Is there any underlying reason we say protons are positive and electrons are negative? Would it work if we just switched both in all our equations? |
- Is there any underlying reason we say protons are positive and electrons are negative? Would it work if we just switched both in all our equations?
- How long does it take for protons to return to being randomly oriented after an MRI scan?
- How can scientists be sure that the iPTF14hls supernova is at exactly the same spot as the this supernova in the 60s?
- In the periodic table, why does the D block start with 3d, rather than 4d?
- Does Quantum Mechanics Allow for the Possibility of Different Eventualities?
- Is there a protocol or concept on how we would define date and time on other planets?
- How was Newton's gravity equation derived if we didn't know the specific quantities involved? How could you check your math with the evidence to verify it's correct? (Such as the masses of planetary objects or the distance between them?) Said another way, how did we compute the masses of planets?
- Does the brain interact with programming languages like it does with natural languages?
- Dark energy is the cosmological version of Vacuum Energy, right?
- How effective are the various winterizing window treatments, and what are the common mistakes? Specifics in post...
- If stars use up their hydrogen before exploding and then a new system forms (like ours) where does the hydrogen in that system come from?
- Are old rock strata "usually" flat?
- Do our finger nail bed grow, or are they permanent?
- Does physical activity durring puberty effect adult weight?
- How much more complex is a CPU than a GPU?
- Does running on an inclined treadmill involve significantly more work than running on a flat treadmill?
- Will gravitational wave detectors help us peer into the nature of dark matter?
- What's going on biologically that makes teens more prone to acne?
- What would happen if a meteor struck a nutron star?
- Are there other animals that closely assist the mother during childbirth?
| Posted: 09 Nov 2017 07:35 PM PST What I mean is, is there any reason we say protons are positive and electrons are negative; so if we just switched every equation would they be just as correct? [link] [comments]  |
| How long does it take for protons to return to being randomly oriented after an MRI scan? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 10:27 PM PST |
| Posted: 10 Nov 2017 01:06 AM PST They talk about a zombie star and what not, but wouldn't it be more plausible that there is another star nearby that exploded because of this supernova from 1954? Would it even be possible to exactly measure a distance of 60 light years in a galaxy so far away? [link] [comments]  |
| In the periodic table, why does the D block start with 3d, rather than 4d? Posted: 10 Nov 2017 05:24 AM PST Why does period 4 have 4s, then 3d? Shouldn't it be 4d? [link] [comments]  |
| Does Quantum Mechanics Allow for the Possibility of Different Eventualities? Posted: 10 Nov 2017 04:53 AM PST To Expand on what I mean: Given the state of the universe at time t1. Does the universe have a chance of evolving into different potential states at t2? or.. If we could some how rewind the universe after t2 back to t1 is there a chance it could evolve into a state different to the one previously? Does quantum mechanics call out causal determinism? And why? Thank you in advance. :) [link] [comments]  |
| Is there a protocol or concept on how we would define date and time on other planets? Posted: 10 Nov 2017 06:05 AM PST |
| Posted: 10 Nov 2017 05:11 AM PST In Newton's equation for the force of gravity, he derived F = GmM/r2 and then that has been used to calculate, say, the masses of the planets in our solar system as well as the sun. What i don't understand is how that was able to be accomplished considering you need all of the values except for one in order to solve the equation (for a specific value). So, for example, if I want to know the mass of the moon, I need to already know the mass of Earth, its distance to the moon, the gravitational constant as well as the force of gravity between the two! Which quantities became known first in order to figure out these things?? [link] [comments]  |
| Does the brain interact with programming languages like it does with natural languages? Posted: 08 Nov 2017 08:48 AM PST |
| Dark energy is the cosmological version of Vacuum Energy, right? Posted: 10 Nov 2017 05:38 AM PST As far as I understand, dark energy = the void of the universe. It is the "vacuum energy" from a cosmology perspective. This energy helps expand the universe even further. It pushes away matter. As far as I understand, it has a negative gravitational pull. (Or a positive gravitational push.) Let me know if I am wrong here. If not, going on: If we take a shielded container, and make it as perfect as a vacuum as we possibly can, would it's gravitational pull be slightly lower than the weight of the container parts? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 09 Nov 2017 11:29 PM PST Specifically talking about the plastic sheeting kits over windows. Do the laws of thermodynamics come into play, and if so, how? Is it better to do sheeting inside, outside, or both? Is there any truth to the recent fad of putting bubble-wrap on windows being better than sheeting? Is this sort of insulation a "weakest link" scenario where it's only as good as the worst part, or is it a drip-scenario where if you can plug 9 out of 10 leaks then you increase your savings by 90%? What sort of R-factor are we talking about for each scenario? Please go into as much detail as possible, while keeping it relatively laymen in answers. Thanks! [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 09 Nov 2017 09:21 AM PST |
