Jevan
[ free music, drawings, writing and more ]

image of a bridge

Science - Physics - Some Ideas

Parallel realities- where everything is the same except for one thing that is slightly different (for example penicillin was never invented, from the sliders science fiction show). There is some possibility that parallel realities could actually be true. Consider this: If you travel far enough in an infinite universe then eventually you should find a planet with that parallel universe existing on it, assuming the universe really is infinite then every permutation of possibilities should exist. In fact it is thought that there are 40,000 worlds with life having intelligence at least that of humans on earth- that's not infinite. However, what if there is more than one universe. See these articles:

How can we get to other planets far away that may contain life, can we build a fast space ship, and that is strong enough and able to navigate around/ avoid running into planets/ moons asteroids etc as it moves. Perhaps nuclear powered? (is that safe? fast?). What about nuclear fusion power (can we succesfully develop that one day?) How fast would it go if it continually accelerates as it's moving, would it go too fast to be able to safely navigate?
Could exoplanet be a haven for life? - Gliese 581d, 20 light years away, is thought to possibly be able to sustain human life, but it would take 300,000 years to reach with todays rocket technology.

Time Travel- it is known that time travel into the future is possible, by travelling at speeds approaching the speed of light. However time travel into the past is possible, if one is prepared to travel across the infinite universe, to find an identical planet where the events, people on it and reality there is equivalent to that of an earlier time on earth. In fact it is thought that time travel into the past is also possible with a wormhole or alternatively by a spaceship travelling near the speed of light and using a cosmic string. A wormhole is where space-time warps and folds over so that two points normally a long way away, temporarily coincide and it is possible to travel between them just by travelling a short distance. In fact if it is possible to send a message faster than the speed of light then it is possible to send a message back in time. Ways to send a message faster than the speed of light include, a tachyon transceiver, a traversable wormhole, or a ship with an Alcubierre drive (evidently it is up to speculation whether these really can exist). If it is possible for you to time travel into the past, then it is possible to predict something about the future, specifically, that you will time travel back to the past and thus also still be alive, however the rest is still undefined, like in the cat in the box for schrodingers cat. Hence it is possible for some things to be defined about the future and other things to as yet be undefined. In fact I wonder whether it might be possible to see into the future and do things in the present to prepare for that future, however the other alternative is that the past is influencing the future and hence it just seems like we could see something of the future back in the past but really it was just because we influenced things. In fact scientific forecasting is used to attempt to predict the future. See these articles:

Hybrid (both electric/photonic) or fully Light Speed Computers- The main thing is to develop a NAND gate using light, since NAND is universal you can then create any of the other logical operations using it (OR, NOR, XOR, AND, NOT). We will start by showing how an AND gate can be constructed. Consider the AND gate to have inputs A and B and output C. Take the inputs A and B and pass them through a glass partially transparent that passes through only 50% of the light. Mix them together to form the output C. If the output is 100% brightness (totalling A and B) then it is considered ON, if it is only 50% brightness (A or B was off) then it is considered OFF, if it is 0% brightness it is also considered OFF. Now we can similarly implement an OR gate by, combining the inputs A and B which gives us 100% brightness if A or B is on, 0% if both off, and 200% if both on, so we need a nonlinear material to pass the output light through that will make 100% and 200% brightness come out as similar brightness as possible. Once we have an OR gate, consider that A NAND B = NOT(A and B) = NOT(A) or NOT(B) by demorgans theorem. So to implement a NAND gate we simply need to take the NOT of both inputs and pass it through our OR gate. A way to have NOT of the inputs is, to have two optic fibres per cable, one is ON and the other is OFF, they are always the opposite. For example if we want a "1" source then we have the two fibres as ON/OFF coming from the source, if we want a "0" source then we have the two fibres as OFF/ON coming from the source. To implement a NOT we simply swap the two fibres over (crossover optic fibre cable), a cable in summary, always contains two optic fibres each of opposite state. Therefore when we implement the AND gate we will also implement the NAND gate (using NOT on both inputs and OR the result) so that we have both the output and its NOT, similarly when we want a NAND we will also implement an AND. Cables are used to join NAND gates together to make logic circuits (such as an adder, cpu, etc). The only problem with this idea is that, consider this: 0% (off) AND 100% (on) = 50% (off), 50% (off) AND 100% (on) = 75% (off), 75% (off) AND 100% (on) = 87.5% (off), as can be seen, the more AND gates it goes through, the higher the OFF state potentially becomes. If ON can be considered 98% or above, (assuming laser light coherent monochromatic with minimal loss) then this will allow quite a lot of gates to pass through before ON and OFF become mixed up. Before they become mixed up, it will be necessary to have an electronic circuit that emits 100% for 98% and above input, and 0% for below 98% input, this of course will slow down the system because electronics is not as fast as light, but hopefully using some light based components (as many gates as possible before electronic intervention to reset the states to 0%/100%) will still be faster than an entirely electronic system. In fact a further investigation would be to not only creating an electronic NAND gate using light but creating other electronic components as well, such as transitor, capacitor (holds a specific amount of energy for a known timespan and then releases it), resistor (pretty easy that one). In fact the optical transistor has been created already, but it is a bit big, miniturization is a problem. Another way of creating the NAND gate is to create it using transistors- in this case optical transistors. See the following articles:
Creating a NAND gate using optics seems to have been done in 1 sep 2005. All-optical NAND gate using cross-gain modulation in semiconductor optical amplifiers it does seem to say all optical, and it describes it as operating at 10Gbit/s. The next question is whether anyone has successfully built a small computer out of them and secondly how fast is it, is it faster than todays computers, and thirdly how big is it. Actually it looks like it has been done. See the following articles:
Also see:
The main disadvantage of using light (photons) instead of electrons in a computer appears to be that it takes more power.
Ben6993 of sci.physics suggested (21/4/2011): If input A is yellow + white (1) or white (0) and input B is blue + white (1) or white (0) then A xor B =
0 xor 0 = white + white = white =0
0 xor 1 = white + (blue +white) = blue = coloured = 1
1 xor 0 = (yellow + white) + white = yellow = coloured = 1
1 xor 1 = (yellow + white) + (blue + white) = white = 0 (as yellow + blue = white)
Giving XOR output as coloured (1) or white (0).
The only issue with this that I noticed is that if you have two xor gates, with x and z as blue-1 and y as yellow-1, gives a truth table of, where L is our light gate:
x y z L
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 1
0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1
1 0 1 1 **
1 1 0 0
1 1 1 1
As you can see the truth table is the same as XOR except for 101 which gives 1 instead of 0. However perhaps an adder or ALU can still be constructed using the properties of blue-1, yellow-1, or yellowOrBlue-1 logical states (here we considered yellow or blue to be 1 and white to be 0) making use of the different truth tables. I'm not sure how possible this is.

Use the concept of rewritable CDs to make a rewritable plate whose surface is used to create 3d holograms thus 3d tv. Alternatively, having tiny rows of colour LCD pixels at different distances from the viewer (different rows and columns are at different distances) so it is possible to pick not only the row and column of a pixel but also the distance from the viewer hence a 3D look. Jan Panteltje from sci.physics suggested that Eidophor might be capable of being adapted to render true 3D imaging by shooting a laser (or coloured lasers) at an oil plate to get the hologram. Another possibility is rotating cylinder of LCD pixels whose radius changes around the circumference, thereby allowing for depth depending on which part of the cylinder's rotation the pixel is on, the problem with that is the refresh rate could be slower (since it has to wait for a full rotation before it can display the next frame), and secondly the height of the effective screen area is not uniform since it is continually changing, but then perhaps it wouldn't change much if it was a big cylinder with only gradual changes in radius, though it would have to spin very quickly then and how would persistence of vision work (perhaps we can have a mist of flouorescent/luminescent gas that retains the pixel that passes by it for a short time). In which case we could have a moving flat LCD screen that moves back and forth (closer and further away) and delivers a pixel grid at different distances, the problem with that is it would block the luminescent pixel spaces behind it until it moves back.

