The Philadelphia Experiment 1943..True or False? If so what advances?
452652
As a tried and true Science Fiction, I like What Ifs as much as the next person.  I think it is important to keep it all in perspective. We did indeed put a man on the moon, but we have yet to find a way to teleport anything. \n\nTo answer your question, a discover of that magnitude could never be kept secret. The money to be made from such a technology would guarantee someone would either leak the secret or steal it.
745178
What is known comes from experiment.
6943
Yeah, i think it is possible, i heard of this one experiment, this guy kept trying to light matches. It took him a good year or so, He found out that the atmosheric pressure in seberia was not suitable for match lighting. He had to then put a match in a controlled enviroment, then he light it.\n\nI think he is being nominated for the noble peace prize
816061
It is tough to answer this question without knowing what the experimental procedure was or what the aluminum foil was used for.  More detail please.
72303
The short answer is no. \n\nIn science, it is important that results be repeatable. This is especially true when dealing with some phenomenon like cold fusion which appears to violate all the principles that we understand. \n\nPons and Fleishman and others tried to reproduce the observations, and were unable to do so reliably. A recent review by the Department of Energy of 15 years of research and efforts in the field reached the conclusion that this phenomenon does not exist, or at least cannot be verified.
580964
Gamma decay is probably the one you are after.\nTransitions in the energy levels of the nucleons is the process behind it.\nNuclear Magnetic Resonance is also a nuclear process and would make a better answer as the wavelength of radiation is much safer.
831271
Dear Madame,\n\nYou could try testing wave-particle duality nature of photons, and report on how the theory corresponds with Schodiger's findings in the early 20th century. \n\nAnyone can put a light bulb in a potato. Also, the above response about commercials is about as unscientific as you can get. I don't trust emus.\n\nPianoguy
186155
No.\n\nThere is something often called "quantum teleportation," but it is much more analgous to a fax machine which send a set ot particle properties from one subatomic particle or atom, to another subatomic particle or atom. This is imporant work and will likely impact things like cryptography, but, despite the name which appears in popular accounts it is NOT teleportation in the Star Trek sense.\n\nEven in star trek they realize that it is fundamentally impossible to identify the position and location of each particle in a person accurately enough to be able to reconstruct it - hense the 'heisenberg compensator' they mention in some of the more recent shows.\n\nAlso the amount of energy in something the size of a person is enormous, more than all the nuclear weapons we have. (I'm guessing, but it is in that range.)\n\nSo, no, I would hope no one is working on this. At best, someone can be working on the physics which will lead to the physics that leads to the physics underlying such a device. Assuming such a device is even possible.
559141
Yes, Richard Feynman suggested this way back when. \n\nThe original paper is available here: http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v76/i6/p749_1\n\nWithout a subscription you'll only be able to read the abstract.
170874
Most physicists (like Feynman) will tell you it's definitely a particle.  I think they're full of crap, and it's a wave.  The fact that it can only be absorbed and emited in discrete packets doesn't necessarily mean that it really travels as a particle, and the notion of a particle flies in the face of the double-slit one-photon experiment.
352876
No, you might be thinking of gamma rays.  Several things can be done using gamma ray coincidence, but only one alpha particle is emitted in alpha decay.
941865
It is quite reliable when properly applied.  It can't be trusted when:\n\n(1) it is applied so far in the past that it is extreme extrapolation of limited data.\n\n(2) the sample and its food source were radiation-protected.\n\n(3) the sample came from a situation or time where the C14/C12 ratio was different from what it is today, or is unknown.\n\nFor all these reasons, the farther back in time you try to read, the less reliable the dating.
1051025
The question is too open. What experiment are you talking about? If you google science supplies you might find out, although since it's homework most people won't just give you an answer.
275900
Thomas Edison explored this very same issue. He experimented many different components and found that a steel wire in a vacuum lasted longest.\n\nSo yes the light would work, but for a short period of time when the wire, exposed to air, would oxidize then burn up.
747869
This was an experimemt the US Navy conducted.  They attempted to "Cloak" a destroyer using magnetism.  How successful it was I am not sure.  There are several myths surrounding the experiment which depict gross outcomes of the experiment.
635129
http://www.physics.gatech.edu/advancedlab/labs/frankhertz/\n\nhttp://www.physics.sfsu.edu/~rrogers/Phys%20321/5_Frank.htm\n\nhttp://www.physics.ucla.edu/demoweb/demomanual/modern_physics/quantum_mechanics_and_atomic_physics/frank_hertz_experiment.html
507974
Yes,It was proved that  the electron can't be restricted to a space as small as an atomic nucleus. The process you describe doesn't involve confinement of an electron. It involves a transformation of an electron (and a proton) into a neutron. If the electron retained its identity as an electron, after the transformation- then there would be a problem.\n\nThe capture of s electrons by a proton occurs within an unstable, neutron-rich nucleus. Usually it's the 1s electrons that are captured. When a vacancy opens up in the 1s orbital, an electron from a higher shell drops into its place, dumping energy as X-rays. The X-rays are experimental evidence that electron capture by the nucleus is taking place. Luis Walter Alvarez was the first to demonstrate nuclear decay via K-shell capture in 1937 (just a year out of grad school).\n\nAnything that affects the 1s electrons could affect the electron capture rate. Since the 1s electrons can be perturbed slightly by valence shell events, it's reasonable to expect that you'd have a rare instance of a nuclear reaction that can be influenced by a chemical reaction. I'd also expect the coupling between the two to be pretty weak, because the 1s electrons are really not very sensitive to chemistry.\n\nOn this very question you have asked, with this explanation, many aspects of Quantum theory are surviving.Goodluck and Peace<3