. I challenge you to find a physics book without this equation in it.

Didn't mulligan use that in his oil drop experiment to figure out the charge of an electron?

For me: Time dilation, Length Contraction, the uncertainty principle,

Last edited:

- #11

Chi Meson

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 1,807

- 10

Didn't mulligan use that in his oil drop experiment to figure out the charge of an electron?

Mulligan kept messing up his first shot at St. Andrews and would ask to take it again. Millikan did the oil drop experiment.

- #12

- 25

- 0

To the extent that if you travel fast enough, you could return to find the earth extinct, or perhaps even the entire universe. Travelling at light speed you would experience zero time and so presumably you can travel to the end of the universe!

I don't study physics but the idea of time being relative to movement has got to be the absolutely most mind blowing statement ever.

- #13

- 2,483

- 100

Can you please explain why such and such is so?

Certainly, but to be honest I haven't got a clue.

Certainly, but to be honest I haven't got a clue.

- #14

- 225

- 3

"the electron interferes with itself"

- #15

Chi Meson

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 1,807

- 10

A single photon of light, which would have a small probability of reflecting off the top surface of a thin film, will sometimes change to zero probability of reflection depending on the thickness of the film on the underside of the surface.

After that, anything else to do with photons is a close tie for "second-most-mind-blowing."

- #16

- 393

- 0

That no objects actually touch each other. If I bounce a basketball off the ground the molecules of the ball never touch the floor.

- #17

mgb_phys

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 7,819

- 14

Mulligan kept messing up his first shot at St. Andrews and would ask to take it again. Millikan did the oil drop experiment.

And Millikan kept messing up the oil drop experiment, but he ignored those measurements.

You're right about the effervescent wave - I always thought it was just a maths trick to get momentum to balance, then my wife did her PhD on sensors made from it.

- #18

- 59

- 0

My favorite statement in classical physics is that light is an electromagnetic wave whose speed we can predict from experiments with charged pithballs and current carrying wires!

My favorite statement in relativity is that a static electric field will also have a magetic component when viewed by a moving observer!

Quantum physics has so much predictive power that I cannot possibly choose just one prediction, but the most mind blowing result for me is that because of quantum mechanics the universe violates Bell's inequalities!

I really like the positive spirit of this thread, buy I found Cyrus' post to be so disagreeable that I have to spoil the thread with the following argument:

Hmm, how do you go from Newton's 2nd to Maxwell's equations?

In relativistic quantum mechanics the maxwell fields pop right out of the principle of locality together with the U(1) gauge symmetry of the wavefunction (i.e. the statement that quantum states are only determined up to a phase). In this sense, the quantum version of Hamilton's equations (i.e. Dirac's equation) does allow you to derive E&M.

The logical basis for F = ma is almost never presented, although it is in fact quite simple. If the current state of the universe, the collection of all positions and velocities of all particles, is sufficient to determine the universe's state at a later time, then in particular the second derivative must be determine by those positions and velocities:

x'' = F(x,x')

The concept of "force' is superfluous; the empirical task in mechanics is to determine the form of F(x,x'), e.g. Hooke's law F(x,x') = -k x . Obviously the theoretical task is to determine the motion given knowledge of F(x,x').

How about Howard Georgi's "Lie Algebras in Particle Physics." Heck, there are entire books about classical mechanics at an advanced level that do not mention Newton's law e.g. http://www.worldscibooks.com/physics/3905.html".

My favorite statement in relativity is that a static electric field will also have a magetic component when viewed by a moving observer!

Quantum physics has so much predictive power that I cannot possibly choose just one prediction, but the most mind blowing result for me is that because of quantum mechanics the universe violates Bell's inequalities!

I really like the positive spirit of this thread, buy I found Cyrus' post to be so disagreeable that I have to spoil the thread with the following argument:

Everything is derived from this one equation [F = ma].

Hmm, how do you go from Newton's 2nd to Maxwell's equations?

In relativistic quantum mechanics the maxwell fields pop right out of the principle of locality together with the U(1) gauge symmetry of the wavefunction (i.e. the statement that quantum states are only determined up to a phase). In this sense, the quantum version of Hamilton's equations (i.e. Dirac's equation) does allow you to derive E&M.

It is the most powerful equaiton in all of physics, and it's absolutely non-intutive.

The logical basis for F = ma is almost never presented, although it is in fact quite simple. If the current state of the universe, the collection of all positions and velocities of all particles, is sufficient to determine the universe's state at a later time, then in particular the second derivative must be determine by those positions and velocities:

x'' = F(x,x')

The concept of "force' is superfluous; the empirical task in mechanics is to determine the form of F(x,x'), e.g. Hooke's law F(x,x') = -k x . Obviously the theoretical task is to determine the motion given knowledge of F(x,x').

I challenge you to find a physics book without this equation in it.

How about Howard Georgi's "Lie Algebras in Particle Physics." Heck, there are entire books about classical mechanics at an advanced level that do not mention Newton's law e.g. http://www.worldscibooks.com/physics/3905.html".

Last edited by a moderator:

- #19

George Jones

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 7,492

- 1,230

Einstein's equation, [itex]G = 8 \pi T[/itex], of general relativity.

One side of Einstein's equation, [itex]G[/itex],is geometrical and is related to the curvature of spacetime, and the other side, [itex]T[/itex], is related to the distribution of energy/mass/momentum. Since this is an equation, it is impossible to change just one side: change the geometry side and this means that distribution of energy/mass/momentum must also be changed; change the distribution of energy/mass/momentum, and this means geometry must also be changed.

According to John Wheeler, "... (spacetime) geometry tell matter how to move, and matter tells (spacetime) geometry how to curve ..."

- #20

Chi Meson

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 1,807

- 10

And Millikan kept messing up the oil drop experiment, but he ignored those measurements.

So Millikan took a Mulligan, big deal!

- #21

- 25

- 0

That no objects actually touch each other. If I bounce a basketball off the ground the molecules of the ball never touch the floor.

Do you have a link or any follow up for this, would be interested to have a look

- #22

- 494

- 2

also the ability for light rays to be tied in knots

magnetic vortices are pretty wacky

so are bubbles of spacetime that could transport matter faster than light

entanglement, that's messed up..

super conductivity

non-determinism

electric and magnetic forces are really the same thing

- #23

RonL

Gold Member

- 1,102

- 216

For me the most mind blowing physics statements,

Energy cannot be created, Energy cannot be destroyed.

No system can exceed 100%

Perpetual motion is impossible. Somehow that does not compute in my brain, it's like saying

2+2= 3.something.

I'm trying to get past this, but the only Einstein quality I seem to possess is my vivid imagination, which he said is better than knowledge. Why would a man as brilliant as he was make such a statement???

P.S. I should have said "more important than knowledge"

Energy cannot be created, Energy cannot be destroyed.

No system can exceed 100%

Perpetual motion is impossible. Somehow that does not compute in my brain, it's like saying

2+2= 3.something.

I'm trying to get past this, but the only Einstein quality I seem to possess is my vivid imagination, which he said is better than knowledge. Why would a man as brilliant as he was make such a statement???

P.S. I should have said "more important than knowledge"

Last edited:

- #24

- 412

- 4

What is themost mind blowing thingyou have ever seen thats physcis related.

..

Crackpottery.

I want to hear things that i never thought were possible.

Almost everything in quantum or electromagnetism.

- #25

lisab

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 1,955

- 617

Bell's theorem.

Share: