• Feeling isolated? You're not alone.

    Join 20,000+ people who understand exactly how your day went. Whether you're newly diagnosed, self-identified, or supporting someone you love – this is a space where you don't have to explain yourself.

    Join the Conversation → It's free, anonymous, and supportive.

    As a member, you'll get:

    • A community that actually gets it – no judgment, no explanations needed
    • Private forums for sensitive topics (hidden from search engines)
    • Real-time chat with others who share your experiences
    • Your own blog to document your journey

    You've found your people. Create your free account

Any one else here obsessed with physics?

I just finished reading Carlos Rovelli book, reality is not what it seem. Excellent book. I have read a lot of books on physics over many years. one of the best easy read. I would answer some of your questions, you are thinking to much in newtonian terms. Carlos books are easier reading
 
Last edited:
I like physics. I was obsessed with science through high school and college, and wanted to be a physicist. I changed my major in college and went into something else. The physics that I did study always raised more questions than they answered.

Some of my unanswered questions are:
1) Viewed as a particle, a photon experiences no time (due to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald time contraction). Viewed as a wave, a photon is an electrical field and a magnetic field, at right angles to each other and propagating each other. As each field is propagated by the change in the other, they must experience time. How do we reconcile the particle not experiencing time, but the wave experiencing time?

2) When an object's potential energy is converted to kinetic energy (i.e. as in dropping a bowling ball off a bridge), the object gains the mass equivalent of the kinetic energy. But before that takes place, when the energy is still only potential energy, where is it? Where is potential energy expressed as mass?

3) When traveling at relativistic speeds, isn't it possible for the traveler's internal instruments to (incorrectly) register a speed faster than light? For example, a rocket traveling at 90% of the speed of light for 10 years will travel 9 light years. During that time, it will only age 4.36 years. An astronaut aboard that ship will note that they traveled 9 light years in 4.36 years, and calculate a speed of 2 times the speed of light. Further, the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction also applies to space and the rocket will be compressed to 43.6% of its original length while traveling. If the ship's instruments are comparing space traveled to the length of the ship, it's calculated speed will be further more than doubled.


I am currently reading "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes. It's very, very, in-depth and it's some really heavy reading, so it's taking me a while to slog through it.
 
You would enjoy reading Lee Smolins books and Carlo Rovelli, his take on black holes exploding billions of years in the future due to time dilation. Fascinating insight on black holes. I used to be a follower of string theory now I am a looper.
Carlo Rovelli is easy reading.
 
Last edited:
Ronald Zeeman said:
My obsession has always been determining how the universe works via particles physics or cosmology. Anyone else having simular interest, I would love to connect with.
Click to expand...

I have always had a very strong interest in physics, but my obsession is with physics involving electronic design.

Otherwise, I love reading and learning about all aspects of physics including astrophysics, particle physics,
thermodynamics, acoustics, etc... I feel I'm in heaven when visiting planetariums, science museums, etc...

Can't say I'm good at it. Really bad in math, but that didn't stop me from making a career in electronic design. It's just my obsession that pulls me through.
 
Sounds like we have a lot in common. My background was chemical engineering specializing in industrial painting.

Museums, libraries, any other public locations for social interaction are off limits for us, under threat of $800.00 fine per person due to Covid.

Sucks to be us, we have the means to travel, but can't.
 
Last edited:
Ken said:
I have always had a very strong interest in physics, but my obsession is with physics involving electronic design.

Otherwise, I love reading and learning about all aspects of physics including astrophysics, particle physics,
thermodynamics, acoustics, etc... I feel I'm in heaven when visiting planetariums, science museums, etc...

Can't say I'm good at it. Really bad in math, but that didn't stop me from making a career in electronic design. It's just my obsession that pulls me through.
Click to expand...
 
When I was younger I was really into reading about particle and theoretical physics. At one point in second grade I even ended up writing a letter to Brian Greene. My interest started to wane after 6th grade though and eventually I lost all interest until 10th grade when I took AP Physics 1. I had an A in the class through most of the year but by the time we were reviewing for the AP test the pandemic had hit and we were online. I lost all interest and forgot most of what I learned and ended up getting a 2 on the AP test.

I find both Quantum Physics and General Relativity pretty interesting but I don't really feel like I have an intuitive understanding of either and I don't think I ever will until I understand the math. Its pretty hard for me to understand any of it without some equations to grasp on to since I don't have any magic Aspie visual intuition. Hopefully that should be soon though. I'm finishing up AP Calculus BC at the moment and reviewing for the AP test. This summer break I'm planning on taking Calculus 3 at the local Community College and self studying Linear Algebra.
 
I used to be obsessed with physics because of my obsession with space. I was also fantastic at math. I dropped out of college because of burnout and I kind of intellectually turned off after that. I'm an object at rest resisting outside forces.
 
Penumbra said:
I used to be obsessed with physics because of my obsession with space. I was also fantastic at math. I dropped out of college because of burnout and I kind of intellectually turned off after that. I'm an object at rest resisting outside forces.
Click to expand...
I've been burning out for the entirety of my school career. I think I'm at around a 2.5 GPA at the moment and if it weren't for math I'd seriously be considering getting a GED. I'm pretty intellectually curious overall but I can't be bothered to complete any schoolwork.
 
Not so interested in theory. It was the application that I enjoyed. In particular I enjoyed nuclear chemistry and worked in production and development for a firm manufacturing nuclear pharmaceuticals, both cyclotron and reactor derived. Found that I had a facility in designing processes, including I-123 production via the Xe-123 parent from a p, 5n spallation reaction on a I-127 target.
 
You sound some one I would like to meet, my forte has always been the ability to visualize processes in my head and then methodically fix them.
 
Ronald Zeeman said:
You sound some one I would like to meet, my forte has always been the ability to visualize processes in my head and then methodically fix them.
Click to expand...
What I enjoyed to do to optimize processes was Statistical Design of Experiments. In school people were tought to vary only one independent variable at a time. With DOE, one changes all variables at once over several levels of input. One easily homes in on the robust region of the process while minimizing expensive trials.
 
Yes, I have a background in quality engineering, familiar with DOE. Did not use it much, straight SPC is my main tool. Currently using it to figure what is going on with covid-19 a process is a process.
 
As you are probably aware, Pharma manufacturing process only need to comply with Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations Part 211. Before I retired, I spent over a decade trying to implement SPC as part of good manufacturing practices. Only recently in guidance has the FDA required some basic SPC for a measure of process quality.

ps. I still have the Western Electric (later AT&T) Statistical Quality Control Handbook.
 
I spent most of my career working in the coating application indusrty not that familiar with Pharma retired a couple of years ago. have a background in chemical engineering. we seem to have a far bit in common interests and education
 
I saw my son just before Mother's Day. we discussed. simple proof that there is no such thing as absolute length. he asked me a obvious question how the speed of light can be measured if its distance over time.. I checked it out using a internet search surprised to find speed of light can only be accurately measured in one direction simultaneously. a hundred-year-old paradox Einstein was aware of this.
 
Last edited:
Gerald Wilgus said:
As you are probably aware, Pharma manufacturing process only need to comply with Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations Part 211. Before I retired, I spent over a decade trying to implement SPC as part of good manufacturing practices. Only recently in guidance has the FDA required some basic SPC for a measure of process quality.

ps. I still have the Western Electric (later AT&T) Statistical Quality Control Handbook.
Click to expand...
You Having worked with isotopes greatly interests me, you must have a very good understanding of neutrons.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom