Quantum gravity physics based on facts, giving checkable predictions

Monday, October 31, 2005

Force of sound

The sound wave is longitudinal and has pressure variations. Half a cycle is compression (overpressure) and the other half cycle of a sound wave is underpressure (below ambient pressure). When a spherical sound wave goes outward, it exerts outward pressure which pushes on you eardrum to make the noises you hear. Therefore the sound wave has outward force F = PA where P is the sound wave pressure and A is the area it acts on. When you read Raleigh's textbook on 'sound physics' (or whatever dubious title it has), as I have done, you see the fool fits a wave equation from transverse water waves to longitudinal waves, without noting that he is creating particle-wave duality by using a wave equation to describe the gross behaviour of air molecules (particles). Classical physics thus has even more wrong with it becaus of mathematical fudges than modern physics, but the point I'm making here is that sound has an outward force and an equal and opposite inward force following this. It is this oscillation which allows the sound wave to propagate instead of just dispersing like air blown out of your mouth.

Note the outward force and equal and opposite inward force. This is Newton's 3rd law. The same happens in explosions, except the outward force is then a short tall spike (due to air piling up against the discontinuity and going supersonic), while the inward force is a longer but lower pressure. A nuclear implosion bomb relies upon Newton's 3rd law for TNT surrounding a plutonium core to compress the plutonium. The same effect in the Higgs field surrounding outward going quarks produces an inward force which gives gravity, including the compression of the earth's radius (1/3)MG/c^2 = 1.5 mm (the contraction term effect in general relativity).

3 Comments:

At 10:05 AM, Blogger nige said...

Don't anybody start going into nuclear implosion lens design or anything like that here, as I'll delete it. Most of the traditional approaches to explosion dynamics are of the same variety of hydrodynamics which was used to prove a bumblebee cannot fly (fixed wing equations applied to flexible wings incorrectly).

With zero physical understanding of blast waves, and just loads of equations, it is unsurprising that some people think you can light a block of explosive at one end and be completely safe from the explosion, as it will burn away from you and deliver all the force to the other end. This is false, ignoring Newton's 3rd law: 50% of the force of the explosion goes one way and 50% goes the other way.

 
At 12:28 PM, Blogger Kevin Brunt said...

Nigel,

all you are doing is demonstrating that you are not sufficiently competent in basic science and mathematics to be calling any physicist names.

You're clearly not aware that a "wave function" is merely a convenient way of handling things like wave motions in fluids, by treating the fluid as a thing with continuous properties. This works for "real fluids" (like liquids and gases) as long as you don't look closely enough to see the individual particles. Part of the reason for the whole idea of the "ether" in the first place was that physicists could get wave functions to work with the various related phenomena, which led them to wonder whether there was a fluid for these "waves" be carried in.

The reason that an electron has "particle-wave duality" is not simply because it has a wave function, but because it sometimes has a wave function, but also does things that are incompatible with the whole idea of "continuous".

Your explosions and "outward forces" and "inward forces" show that you are in a total muddle about the basic concepts of Mechanics, such as force. motion and energy, Newton's 3rd Law and the principles of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy.

And if you're going to have forces here, you need to go back to the very first paragraphs of the first part of your "Electronic Universe" articles and correct your failure to deal with the forces acting on the electrons in your total botch of an attempt to prove that the transfer of energy in current flow can't be explained by the motion of the electrons.

 
At 3:38 AM, Blogger nige said...

Kevin,

Quite right. I'm so ignorant I think you are talking horseshit too. Bohr's complementary horseshit disproves the force of sound and of gravity.

Great horseshit, Kevin.

Nigel

 

Post a Comment

<< Home