Basic every day stuff has been handled by Newtons theory for a long time, except the theory was wrong and it changed to give us Einsteins theories. These give almost the same result but are fundamentally different and far more complex.

have you ever studied relativity Serious?

if you go through the maths, relativity reduces to Newtons laws of motion in the limit where velocity is very much less than c.

Newtons laws are not wrong, they are just limited in the range of situations in which they apply.

Quote from: Serious

Quote from: SteveF

Mongoose and Funky Chicken are totally right on the laws of physics. they really dont change. People on this forum (well Serious at least) go on as if the whole system radically changes every couple of years when it really doesnt. Quantum physics didnt change how balls roll around. When string theory appeared it didnt change quantum effects or balls rolling round. When the next insight appears it still wont change how balls roll around. The laws of thermodynamics and macroscopic objects are proven - the only things that have changed is people have found that the same rules dont apply to tiny or massive objects, or when travelling at incredibly high speed. The day to day rules dont change and havent in any noticeable way since Newton and co wrote them down.

Did I say that? Please point me to where. I do acknowledge its possible that they do change, and several theories have speculated this.

You said it at the very top of your post and youre even saying it at the end of the question youre asking lol.

Quote from: Serious

I have said the theories change, not that what the universe does changes,

Quote from: Serious

I do acknowledge its possible that they do change

No.  This is the bit you get wrong in each conversation about science.  We both agree that the universe underneath doesnt chage (lets ignore the fringe stuff for the sake of simplicity because if the universe is changing as it expands then the change is so slight at this point in the universes lifecycle that we cant even detect it.

Second is part of a disclaimer, there are people who claim they do or can change slightly and who knows, they may be right. first is completely different and talks about theory, not how the universe actually works

Quote from: Serious

Physics is an attempt to model how the balls run around, to describe how things work. The problem is they may end up with a theory which, while it describes everything in perfect detail, is totally wrong.

This is a silly statement.  Physics hasnt been this for a long time.  The movement of the balls is known.  Theres no physics element of it anymore.  Thats mechanics.  Its a law  and proven in so many ways that its not even an issue.  If you dont see why the above is true then i dont think I can explain it any better - Im stumped.  Guess its easier for you to just believe every revision of one of the quantum theories rewrites all human knowledge and the balls moving on the table need further study.

I didnt bring the balls up in the first case! Mechanics is still a part of physics - even if you dont think so. The balls they are experimenting with now may be subatomic particles but that doesnt change anything.

You wont find a single law of physics that has been disproved or modified.  These things only become law when theyve been proven.  Science has very few things it can prove but it has proven these.  The title "law" is kept for a very specific set of rules.  Theyre the ones that are known to be correct.

Whos talking about laws changing? Im talking about theories. Mind the universe certainly does have to take into account everything the great God SteveF has to say, that is obviously unbreakable law. Sorry to piss on your nice ideal but the universe doesn’t care who you are, or what your theories or laws are.

Quote from: red

Quote from: Serious

Basic every day stuff has been handled by Newtons theory for a long time, except the theory was wrong and it changed to give us Einsteins theories. These give almost the same result but are fundamentally different and far more complex.

einstiens theories prove that newtonian physics dont work approaching the speed of light.

Exactly!  Einsteins equations are what happens to mechanics as you move to incredibly high speed.  He never claimed his theories replace mechanics - theyre just what happens under different conditions.

Err, no. Einsteins theory was started because Newtons didnt match the paths of the planets exactly. The thing is they still do not give a result that is exactly right. They are near enough for almost everything we do though - and a hell of a lot simpler to use. Any change in speed affects the passage of time, the that the effect is just insignificant at normal speeds does not come into this. The unederlying principle is completely different.

Remember that newton had no idea that gravity could affect light or time. That new principle totally changed everything.

Whos talking about laws changing? Im talking about theories. Mind the universe certainly does have to take into account everything the great God SteveF has to say, that is obviously unbreakable law. Sorry to piss on your nice ideal but the universe doesn’t care who you are, or what your theories or laws are.

Anyone who is talking about building a perpetual motion machine is talking about violating the laws of thermodynamics.

You missunderstand totally the concept of a law of physics. You suggest that scientists somehow expect the Universe to conform to a set of laws we lay down. In fact the grass roots of physics is the study, identification and description of the laws which the universe follows all on its own. Some of those laws we have yet to figure out, some we are still refining our descriptions of. Thermodynamics is an example of neither. As far as we can determine our understanding of thermodynamics on a macroscopic scale is complete. Therefore you cannot build a perpetual motion machine which produces any significant quantity of juice.

Even if you postulate some bizarre and unknown QM effect which allows something on the scale of a single atom to violate the macroscopic laws of Thermodynamics, you cant use it to build a working PM machine because QM effects always average out to the long known macroscopic laws when you add enough of them together. That is why you dont get lions behaving like a wave and defracting through the bars on their cages at zoos.

Erm, aint this a contradiction?

No

Plays - E=Mc Hawkings - Entropy[1].mp3

/

(Dave now thinks serious would probably argue with the pope over catholic dogma as long as he had access to google)

Steve tries to talk pure science fact, I talk cardplay. Usually I win cause I cover my butt more and cant be pinned down when I get it wrong

No, people give up because youre so unbelievably thick skinned.  For what its worth, I still think your generalisms are more about covering up your cluelessness for as long as it takes you to run another yahoo search, rather than any cunning ruse.