General > General Technical Chat

Why are physicists the electronics experts?

<< < (12/13) > >>

Rick Law:

--- Quote from: TimFox on August 23, 2020, 08:51:28 pm ---...
There is Special Relativity in the real world;  General Relativity is less important to your day-to-day life.

--- End quote ---

We are on the same page.

Special relativity has not been the discussion here anyway.  Fast but sub-light speed is what we have been talking about, so only general relativity is applicable here.

I called it "a rounding error" in my original reply under discussion here, you call it "less important to your day-to-day life."  Not exact same wording, but in general agreement I would say.

I should however consider GPS further, but I wont.  That one really straddle the fence, but I gotta eat so I wont worry about GPS for the time being.

Berni:
You are not going to see relativistic effects within the same blob of circuitry, no matter how fast it goes, that's sort of the point behind it that you can't detect your own absolute speed, only relative speed to something else.

GPS is one of the rare cases where you can see it happen because the fast moving satellite and slow moving receiver are communicating over a radio link. So even if they are not one physically connected circuit they are exchanging information. But even then all of this is only easily noticeable because the satellites have incredibly precise clocks in order to make such tiny timing differences show up (rather than getting lost under the clocks own natural drift)

If you wanted to see relativity within the same circuit then i suppose the best bet is to build a ring laser gyroscope using coax cable instead of fiber optics. Send a high frequency sine wave in a clockwise and a counterclockwise spool of coax and compare the timing while rotating the whole thing. Since its going along with the rotation and counter to the rotation you get a phase shift as if one of the cables got longer during rotation. Tho the effect is again really really tiny so they prefer using fiberoptics for actual gyros (fiber is tiny and light has a short wavelength).

paulca:
Electronic Engineering.

Engineering = application of science to solve problems.

The physicists work out how things work, present that research to engineering who work out how to solve problems with it.

FransW:

--- Quote from: Rick Law on August 22, 2020, 06:41:18 pm ---
--- Quote from: pidcon on August 22, 2020, 03:11:58 pm ---I would imagine that physicists work in an academia-like environment and would be more open to communicating their ideas and definitely will take the time to explain how things work from their perspective. Maybe the engineer was too busy to write out a long explanation.

--- End quote ---

RE:"...physicists work in an academia-like environment and would be more open to communicating their ideas..."

That would be the ideal, but that is not the real world.  A lot of careers and money are on the line.

Say for example, Dark Energy.  It is the current accepted "standard model".  A lot of money is on the line.  You have to search really hard to find Astrophysicists who openly voice their doubt.  Doing so will pretty much limit your grants and career rather quickly.  You have some "voices in the wilderness" and that is about it.  If your publication submission doesn't agree with the "standard model", good luck getting it published.  It can be done, but certainly not easily.  Should their objection of Dark Energy be proven truth, a lot of "heavy weights" (establishment, including Nobel Laureates) will be handed a good size serving of humble-pies.

But, the world of Physics is changing...

First a quick fact: LHC found the Higgs particle, but absolutely nothing else!  Super Symmetry is now in doubt -- All the SUSY particles we hoped for, no SUSY particles found at all!  Not a one.  Proposals exist to upgrade LHC (14TeV, about 27km ring) to about 8x (110TeV) by adding another ring at about 100km radius - hoping may be we will find some (SUSY and the likes).  Tons on money there for everyone to get a piece of that pie.

The fallout of no SUSY: Physics today is in crisis or in an era of great opportunities.  String Theory have been sucking all the top brains of Theoretical Physics for the last few decades, but it is now in great doubt.  The Standard Model for Particle Physics while works but too much seem like patch-work, is therefore lacking a way to get out of that patch-work construct.

It is now finally the time to call some "standard models" into question.  You can still have a career if you openly question "Standard Model for Particle Physics" or the validity of String Theory today.

EDIT - missed the re:"... ..." in the first line.  Corrected a "could" to a "can" in the last line.

--- End quote ---

There is a vast territory for a talented physicist to use his/hers abilities.
Not the physicists that copy, publish and summarise other physicists work.
The simplicity of the "Standard Model", "Big Bang" and "Dark Matter/Energy' always make
me feel uncomfortable.
The lack of abstraction is too strong. There is so much absent.
It is like the "-2x𝞼" from the median of the IQ-Gauss curve applied to the "highly gifted".

TimFox:

--- Quote from: Rick Law on August 24, 2020, 03:53:37 am ---
--- Quote from: TimFox on August 23, 2020, 08:51:28 pm ---...
There is Special Relativity in the real world;  General Relativity is less important to your day-to-day life.

--- End quote ---

We are on the same page.

Special relativity has not been the discussion here anyway.  Fast but sub-light speed is what we have been talking about, so only general relativity is applicable here.

I called it "a rounding error" in my original reply under discussion here, you call it "less important to your day-to-day life."  Not exact same wording, but in general agreement I would say.

I should however consider GPS further, but I wont.  That one really straddle the fence, but I gotta eat so I wont worry about GPS for the time being.

--- End quote ---

To clarify the discussion:  Special Relativity (the first of Einstein's theories) deals with "inertial" reference frames in uniform motion (constant velocity), and includes the dilation of time with velocity and the speed of light as a maximum.  Here, he introduced the Lorentz factor
 (1 - v2/c2)-1/2  .
General Relativity (the later theory) deals with reference frames in non-uniform motion, including acceleration and gravitation.  Motion around a circular orbit, for example, involves acceleration.  As an undergraduate, one exam question involved a sealed boxcar with a helium balloon tethered to the floor.  When the train accelerates to the east, what direction does the balloon move (with no drafts from the outside air)?  The simplest answer is to invoke General Relativity.  (A gravitational field is equivalent to an accelerated reference frame.)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod