Physics: perceived reality is merely illusion? (oh, just click me)

[Skip Intro]

I read this book years ago, and this little bit of it has stuck with me. I have no sense of whether there are vaild points here, or just cheap, Dr.Phil-like bs used to fill a book.

I do know this beer seems pretty real.

-----------
But an atom with a nucleus the size of a grain of salt only appears to be the size of St. Peter's dome. The nucleus is 99.95 percent of the mass ("solid stuff") of the atom. The rest of the atom is nothing, appearing to be much, much more--a grain of salt pretending to be a dome.

The Encyclopdia Britannica tells us, "An atom (and thus all matter) is mostly empty space."

How does an atom do this? Energy. The protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the atom move about at 40,000 miles per second . The electron cloud is full of (not surprisingly) electrical energy.

Not only is the empty space within atoms large, but the space between atoms--the space in which there is nothing at all--is enormous.

This doesn't fit our perception of--or even belief about--things at all. As Britannica tells us, "Some daily life concepts are no longer valid on the atomic scale." Indeed.

For example, there is more empty space in the book you're holding than book. The atoms of the book give the illusion of solid ink on solid paper.

They're not. It's just an illusion. If the electricity in the electron cloud were switched off, even for an instant, this book would crumble into atomic dust--an amount of dust not even visible to the naked eye. This book would appear to disappear. Poof.

The same is true of whatever you're sitting (or lying) on, everything in the room or vehicle you're currently in, and everything you've ever seen, touched, heard, tasted, or smelled.
------------

trippy, huh?

[dweller]

1. it's all true

now add Psychology to the theory....

:silly:
dp

[DrWeird]

2. Yup, that's the truth.

That's why when you've got a lot of neutrons around you want lots and lots of lead shielding.

[Birthmark]

6. OMG! What should I do?!!!

I just found out that I'm full of freakin' neutrons!!!! :scared:

[mn9driver]

3. Try String theory. It gets even wierder.

The sub-sub atomic particles gain their identities by how the strings happen to vibrate. All matter is just good vibrations.

[dweller]

8. That makes sense

contact high

:D
dp

[BEZARK]

4. Ah, but . . .

If the electricity in the electron cloud were switched off, even for an instant, this book would crumble into atomic dust--an amount of dust not even visible to the naked eye. This book would appear to disappear. Poof.
============
If it's mostly nothing then why can't matter pass through other matter, like a galaxy can pass through another one with almost nothing (or nothing at all) colliding.

[DrWeird]

7. Matter can pass through other matter.

Assuming it's small and neutrally charged. Neutrons for example. Or neutrinos, they can pass through six light years of lead without hitting anything. At least I read that somewhere.

As for galaxies, when they collide they do pass through each other with almost nothing colliding. Of course all the stars have gravity, and the gross structure of the galaxies are deformed, but most stars never hit another.

[BEZARK]

9. Not exactly

Neutrons for example. Or neutrinos, they can pass through six light years of lead without hitting anything.
=========
Neutron are easy to stop and I don't think that neutrinos have yet been demonstrated to be matter.

[DrWeird]

11. Not true.

Neutrons are very good at penetrating, much more so then alpha or beta radiation. That's why we have neutron bombs, so they can penetrate things like tank armor and office buildings and kill the occupants while leaving everything intact.

As for neutrinos, recent research has demonstrated that they do indeed have mass.

[BEZARK]

12. Not the point.

Neutrons are very good at penetrating, much more so then alpha or beta radiation.
===========
But far far less than neutrinos. You can't kill anything with something that can penetrate light years of lead (although that's not really correct either). And when did we make neutron bombs?

[TXlib]

15. neutron bombs

also known as 'enhanced radiation weapons' (ERW) were developed by the US in the mid 50s.

They are really nothing more than a fusion bomb with the smallest fission trigger possible, with as little neutron-absorbing material as possible.

Fusion emits enormous numbers of neutrons, and so, such a bomb would be able to create the radiation killing radius of a 'conventional' nuclear bomb 10 times its yield.

The idea was to counter the perceived Soviet advantage in armor. But the idea wasn't a very good one; you need to be very close to receive such a high dosage to be immediately incapacitating, and lesser (but still fatal) doses would allow the tank crew to fight for a few hours before coming down with symptoms.

The Soviets didn't have small bombs, so if we started lobbing 0.1 kt bombs at their tanks, they'd likely have responded with megaton-class weapons against cities.

With the advanced precision-guided munitions that became later available, ERWs were not needed, thankfully.

Check out this link: http://www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/views/op-ed/schwartz/19970126.htm

[BEZARK]

16. Then what was the "neutron bomb" that Carter

. . . so publicly put an end to the development of, with so much whining from the Republicans. Had we already had neutron bombs then presumably it would have been moot. Something is not as it seems here.

[TXlib]

14. Not quite correct

A beam of neutrinos is attenuated by a factor of 2 when passing through a column of lead 15 ly long. They interact very weakly with other particles.

[BEZARK]

17. Yeah, the answer is always statistical or proportional

. . . not the absolute as was give.

[TXlib]

13. The difference between (apparently) solid matter and galaxies

First, the ratio of the distances between stars in galaxies to the size of the stars themselves is much larger in galaxies than the ratio of interatomic spacing to the size of atoms in a solid.

Second, the stars experience an attractive force (and a very weak one, at that). As atoms approach each other, the electrical repulsive force of the electron shells becomes very strong.

Since the atoms are bound into a solid form (ie, a crystal lattice), one solid repels another at very short distances (what we call contact).

[BEZARK]

18. Thanks. I was really just using it to try to draw an answer

. . . out of the former poster.

The amount of solids (and we don't even really know that the atomic particles are solid) is so low that it is immaterial (ahem) as it were. It is the forces that really matter (ahem again) in matter.

[AlienGirl]

5. True, but frankly irrelevant

All the quantum weirdness seems to go away once you get up into the macro levels.

Tucker

[Deja Q]

10. There is no spoooooooooon...

:D

Go Neo!