| Are old rock strata "usually" flat? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 09:31 PM PST This is something I've wondered for a while, but it's seems shockingly hard to find straight answers about it. At least, not from a variety of sources. Exposed layers of rock always seem to be flat, maybe angled in some cases, but they would have been flat at one time. Yet today we mountains all over, places like the Grand Canyon extending for miles in area, and cutting through millions of years of rock. And yes, this question comes from the related young-earth argument: that the lack of evidence of surface irregularities in millions of years of rock strata implies a very quick deposition period. A bunch of people probably downvoted this on sight. But when I search for anything regarding this specific topic, all that comes up are resources supporting their view. It's hard to get anything from the other side. So, what is the reason for the flatness of rock strata? Is it a sample size issue? Meaning, there is evidence somewhere, but it isn't exposed? Am i just relatively uniformed, and there are plenty of places where rock strata shows signs of major irregularities? [link] [comments]  |
| Do our finger nail bed grow, or are they permanent? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 11:43 AM PST |
| Does physical activity durring puberty effect adult weight? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 07:40 PM PST The wording is kind of weird. Essentially I want to know if someone that gains a significant amout of muscle mass durring puberty due to physical training, say 30 pounds, will ever naturally loose weight back to the previous weight as an adult. As an example I went from 160lbs to 195lbs during my freshman year of high school while wrestling while only growing 2 inches in height from 70 inches to 72 inches. As an adult the lightest I have been since is 185lbs despite a significantly lower activity level. The muscle just seemed to stay on. If I hadn't worked out as hard during this time period would I have stayed closer to 170lbs as a normal weight or was my 195lbs weight inevitable? [link] [comments]  |
| How much more complex is a CPU than a GPU? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 02:07 PM PST I know a few concepts about a CPU architecture. e.g. pipelining, branch-prediction, superscalar, out-of-order execution, VLIW,... I also know that a GPU has multiple "cores" working in parallel, and that allows them to do much more operations that a CPU. However, I am expecting that a GPU "core" is much more simpler that a CPU "core". (they have a narrow application field that a CPU). The question is, what are the concept designs that are used in one(CPU) but not in the other(GPU)? Do GPU's use branch prediction, out-of-order execution? Thanks [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 09 Nov 2017 11:42 AM PST Conventional wisdom says yes. Even calorie burn estimators say you use a lot more energy on an inclined treadmill. But there's no net displacement in opposition to gravity. I guess you could theoretically be slightly elevating your body with every step and then be slightly lowered by the machine on the back-step, but it seems like the mechanics of running are such that you're mostly only beginning to support your body weight against falling when your foot is out in front of you with the majority of the propulsion occurring only after your front foot is nearly under you. Plus it just seems like your body would kind of naturally move differently when not required to actually combat gravity by climbing from a kinesthetics standpoint. I guess this would ultimately depend on an individual's gait, which can be pretty idiosyncratic. Is running/walking consistent enough of a movement to draw conclusions based on physics? If not has there been any statistical study of this question? (Couldn't figure out how to add a second flair.) Are all of those treadmills that say you're burning like 50% more calories on the incline mode full of shit and just using numbers based on actual uphill running? Or is there a legitimate scientific basis for those kinds of claims? [link] [comments]  |
| Will gravitational wave detectors help us peer into the nature of dark matter? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 10:23 AM PST My popular science "education" (no formal physics in my background, please dumb down your answer as much as you can) says that we're having a helluva time figuring out what dark matter is because it refuses to interact with "normal" matter in a measurable way. My takeaway from that is that perhaps we shouldn't assume that it is composed from massive particles at all. All we can see are its gravitational effects on a very large scale (galaxies, clusters of galaxies). So I was wondering if ever more sensitive GW detectors can be used to "look a little closer" (than we can with optical astronomy) at the regions of space where gravitational forces indicate apparent presence of undetectable mass? Looking for WIMPs assumes that DM is composed of some massive particles. Can GW detectors be a way to look at the problem without the need for that assumption? [link] [comments]  |
| What's going on biologically that makes teens more prone to acne? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 02:13 PM PST |
| What would happen if a meteor struck a nutron star? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 11:23 AM PST |
| Are there other animals that closely assist the mother during childbirth? Posted: 09 Nov 2017 02:59 PM PST |
| You are subscribed to email updates from AskScience: Got Questions? Get Answers.. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment