What is Space?

Hi vermin,

Actually how do you get 440 v three phase out of 110 v phase to neutral. I know you use a 220 v split phase system but 110 v phase to neutral gives you190 v phase to phase. Too get 440 phase to phase you need 254 v phase to neutral.

Dose this mean you actually have three different supplies, 110pn/190pp v, 220 v split phase with each 110 v to neutral and a 254pn/440pp v systems?

In Australia we have a single final 3 phase system with 240 v phase to neutral which gives 415 v phase to phase. If you need more grunt than that the next step is 11 Kv three phase

I swiped this from Wikipedia. If it doesn't answer all your questions, go to this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase_electric_power

There's some really neat animated graphics that explain a lot!

Three-phase is a common method of electric power transmission. It is a type of polyphase system used to power motors and many other devices.

This article deals with where, how and why "three phase" is used. For information on the basic mathematics and principles of three phase, see three-phase. For information on testing three phase equipment (kit) please see three-phase testing.

Three phase systems may or may not have a neutral wire. A neutral wire allows the three phase system to use a higher voltage while still supporting lower voltage single phase appliances. In high voltage distribution situations it is common not to have a neutral wire as the loads can simply be connected between phases (phase-phase connection).

Three phase has properties that make it very desirable in electric power systems. Firstly the phase currents tend to cancel one another (summing to zero in the case of a linear balanced load). This makes it possible to eliminate the neutral conductor on some lines. Secondly power transfer into a linear balanced load is constant, which helps to reduce generator and motor vibrations. Finally, three-phase systems can produce a magnetic field that rotates in a specified direction, which simplifies the design of electric motors. Three is the lowest phase order to exhibit all of these properties.

Most domestic loads are single phase. Generally three phase power either does not enter domestic houses at all, or where it does, it is split out at the main distribution board.

The three phases are typically indicated by colors which vary by country. See the table for more information.

Star connected systems without neutral Since we have shown that the neutral current is zero we can see that removing the neutral core will have no effect on the circuit, provided the system is balanced. In reality such connections are generally used only when the load on the three phases is part of the same piece of equipment (for example a three-phase motor), as otherwise switching loads and slight imbalances would cause large voltage fluctuations.

Unbalanced systems Practical systems rarely have perfectly balanced loads, currents, voltages or impedances in all three phases. The analysis of unbalanced cases is greatly simplified by the use of the techniques of symmetrical components. An unbalanced system is analyzed as the superposition of three balanced systems, each with the positive, negative or zero sequence of balanced voltages.

Fess up, Masu. Tell us really why you're interested in all this heavy-metal three-phase stuff. This ain't one o' those "What Is Three Phase" threads that pops up every few months. Did you just buy the Keck or something?

-e

No I'm working on a linear accelerator that will launch my glider to 5,000 and the supply authority won't let me use 135 Kv so I will have too make do with standard 415 v supply.

Hi Vermin,

Sorry should have been more specific. I studied electrical engineering at the New South Wales Institute of Technology so I have a reasonably good understanding of the mathematics and concepts behind three phase power transmission and use.

What I was really asking was the apparent three separate supply voltages? In Australia, like just about everywhere, we use the standard three phase system but the end user supply is all 50 Hz 240 v phase to neutral. When you then multiply this by √3 it give you the 415 phase to phase voltage that is used for equipment that needs it. So we really only have one end user supply voltage which is 240/415 v. Depending on your demand you either have a single or three phase supply connected. If this is insufficient or the distance requires a higher voltage the next step is to go to a three phase 11 Kv supply which is nearly always connected to a delta configured load.

Now I know in North America the usual domestic supply is 110 v single phase and if you connect this as three phase your phase to phase voltage is 190 v. Just to complicate thins you also have a 220 v split phase system for items that pull too much to run on a 110 v single phase supply.

You also appear to have a 440 v three phase supply which if connected as star gives you 245 v phase to neutral. I assume you use for items that pull too much power to use the 110/190 v three phase supply.

So do you really have three end user supply voltages i.e. 110/190 v, 220 v split phase and 440 v three phase or am I mixing something up?

Most houses in the US have 220V single phase - two hots and a neutral. Unless you need it for an electric stove or dryer, you never know that there's 220V there. Almost everything else in the house uses 110V, three-prong receptacles (hot, neutral, and true ground {You call it "earthed" I believe})

Three phase 440V is strictly one of those things you have to arrange with the power company. However, I do know that three phase 440V can be supplied with or without a neutral. Also, its main purpose is to run honking big-ass motors. Three phase really smooths out the forces within the motor. If you went to that URL, you saw an interesting animation on how the three phases work within an electric motor.

Most US power lines carry 12KV at the top of the pole, then dump it into step down transformers to get the 220V single phase house feed. Inside our outdoors box, the 220V is then split into two circuits of 110V and distributed throughout the house.

I'm not really an expert in power distribution, so this may not answer your question. Let me know.

Hi Vermin,

thanks for the info, I think I have a handle on what is going on now.

Most US power lines carry 12KV at the top of the pole, then dump it into step down transformers to get the 220V single phase house feed. Inside our outdoors box, the 220V is then split into two circuits of 110V and distributed throughout the house.

Interesting, are you sure about the 12 Kv part, I was under the impression that most places in the world used 11 Kv as the second to last stage in their power distribution systems.

We have something similar in Australia with 11 Kv three wire (no neutral) power at the top of the poles with a 240/415 v four wire (3 active and 1 neutral) that is then distributed to the user.

Since, in North America, most houses have the split phase, 2 x 110 v, system that means your last stage of distribution must be a seven wire system. If you split a single phase to produce the two 110 v feeds with respect to neutral you need to do it on each of the three phases which now give you six actives and one neutral. i.e.

Phase A at 0° splits into two at 0° and 180°

Phase B as 120° splits to two at 120° and 200°

Phase C at 240° splits to two as 240° and 20°

Yuck, what a mess, not only do you need to quadruple the size of the conductors, due to the lower voltage, but you end up with seven instead of four conductors and then you have the 440 v end stage distribution system as well.

Boy am I glad that we have a 240/415 v three phase end supply, it really makes things a hell of a lot simpler. One end user voltage, 240 v phase to neutral, for everything and if you need you just go to three phase and run phase to phase at 415 v. We do have an additional SWER Single Wire Earth Return system, for places that are too widely spaced to use the 240/415 v end stage, but this is only a tiny portion of the system outside the population centers.

Something else I just thought of, if you keep you voltage drop the same you can send 240 v four times as far as 110 v. That means you only need 1/16 the number of transformers to step the 11 Kv down to the final user voltage. That is a huge incentive to use a higher end user voltage.

I know it is totally impractical to change to a higher voltage, in North America, but bloody hell, the advantages are huge and I am truly glad that we never went for a 110 v system in Australia. With the spread out population we have it would have been an absolute nightmare.

Yes, in America (at least in the Bay Area) three wires come down from the pole to the weather head. From there, 4-gauge wire brings power into the outdoor box... Have you ever tried to pull 4-gauge wire?! It sucks!

Here in Silicon Valley we have this funny problem that there are so many computers running that they return a relatively high frequency current back to the power station through ground. This results in burned up power stations! Because of this, every large building that contains lots of computers has to install a really big-ass choke to dampen out the signals. Ever heard of this before?

Here in Silicon Valley we have this funny problem that there are so many computers running that they return a relatively high frequency current back to the power station through ground. This results in burned up power stations!

I have never had it that bad but yes I have had earth leakage cause numerous other hassles like ground fault circuit breakers tripping and high frequency noise. Part of the problem is the use of switch mode power supplies but the ever increasing frequencies that computers are operating at makes them radio transmitters. I think the split phase power that you use could also be a contributing factor as well.

A properly designed power supply should suppress much of this so it really comes back to it being another symptom of the cheap power supply syndrome.

"Come and get 'em now!!! 50 billion Mhz front side bus with 95 bazillion gigs of memory and a 922 google byte hard drive, blah, blah, blah" and they put a $3.00 power supply in it.

It's funny out here, there are so many damn computers that they actually create a rather large amount of high frequency current on neutral (ground?).

That's why I'm a devotee of automatic watches. At least I'm not carrying a damn computer around on my wrist. Dang!!!

It's something I have seen a lot, an engineer puts his heart and soul into designing something to the most efficient and reliable piece of equipment and some idiot bean counter destroys it completely by cutting corners in production.

Have you seen the Seiko watches that have a built in generator that is powered by a counterweight. They say that it should last a lifetime without needing any servicing, batteries or winding.

Yeah, but I like getting all the circuitry out of there. It's really neat when some old Swiss guy creates a watch that is as accurate as a quartz watch, but only has mechanical innards. Now that's cool!!! It may be past its time, but ya gotta respect it.

Also, when you live in Silicon Valley, everything you work with is computerized. It allows you to do some pretty amazing things, but still... It's good to get away from the computers once in a while.

By the way what time and day is it where you are? It's Sunday morning, 03/11/2007 here at 6:57 AM because we just started Daylight Savings Time early this year. What day and time is it where you are?

Hi Vermin,

It currently 00:40 Monday morning, the temperature is 22°C and the wind is 200° at 15 Kt.

My favorite watch, which I still have, is an Bulova Accutron Spaceview. I don't know your age, but I'm guessing you may not remember this kind of watch, which was introduced in the early sixties:

The timebase was a miniature tuning fork, which you can see running up the center. The watch was battery-powered, of course, which meant no winding, and it was extremely accurate - more so than my first quartz watch, at least - and totally übercool. I bought it in 10th grade with the money I earned as a $1.00/hour dishwasher at Wyatt's Cafeteria. I'd hold the watch near my guitar pickup so I could hear it through the amp and tune my guitar. The fork oscillated at 360 Hz - a slightly flat F^#₄/G^b₄ (about 369 Hz) - but it was sufficient for my needs and no one else had a tuner quite like it. I liked it better than the autowinds and much better than the clunky two-hands-needed-to-read-the-time LED digitals that came later. I don't even wear a watch now and consult my cell phone if I need to know the time.

-e

Does it still work?! That's cool, and yes I remember them.

It is in mint condition and works perfectly. I've no idea how much it's worth now, but I bought it new for about $150 in 1970. Some owners made their 'trons into so-called "conversions" having a newer, more stylish-looking case and a view into the innards. Mine is an original, 2nd-generation-case Spaceview (the first-gen Spaceviews had a really bland-looking, round case. Mine is what you see in the pic). The only thing about it that's different is the wrist band, which was leather. I replaced the leather one with a sterling-silver "chainmaille" band with friction clasp. I now keep the watch out of harm's way in a safe deposit box.

-e

No! I hate that! You should wear it. In this day and age it really makes a statement.

I purchased a Namiki collectors pen. Black lacquer with a panda on it. only a 1000 were made and only during 1998. It originally sold in its big-ass wood presentation box for $7,500.00. I got it for about a grand on eBay. When I emailed the previous owner with the question "Should I use the ink that came in the presentation box or should I buy new ink, she freaked!!! She couldn't believe that I was actually going to use it, reducing its value as a collectible. My idea was why the heck would I buy a pen if I wasn't going to use it?! Every time I use it, it makes a statement and causes a conversation!!!

I wear it on special occasions. One lady studied my watch for some time with a puzzled look on her face. She finally asked, "What is that a map of?"

Oh, well...

-e

Hi e,

Yes I do remember those watches although I believe the word space is improperly used. Most people do not realize that the watches that the astronauts used were all made from brass and had no stainless steel in them. This is because stainless steel can burn violently in a pure oxygen atmosphere and until the space shuttle all NASA craft used a pure O₂ atmosphere.

I have one of those Rolex copies that was given to me about 12 years ago but even though it is only a cheap copy the accuracy is impressive. Whenever I need to change it to allow for daylight savings it is always less than a second out. The only time it becomes inaccurate is every couple of years when the battery runs down and it starts gaining about 20 seconds a month.

There you go! Weak batteries are the Real cause of Time Dilation. Somebody tell Jorrie!

