A set of worthwhile questions in Physics

Jul 17, 2006 at 04:10:36PM

>> 1. How to understand the Parallel Path Technology in terms of your
>> understanding of Physics?
>> http://www.flynnresearch.net/Parallel_Path_Technology.htm
>>
>> 2. When an object is in vibration caused by heat, it follow from Einstein’s theory
>> that it would increase its relativistic mass. When it is no longer
>> energized by thermal energy, would the excess relativistic mass return
>> back to energy?
(since 1993)
>>
>> 3. What happen when a Magnet is falling into a coil, what is the exact
>> energy picture and the trajectory of movement of Magnet? Does excess
>> energy enter into the picture?
(since 1995)
>>
>> 4. What really is rotational inertia? It appears to me that rotational
>> is like the original state of motion of matter, any object ‘enjoy’
>> being in that state. Moreover, it also appear to be that Physicist
>> through out the world has mistakenly ignore this quantity in the
>> circular trajectory roller-coaster problem.(since 2005) Similarly, the
>> calculation of final velocity has failed to take into account of the
>> rotational inertia in the spiral trajectory problem.
>>
>> 5. Could we consider the Electromagnetic field bend the time-space as
>> gravity bend the time-space. We can envision that Electromagnet matter
>> is going in straight line except its time-space is curved, therefore
>> an electron is moving in circular orbit in the atom. It also followed
>> that presence of strong E-M field would slow down the passage of time
>> similar to gravity. Why is gravity assigned such a special role that
>> no other field could match?
>>
>> 6. Among the circle of energyfromair researcher, it is custom to say
>> energy elicit energy in another form instead of energy converted from
>> one form to another. One of our strongest evidence/example is the
>> swing example: You push it slightly in the lowest point, it would
>> swing upward. And the potential energy for moving doesn’t all coming
>> from your hand. Translate it into Physicists’ language, the input of
>> energy does not mysteriously become another energy,it merely cause the
>> excitement or change of state of the object, therefore the object
>> responds. My question is: Is it possible that we are living in a world
>> of unlimited energy which appear to us as finite energy? Every force
>> fields we know of would never run out of energy, why then human would
>> have the impression of finite energy?
>>
>> 7. Would mutual induction take place inside an atom among layers
>> orbits of electrons? Each orbit of electron presumably would posses
>> Magnetic moment, and we can also treat it as a electrical current.
>> When a few electrical current orbiting the nucleus, why wouldn’t they
>> interact with each other similar to the currents in conductor wire?
>>
>> 8. Does reciprocal interaction happen? i.e. Would an electrical current
>> influence by its Magnetic flux lines? Could all normal law of
>> electromagnetic explored as the result of reciprocal interactions?
>>
>> 9. This is from one of our observation during the Generator
>> experiments. When we connected the load before it operate, the Lenz’s
>> effect appear to be already happened. It require a higher kinetic
>> energy to kick off an Generator when it is pre-connected to load. It
>> is possible to explain it in terms of virtual electrical current flow?
>> i.e. I presume it is a quantum phenomena which the load demand
>> electricity from the Generator in a previous time. It is the load
>> generate electricity and the motion,not vice versa.
>>
>> 10. Just a brief observation and description of a possibly Quantum
>> phenomena: That most electrical appliance require only certain amount
>> of electrical current to operate, but not voltage. i.e. Regardless of
>> the voltage we can’t input electrical energy into a system if the I
>> isn’t right. Since V is generally thought as like kinetic energy of
>> electrons, therefore I put forward this hypothesis: Liken the
>> Photoelectric effect, electrical appliance would only accept electrons
>> carrying a multiple of certain amount of kinetic energy(1k, 2k,
>> 3k…., nk where n is an integral). i.e. Electrical appliance would
>> only accept electrical energy in small packet. No more, no less. Thus
>> a greater V can’t elicit any reaction from the electrical appliance
>> because the amount of kinetic energy it posses is more than it can
>> accept on per electron basis. What do you think?

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: