• With the collapse of the Twin towers in 2001, do the laws of Physics need to be revised?

    We are led to believe that the collapse of the world trade centers in 2001 violated the 2 most fundamental law of physics; 1. Newtons third law of motion - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A little tiny chunk of the building cannot fall and crush the entire structure underneath at the... show more
    We are led to believe that the collapse of the world trade centers in 2001 violated the 2 most fundamental law of physics; 1. Newtons third law of motion - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A little tiny chunk of the building cannot fall and crush the entire structure underneath at the rate of gravity. Architecture and engineers are astonished. 2. Law of momentum conservation - the total energy within an isolated system must always remain the same
    7 answers · 23 hours ago
  • Is all Dark Energy of the same exact energy?

    Is it a part of its own spectrum? Independent of the EM spectrum?
    Is it a part of its own spectrum? Independent of the EM spectrum?
    14 answers · 3 days ago
  • Why does the Bible say that the Moon is a light when it is only a reflector of light...it is not a LIGHT?

    let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.
    let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.
    32 answers · 5 days ago
  • Will a time machine ever be invented?

    Best answer: If it WAS invented even a thousand years into the future it must mean that it was invented thousands of years or more into the past. Because the past and the future would become one and the same. So unless you have clear evidence that the time machine was responsible for the fall of Jericho then the evidence is... show more
    Best answer: If it WAS invented even a thousand years into the future it must mean that it was invented thousands of years or more into the past.
    Because the past and the future would become one and the same.
    So unless you have clear evidence that the time machine was responsible for the fall of Jericho then the evidence is that the machine is never invented in the future/past.
    Whether or not it is possible.

    Your alternate "to a different timeline" is not time travel. It doesn't come back to NOW. Or to last year or indeed to any time in OUR past.

    It is even more impossible than a time machine but there is no chance of getting any evidence one way or the other.
    Any evidence at all would immediately create a new and different time line so it becomes entirely a fanciful matter of imagination trumps substance.
    18 answers · 5 days ago
  • Does a field ever finish? (physics)?

    I have been thinking about gravity and magnetic force, and seeing that these two forces have a field, does their field ever finish. For example, the Earth's gravity field weakens the further you go from the Earth, but does it ever finish?
    I have been thinking about gravity and magnetic force, and seeing that these two forces have a field, does their field ever finish. For example, the Earth's gravity field weakens the further you go from the Earth, but does it ever finish?
    9 answers · 3 days ago
  • How exactly does a newton's cradle work?

    I understand that it has to do with conservation of momentum. But why is it that if you pull one ball back and drop it only the one on the end is affected. Why don't all 4 of the balls move with 1/4 as much momentum?
    I understand that it has to do with conservation of momentum. But why is it that if you pull one ball back and drop it only the one on the end is affected. Why don't all 4 of the balls move with 1/4 as much momentum?
    5 answers · 1 day ago
  • Are Bullet Shells Considered Physical Evidence?

    Im doing a 4H project on Physical Evidence and I have an idea on something for my poster. However, it includes bullet shells, and I haven t seen anything about bullet shells in anything I ve researched. So are they considered physical evidence, or not? Thanks!
    Im doing a 4H project on Physical Evidence and I have an idea on something for my poster. However, it includes bullet shells, and I haven t seen anything about bullet shells in anything I ve researched. So are they considered physical evidence, or not? Thanks!
    7 answers · 3 days ago
  • How can vacuum have pressure?

    5 answers · 2 days ago
  • How do I create a specific sound (frequency, wave length, etc) with a speaker from a physics perspective?

    I have an idea for a science fair project for this upcoming year. I know how a basic speaker works but how do I get a specific frequency from a physics perspective? Is there a good reference like text book I can read on the subject? I would like to be able to look into this before school starts.
    I have an idea for a science fair project for this upcoming year. I know how a basic speaker works but how do I get a specific frequency from a physics perspective? Is there a good reference like text book I can read on the subject? I would like to be able to look into this before school starts.
    4 answers · 1 day ago
  • What happens if you compress heat?

    I realize it might sound pretty stupid, but I'm curious as to what would happen if you were to take a lot of heat energy and simply compress it. Would there be combustion at some point or...? Or could a fire burn on only molecules found in air (aka, without wood or a similar fuel source), like, if you could... show more
    I realize it might sound pretty stupid, but I'm curious as to what would happen if you were to take a lot of heat energy and simply compress it. Would there be combustion at some point or...? Or could a fire burn on only molecules found in air (aka, without wood or a similar fuel source), like, if you could pull a firebender and make fire appear and float over your hand could it keep burning only using the air around it? I seriously doubt it. I figure you'd still require some sort of chemical reaction or gaseous fuel to feed it. It's mostly just a weird idle curiosity, but I figured I'd see if there were any experts on heat and other forms of energy who felt like giving an answer.
    5 answers · 3 days ago
  • In F = ma, if an object is travelling at 10m/s but not accelerating, does it mean it has no force?

    Best answer: ...
    not necessarily
    it means that it has no NET force acting on it
    there may be several forces on the object
    but the sum of all the forces is zero

    When you get a good response,
    please consider giving a best answer.
    This is the only reward we get.
    You may have to wait an hour to award BA.
    Best answer: ...
    not necessarily
    it means that it has no NET force acting on it
    there may be several forces on the object
    but the sum of all the forces is zero

    When you get a good response,
    please consider giving a best answer.
    This is the only reward we get.
    You may have to wait an hour to award BA.
    9 answers · 5 days ago
  • Does everything change in time?

    Best answer: Everything but the passage of time. The passage of time changes per velocity.
    Best answer: Everything but the passage of time. The passage of time changes per velocity.
    6 answers · 4 days ago
  • Does vacuum has pressure?

    Best answer: A prefect vacuum would have exactly zero pressure, but there is no perfect vacuum.
    Best answer: A prefect vacuum would have exactly zero pressure, but there is no perfect vacuum.
    4 answers · 2 days ago