Ignore the position i.e whether you are on one or other side of orbit. Does space quantization play any role.
123102
Given the wavefunction, $\psi$ is explained as the flow of probabilities or in other words probability density over a certain region of space. In the case of electrons, say in $s$ orbital, the probability of its existence is distributed over the whole spherical region. Now, when we talk about orbits is it true that the electrons are literally orbiting around the nucleus or are they just chaotically whizzing "around" with no sense of direction unlike we'd classically understand an electron to "orbit" around a positive nucleus.
62157
The usual simple statement of geodesics is that when moving from point $(x_o,y_o,z_o,t_o)$ to point $(x_1,y_1,z_1,t_1)$ the object will follow the path of greatest proper time experience, i.e., a clock traveling the geodesic will record more seconds than one going another path.  I believe that is true even if you allow rocket thrusters or other energy addition devices. But what if you consider a circular orbit which, after 1 year, results in going from $(0,0,0,0)$ to $(0,0,0,1)$?  Wouldn't the proper time be maximized by simply sitting still, i.e., traveling only through time and not space?  The orbiting clock would presumably run slower just as the orbiting clock in the international space station runs slower than one on Earth.  In fact, if you want a physical model, assume a clock on a 400 km tall flag pole synchronized with the ISS during a pass-by (the ISS orbits at 400 km above the planet surface).  One orbit later, wouldn't the ISS clock record less time than the flag pole clock? Is that a violation of the concept &quot;orbits are geodesics, for which the shortest distance between two 4D points is the path of greatest time&quot;?
84812
Consider your typical  scenario.  You are standing on the inner side of the sphere.  You look up and see the shining sun far away.    My question (or thought experiment rather) is: Completely negating the gravitational forces, mass, etc. of the sun, if you could be placed anywhere within the radius of the Sphere, is there a point within the Sphere where you would float freely? The center seems the most obvious answer, but is it the only one? Keep in mind: standing at any point on the ground you have a "small" amount of mass beneath your feet, and FAR much more mass "above" you. Does this mass pull you more than the ground beneath your feet?
95236
Is there a way to force a free electron move in a low speed in order to observe it actually hitting 'on the floor'?
5340
Given 2 objects moving at some velocity $v$ relative to one another, is it possible to determine whether they are moving or whether the space between them is expanding?
1087
Total noob question, but the passive perception is confusing. I don't understand how to calculate it or use it, and I need help.
113597
For instance do the planets around the sun experience drag from the near vacuum of space? Or do the (hydrogen) atoms in interplanetary space have a mean velocity near orbital speeds, such that object with the roughly the same inclination would have relatively low relative velocity and thus insignificant drag? And if so would (small) celestial objects orbiting the sun in the opposite direction experience a significantly larger drag?  When searching for whether if this question has been asked before I also found  in which the best answer also mentions gravitational waves. How would this possible drag compare to the effect of gravitational waves?
11449
I am following this  on making an asteroid and when it comes to rendering the scene I get an unwanted "shadow". The shadow starts to appear in frame 36 of the render (but is clearer in frame 40) and i do not know what i have done wrong. Here is the .  The effect described here is clearly visible in the right top corner, like a polygonal darkness.
7117
When I'm rotating, I feel centrifugal force. But if I were the only one in the universe and rotating, wouldn't I just kinda be still (since I'm not rotating with respect to anything) or would there just be a force pulling me out? What if there were another person a billion miles away, this should not change anything, right?
26445
I am trying to understand  ($c$). The geometry of the situation is shown in the image below. The determination involves measuring apparent fluctuations in the orbital period of Io. (Jupiter's moon)    The Earth starts from point A. $r(t)$ is the distance between the Earth and Jupiter. $r_e$ is the radius of the (assumed) circular orbit of the Earth around the Sun, while $r_0$ is the same for Jupiter. $T$ is the period of the Earth's orbit.  Under the assumption that the Jupiter-Io system is stationary, $r(t)$ can be expressed as  $$r(t) = \sqrt{r_E^2 + r_0^2 -2r_0 r_E \cos \left(\frac{2\pi t}{T}\right)}$$  If we further assume that the period of Io's orbit around Jupiter, $\Delta t$ is much smaller that $T$, then it can be shown that the distance the Earth moves, $\Delta r$ when Io completes one orbit is:  $$\Delta r = \frac{2\pi r_E \Delta t}{T} \sin\left( \frac{2\pi t}{T} \right)$$  The point I am stuck is about why is there an apparent fluctuation in Io's orbit as observed on the Earth? And how can we derive the observed delay using these expressions?
1223
I'm running a Laptop with Arch Linux, X.org and i3. Due to a broken LCD panel, I would like to disable/ignore the left ~228 Pixels of the screen until I have time to get it repaired.  So far, I've tried using a non-standard resolution and then adding an offset, but had no success. Is there any simple solution for this?
11576
I know very little about quantum physics, but I just can't wrap my head around the fact that non-spherical orbitals appear to be "oriented", constituting a set of fixed "frame of reference axes".  Does it really work like that? Are there for a single atom given directions in which the orbitals "protrude"? And if so, what are they based on? If I understand it right, the nucleus is seemingly spherical - symmetrical with no unique axis of symmetry. What would then decide the orientation of the orbitals in space (with respect to the surroundings)?  Edit: I understand any orientation works to satisfy the wave equation. I was more curious why the atom would choose one direction, instead of any of the others. Is that fundamentally random? And is this setup retained further, or can it change at any time?
83329
Consider a free electron in space. Let us suppose we measure its position to be at point A with a high degree of accuracy at time 0. If I recall my QM correctly, as time passes the wave function spreads out, and there is a small but finite chance of finding it pretty much anywhere in the universe. Suppose it's measured one second later by a different observer more than one light second away and, although extremely unlikely, this observer discovers that electron. I.e. the electron appears to have traversed the intervening distance faster than light speed. What's going on here?  I can think of several, not necessarily contradictory, possibilities:   I'm misremembering how wave functions work, and in particular the wave function has zero (not just very small) amplitude beyond the light speed cone. Since we can't control this travel, no information is transmitted and therefore special relativity is preserved (similar to how non-local correlations from EPR type experiments don't transmit information) Although the difference between positions is greater than could have been traversed by the electron traveling at c, had we measured the momentum instead, we would have always found it to be less than $m_e c$ and it's really the instantaneous momentum that special relativity restricts; not the distance divided by time. My question is ill-posed, and somehow meaningless.   Would anyone care to explain how this issue is resolved?
105226
Can you think of any spaces that are connected but not path connected apart from the Topologist's Sine Curve?
21073
I know Newton's third law of motion might be the answer for this but still I am wondering how the rockets could thrust in the empty space and move in the opposite direction. I guess an astronaut wouldn't be able to push in the empty space with his hands or legs to move himself, but with a rocket engine it's possible. How? What might be the explanation for this in General Relativity?
17742
I keep reading about instances where we center the data (e.g., with regularization or PCA) in order to remove the intercept (as mentioned in ). I know it's simple, but I'm having a hard time intuitively understanding this. Could someone provide the intuition or a reference I can read?
62584
I would like to know the physical meaning of the , if there is any? I've used it in thermodynamics and classical mechanics and it seemed only a change of coordinates?