• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

I have a question about laws of physics

 
 
 
Singularities are not all that exotic.

An example of a singularity is an inductive ignition system for a car.

The equation for voltage on an inductor is E = L* di/dt where L is inductance and I is current.

Put a DC current through the inductor. Abruptly break the current and the voltage tries to go to infinity. At some point the spark gap arcs dissipating the energy in the inductor and detonating the air fuel mixture.

Without the spark gap the inductor wire insulation could break down causing a lot of heat and the inductor exploding or catching fire.

The flip side is a capacitor I = C * dv/dt. Abruptly short a capacitor and the current will try to rise to infinity. Results can be explosive. One wears safety glasses when woring with large captors.
 
Are those infinities actually reached though?

The infinity at t=0 is likely not physically real and there some other physics we don’t know about yet that were at play then.
 
No. A system only has a finite amount of energy.

Mathematically in the limit as dt --> 0 a parameter asymptotically approaches infinity.

a = 1/b. As b --> 0, a --> infinity.

Division by zero is undefined.

Electronically you can add, subtract, multiply, and divide. But there is no physical way to divide by zero.

I doubt we have any idea of the total reality we are in.
 
bilby said:
steve_bank said:
Unless you posit something fro nothing like Creationism there has to be an initial condition and a spark that starts the BB.
Click to expand...
We don't need to "posit" something from nothing; We have observed it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect
Click to expand...
Disagree--the Casimir Effect requires there to be a universe for it to occur in. It's not from nothing.

QM feels an awful lot like static to me. But to have static you must have something receiving/rendering a signal of some sort.
 
It becomes like a theological debate.

I had to know something about QM for work, I also had the Laws Of Thermodynamics tattooed on my chest.

Every time I looked at claims like something from nothing citing QM I found it to be speculative science IOW an interpretation, misinterpretation of theory, or conflation of science with science fiction.

Using imaginary constructs to make a technique work is not uheard. In digital control systems it may not always be possible to mathematically transition from one real system state to another. A virtual state is created as an intermediate step.

Or method images used in electromagnetics.

The "method of images" is a mathematical technique used primarily in physics to solve problems involving electric or magnetic fields in the presence of a conductor. It works by replacing the conductor with a "fictitious" or "image" charge (or charge distribution) that is a mirror image of the original charge, but with an opposite sign. This creates an equivalent problem that is easier to solve, allowing one to use Coulomb's law instead of complex differential equations to find the electric field, as shown in this YouTube video.
Click to expand...

Using something from nothing to make a theory match experiment does not mean something came from nithng.

Phlisophicaly how wold you prove something came form nothng not soewhere we know nothing about?.

We use the term fields withnut thiking, but fields are a gerneralized absrtaction used to model phenomena.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom