Science Forum - Energy being converted into matter?

The Science Forum - Scientific Discussion and Debate

Live Chat

FAQ

Usergroups

Science Forum Forum Index » Pseudoscience » Energy being converted into matter?

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Energy being converted into matter?

« View previous topic :: View next topic »

Author

Message

trewsx7

Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 7:54 pm Post subject: Energy being converted into matter?

Forum Freshman

Joined: 17 May 2008
Posts: 2
Location: Northern Virginia

Noob here, with a quick question regarding mass-energy equivalence (e=mc2) and matter creation.

Knowing that there are many concete visual examples of matter turning into energy using Einstein's formula, how do you use energy to create matter? If I'm not mistaken, I beleive electron-positron pairs are created using gamma rays, but how does one use energy to create protons and neutrons? What are the "energy ingredients" for these particles and have they been ever created in a lab, or seen in outerspace? Thanks!

SuperNatendo

Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:37 pm Post subject:

Forum Masters Degree

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 518
Location: Nashville, TN USA

The only time I have heard of energy being made into matter by man comes out of experiments performed in particle accelerators. The amount of energy produced by matter is the same as the amount of energy needed to produce the same type of matter.
_________________
â€œItâ€™s no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.â€ - Mark Twain

zhang zhi qiang

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 7:09 pm Post subject: Re: Energy being converted into matter?

Forum Freshman

Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 90
Location: Dalian ,China

trewsx7 wrote:

Your question elicits a fundamental prolem baffled public and scientists for centuries .
To explore the answer , you should widen your sight , shift your focus
on overall picture of the universe and follow a road map guided by two beacons.

Beacon One
Mass Law --- Quantitative Description of Mass Formation
Mass of an object is equal to sum of energies fed back from all other
objects of the universe , divided by square of speed of light .

that is : m(⊙) = ∑E(i , ⊙) / c^2

by this law , an object would disintegrate entirely , should all other
objects of the universe move to infinite from it . Most of physicists believe
there exist gravitatioal radiation between two objects and have been trying to detect it but failed . Now we realize that this sort of radiation does exist and its function is to contribute itself in mass formation of an
object .

This law has been well demonstrated theoretically and by observation.

See more detailed about Mass Law at :

http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c6.htm

http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c5.htm

Becond Two
Informaiton Materialized Principle --- Physical Mechanism of Mass Formation .
1 , The universe constantly produces information that make everything
happened in reality ;
2 , That Information interacts with vacuum emerge event and the event
is condensed simmultaneously into mass ;
3 , Total masses of the universe at preset were condensed from all events
happened in the past of the universe .

All these arguments are well proved in both theory and observations .
See them at :

http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c14.htm

http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c16.htm

http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c13.htm

William McCormick

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject: Re: Energy being converted into matter?

Forum Ph.D.

Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 1072

trewsx7 wrote:

Everything is electrons. Even the spheres we call protons or a hydrogen atom. Hydrogen is just a sphere of electrons. Other atoms have many spheres of electrons.
Everything is electricity even matter. That was Benjamin Franklin's claim to fame. He showed that even matter could repel matter, a single piece of foil, could repel itself. If charged differently then the surrounding air the experiment was done in. Just like electricity.

At the edges of the universe it is speculated that free electrons in a giant dead pool. Do re-form into a proton/hydrogen atom, and move back into the Universe. There really is no energy. Or inertia.
However it is just a change in shape, not really energy. Newton was way ahead of his time about all things having an equal and opposite reaction. But he was speaking on a Universal scale.
There is velocity. And with velocity electrons can penetrate into places, and then either be accelerated, and become almost undetectable. Or they can slow further like in a bomb and you know they are rather detectable.

They are indestructible little levers with infinite power. Each and every electron.

Atoms and the structures they from can also have velocity, and these can appear to have energy. However they are just being held in place by repulsion and the time it takes to reverse the velocity.

Have you ever seen those science fiction space battles when a super giant battle cruiser is rammed by another giant ship. And it looks like only part of the ship is effected. Well on a subatomic scale that is how atoms that are also massless weightless objects create the illusion of mass. They absorb with space and time impacts that would shatter the whole structure without these principles.

Look at super cold objects, those objects have less then normal space between the atoms. If you drop them they shatter. Because they no longer have that time and space to eat up velocity. No more spring. No real large change in mass takes place in a super cold object. Yet an amazing difference in absorption capability.

I am doing some Benjamin Franklin like experiments, except, I am using an Oscilloscope. He would have loved it. I have found that static electricity is almost the same thing as magnetic fields. I will compile some information and make some movies.

Sincerely,

William McCormick
_________________
Warning: Any information contained in this post could be part of a conspiracy to make you stupid. So only use it if you understand it. Use at your own risk.

http://www.Rockwelder.com

zhang zhi qiang

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: Re: Energy being converted into matter?

