Welcome to the ToeQuest.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    non-relativistic spin


    A direct quote from the English translations of Chapter VIII, Page 199, 1st paragraph, Volume 3, 3rd Edition, Course of Theoretical Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Non-relativistic Theory) by L.D. Landau and E. M. Liftshitz at the Institute of Physics Problems, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1977, Pergamon Press:

    In both classical and quantum mechanics, the law of conservation of angular momentum is a consequence of the isotropy of space with respect to a closed system. This already demonstrates the relation between the angular momentum and the symmetry properties under rotation. In quantum mechanics, however, the relation in question is a particularly far-reaching one, and essentially constitutes the basic content of the concept of angular momentum, especially as the classical definition of the angular momentum of a particle as the product r ´ p has no direct significance in quantum mechanics, owing to the fact that position and momentum cannot be simultaneously measured.

    It is now understood that both authors did not believed the mathematical usefulness of topology for physical descriptions. Nevertheless, from a topology point of view it is the isotropy of spacetime that effected the laws of conservation not exclusively for angular momentum but for square of energy as well. The square of energy is derived from r ´ p by taking the time derivative r ´ dp/dt ® r ´ F where F is now the infinitesimal primary force and the quantity r ´ F is transformed into an infinitesimal torque. Furthermore, the scalar product of r ´ F with itself can be defined as the local infinitesimal quantity for the square of energy: E²= r ´ F × r ´ F. This quantity is experimentally discovered as the quantum vacuum fluctuation by a Casimir detector.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  2. #2
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,621
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: non-relativistic spin

    Stillness awaits in the eye of the storm,that "stillness principle" awaits us all,some find it in meditation,some in pondering the awe in nature.At the core of all spin lies a
    peaceful stillness.




    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  3. #3
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: non-relativistic spin

    How can we transform this quantized stillness into continuous spillness?
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,621
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: non-relativistic spin

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    How can we transform this quantized stillness into continuous spillness?
    By becoming spontaneously supersymmeterised!



    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  5. #5
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: non-relativistic spin

    How about by a double-entry accounting?
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,621
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: non-relativistic spin

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    How about by a double-entry accounting?

    That will not cut the mustard!



    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  7. #7
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: non-relativistic spin

    Then it must be a quadruple entries accounting (yin-yang-yin-yang) creating the first matter particle of the relative universe while the absolute universe remains yin-yang.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

  8. #8
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    6,657
    Thanks Given
    836
    Thanked 1,049x in 746 Posts
    Rep Power
    105

    Re: non-relativistic spin

    Hi Antonio;

    I watched the segment on cold fusion on 60 minutes and it was excellent. You can access the entire segment, both video and print, with a quick internet search for 60minutes.com. Don't give up your research it seems very possible.

    Best,

    Pat

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    11,621
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    295
    Thanked 896x in 724 Posts
    Rep Power
    154

    Smile Re: non-relativistic spin

    Quote Originally Posted by AntonioLao View Post
    Then it must be a quadruple entries accounting (yin-yang-yin-yang) creating the first matter particle of the relative universe while the absolute universe remains yin-yang.
    That sounds more like it.



    regards michael.
    Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
    reveal herself?

  10. #10
    Raider of the lost time
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,778
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,106
    Thanked 1,472x in 1,192 Posts
    Rep Power
    158

    Re: non-relativistic spin

    And Profpat would be our resident accountant to sanctify its validity and usefulness calling it double accounting of the balance energy book of the universe.
    Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: a(tr(t)=c²

 

 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top