I was thinking we could have a 3d grid of cubes containing gas, that changes from transparent to a colour when electricity is passed through it, therefore it would be possible to create a 3d image by turning on the colour of cubes at varying depths. By placing red, green, blue cubes next to each other, it would be possible to create colour 3d. The cubes could be for example, 600 cubes spaced over 1m depth, if it is also 1m x 1m grid say 600x800 resolution then thats 600x800x600 cubes that's a lot of cubes. The question is how would you gather a video signal for such a 3d tv ie how would the video camera work. It would need some kind of mathematics to work out the depth of each pixel, from two cameras next to each other, that is, what distance does light travel before it hits an object. If this is not possible, a laser range finder could sweep the 2d grid of the 2d video camera continuously providing depth information (analyze time of reflected light), but this has a danger of the laser light going in the actors eyes (maybe ok if its low enough power).

Cars have elastic outsides so they can bounce off each other down the road (and off an elastic border on the sides of the road)-no accidents. Also people in cars sit in spherical balls for seats, that rotate in 3d if the car stops suddenly (better than thrown forward/back suddenly).

North electromagnets at front/back/sides of person at head height in car repel north magnet in passenger/driver helmet to stop whiplash if accident. An alternative (perhaps better) seems to be a HANS device, compulsory in car racing sports but not compulsory for everyday driving. Other head/neck restraint devices which pass the SFI Foundation Specification 38.1 standard are Moto-R Sport, R3, Hutch-II, Hutchens Hybrid, or Hybrid X.

Electric cars. Electric "petrol" stations have solar panels that charge their batteries and you go there and swap to charged batteries (requires swapping the whole batteries). Alternatively vanadium battery charged liquid swap. Or could do the usual thing and charge the battery (such as lithium ion batteries are fairly quick to charge). See the following articles:

Could there be a subatomic particle that is responsible for consciousness (in people)? Or does it really just appear when the right logical conditions (through electrical and chemical communication in the brains many cells) are met (such as could also be done in the right computer program) that emergent properties occur. If there is a subatomic particle, maybe it can be duplicated through processes like cell multiplication in the body. Or maybe you just get a certain number at birth (like you don't get new brain cells but you've got lots) but when pregnancy occurs it creates a new copy of the subatomic particle responsible for consciousness. How does it know that this is the baby's consciousness and not your consciousness, why doesn't some instances of the subatomic particle move from the baby to the adult and vice versa. Maybe it is in the genetic DNA.

Explanations for quantum physics? Quantum physics consists of only quantized energy states (like going down a series of steps) (and it's a wave rather than a particle? or maybe both, superposition of?) but also it is considered the probability of an electron making it over the hill (hill of an electric field that slows the electron down for example) whereas in classical physics a tennis ball would be considered to have the energy to make it over the hill or not, no probability. Having probability to me speaks of a consciousness in quantum physics, because only something conscious could "decide" something which results in a change in decision from classical physics where it will or won't make it over the hill, to a probability where it might make it over the hill if that electron really wanted to. This supposes that the amount of potential energy it has, isn't necessarily all used, depending on probability. Another possibility is that the probability of the electron making it over the hill, could be a function of its future and past probability of making it over the hill, meaning the electron could actually predict the future (if there is some correlation between the future probability of making it over the hill, and the past probability of making it over the hill). The question is whether all of these tiny particles predictions of the future could add up to a larger scale prediction. This assumes that the electron is not interacting with another electron, and that it has a consciousness. Another possibility to explain quantum physics is that, two electrons could happen by probability to bump into each other and the second electron could bump the first electron over the hill - only if the second electron happens through probability to come along at just that moment and position and bump the first electron, will the first electron make it over the hill. Instead of electrons bumping each other over the hill, it could be, some smaller particle than the electron, happening to come along and bumping into and adding to the electrons energy, so it makes it over the hill. Or even superposition of waves, adding up to a wave with sufficient amplitude that the underlying particle or if you imagine water makes it over the hill. It doesn't need to be conscious to explain why probability could make the electron make it over the hill, as long as there is some other particle (electron or smaller) involved that can add to its energy, but what if that particle influencing the electron's energy is considered to be the conscious decision. Some articles:

Quantum Entanglement - an explanation. Firstly quantum superposition, which is where particles occupy two or more mutually incompatible states until they're observed. For example a particle could be in two cities at once, and once it is observed, it collapses down into only being in the one city. Quantum mechanics states that you can't predict which city the particle will appear in, and also, you can't affect which city it will be in. Now, two particles can be in superpositions of being either horizontally or vertically polarized. The spookiness of Quantum Entanglement is that the two particles can be created in a state where (for example) their polarizations have to be opposite (perpendicular), for example if one is measured and found to be horizontally polarized then when the other is measured it will be vertically polarized - irrespective of the distance separating the particles. This seems like faster than light communication is going on between the particles. See this article:
Quantum Entanglement

Entangled particles and wormholes? Entangled particles are apparently always in the opposite state (like a quark is up and down and then down and up) no matter what distance they are separated by. Evidently this could be used for cryptography, because you could generate a series of bits of 1 and 0 take a certain starting value of 1s and 0s that occurs at a certain time, tell the other end this starting value and time, so that they both listen for that starting sequence, and when that occurs it XOR the bit with the data to encrypt, XOR it again with the entangled bitstream to decrypt it, that's a fairly simple method. The question is whether entangled particles could have some information about a wormhole in it (since wormholes don't depend on distance apart), then the wormhole could be in the future or past, given it is effectively mimicing two nearby positions states that is actually potentially light years apart (the third position) that these two entangled particles are copying the state of. To me the property of entangled particles that it has opposite state irrespective of distance apart, could be related to wormholes. My understanding is that you can't actually decide whether the entangled particle will be spinning clockwise or anticlockwise next, you can only cause it to change to something seemingly random and then measure what it then is, which means you can't use it for transmission of information. The question though is whether it really is random or in fact some particle through a wormhole's current state that is being echoed. The next thought is, if you cool down (or warm up) one of the two entangled particles, will this slow down or speed up the rate of changing spin, hence allow information transmission (through encoding the information using temperature changes). Maybe it will change state at the rate of the colder of the two entangled particles, therefore can determine which is coldest by seeing which is changing spin at a slower rate than expected. When I post a message to a newsgroup (usenet) such as sci.physics, I tend to have more ideas, before I have read the replies - is this entanglement, the act of someone else reading my post, is influencing/ increasing my ability to have new ideas? Physics theory currently says that in accordance with the uncertainty principle, measuring the entangled particle will cause it to change spin randomly, so that as fast as you can measure it, it will change spin randomly. But surely there must be a limit as to how fast it can change spin, if you cool it down it can't physically change spin as quickly, presumably. Some articles:

Two common things that are often wrongly interpreted. Firstly, seasons are not caused by the distance of the earth to the sun, the effect of that is too small. Seasons are caused by the tilt of the earth on its axis, which results in longer or shorter hours of daylight in a day, and the southern hemisphere facing the sun in december and the northern hemisphere facing the sun (during the day) in june. Australia has summer in dec-jan-feb and America has summer in june-july-august. If it was caused by the distance to the sun we would all have our seasons at the same time. Secondly, the Coriolis effect (eg velocity due to rotation of the earth) is too small in a sink to affect the direction the water goes down the sink, in some sinks it will go anticlockwise and other sinks clockwise, in the same hemisphere/part of the world. In a cannonball shot north from the earths equator, the coriolis effect is not negligible because once it travels sufficiently far north the ground isn't moving as fast as the cannonball so it will appear curved relative to the ground. This is also why hurricanes rotate in certain directions in different hemispheres. See this article:
Fundamental Flaws in General Physics Education

Idea, this is a fairly simple one. Two beams of light one in front of the other (one closer to the inside of the room, one closer to the outside). If the inside one is interrupted before the outside one, it turns off the light. If the outside one is interrupted before the inside one, it turns on the light. Only goes on if the brightness is sufficiently dim that its clearly night time. There would be an override switch on the wall, to for AUTO/ On/ Off so you could turn it on or off if you wanted to override it. OK here's the energy saving part. There's two sensors in the floor (one outisde and one inside, before the beams) that turns off the beams unless it feels your weight then it turns on the beams for 10 seconds. Sounds a bit hard to implement, after all, you need sensors under the carpet before the carpet is layed down and it needs to be set so that the carpet won't trigger it unless the weight of a person at least 30kg say (not a cat but a kid would trigger it). Is 30kg too much or too little to trigger on, I guess it depends on whether you want baby to trigger the beam on and off too. But they wouldn't be tall enough to reach the beam anyway. So there's no point in babies triggering it. Though I guess it wouldn't do any harm if the beam went on when baby crawled over the carpet sensor.