Sentences with phrase «all known physics»

Our observable universe had a beginning and the there is no aspect of it that conflicts with known physics.

You seem to think that «faster than the speed of light» is something outside of known physics that needs a supernatural explanation.

Who knew physics could be so exciting and dangerous, so filled with possibility?

Inflation and dark energy can not be accounted for easily using known physics, but if our «universe» is merely one of millions of multiverses, this could account for the fact that particular values of the dark energy are weaker than one might otherwise have supposed.

People who know physics and all those other things much more in depth than either of us.

He had been musing over the arrow of time as far back as graduate school in the late 1980s, when he published papers on the feasibility of time travel using known physics.

It marks the edge of known physics, a region where distances and intervals are so short that the very concepts of time and space start to break down.

«If you look at the things within known physics that could actually take us to the stars, there are few options,» says Les Johnson, deputy manager of NASA's Advanced Concepts Office.

Nothing in known physics predicts this acceleration.

Fischbach is the epitome of the curious soul, constantly poking around at the edges of known physics in search of something that other people overlooked: a fifth force of nature, for instance, or a flaw in Einstein's theory of relativity.

This is a routine bookkeeping style of research: According to known physics, this type of radioactive decay is a fundamental process that unfolds at an unchanging rate, and all the researchers were aiming to do was to measure that rate and record it for reference.

By now, all aficionados of physics news — and quite a few people who don't know physics from phonics — have heard about the discovery of the Higgs boson.

It basically builds on known physics that we pretty much understand.

The British company manufactured a radiation - absorbing carbon material that could hide battleships from radar detection but didn't know the physics of how it worked.

We can not explain it in terms of known physics.»

The revelation that neutrinos have heft implies that some mysterious mechanism beyond known physics is out there waiting to be discovered.

The 2004 Scientific American 50 researcher of the year continues to tweak matter at the edge of known physics to reveal strange and potentially useful properties

And I'd argue that if you let everyone in the country who knows physics teach physics, with no credentialing, you'd have a better outcome.

The odd acceleration detected in the niobium ring also suggests that energy isn't conserved in the superconductor — another major violation of known physics.

«They told me it was not for the girls,» she recalls, «that it was only for the boys because you need to know physics and optics... I showed them that I could be completely self - sufficient: prepare my samples, use the microtome, make the examination.

So when they go back to the classrooms they talk about their own research, their high - tech research of isolating cancer cells to space technology — we've sent students to NASA or they do nanotechnology or, you know physics or chemistry or, you know, you name it, agriculture — and when they go back to their classrooms and talk this over among their peers, more peers get interested.

This is standard textbook climate physics as well as well - known physics.

Second, the current generation of climate models seem to do a pretty good job, based on already - known physics.

I know physics / maths helps to explain this complex science of motion.

Gilles (199)-- Tamino's to box model follows from the known physics.

«Physics teachers should know physics,» he said, but they should also have a «foundational knowledge in language arts and math.

You know those physics puzzle games where you have to remove blocks to safely drop a character on the ground below without having him roll off the edge?

I would like to see this evidence that models just based on known physics «model climate and paleoclimate rather well».

T Marvell, OK, so now you are saying that it is a logical fallacy to cite the combination of a good correlation between ln [CO2] and temperature rise + the well known physics of greenhouse warming as evidence in favor of the consensus view?

The best I can think of is to do a corrected version of Arrhenius's technique, using known physics up through 1977 CE to establish a estimated mean and variance.

I suppose if one argues that the cloistered expert who is picking this prior knows some physics, then she might choose a translated Cauchy centered at 1.2 K for 2xCO2.

The cloistered expert knows the physics (and geology), k but has no acess to the actual data.

[Response: Physically based models (like GCMs) can only incorporate known physics.

The cloistered expert knows physics and geology and has acess to all the literature up to that time.

Unlike weather, the if we know the physics, know the inputs and their influences, it seems that we can make pretty good predictions, as has already been fairly well demonstrated (albeit not absolutely conclusively).

I know it is much more complicated that this, and I know my physics isn't good enough to work it out.

(As far as we know physics is time - translation invariant, and Noether's theorem applies to quantum field theory just as much as to classical mechanics....)

Second, the current generation of climate models seem to do a pretty good job, based on already - known physics.

«climate models perform known physics» Hahahaha.

I know my physics suxx, and I'm a newbie in this climate debate, but your POV about the infernal hyper - networked complexity of the climate system makes more intuitive sense to me than the CO2 control knob paradigm.

«However, to really turn over a theory, then you show that an alternative theory fits all known physics... and makes better predictions.

Even on pages which otherwise give real traditional tried and tested well known physics.

All you have done is repeat over and over a lot of wild claims of your own invention that have absolutely nothing to do with known physics.

I'm constantly being told that «there are hundreds of experiments to prove it, that it is well know physics, thoroughly examined in the last century», but yet not one of you has ever come back with any real physics to explain it.

The null hypothesis should be based on known physics rather than denial of it.

«I know physics.»

At that point, you have to give me evidence that warming will be small... and you have to do it without throwing out known physics or math.

The issue is not whether «climate denial» is right or wrong, but rather that the explanations pertaining to the greenhouse conjecture just simply don't adhere to well known physics, and ignore the physics which explains the warming of the surface by non-radiative processes.

Show me real valid known physics to say visible light heats matter which is your AGWScienceFiction claim.

This was calculated from known physics and it was calculated correctly.