Forum Freshman

Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 90
Location: Dalian ,China

William McCormick wrote:

trewsx7 wrote:

Everything is infromation being materialized by vacuum of the universe.

All thing (universal events) happened in the past of the universe appears
themselvies in form of matter (all masses of the universe )at present ,
all these matter are just a result of an information entity interacting with
vacuum . This infromation entity contains information of all events happened in the past of the universe . it is ultimate root of what now the universe looks like .

More expounded in an article entitled " Spirit of the Universe and the Materialized Universe" .
linked at ：http://www.universefedback.com/en/10web.htm

Preview of abstract of the article

Abstract Based on essentially upgraded physical concepts ---Space time configuration and Space time value of all physical units , all calculation results from Feeding Back Theory of the Universe (FBTU) are
tracking down an information entity existing in the universe which contain
information of all events happened in the past of the universe . Physical properties of this information entity are well described and calculated ,
some of which have been directly observed by human so far . When this
information entity interacts with vacuum , it yields the substantiated and
materialized universe we live accompanied by its general physical
property values having been calculated , being well matched with
observations commonly recognized .

Key word Mass law , G gauge , Space time configuration , Space
time value , 5 dimensional space , 5 dimensional time , 10 dimensional space time of the universe , STC analysistechnique , G bubble , Information modulus of the universe , Information equation of the universe , General physical property equation , Mirror equation , Information and event principle , past world , Information entity , spirit of
the universe .

All calculation results

Dishmaster

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 1:32 am Post subject:

Forum Junior

Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 258
Location: Heidelberg, Germany

Oh crap! Now we have two individuals spreading their own ideas about physics. Rolling Eyes

In order to create matter from energy, you will always get particles and their anti-particles as soon as you have photons with energies surpassing the equivalence of the masses of the two particles. They are then produced with a certain probability, like everything in quantum physics. However, the photon energy should be higher than the combined mass-equivalence, because you need some additional energy that is transformed into kinetic energy giving the particles some velocity to separate them from each other. Otherwise they will attract each other very easily and annihilate quickly.

This means, it is much easier to produce lighter particles like electrons/positrons than the much heavier nucleons. It happens during collider experiments. In nature, there are also the so-called virtual particles. They are particle/antiparticle couples that can be formed with some small probability even though they briefly violate the energy conservation law, because normally they annihilate each other instantly. But the infamous Hawking radiation is believed to consist of virtual particles built on the event horizon of a black hole becoming real, because on of the two is drawn in, while the other can escape.

mitchellmckain

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:12 am Post subject:

Forum Professor

Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 1869
Location: Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA

Dishmaster wrote:

Oh crap! Now we have two individuals spreading their own ideas about physics. Rolling Eyes

Indeed! This is quickly becoming thepseudoscienceforum.com when it comes to physics. The physics section of this forum is no longer a place which I can recommend to people for a place to discuss concepts of physics in order to understand physics better.
_________________
See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

theQuestIsNotOver

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 11:32 am Post subject: Re: Energy being converted into matter?

Forum Junior

Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 232
Location: grail search

trewsx7 wrote:

As a biology student, you cAN REST ON the gal you chose to use as your "best effort" of sexual endurance, yes?

Of course, you have no idea what I am talking about.
_________________
God is here for "good".....he ain't leaving.

Lawrence

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 12:09 pm Post subject:

Forum Freshman

Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 25
Location: United Kingdom

Is it me or does this feel like a topic filled with semi-religous beliefs. The "Information Theory" is not widely accepted, and nor will it be until it can be proven. I personally put more faith in Will's concept because he can prove it, and he is actively working on the theory.

This is still doing exactly as the Physics forum (I believe) was intended, but the focus on stable theories has been lost.
_________________
Just to be clear - I'm a student in IT. I am not a scientist, or trained philosopher, I'm just trying to portray my ideas.

SuperNatendo

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject:

Forum Masters Degree

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 518
Location: Nashville, TN USA

So when the matter is created from energy, both the matter and antimatter components are created, and unless you separate them using a magnetic field, they will collide and annihilate each other?
_________________
â€œItâ€™s no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.â€ - Mark Twain

Dishmaster

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject:

Forum Junior

Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 258
Location: Heidelberg, Germany

SuperNatendo wrote:

So when the matter is created from energy, both the matter and antimatter components are created, and unless you separate them using a magnetic field, they will collide and annihilate each other?

Exactly. Or they have enough velocity from the excess photon energy that is transformed into kinetic energy which allows them both to separate.

zhang zhi qiang

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject:

Forum Freshman

Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 90
Location: Dalian ,China

mitchellmckain wrote:

Dishmaster wrote:

Oh crap! Now we have two individuals spreading their own ideas about physics. Rolling Eyes

Following is quoted from your webpage as saying :
I am an online physics instructor. I have a masters in physics from the University of Utah. I lost interest in pure research and found myself more interested in physics education and software so I abandoned my PHD project to spend all my time on this simulator and some teaching.

Well , I have created some new concepts in phsics , and had no response
form academic society so far . Would you please share your comments
about these new concepts in physics ?

1 , space time configuration of physical unit
Every physical unit has its own space time structure objectively ,
is universally consists of multidimensional space time . and can be identically expressed in formula as :
dimA =Bm^a s^-b
here，B is an cofficient ，B≥|G|=6.67259e-11.
a ，b =5，4，3，2，1 ，0 ，-1，-2，-3，-4，-5
m represents one dimensional space ,
s represents one dimensional time .

called such expression as space time configuration (abbr.STC) .
e.g.
STC(N) = |G| m^4 s^-4 ,
that is , Netow is consists of 4 dimensional space
and mimus 4 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(kg) = |G| m^3 s^-2
that is , kilogram is consists of 3 dimensional space
and mimus 2 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(J) = |G| m^5 s^-4
that is , Joule is consists of 5 dimensional space
and mimus 4 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(W) = |G| m^5 s^-5
that is , Watt is consists of 5 dimensional space
and mimus 5 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(P) = |G| m^4 s^-3
that is , One unit of momentum is consists of 4 dimensional space
and mimus 3 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(Wb) = √|G| m^2 s^-1
that is , Weber is consists of 2 dimensional space
and mimus 1 dimensional time and an coefficient of√|G| .

See more detailed at : http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c2.htm

2 , space time value of physical unit
Every physical unit has its value , called as space time value(abbr. STV)
and can be expresses as:
STV(dimA) = STV [ Bm^a s^-b ]
e.g. :
STV(m)=2.4686279637116245â€¦e+34 (one dimensional space)
STV(s)=0.7400760451286427â€¦e+43 (one dimensional time)
STV(kg)=1.8327730013788420â€¦e+7 （kilogram）
STV(K)=2.8154860927690915â€¦e-33 (Kelvin)
See more at :
http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c2.htm

3 , G gauge of physical unit

For every physical unit , there exists an objective entity called it as
G gauge of the physical unit , whose value is constantly equal to 1 .

This is theoretical basis from which all conclusions are derived , called
it as Axiom of Physics
See more at :
http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c1.htm

Are these new concepts in physics enough for your appetite ?
Do these new stuff have enough might to call you back ?
Hopefully , you are intrigued from them once more .

Tell you in advance , by these new concepts , we have calculated out
most of physical properties of thr universe , well matched with observations made by human so far.

William McCormick

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:37 pm Post subject:

Forum Ph.D.

Joined: 03 Apr 2008
Posts: 1072

Dishmaster wrote:

Oh crap! Now we have two individuals spreading their own ideas about physics. Rolling Eyes

There are no anti-particles. I never saw even a slight proof of there existence.

Sincerely,

William McCormick
_________________
Warning: Any information contained in this post could be part of a conspiracy to make you stupid. So only use it if you understand it. Use at your own risk.

http://www.Rockwelder.com

mitchellmckain

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:37 pm Post subject:

Forum Professor

Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 1869
Location: Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Well , I have created some new concepts in phsics ,

Why?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

and had no response form academic society so far .

Could it be like inventing your own language and no one is interested in speaking it?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Every physical unit has its own space time structure objectively ,
is universally consists of multidimensional space time . and can be identically expressed in formula as :
dimA =Bm^a s^-b
here，B is an cofficient ，B≥|G|=6.67259e-11.
a ，b =5，4，3，2，1 ，0 ，-1，-2，-3，-4，-5
m represents one dimensional space ,
s represents one dimensional time .

Why should there be a numerical constant in front?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

STC(N) = |G| m^4 s^-4 ,
that is , Netow is consists of 4 dimensional space
and mimus 4 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(kg) = |G| m^3 s^-2
that is , kilogram is consists of 3 dimensional space
and mimus 2 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(J) = |G| m^5 s^-4
that is , Joule is consists of 5 dimensional space
and mimus 4 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(W) = |G| m^5 s^-5
that is , Watt is consists of 5 dimensional space
and mimus 5 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.
STC(P) = |G| m^4 s^-3
that is , One unit of momentum is consists of 4 dimensional space
and mimus 3 dimensional time and an coefficient of |G|.

I can see that this part is consistent.

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

2 , space time value of physical unit
Every physical unit has its value , called as space time value(abbr. STV)
and can be expresses as:
STV(dimA) = STV [ Bm^a s^-b ]
e.g. :
STV(m)=2.4686279637116245â€¦e+34 (one dimensional space)
STV(s)=0.7400760451286427â€¦e+43 (one dimensional time)
STV(kg)=1.8327730013788420â€¦e+7 （kilogram）
STV(K)=2.8154860927690915â€¦e-33 (Kelvin)

Why do this?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

3 , G gauge of physical unit

For every physical unit , there exists an objective entity called it as
G gauge of the physical unit , whose value is constantly equal to 1 .

This is theoretical basis from which all conclusions are derived , called
it as Axiom of Physics

Like what conclusion for example?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Are these new concepts in physics enough for your appetite ?
Do these new stuff have enough might to call you back ?
Hopefully , you are intrigued from them once more .

No. You have yet to offer anything to spark any interest of any kind. How old are you?

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Tell you in advance , by these new concepts , we have calculated out
most of physical properties of thr universe , well matched with observations made by human so far.

Like what for example?
_________________
See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

zhang zhi qiang

Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 3:59 am Post subject:

Forum Freshman

Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 90
Location: Dalian ,China

mitchellmckain wrote:

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Well , I have created some new concepts in phsics ,

Why?

Answer
Because by calculation I found that most of elementary constants
in physics are all equal and equal to 1 in their general values .
e.g. STV(G) = STV(G) = STV(h) =STV(c) =STV(kB) ... =1 , this
calculating results reveal space time configuration of physical units,
an intrinsic nature of them , I just defined them in line with this sort of
nature .
Please refer to :
http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c3.htm

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

and had no response form academic society so far .

Could it be like inventing your own language and no one is interested in speaking it?

Answer
Not sure .
But my freinds on line who is just a college student can understand
my theory .

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Why should there be a numerical constant in front?

Answer
it is a result of calculation , just like why modulus of gravitational
constant G has value of |G|=6.67259e-11 , it was specific nature of them.

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

I can see that this part is consistent.

Answer
Through calculation , I found that dimensional numbers of space or time
of all physical units we have defined and proved are less than or equal to
5 , there is no exceptional case . as long as the situation remain same ,
that would be an conclusion convincible :
The universe is consists of 5 dimensional space and 5 dimensional time ,
in other word , the universe has 10 dimensional space time .
Since the universe is composed of nothing but various physical
quantities (physical units)

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Why do this?

Answer
This are results directly coming from G gauge assumption .
In calculating all physical properties of the universe , they played an
important role . While these claculation results are well in line with
observation , in turn , I was convinced these values of physical units
to be true , to be objective.

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Like what conclusion for example?

Answer
Basic G gauge can be modified from Planck Dimensions
e.g.
Length gauge :
L(G) = [Gh / c^3]^1/2 =0.4050833153880067.â€¦e-34 m =1

Time gauge :
t(G) = [Gh / c^5]^1/2 =1.3512124957728855â€¦e-43 s =1

Mass Gauge :
M(G) = [ch / G]^1/2 =0.5456213067563055â€¦e-7 kg =1

Temperature gauge :
T(G) = [c^5h / G k(B)^2]^1/2 =0.3551784548210921â€¦e+33 K =1

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Are these new concepts in physics enough for your appetite ?
Do these new stuff have enough might to call you back ?
Hopefully , you are intrigued from them once more .

No. You have yet to offer anything to spark any interest of any kind. How old are you?

Answer
Sorry , I have not convinced you yet .

zhang zhi qiang wrote:

Tell you in advance , by these new concepts , we have calculated out
most of physical properties of thr universe , well matched with observations made by human so far.

Like what for example?

Answer
e.g.
I calculated 21 items in total for general physical properties of the
universe( calculated from a single formula , called General Physical
Propertiy Euqation of the Universe), and found those calculating results
of total mass , radius , age and average mass comply with our observations , despite these observed datum are not exactly assured .
e.g.
Observation datum for these four physical properties of the universe :

Total mass (observed mass) : 1.986e+51 kg ～ 1.986e+52 kg ?
(Observed data )

Radius : e+10 pc =3.0857e+26m ？
Observed data)

Age : e+10 years --- 2e+10 years ？
Estimated result in cosmological theories)

Average mass density : e-27 kg/m^3 ?
(Observed data and theoretical result combined)

Calculating results by the theory as :

Total mass (including dark matter) :
4.2315167338906745â€¦e+53 kg

Radiu :
3.1381767999999997â€¦e+26 m

Age :
3.3170311178758666â€¦e+10 years.

Average mass density :
3.2687013208516523â€¦e-27 kg / m^3

Specific calculating process and calculating results for other physical
properties of the universe can be seen at :
http://www.universefedback.com/popularized_e/c10.htm

density of the universe

Display posts from previous:

Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Page 1 of 3

Science Forum Forum Index » Pseudoscience » Energy being converted into matter?

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum