Physicists observe negative mass *Updated*

[tlink]

still tens of years away from actual uses for it, unless we do accidental major discoveries which is unlikely. the more we know the more we know how much we don't know. if you know barely anything you can ask less questions so research is quicker because there are less factors to combine, if you know a lot you can ask a lot of questions and research is very slow because there are lots of factors to combine. or is that baseless bullshit?

[arbellason55]

3 minutes ago, tlink said:

still tens of years away from actual uses for it, unless we do accidental major discoveries which is unlikely. the more we know the more we know how much we don't know. if you know barely anything you can ask less questions so research is quicker because there are less factors to combine, if you know a lot you can ask a lot of questions and research is very slow because there are lots of factors to combine. or is that baseless bullshit?

I had a really good chemistry teacher who taught my class one very important thing, we know that we know nothing.

[ManIkWeet]

Now put this on my phone's display so I will never see a fingerprint again!

 

(Actually, it might be difficult to get it to "stick" with it's properties)

[Nup]

Has a your momma joke been done for this yet? 

[arbellason55]

20 minutes ago, Nup said:

Has a your momma joke been done for this yet? 

Not that I am aware of.

[1832vin]

yay! clickbait!!

 

another symmetry breaking.  at this point, it's like finding new elements during the old times (i forgot when)

 

 

[sazrocks]

4 hours ago, Granular said:

Err, so if F=ma, does pushing the liquid pull it closer to you?

Or did my narrow minded physics teachers neglected to account for negative mass and the equation is actually F=|m|a ?

...Or Newton wasn't really able to account for negative mass since he had no idea it existed.

[Taf the Ghost]

9 hours ago, tlink said:

still tens of years away from actual uses for it, unless we do accidental major discoveries which is unlikely. the more we know the more we know how much we don't know. if you know barely anything you can ask less questions so research is quicker because there are less factors to combine, if you know a lot you can ask a lot of questions and research is very slow because there are lots of factors to combine. or is that baseless bullshit?

10 years is way under-estimating any practicality from stuff like this.  It's normally closer to 20-30 years before you see much understanding to apply it to something a little more testable.  For as much as "scientific knowledge" has expanded rapidly in the post-WW2 era, the "great age of discovery" is really from about 1880 through 1960.  What we view as "science", to the modern mind, is really the "Engineering Revolution".  WW2 and the post-war booms produce an entire infrastructure to support a massive amount of Engineers.  That's what has changed everything.

 

Which is why, while I love these types of news reports, the really cool stuff is always what is in the R&D pipelines.

[tlink]

5 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

10 years is way under-estimating any practicality from stuff like this.  It's normally closer to 20-30 years before you see much understanding to apply it to something a little more testable.  For as much as "scientific knowledge" has expanded rapidly in the post-WW2 era, the "great age of discovery" is really from about 1880 through 1960.  What we view as "science", to the modern mind, is really the "Engineering Revolution".  WW2 and the post-war booms produce an entire infrastructure to support a massive amount of Engineers.  That's what has changed everything.

 

Which is why, while I love these types of news reports, the really cool stuff is always what is in the R&D pipelines.

yea thats what i meant with tens of years, it means multiple times 10 years i thought but my english isn't that great so maybe i got it confused   and i sorta agree but in some fields we are still making rapid scientific discovery's simply because we didn't look to much at it before, for example psychology or quantum physics. every time we find a new field we will have a small science boom imo.

[wrath]

On 4/19/2017 at 4:46 PM, arbellason55 said:

I've never played the game but isn't Mass Effect's whole thing with long distance space travel use negative mass?

Exactly my thoughts too although not from mass effect since I couldn't go through with it

[Spuriae]

It has negative effective mass, but does not actually have negative mass. Nowhere in the original paper do they state that they have achieved negative mass: https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.155301 

 

The only thing these articles prove is that journalists are even better than physicists at manipulating spin.

 

[arbellason55]

48 minutes ago, Nimrodor said:

It has negative effective mass, but does not actually have negative mass. Nowhere in the original paper do they state that they have achieved negative mass: https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.155301 

 

The only thing these articles prove is that journalists are even better than physicists at manipulating spin.

 

I was doing more reading on their actual procedure today and one of the other sites I saw did actually explain that it was effective mass and not actual. Will update my post to reflect that.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

On 2017-04-19 at 9:56 AM, othertomperson said:

A lot of science fiction (and actual general relativity) relies on negative mass-energy for a warp drive to be possible.

It really makes you think about how much science and science fiction have an influence over each other.

[Sauron]

Wait what? So if I push it it goes backwards through my hand?

[arbellason55]

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Wait what? So if I push it it goes backwards through my hand?

Well not exactly, more like it would push against your hand. That being said we really don't know all that much about that it can do yet.

[Sauron]

Just now, arbellason55 said:

Well not exactly, more like it would push against your hand.

So I wouldn't be able to move it because it would turn my strength against me?

[arbellason55]

Just now, Sauron said:

So I wouldn't be able to move it because it would turn my strength against me?

That is an interesting question. I'll also tack on here that it does act like matter with a positive mass in one aspect in that it does not float upwards in the air apparently.

[BuckGup]

This is like the metallic hydrogen. It was shiny so they said it was a metal

[Taf the Ghost]

7 hours ago, Nimrodor said:

It has negative effective mass, but does not actually have negative mass. Nowhere in the original paper do they state that they have achieved negative mass: https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.155301 

 

The only thing these articles prove is that journalists are even better than physicists at manipulating spin.

 

Sadly, no one seems to have gotten the joke about "spin". 

[Kamina]

We're living in dank times.

Makes me think of this:

 

[vorticalbox]

On ‎19‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 8:35 PM, arbellason55 said:

I had a really good chemistry teacher who taught my class one very important thing, we know that we know nothing.

any good teacher should tell you that. 

[rhyseyness]

9 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Sadly, no one seems to have gotten the joke about "spin". 

It did go very underappreciated.

10/10 would laugh again.

[handymanshandle]

On 4/19/2017 at 9:35 AM, arbellason55 said:

I wonder what it would do in a vacuum environment.

Time to have those Vacuum Chamber channels make a video with this fluid...