smaller than subatomic particles

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Lexi, Jan 30, 2010.

  1. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Hello and welcome ZMacZ.

    For what's it's worth that poster is probably long since gone.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. ZMacZ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    108
    Umm..could be..but since I looked it up myself..the answer is still (more or less) usefull..

    And with that I mean the answer that there is no answer..

    But thanx for the welcome..

    But still did anyone ever come up with a name for sub sub atomics ? I had a name in my mind that pastes well..

    Mesionic (even smaller than sub atomic..whether it exists or not..)
    Mesionics (the stuff that happens below the sub atomic levels..quantified or not..)

    And for your next question...I was theorizing on the ways that processors could only become smaller than single molecules if the existence
    of mesionic particles would be fact..since any programming would only be possible when said processors would have enough 'parts' to actually be programmable; without sufficient substructures there can't be any programming and/or flexibility to contain information and/or programming.. )

    (taking mesons (quark 'molecules'') as the actual particles..the interaction between those would be not sub atomic, but actually in the sub sub atomic..and don't you think that mesionics rolls of the tongue better than "sub sub atomics" ?..
    and also it leaves the door open towards sub-mesionics..^^..)
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. ZMacZ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    108
    Recipient User: Aqueous Id

    An FMI

    For My Information plz..

    How do I set my signature ?
    Been looking at general settings and profile and stuff..but can't find the button for signatures..

    Is it hidden or something ?

    (and yes I know it's not customary to do this this way..but you are not letting me do this by PM..so..sowwies..but can't be helped..)
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    That's fine w/ me . . but I didn't understand your question. If you mean the title above the avatar, that's in Settings -> MySettings -> Edit Profile -> Custom User Title. (Note you can answer me by clicking Reply With Quote.)
     
  8. ZMacZ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    108
    Well I meant the signatures...(the ones that appear underneath like a catchphrase..sometimes with a picture or something added..)

    But thanx for the Custom User Title...That I hadn't searched for (yet)...

    (and nope on that...it's not visible (yet ?)..)
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
  9. ZMacZ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    108
    Umm..that was bit crass....

    I mean..once the earth was flat..until it wasn't..(from what people knew..)

    And sorry about it..
     
  10. CreatureX Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    So in other words in about 10 or 15 years the all that we know now about this matter will most likely be disproved. Interesting indeed, Solomon was right we know nothing ....
     
  11. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,289
    Eh? How you reach that conclusion from what has been said on this (very old) thread?
     
  12. CreatureX Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    LOL not just this thread but everything I have read up on and searched, seems lots of science fiction is becoming fact and lots of fact is becoming fiction. If I actually look up and ahead and retrace I can almost see what is coming .... "she is scary ...." LOL
     
  13. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,289
    Things do change in science, which is how our knowledge of nature improves, but it is wrong to conclude from that that "all we know about this matter [subatomic particle physics] will most likely be disproved" in 10-15 years.

    Most improvements in knowledge are refinements to our models of reality, not the complete rejection of the previous model, surely?
     
    danshawen likes this.
  14. CreatureX Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    Like Graphene ... it is weird how things according to physics and maths should not be possible and all a sudden ... but as you say we learn as we go the smaller we go the more the impossible becomes possible and most of the time by accident. Most of the great findings happened by accident. So science fiction is just a state of time so to say. I jump through my window and land flat on the ground in 2016 in 2020 I land in Paris. Even it is a joke I don't think I am willing to laugh at that kind of thing anymore.
     
  15. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,289
    Who says graphene should not be possible? There is nothing anomalous about its structure, so far as I am aware. This is what Wiki has to say: "Scientists have theorized about graphene for decades. It has likely been unknowingly produced in small quantities for centuries, through the use of pencils and other similar applications of graphite. It was originally observed in electron microscopes in 1962, but not studied further.[5] The material was later rediscovered, isolated and characterized in 2004 by Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov at the University of Manchester"

    And I am not at all sure it is true to say most great findings happened by accident. That was true of, say, the discovery of penicillin, but what about relativity and quantum theory for example? Serendipity plays a role undoubtedly, but I don't think you can say it is the main route to scientific advance.

    Nevertheless I agree that at one level the march of technology can sometimes look as though sci-fi is coming true. That, I would say, is because really good sci-fi is written by people who understand science and can thus predict what might one day be possible.
     
    CreatureX likes this.
  16. CreatureX Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    Yes I still wonder though what is really possible and what is not, taking into consideration what people in the 15th century called witchcraft but today it is called science. What was said to be impossible today is common in every house. What was argued to be unholy is know found in every church. Is there a line still between science and witchcraft actually does witchcraft still exist anymore? I do also wonder maybe you can shed some light for me. I like to consider things known with things that is unknown and farfetched yet probable because as I noticed in science the impossible today is common tomorrow.

    They say that there is subatomic particles which comes from the sun and flows through the earth at first it was thought that these neutrinos from the sun actually does not interact with objects but know it has been found that they actually do interact with things. Know comes the sci-fi question, (don't know why or how it got into my head but here goes) what if the subatomic particles was supposed to interact with things on earth, but because of the changes that the earth, the environment the living as well as non living matter has undergone interaction does not happen. Like I said it sounds like a sci-fi movie but I cannot get that out of my head.
     

Share This Page