Mass - Science topic

In plants

Is the energy of universe conserved while its entropy is increasing and what would happen if two black holes collided that are both the same size and mass?

What happens to gravitational potential energy as distance increases and what happens to gravitational attraction of mass or distance changes?

Gravity is often considered a pseudo-force that is associated with the geometric curvature of spacetime. The electromagnetic force is considered a gauge force transferred by virtual photon messenger particles. Gauge theories are field theories that have the property of gauge invariance. These two mechanisms appear to be completely different.

However, this is a discussion question, and I will attempt to prove these two forces are closely related. The referenced preprint below presents a model of the universe based entirely on waves. An electron and other fermions are modeled as rotating soliton waves that exist in the sonic medium of oscillating spacetime. This model predicts that the electron’s electrical charge and its gravitational curvature are both the result of an electron’s wave properties interacting with the medium of oscillating spacetime.

When these forces are viewed as wave effects, predictions are made that these two forces should merge at the wave limit. The maximum charge that a wave-based particle can produce is Planck charge (q_p) and the maximum mass a wave-based particle can produce is Planck mass (m_p). The prediction is that the electrostatic force between two Planck charges (F_qp) equals the gravitational force magnitude between two Planck masses (F_Gp). At arbitrary separation distance r, the force magnitude is F_qp= F_Gp = ħc/r². This merging of these forces at the Planck limit can be turned into equations that show that the forces are also closely related even at the level of two electrons or between any other particles.

What do you think? Are these forces fundamentally different? Is gravity even a force?

How do unequal heating and the movement of air at the equator and at the poles produce global wind patterns and what does the unequal heating of air masses cause?

In my theory, the speed of gravitational waves could be 76 m/sec greater than the speed of photons. If what I'm saying could be true (i.e. experimentally verifiable), then it would be proof that the photon has a non-zero mass!!

My objective is to find the binding affinity of divalent metal ions with polyacrylic acid (PAA) by Isothermal Titration Calorimetry. In this experiment, I need to prepare 2mM of PAA. The 2mM should be in monomer concentration terms. So, How do I calculate how much mass of polyacrylic acid do I need to measure if the average molecular weight(Mw) of choosen polyacrylic acid is 12000. If someone knows, please tell me in detail with mass calculation strategies.

Dear Friends, Grand Success. The 119th finding in TOU (Theory of Universality) is that G at the periphery of Cosmos is theoretically calculated as G' = 1.82266 x 10^16 terrestrial SI units as per Lorentz transformations; which agrees with the G' calculated as 1.81423 x 10^16 terrestrial SI units as per my Theory. Both agree. This is the theoretical proof that all the constants change as we move up and down from the spherical shell of our OU (27.6 Billion light years thickness) and from a radius of 1.64682 Trillion Trillion light years from the CCBH ( Central Cosmic Black Hole ). For example, as per TOU, G = (4 c^3. lambda_p^2. m_p) / (N_a^2/3. h), where, c is speed of light, lambda_p is the Compton wavelength of proton, m_p is the mass of proton , N_a is Avogadro constant and h is Planck constant. The above formula for G yields a value of 6.66889 x 10^-11 SI units , which perfectly agrees with experimental value of G. Now, as space-time changes when we move across the Cosmos radially, c changes, mass changes with speed ( so does the Compton wavelength). As mass changes with speed Avogadro constant also changes. Finally, h = lmc, and all the three change, so does h. This is because the space-time created for each shell from the CCBH is different. To be published in the next Annexure.

Please, join:

i m post mais idea in youtube beacause in brazail all institutes are comunist. and not have free minds .

maybe mass exist only because universe stay in aceleration

see video in diego silva lemelle chanel in youtube.

link in

I'm keen to view data on the body masses of people (and/or heights), disaggregated by sex, representing a good diversity of human populations, based on large sample sizes and including a measure of spread/error around the means.

Is anyone aware of such a resource? Thank you.

I am expressing a membrane protein (about 15 kDa) in BL21(DE3) cells. The expression is good, and the yield is decent, but each time I checked the mass with a TOF mass spec, the mass I get is nothing close to the expected value for an isotopically labeled protein, especially with 15N. When I introduced 13C glucose, I saw an increase in mass, which shows the incorporation of 13C. This is in contrast with the 15N labeling. I've tried increasing the concentration of 15NH4Cl and eliminating rich broth, but nothing has changed thus far. Does anyone have an idea how to go around this problem? Thank you

How are warming ocean temperatures impacting fish and other marine mammals and difference between ocean currents and water mass?

If anything is physically existent, it can well be considered (1) as matter and energy, because these two are inter-convertible, and (2) as either matter or energy, since these are the two most basic states of physical existents.

But the mass of matter-energy is considered as a quantity, and energy too is considered as a quantity. In these cases, the former manner of considering matter and energy as physical existents is kept away from consideration. Instead, the circumstantially possible measure of matter-energy together is taken as mass, and the circumstantially possible measure of energy alone is considered as energy. Thus, mass and energy may be considered as a pair of quantities too.

How to differentiate these two aspects of doing physical science? How to reconcile them? Note that existent matter and energy as such are not separately and respectively being treated to correspond to the quantitative concepts of mass and energy. We have, as a result, many confusions in physics and in the philosophy of physics. Famously, the difficulty to define mass and energy as quantities might issue from the above discrepancy.

I invite your well-considered viewpoints. Merely holding that physics is such and that we need not ask such questions at all -- such is not the attitude from which the above questions are asked here. Do we have fundamental solutions for these questions?

Raphael Neelamkavil

Everyone knows simple classical model of dielectric susceptibility called Lorentz oscillator model, in other words, spring mass model. But I can't find it's all parameter values for different atoms: resonance (spontaneous) frequency - ω0 = \sqrt{k/m}, 2) effective mass of electron - m, 3) damping coefficient - γ = 1/τ, τ - relaxation/scattering time. If there are experimenters or specialists from relating fields which have knowledge of handbooks, databases, catalogs or any writings for experementers, of values of ω0, m, γ, plasma frequency ωp, real (refractive index or relative permittivity) and imaginary parts of susceptibilities \chi(1), please provide information on them.

Related question is the following: Has the Lorentz model expanded for diatomic, triatomic, ... multiatomic molecules? Is it useful for theoretical description of susceptibilities for multiatomic molecules? Why yes or why not? Please provide relevant information.

Thank you in advance...

according to Newton gravity and GR a star with mass exceeding the Chandrasekhar limit collapses to a point and mass density becomes infinite, what is nonsense and shows the limit of especially GR.. A new formulation of W.Greiner an collaborators has been given, which avoids this problem.

please comment.

Hi,

 I'm using Brooks mass flow controller 5851E with Brooks control and readout unit 0152E. The differential pressure is set at 15 psi. Even though the set point is zero at the control unit, the mass flow controller lets through the gas. I cannot completely stop the gas flow, it still shows 2.5% on the control unit when the set point is at 0.

Gravitational time dilation and time dilation for a moving object are fundamental concepts in the theory of relativity, expressing the equivalence between density and distance traveled in time. In this context, density can be defined as a length in space-time, representing the concentration of mass and energy within a given region of the universe.

Gravitational time dilation occurs in the presence of a gravitational field, where time is experienced differently depending on the strength of the gravitational field. This phenomenon is a direct consequence of Einstein's general theory of relativity, which posits that massive objects cause a curvature in space-time. As a result, time passes more slowly in regions of stronger gravitational fields, such as near massive celestial bodies like stars or black holes.

On the other hand, time dilation for a moving object, also known as relativistic time dilation, arises from the principle that the speed of light is constant for all observers. When an object moves at a significant fraction of the speed of light, time for that object appears to pass more slowly from the perspective of a stationary observer. This effect becomes increasingly pronounced as the object's velocity approaches the speed of light, leading to significant differences in the passage of time between the moving object and the stationary observer.

The equivalence between density and distance traveled in time is a profound insight into the nature of space-time and the interconnectedness of mass, energy, and the passage of time. It suggests that the concentration of mass and energy within a given region of space-time directly influences the experience of time within that region. Furthermore, it underscores the intricate relationship between gravitational forces, relative motion, and the fundamental fabric of the universe.

In summary, gravitational time dilation and time dilation for a moving object reveal the intricate interplay between density and distance traveled in time within the framework of Einstein's theory of relativity. These concepts have profound implications for our understanding of the nature of space-time and the fundamental laws governing the behavior of mass, energy, and the passage of time.

Here I present my findings that the solar system mirrors atomic systems and has a quantum mechanical solution to the Schrödinger wave equation based on a base unit of 1 second. I further suggest that this solution for our spectral class G2V star the Sun, may indicate that life is a uniform cosmic unfolding throughout the Universe. In order to test whether this works for many G2V star like our Sun we would need to detect Earth sized planets around such other such stars, to see if my Planck constant works for other planetary systems, which I show is connected to the my theory for the radius of a proton in terms the Natural constants such as the gravitational constant for gravity and the Planck constant for atoms. However the first Earth-sized planets have been detected in the habitable zones of stars, and interestingly there are 4 planets in a red dwarf spectral class M star in the habitable zone of a star designated TOI 700 with complete data and fairly small margins of error. Two of them are Earth-sized, but the star is not spectral class G2V like our Sun. However, before that we detected an Earth-like planet in the habitable zone of a G2V star like our Sun, but it was not Earth-sized, but rather a super-Earth, which is to say it was much more massive than the Earth, estimated 5 times more massive. And this figure for the mass was an estimate, where for our Earth-sized planets around an M star are well determined. The star for the super-Earth is called Kepler-452 and the planet is called Kepler-452b. We will not work with this one in the paper, as the data is not accurate enough for the size and mass of the planet because the system is so far away. Lightly suggested in this study is the progression from cool red M stars to warm yellow G stars to hot blue A stars in association with a progression from one type of life to another.

I have a dataset of trace elements LA-ICP-MS analyses with raw data, which consists of a set of a single file for each spot analysis. Each of these files has some columns (masses) and plenty of lines or sweeps (count rate per mass). The first column holds the time data, which is the time spent to sweep all analysed masses or the dwell time per sweep. Supposing I've analysed 10 masses and each sweep has 1.01 seconds, Is it possible to calculate the dwell time per mass?

I know one can get this information directly from the ICP-MS software but I would like to know if it's possible to get it from the raw data somehow.

Thanks!

Shadows could be a little energy and do not “without anything”?

Hello, what is the correct way to express the biomass results measured with a laboratory digital scale? Most scientific works express it as weight, however very few express it as mass,

thank you very much

Are Lorentz transformations a paradox?

The modern proof of Lorentz transformations makes you laugh and the modern proof of mass energy equivalence E=mc^2 keeps you laughing.

So what ?

I tried to isolate pr-FMN from UbiD like enzyme and verify it via UPLC and Mass spectrometry. The results obtained from MS shows detection of right mass but UPLC spectrum tell another story. How can I identify compound just with mass if it’s not prFMN?

your guidance will be highly appreciated.

If a point on its surface(if we suppose it as a sphere with radius 'r')moves with linear velocity 'v'(relativistic speed) and the mass pf that particle is 'm'.

How can we calculate its quantum spin? I am not interested in listening that quantum is different, relativity is different and a classical is different.

Its spin can be calculated. Please elaborate .....

Dear Friends, Grand Success. The 131st finding in my TOU (Theory of Universality) is : that protons are space-waves just like electrons, and taking the speed of protons in the space to be (1/43) of electron speed and applying exactly the same logic as applied for electron, the mass of the proton works out to be : (- i) 1.63193 x 10^-27 kg, ( the electron mass was derived earlier as (+i) 9.11941635 x 10^-31 kg ); which agrees with the experimental results. The (i) factor shows that all mass moving at speeds greater than or less than the speed of space is imaginary. That is only space can have realistic mass. Incidentally, the speed of the space is same as the speed of light at that space-time. To be published in next Annexure.

Pl join :

The article is Die 2/3 Potenz des Korpergewichtes als Mass des Energiebedarfs (English: Power of body weight as a measure of energy requirements).

If you know the link, can you provide it? Thank you.

why critical mass is require to start nuclear activity ?

how to obtain the microalgae mass for adsorption? microalgae lyaphlization ? Does any other action need to be taken before and after?

i want to find center of mass coordinate of the protein,for that i using the following command

gmx_mpi traj -f md_noPBC.xtc -s md.tpr -com -ox com.xvg -pbc

but i m not getting satisfactory results. what could be the issue .is it with this command or anything else

I applied cuprous oxide onto a Titanium plate and subjected it to sulfur treatment, employing Ammonium sulfide vapor. This process was undertaken to create a supercapacitor, which involved the use of a gel electrolyte. What is the procedure for calculating the Active mass of the electrode material?

Hello everyone,

I'm currently working with chromatograms on a Shimadzu system and am seeking assistance in converting files saved in either .CDF or .qgd formats to .d format for use in Mass Hunter. I've attempted saving the files directly from the Shimadzu program and have also tried downloading some converters, but so far, without success. Any insights or guidance on overcoming this challenge would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you in advance!

Hello.

There is a file that is attached here.

I want to calculate pressure (P) and gas velocity (u_g).

The data are:

The system is an ideal gas mixture in a fixed bed reactor, the gas goes up through the reactor and I am using numerical methods to calculate my parameters from mass and energy balance. But inside the problem, I am facing the following problem :

temperature (T) a function of z and is know for z₁

P is a function of z not r.

u_g is not a function of r.

r₇=r₉=r₁₀=0

𝑐𝑡 is molar concentration of gas mixture.

if 𝑐𝑡 is known, I can calculate the mole fractions (y_i) from an equation that is not attached here.

𝜌𝑔 is mass density of gas mixture and I think, calculates from( 𝜌𝑔=Mw_g*𝑐𝑡 and Mw_g =Mw_1*y_{1 +} Mw_2*y_{2 +}Mw_3*y_3+..., Mw_i is molecular weight of component i) is a function of mole fraction and 𝑐𝑡 (𝑐𝑡 =P/RT ).

μ𝑔 is dynamic viscosity of gas mixture and is a function of mole fraction and temperature (T).

d_p,epsilon_b are known and are constant.

How can I calculate P pressure and u_g from these equations for z₁?

I am working on 137Cs-based soil erosion estimation. For this purpose, I need to calculate the soil mass depth (Kg/m²).

Suppose I am using a box monolith with dimensions of 0.15 meters in length (L), 0.10 meters in width (B), and 0.05 meters in depth (the depth of the box) for soil sampling.

Should I use the vertical or the horizontal cross-section of the box for 137Cs-based analysis to estimate soil mass depth and convert Bq/Kg to Bq/m²?

Regarding the Dark Matter mystery in astrophysics - do we need to change the law of gravity (think MOND aka MOdified Newtonian Dynamics) or accept that there is unknown, extra mass in the universe?

We may not have gravity entirely right and also, there may be extra mass in other dimensions which interact with ours. Albert Einstein might give us a clue to getting gravity right, because he thought of gravity as a push caused by the warping and curvature of space-time, not as a pull. This "push" interpretation was popular as recently as the 1960s when a scientist described it this way in World Book Encyclopedia. Einstein could also give clues to understanding dark matter through General Relativity, E=mc^2, and a paper published 3 or 4 years after general relativity.

The push interpretation could explain Earth's tides this way. All the water in the oceans is being pushed towards Earth’s centre at 32 feet per second every second. But the seafloor prevents its descent. So there is a recoil. This recoil is larger during the spring tides seen at full and new moon because Sun, Earth and Moon are aligned at these times. At the neap tides of 1st and 3rd quarter; the sun, earth and moon aren’t lined up but form a right angle and our planet has access to more gravitational waves, which suppress oceanic recoil to a greater degree. We can imagine the sun and moon pulling earth’s water in different directions at neap tide but suppression is a more accurate description. If variables like wind/atmospheric pressure/storms are deleted, this greater suppression causes neap tides which are much lower than spring tides.

The extra mass in other dimensions (dark matter) might be regarded this way - If the propagation of photons and gravitons is indeed curvilinear (General Relativity says space-time is curved) and follows the circular path of Wick rotation, the energy inherent in space-time could pass from our real space-time on the x-axis to imaginary space-time on the y-axis then return to the x-axis, and on and on. The negative imaginary space-time below the x-axis might even be identified with science fiction’s subspace.

In 1919, Einstein published a paper asking if gravitation and electromagnetism play a role in formation of elementary particles. It isn't outdated by discovery of the nuclear forces in the 1930s since adaptation of the paper reveals how it can describe the properties of the nuclear forces' bosons, and even the Higgs boson. This interaction of the axes, and repeated cycling through other dimensions, allows dark energy to form the mass known as dark matter by obeying E=mc^2 i.e. the photons and gravitons of “dark” electromagnetism and “dark” gravitation would interact. This model challenges the prevailing notion of dark energy as the driver of universal expansion. Instead, it posits a potentially groundbreaking view of the universe as a static entity.

According to our theory for new physics it exists a close link between the two masses. The mass of the universe is in fact a function of a mass at rest of a neutron.

How to prove that the movement of the winds of the planet Earth is towards the North Pole or the South Pole? And how do climatologists respond?

as you know :

The magnetic attraction force increases in the frontal part of meteorites and planets.

It leads to the accumulation of matter, so the mass of the planet increases in the direction

There is a moving front and, on the other hand, the accumulation and mass has been reduced in the rear

The part of the planet that results in reduced gravity. Therefore, any observation of greater gravitational force means that the planet is moving in this direction, and it has been proven that the greatest attraction is at the North Pole, i.e. at . The planet moves in a direction from the South Pole to the North Pole

James Gray added a reply

Chartered Physicist, PhD Director of Design and Development at Red Core Consulting ltd.

Vancouver, Canada:

There is no such polar movement of wind.

We can show that at high latitudes, air does not flow uniformly poleward (how is that possible if air sinks?)

The magnetic properties or other properties of meteorites have nothing to do with this issue.

>This planet moves in a direction from the South Pole to the North Pole

It is not true.

The Earth rotates on its axis - and orbits the Sun in an elliptical path. The earth does not and cannot move perpendicular to the plane of that path.

Michael John Patrick added a reply

Alumni of the University of Washington, Seattle

United States:

"What do you mean by 'winds'? Earth's atmosphere has various stable structures at different scales from the global circulation (https://www.noaa.gov/jetstream/global/global-atmospheric-circulations) to very small microclimates in a River valleys are special - each governed by different physics and thermodynamics. The "wind" is actually somewhat of a side effect, the circulation of fluid mass tangential to the slope between high and low pressure areas.

As for mass gain, "48.5 tons (44 tons or 44,000 kg) of meteorite material falls to Earth every day" (https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/meteors-meteorites/) and due to Earth's rotation which spreads relatively evenly on the surface during a day. Furthermore, any increase in mass will increase gravity, not decrease it. And the magnetic field vector is almost vertical at the poles, the earth (planet) itself is a "magnet", so the field is more or less symmetrical, so why should it move "towards" the north pole?

There is a great image at https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/isobaric/700hPa/orthographic=57.78,35.19,1946, you can see the different wind patterns at different pressure scales and altitudes for the local area view Explore for yourself. . Attached is a high level snapshot.

According to our theory for new physics there is a close link between these two masses.

Gavitational potential originating from distant masses of the universe is about 10⁸ times larger than the Sun's gravitational potential at the Earth's distance, and yet the latter can keep the Earth in its orbit.

It cannot be excludd that luminal speed according to c² = 2GM_u/R_u is essentially determined and limited by the gravitational potential of distant masses (subscript u). Notably, Einstein 1911 found light deflection close to the Sun to result from locally enhanced gravitational potential.

So it also cannot be excluded that electromagnetic properties of vacuum space according to 1/(ε₀µ₀) = 2GM_u/R_u are essentially determined by the gravitational potential from distant masses.

Accidentally or not, it appears noticeable that the potential energy of a mass m at the gravitational potential of the universal masses approximately corresponds to the relativistic energy equivalent E = mc².

Finally, a characteristic deceleration observed on rapidly spinning rotors also indicates a possible interaction with distant masses.

How can tourism companies collaborate with destination marketing organizations, local businesses, and travel influencers to collectively promote destinations and experiences through digital marketing initiatives?

Can entropy change without temperature and what happens to the thermal energy of a substance when it changes mass?

I just added an answer to an elder discussion,

I am doing the metabolic profiling using mass spectrometry (MALDI-MS) and I have a question about feature mass peak selection (peak extraction and alignment) for further applying to machine learning.

There are several journal papers regarding this for other labs.:

"Self-Assembled Hyperbranched Gold Nanoarrays Decode Serum United Urine Metabolic Fingerprints for Kidney Tumor Diagnosis".

"Bimetallic Metal–Organic Framework Nanoparticles for Monitoring Metabolic Changes in Cardiovascular Disorders"

How can we align mass peaks?

In my study, I usually extract mass peaks with S/N >3. After peak extraction, mass peaks are aligned. But, I have no idea how to align the mass peaks. For example, one mass spectrum shows a mass peak at 149.95 m/z, while the other mass spectrum shows a peak at 149.99 m/z (slightly different position but eventually the same peak).

Anyone can provide a more detailed explanation of the peak alignment in the process?

Thank you

Which are ways in which heat energy leaves the surface of land masses and type of energy transfer does not require matter?

The concept of relativistic mass can be understood as an effective mass. The original equation, m′ = m₀/√{1 - (v²/c²)} - m₀, is analysed within the context of special relativity, revealing that m′ takes on an energetic form due to its dependence on the Lorentz factor. The unit of m′, denoted in Joules (J), emphasizes its nature as an energetic quantity. The brief connection between relativistic mass (m′) and m′ being equivalent to an effective mass (mᵉᶠᶠ) highlights the distinctions between relativistic mass and rest mass (m₀), as m′ is not considered an invariant mass. To illustrate this, a practical example involving an 'effective mass' of 0.001 kg (mᵉᶠᶠ = 0.001kg) demonstrates the application of E = m′c², resulting in an actual energy of 9 × 10¹³ J. This uncovers the effective energy as a function of relativistic mass within the framework of special relativity.

I am using Inficon Transpector XPR3 and fabguard explorer software to analyze gases in our vacuum system. I am facing an issue in exporting the RUN data in other units. I can see that I can switch between different units such as RAW, PP, amu, etc. in the software. I am specifically interested in exporting my data in PP unit. When I select PP unit in the RUN window and then exporting data by clicking RUN>Export>selected mass bins, I ended up in exporting data only in RAW unit. I am not able to export the data in PP unit.

Anybody knows how to export the RUN data in PP unit in FabGuard Explorer?

In classical mechanics, kinetic energy is KE = ½mv², where m is mass and v is velocity. So mass multiplied by the square of the speed is an energy. The concept of energy plays a fundamental role in understanding the behaviour of objects in motion. One of the key forms of energy is kinetic energy, which is intimately linked to an object's mass and velocity. Additionally, in the realm of relativity, Einstein's famous equation E = mc² introduces a profound understanding of energy in terms of mass and the speed of light. This discussion aims to delve into the classical expression for kinetic energy KE = ½mv² and its connection to relativistic energy (mc²).

If the total mass is interdependent, then does the total mass contain both matter and antimatter masses like this:

Mass = Matter × Antimatter.

E.g. (hypothetical),

The Proton's mass == Antimatter(59×31×31×3×3) × Matter(59×31) × 1.005303472855531 eV/c^2?

The Down Quark’s mass == Matter(59×31×31×3×3×3) × Antimatter(3) × 1.023381212332223 eV/c^2?

The Up Quark’s mass == Antimatter(59×31×31×3×3×2) × Matter(2) × 1.077816383200958 eV/c^2?

The Electron’s mass == Matter(59×31×31×3×3) × Antimatter(1) × 1.001387338009097 eV/c^2?

Proton’s Charge = 2×(An(59×31×31×3×3×2)×M(2)) - M(59×31×31×3×3×3)×An(3) = An(59×31×31×3×3×1)×M(1)

But electrons don’t need extra matter or antimatter to be balanced. Therefore, only protons could have a Charge.

The Muon’s mass == Matter(59×59×31×31×31) × Antimatter(1) × 1.01886073187205 eV/c^2?

The Tau’s mass == Matter(59×59×59×31×31×3×3) × Antimatter(1) × 1.000302326214752 eV/c^2?

The Strange Quark’s mass == Matter(59×59×31×31×3×3) × Antimatter(3) × 1.051798216785732 eV/c^2?

The Bottom Quark’s mass == Matter(59×59×59×31×31×(3 + 4)) × Antimatter(3) × 1.008503859194067 eV/c^2?

The Charm Quark’s mass == Antimatter(59×59×31×31×31×3×2) × Matter(2) × 1.024565750222095 eV/c^2?

The Top Quark’s mass == Antimatter(59×59×59×31×31×31×2×(3 + 4)) × Matter(2) × 1.008426030527669 eV/c^2?

If 1 eV/c^2 contains a structure with smaller units, then it would be like this:

1 eV/c^2 = Matter(59×31×31×3×3) × Antimatter(59×31) × asymmetry? It has masses like this 1/933322239 eV/c^2.

Hypothetical extraordinary correlation #1:

The particular mass of Down Quark and Up Quark could emerge while the structure of the Gluon field becomes geometrically symmetric when it decays into a Proton, making the strongly stable Proton.

Proton's hypothetical structure == 3481 × 31^2 × 31 × 9 × 1.005303472855531 eV/c^2.

Down Quark's hypothetical structure == 59 × 31^2 × 9 × 9 × 1.023381212332223 eV/c^2.

Hypothetical extraordinary correlation #2:

The mass of the Helium nucleus == 59×59×31×31×31×3×3×4×1.005996337712896 == 3755675017.36 eV/c^2

The asymmetry in the Helium nucleus = 1.005996337712896 - 1 == 0.0059963377128957

The mass of the final atomic symmetry == 1/0.0059963377128957 == 166.7684589961309 == Nearly, 167 amu.

Atom-65 Terbium's mass == 158.9254 amu, Melting point == 1629 K, Boiling point == 3396 K

Atom-66 Dysprosium's mass == 162.50 amu, Melting point == 1680 K, Boiling point == 2840 K

Atom-67 Holmium's mass == 164.9304 amu, Melting point == 1734 K, Boiling point == 2873 K

Atom-68 Erbium's mass == 167.26 amu, Melting point == 1802 K, Boiling point == 3141 K (It is stable at 167 amu)

Atom-69 Thulium's mass == 168.9342 amu, Melting point == 1818 K, Boiling point == 2223 K

Atom-70 Ytterbium's mass == 173.04 amu, Melting point == 1097 K, Boiling point == 1469 K

Probaby, most masses of quantum objects (standard elementary particles) have a relationship to each other because their masses have a strong relationship to a very few similar numbers. E.g., 59, 31, 3.

The W Boson’s mass == 59×59×31×31×31×31×(3 + 2)×(3 + 2)×1.000094376386809 == 80377000000 eV/c^2.

The Z Boson’s mass == 59×59×31×31×31×31×(3 + 1)×(3 + 4)×1.013040843642746 == 91187600000 eV/c^2.

The Neutron's mass == 59×59×31×31×31×3×3×1.00668920257026 == 939565420.52 eV/c^2.

The Proton's mass == 59×59×31×31×31×3×3×1.005303472855531 == 938272088.16 eV/c^2.

The mass of gluons without the fluctuations like quarks = 59×59×31×31×31×3×3×1 = 933322239 eV/c^2.?

Photons have many different masses, including very low-energy masses. The mass of a photon == 31×a/b eV/c^2.?

The Higgs Boson's mass == 59×59×59×31×31×3×3×3×(3+2)×(3+14)×1.000404952049279 == 125100000000

eV/c^2 or 59×31×31×31×31×3×3×3×(3+1)×(3+7) == 58846758120 eV/c^2 (The hypothetical mass of a matter or antimatter Higgs super-fermion that has an undetectable -1-x Charge or +1+x Charge while x>0.) or 59×59×59×31×31×3×3×2.34754606458332×30 == 125100000000 eV/c^2.?

Perhaps, the Higgs Boson decays into matter and antimatter Higgs super-fermions and a photon, before it decays into fermions. Presumably, more groups of elementary particles exist with relatively undetectable Charges.

Likely, there is a fundamental building block with 31 points of existence. Perhaps, they emerged from 32 or 33 fundamental structures like 31 points of existence with a lost point or lost points of existence due to a delayed breaking point (like Bhavanga Upaccheda) and interactions. Most likely, a structure with connected 31 or 32 points of existence can connect with another similar structure by sharing their points of existence with each other like this:

((32 or 31) + (-32 or -31) == 29+((1-1)+(1-1)+(1-1) or (1-1)+(1-1))-29 == 29+(x+y+z or y+z)-29. If x+y+z=3a or y+z=2a, and a=0, then 29+(3a or 2a)-29 == 29+(3x0 or 2x0)-29 == 59 points of existence with 3 or 2 potential gaps == 59×(built-in 3-3 or 2-2 symbolic gap) == 59(3/3 or 2/2 potentiality).

Arguably, 31 planes of existence could emerge if they depend on 31 types of possible connections between two connected fundamental streams of existence. If the three neutral gaps ((1-1)+(1-1)+(1-1)) between the connected two streams of existence became a reason to originate a plane of existence like the third plane of existence, then two neutral gaps between two connected streams of existence (61(built-in 2-2 symbolic gap)) could create the second plane of existence. Similarly, four neutral gaps between two connected streams of existence (57(built-in 4-4 symbolic gap)) could create the fourth plane of existence, and so on.

Research:

Optical mode interaction with the mechanical mode is gravitationally induced while mechanical mode interaction with the optical mode is electromagnetically induced and both are optomechanical coupling. The EM force (Coulombs or Lorentz force) is the charge domain while the gravity force is the mass domain. Both the mass domain gravitational force and the charge domain EM force affect light interaction. Both gravity and EM are conservative forces, and their interrelationship in optomechanical coupling is new area of research.

ERROR 1 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom O5 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

ERROR 2 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom O6 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

ERROR 3 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom H31 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

ERROR 4 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom H32 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

ERROR 5 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom H33 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

ERROR 6 [file topol.top, line 55398]:

atom H34 (Res HIS-1) has mass 0 (state A) / 0 (state B)

General/special relativity question

One person, called the observer, is far from a black hole and is watching another person, called the victim, fall into the black hole, where "fall in" is defined by crossing the Schwarzschild radius. My understanding is that, from the victim's point of view, he will fall into the black hole in a finite amount of time. But from the observers point of view, the victim will approach the Schwarzschild radius but never reach it. So, from the point of view of the observer, how can the mass contained within the Schwarzschild radius (i.e., the mass of a black hole) ever grow?

I figured out that as new mass enters, the Schwarzschild radius gets larger, so the falling mass and the Schwarzschild radius are approaching each other. But I still don't understand how the falling mass gets within the Schwarzschild radius when it can't cross that radius.

Currently, I am working on a project, and I want to study the marine ecotoxicity of rust. When CS pipe is exposed to the marine environment during the usage phase, it begins to degrade, resulting in the release of rust into the sea, which may cause marine toxicity. The elemental characterization of rust is given below Elements Mass in grams Iron (Fe) 0.93 grams Manganese (Mn) 0.1 grams Phosphorus (P) 0.03 grams Sulfur (S) 0.035 grams Silicon (Si) 0.1 grams Copper (Cu) 0.4 grams Nickel (Ni) 0.4 grams Chromium (Cr) 0.4 grams Please let me know whether I can determine marine ecotoxicity using the life cycle impact assessment software SimaPro when rust comprising the above-mentioned elements is released into the sea.

The problem is: if 2 blocks, one fouble mass, are moved the same distance d, pushed by the same force, work kinetic theorem ("" 9nly empirical proved) says they ll achieve same final kinetic energy. But does kinematics prove it? I. E Kinetic energy is prop to mass and velocity sq. Ligher block will have deficiency in mass proportionality (1/2) while heavier mass has deficiency in final speed, according to Newtons. Is this deficiency prop to 1/2 so it cancels out and agreement with theorem is met?

Answer

V=sqr 2ad or so for heavier block, acceleration is half according to Newtons.

This means velocity of heavy is prop to sqr (1/2) compare to prop of sq1 for light. Inside sq root, half cancels with 2 so we have sq ad vs sqr 2ad. We need to examine if these are double of each other, or if we divide their squares ad/2ad gives 1/2 or velocity of heavy is half.

To do this, we ponder that heavy has double prop with mass, light double with velocity, they cancel and this agrees with kinetic work theorem.

The cumulative gravitational potential originating from mainly the outer masses of our visible universe is about 8 orders of magnitude larger than the Sun's gravitational potential at the Earth's distance, which also holds all other planets on track. Remarkably, the potential energy of a mass m at the level of gravitational potential originating from the masses of remote parts of our universe is of the order E = mc^2.

The potential energy of a 1 kg mass due to the sun's gravitational potential at the earth position is about 10⁹ J (1 GWs). The cumulative gravitational potential of all masses within the visible universe is about 10⁸ times larger. At this potential a 1 kg mass will hold a potential energy of about 10¹⁷ J which is equivalent to E = mc^2. This may be interpreted as a strong vote in favour of Mach's Principle telling that certain local phenomena might be related to the background masses of the universe.

There are many weird ideas in physics that make it work. Some weird definitions

Spin- something between a number and a physical quantity

Electrons - between a wave and a particle

Charge - a trait of matter that cannot be separated from elementary matter or from its mass trait or defined physically as mass is, just by implication of having a similar role to mass

Certain of my book reviews are listed as my publications, In the edit section of the publications page, there is no category for "book review". and I don't want to get problems by claiming authorship for something I have not written but only reviewed. Add one or I'll remove those "publications"

A : Massing

If we consider the special theory of relativity as a Lorentz-invariant theory, which it essentially is, then there is no place for the relativistic mass m in such a theory. Therefore, the law E = mc^2 and the formula expressing it do not exist and cannot exist. What should I do?

Gravitational potential of a 1 kg mass in the sun's field at our location is about 10⁹ J. According to Schwarzschild relation R_u = 2GM_u /c², the local cumulative gravitational potential originating from remote masses of the universe is about 10⁸ times larger, i.e. about 10¹⁷ J. This according to E = mc² is the energy equivalent of 1 kg mass. Is this just a circular conclusion?

Matter is a concentrated form of energy connected to mass, requiring three-dimensional space. Energy can exist across various dimensions, even within a dimensionless space. Gravity interacts with both matter and energy, with mass indicating the presence of an atomic nucleus. Photons, carriers of light energy, lack rest mass, unlike electrons within atoms. When an electron absorbs a photon, its mass remains unchanged but its energy increases. Photons, originating from celestial bodies, exhibit the weakest gravitational interaction with mass due to their masslessness. Subatomic particles, like neutrons and protons, demonstrate stronger gravitational interactions within gravity. A photon requires the least amount of energy to reach maximum speed, while an atom requires substantial external energy to reach the speed of light.

Than the weight of the entire system, would the system move forward? If it started from geo-stationary, would it be able to move freely into interplanetary space?

I modeled the 2D frame with OpenSeesPy in a way that the concrete class is variable, there is a distributed load on the beams and horizontal load on only 2 nodes, I analyzed the statics in this way, but I am getting an error in the analysis part.

My modeling steps are very similar to the OpenSeesPy 2D Portal Frame example:

However, while I was doing the analysis using eigen in the example, I did not use eigen. I would like your comments.

import time

import sys

import os

import openseespy.opensees as ops

import numpy as np

import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

m = 1.0

s = 1.0

cm = m/100

mm = m/1000

m2=m*m

cm2=cm*cm

mm2 = mm*mm

kN = 1.0

N = kN/1000

MPa = N/(mm**2)

pi = 3.14

g = 9.81

GPa = 1000*MPa

ton = kN*(s**2)/m

matTag=1

for i in range(0,8):

# remove existing model

ops.wipe()

# set modelbuilder

ops.model('basic', '-ndm', 2, '-ndf', 3)

L_x = 3.0*m # Span

L_y = 3.0*m # Story Height

b=0.3*m

h=0.3*m

# Node Coordinates Matrix (size : nn x 2)

node_coords = np.array([[0, 0], [L_x, 0],

[0, L_y], [L_x, L_y],

[0, 2*L_y], [L_x, 2*L_y],

[0, L_y], [L_x, L_y],

[0, 2*L_y], [L_x, 2*L_y]])

# Element Connectivity Matrix (size: nel x 2)

connectivity = [[1,3], [2,4],

[3,5], [4,6],

[7,8], [9,10],

[7,3], [8,4],

[9,5], [10,6]

]

# Get Number of elements

nel = len(connectivity)

# Distinguish beams, columns & hinges by their element tag ID

all_the_beams = [5, 6]

all_the_cols = [1, 2, 3, 4]

[ops.node(n+1,*node_coords[n])

for n in range(len(node_coords))];

# Boundary Conditions

## Fixing the Base Nodes

[ops.fix(n, 1, 1, 1)

for n in [1, 2]];

fpc = [30,33,36,39,42,45,48,50]

epsc0 = [0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002,0.002]

fpcu = [33,36,39,42,45,48,51,54]

epsU = [0.008,0.0078,0.0075,0.0073,0.0070,0.0068,0.0065,0.0063]

Ec=(3250*(fpc[i]**0.5)+14000)

A=b*h

I=(b*h**3)/12

ops.uniaxialMaterial('Concrete01', matTag, fpc[i], epsc0[i], fpcu[i], epsU[i])

sections = {'Column':{'b':b, 'h':h,'A':A, 'I':I},

'Beam':{'b':300, 'h':500, 'A':300*300,'I':(300*(300**3)/12) }}

# Transformations

ops.geomTransf('Linear', 1)

# Beams

[ops.element('elasticBeamColumn', e, *connectivity[e-1], sections['Beam']['A'], Ec, sections['Beam']['I'], 1)

for e in all_the_beams];

# Columns

[ops.element('elasticBeamColumn', e, *connectivity[e-1], sections['Column']['A'], Ec, sections['Column']['I'], 1)

for e in all_the_cols];

D_L = 0.27*(kN/m) # Distributed load

C_L = 0.27*(kN) # Concentrated load

# Now, loads & lumped masses will be added to the domain.

loaded_nodes = [3,5]

loaded_elems = [5,6]

ops.timeSeries('Linear',1,'-factor',1.0)

ops.pattern('Plain', 1, 1)

[ops.load(n, *[0,-C_L,0]) for n in loaded_nodes];

ops.eleLoad('-ele', *loaded_elems,'-type', '-beamUniform',-D_L)

# create SOE

ops.system("BandSPD")

# create DOF number

ops.numberer("RCM")

# create constraint handler

ops.constraints("Plain")

# create integrator

ops.integrator("LoadControl", 1.0)

# create algorithm

ops.algorithm("Linear")

# create analysis object

ops.analysis("Static")

# perform the analysis

ops.analyze(1)

# get node displacements

ux = ops.nodeDisp(5, 1)

uy = ops.nodeDisp(3, 1)

print(ux,uy)

print('Model built successfully!')

We know that electron mobility is higher than hole mobility because the effective mass of an electron is less than that of a hole. However, if we ask why the effective mass of an electron (excluding complexities of longitudinal and transverse electron effective mass and the lightness/heaviness of hole effective mass) is less than the effective mass of a hole, we would say it's because the energy of a hole is considered greater than the energy of an electron; so according to the energy relationship, when the energy of a hole is greater than that of an electron, its mass is also considered greater. But what is the reasoning behind considering the energy of a hole greater than that of an electron, and what is the scientific basis for the higher energy of a hole compared to an electron?

Hello everyone; I am doing a simple beam analysis in Abaqus and want to check the stiffness and mass matrix for that beam. I obtained the stiffness matrix in mtx format and want to see it as a matrix. Please anyone can suggest how to convert this mtx format file to the simple visual form of a matrix in Matlab. How to read these as well. I attached those files.

Thanks

Ram

For the system given below derive the equation of motion specifying the corresponding FBD for each mass, mass matrix, stiffness matrix, natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes. Use MATLAB m1= m/3, m2 = 2m/5, k1= 11k/3, k2= 7k/2 where m=10 kg, k= 1000 N/m

As far as *Temperature Control of the flash drier* is concerned, how can we calculate the right temperature depending on the amount of mass of PAM/NAM and the humidity loss? is there any relationship between them to be calculated?

Thanks for your help.

Best

Mahboubeh

Can general relativity be reinterpreted via continuum mechanics or in particular Non-Newtonian fluid mechanics of some hypothetical continuous medium filling space-time ? That is, gravitation and gravitational waves relate to the stress, strain, compression and oscillations of this medium ? The Ricci tensor is like the Cauchy stress tensor, Ricci curvature like pressure ? Galaxies as vortices ? Maybe what we call mass, is nothing more than a manifestation of structured (self-similar) turbulence ? Ordinary gravitation is some kind of current or flow towards the direction of the mass.

In fact, MAAs is one of the primary or secondary metabolites? And about how many days of culturing are they produced and massed?

I am currently working on yeast cells for melatonin production which requires me to quantify melatonin easily and economically. I was hoping that anyone could provide me with an optimized protocol.

CO2 Sequestration

Why are we concerned about

the consequences of CO2 sequestration

(in particular, CO2 escape/leakage or mineral dissolution

over 1000s of years),

when Sun itself - may approximately last - only for - another 2000 years

(having a luminosity of 3x10^26 Joules/Sec;

or

delivering solar energy equivalent to that of 3x(10^19) Kg of burning oil per second;

and

having a mass of 2x(10^30) Kg)?

I understand the physical mechanism of either negative mass or negative bulk modulus of acoustic metamaterial, but paper seems to use analogous electromagnetic model or just equations to demonstrate that "negative refraction needs both negative mass and negative modulus".

However, I am confused about the physical mechanism behind it. Is there any paper or book illustrating this? Thank you.

Three balls with masses m1, m2, m3 can slide without friction along a straight horizontal line, with ball 2 located between balls 1 and 3 (Fig.). It is known that m1 >> m2, m3 >> m2. Determine the maximum velocities of the two outer balls if they were initially at rest and the middle ball was moving with speed v0. The impacts are considered absolutely elastic.

Why is the Moon not affected by the Sun’s gravity but seemingly affected strongly by the Earth’s gravity and Moon have less gravity and less mass than Earth?