-e

You mean the word "Space" in "Spaceview?" Accutron Spaceview is the name of the model where the innards are visible.

I didn't realize SS was so flammable in an O₂ atmosphere. In terms of flammability, I should think aluminum would be the stronger candidate. Certainly magnesium is, and I'm quite sure a number of components in the pressurized cabins of early spacecraft - things like switch toggles and so forth - were made of SS. Apollo 1 was the last of its series to use a pure O₂ atmosphere, to be replaced in later missions with a mix of oxygen and nitrogen.

Do you have experience with SS burning in pure O₂ atmospheres? This is news indeed!

-e

He e and others,

This thread is becoming cumbrously large and trying to get from post to post is becoming extremely difficult and for some reason is hanging my link to the internet so I am going to answer a host of thing in one post.

Apollo 1 was the last of its series to use a pure O₂ atmosphere, to be replaced in later missions with a mix of oxygen and nitrogen.

Actually they only used an oxygen nitrogen atmosphere on the ground. In flight they always used a pure O₂ atmosphere at about 200 Hpa for all the Apollo and Skylab missions. This was a big problem when they had the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission as the Russian craft used an oxygen nitrogen mix at around 950 Hpa. Since the Apollo was designed to be able to dock with the LEM they replaced the LEM with an airlock and docked the whole assembly with the Soyuz craft.

The space shuttle uses an oxygen nitrogen mix as dose the ISS but space suits use pure oxygen at about 200 Hpa. Prior to any space walk the astronauts need to pre breath a pure oxygen atmosphere for around 8 hours to purge the nitrogen from their system as prevent decompression problems.

Do you have experience with SS burning in pure O₂ atmospheres? This is news indeed!

I don't have any hands on experience with stainless steel in a pure O₂ atmosphere actually burning. However, during my O₂ high altitude training, as a glider pilot, the covered the subject of the precautions that need to be taken and how stainless steel was a no-no near the O₂.

I am not sure but I think aluminium isn't a problem because the oxide coating, that it develops almost instantly, keeps if from burning any further. I do know however that given the right conditions it can burn fiercely as it did in the HMS Sheffield during the Falkland's war.

Ok following on from my earlier postulates that the three fundamental dimensions are actually time, space, matter and energy and Vermin's statement Time = m$² how about this for a definition of space

Since the universe expanded from a singularity in both space and time and nothing can travel faster than the speed of light the maximum distance anything could have traveled in that period is time multiplied by the speed of light so we can say that

Ok that's enough hypothesizing I feel another cosmolograine coming on so I am calling it quits on this thread for the moment.

I've found one interesting component about space... When the listings reach about 200, CR4 starts breaking down!!!

Thanks for the input, Masu!

I say we torment them with Denial-Of-Service Posts until they relent and give us a chatroom. With sound. Heck, just a chatroom. Chris? Hello, Chris???

-e

Heck, you sound like more of an Early Space Program junkie than I was! Did you know I pulled in someone's driveway once to turn around (on Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts) and it turned out to be my favorite Space Program news anchor Walter Cronkite's driveway? Not only was it his driveway, but Burt Reynold's yacht was moored not far offshore. The damn thing was as big as the ferry we took out to the island. Must be nice. Sadly, Walter didn't come outside to shoo us away. Word has it that below desk height he looks like Donald Duck with feathers and those big orange feet. Don't blame him for not showing up.

-e

My wife is a hairdresser and used to look after Andrew Thomas's (the Australian astronaut) step mothers hair. She would always have stories of some new adventure he was on that was part of his training.

Hi Masu, on your formula for space: throw in a factor pi and you've got the volume of observable space. But to completely "cure" your cosmolograine, consider that you may also have to throw in a factor ∞ (infinity) above the line to get the volume of "proper space"...

Regards, Jorrie

Actually I meant to include π originally but somehow forgot and left it out. The revised formula for space then becomes

Now all we need to do is tie mass and energy together with this and we have solved the universe.

Actually what do you think about the concept of the dimensions being time, space, matter and energy?

I realize we use three variables to describe a position within space but I believe that is more a property of our numbering system than space itself. The other thing is that if we use length, depth, height and time we leave out matter and energy which is what really makes up the universe.

Hi Masu, nothing wrong with your 4 "dimensions", except that energy and matter are perhaps the same thing.

I look at dimensions as follows: for an event's location in spacetime, you need one time and three space dimensions. If you want to specify what is going on at that event, you may need many more "dimensions", e.g., the mass centering on that event, the type of matter the mass is made of, etc...

Some will say that I'm simply listing attributes of the event; yep, so it may be, but I need a multidimensional array to store all that information!

Regards, Jorrie

Hi Masu, nothing wrong with your 4 "dimensions", except that energy and matter are perhaps the same thing.

Actually I have a feeling that all four are the same thing and are tied together in a fundamental and elegantly simple way like matter and energy. The universe at its base seems to be extremely simple, it's just the way it interacts and how we interpret this interaction that gets complicated. A bit over a century ago if you suggested that matter and energy were indeed the same thing and were tied together in such a simple way as they are, in the equation E=mc², you would have been laughed off the planet.

Perhaps it is our overly complex interpretation that is clouding what we see and hiding the simplest of answers.

Anyway this thread has become unworkably large and it is difficult to try and get from one posting to another so I think it's time to call it quits and start a new thread.

Jorrie, I believe you are confusing models of perceived reality with the real thing.

Space-time is a model constructed to develop a theory and its applications. It has no reality except in the mind.

Matter is condensed energy, and gravity is the effect caused by this condensation.

No one has taken me up, (apart from a jibe from Guest) as far as I can see in this long thread, on the question of fields and how they come about.

Hi duikerbok, when you say "I believe you are confusing models of perceived reality with the real thing", do you care to define "the real thing"?

Maybe, we should start another thread titled: "What is Reality?"

Regards, Jorrie

PS: From your user name it appears that you, like me, reside in a Dutch or "derivative" country(?)

I think that this is somewhat on the right track.

Hi Jorrie,

To that I'd have to say, "If the shoe fits..."

A "robot" on one of our big scopes (the HET) is a very clever mechanism called a hexapod (not to be confused with a hexapod of the insect variety, to which it bears no resemblance). The full forward kinematics equations for an unconstrained hexapod involves 40 variables and are, shall we say, something of an effort to solve. In a sense, one might consider this little beastie to be 40-dimensional "object" if, as in our particular case, it didn't have certain application-dependent constraints on its motion that reduce the number of variables (for which I'm thankful, as it is my task to write the control software for it).

It might be less of a "trigger" to hair-splitters, nit-pickers, and like-minded-others with plenty of time on their hands to refer to these extra mass-centering, material, and other "dimensions" as simply additional "degrees of freedom." Works for me.

But one can see their objections: there are mathematical "dimensions" and there are physical "dimensions," and they are really quite different but are described by the same word. We can thank the usual ambiguities inherent in natural language for the confusion. Take the phrase "a fourth dimension" and contrast it with "the Fourth Dimension." That one little word makes all the difference.

-e

Hi -e, "But one can see their objections: there are mathematical "dimensions" and there are physical "dimensions," and they are really quite different but are described by the same word."

I hope we do not trigger a vast thread, or worse, a contraction of this one, on "What is a Dimension?"

Jorrie (exhausted!)

Now now, Jorrie. Cheer up! You did suggest a new thread, "What is Reality?" after all! Surely there's still enough gas in the tank for one more 200-plus-post round of Existential Physics? And you did log on to CR4 to read this nonsense, yes?

How 'bout a new thread: Reality Lite. Maybe "What is Reality TV?" Can you go for that?

Please say 'yes,' because I'm about to O.D. on these Excedrin Migraine tabs I'm popping. Talk about gettin one friggin' Cosmolograine! (btw, nice word, Masu: cosmolograine. I'm starting a list: CR4isms. So far we have cosmolograine, collarborate, and reprocute. Am I missing any?)

So, Jorrie, what'll it be?

-e

The typical voltage breakdown for a medium sized industry in the US goes this way:

113k from substation(utility side, stepped down to 13.2k on their side) 13.2 k goes to distribution switches, (industry side) and transformers, that go from 13.2k to 7.2k, to 4.160k, to 440v, and from there to 240/120v.The appropriate voltage is selected accordong to HP requirements, with up to 1000 hp and above from 4160v/3ph.

There are also 208/120 Y systems im many commercial buildings. 208 isused for lighting loads, and small motor loads, and 120 for office equipment, etc.

The harmonic voltages on single phase systems that serve large computer farms is due to the switch-mode power supplies on the computers and routers, etc. .They do not nescessarily switch when the sine wave is at zero, and induce high-frequency current into the neutral conductor.The neutral is normally doubled in size from the normal calculated size to accommodate for this extra current.If all currents are equal on the 2 phases of 240, there will be no neutral current.The neutral simply carries the imbalance current.The high frequency currents cannot be measured by normal devices because of the freqency, but can induce heating in the conductors nonetheless.

Cool! Thank you for clearing that up, HTRN!

I wonder what life would be like today if Edison had got his way. "DC for everybody!!!"

vermin ponders: "I wonder what life would be like today if Edison had got his way. 'DC for everybody!!!'"

-----

The air, soil, and water would be so polluted from the huge number of power plants needed to compensate for I²R losses that industrialized countries would presently be uninhabitable by all except lichens and cockroaches. That's why cross-country AC transmission lines operate at such very high voltages. The same power is delivered, but at a lower transmission current. It's hard to generate sustained high-voltage DC - hundreds of kilovolts - in order to reduce the I²R losses in transmission lines. It might be different if there was such a thing as a DC transformer (probably requiring magnetic monopoles), but there isn't. DC isn't practical in terms of distribution.

You think we use a lot of petro fuels now! Can you just imagine the waste if we used DC? A typical power plant is around 34% efficient. And it would also have broken the economic backs of every country that adopted his ideas. Please don't get me going on Edison. The man was creative, yes, but he was also a thief, a liar, and he publicly tortured and executed animals (even elephants) - using AC - to get his point across that DC was superior because it was "safer." The man himself is a heel in my book.

-e

Sounds like a great idea for a sci-fi book "Edison World."

As an aside, lately I heard that a lot of his early life was spent in the service of large corporations. His job was to search the patent office for mistakes in patent filings, then take the invention to his masters where they would refile it as their own. How the mighty have fallen!

Corporate sleaze knows no bounds. I'm currently reading an excellent book, "Pigs At The Trough." You might wish to check it out. Also viddy "The Corporation," a documentary that clearly illustrates the fact that if one were to consider the modern corporation as an individual, that individual would meet every clinical criterion for a psychopath.

-e

There's another book out there that addresses the idea that all top corporate executives ARE psychopaths. It's called "Sharks in Suits."

Next on my list!

-e

When I was a young man, I held Edison is great esteem, but after reading about his dealings with N. Tesla, my respect turned into disgust.He was a thief and a scoundrel, that used people in a selfish manner.Tesla is the true father of our modern civilization, and his work is visible everywhere we go. G Westinghouse was no better than Edison,although he did provide Tesla with a lab, where he made the first 3phase motor.When the depression hit, he went to Tesla, crying and moaning that the only way his company could survive was to get out of his contract with him, which was 1 penny per horsepower.Tesla fell for it, and tore up the contract.Tesla died a poor man as a result.

The Smithsonian has many exhibits dedicated to Edison, but none for Tesla.I inquired as to why, and was told that General Electric made yearly contributions to the institute. Money talks.

Now, back to DC. Direct current is being used to transmit very high quantities of electricity much cheaper than AC.This is done by using high temperature superconductors, and even with the cost of refrigeration, and the conversion equipment needed to change it back into AC, the cost is still lower than the losses from A/C.

DC may yet have it's day, but no thanks to Edison's method of distribution.

Hi HTRN,

The Smithsonian has many exhibits dedicated to Edison, but none for Tesla .I inquired as to why, and was told that General Electric made yearly contributions to the institute. Money talks.

At least Tesla's name is being used by Tesla Motors .

I would really like to get my hands on one of their roadsters and see if it performs as well as they claim. To me, the thought of sitting at a set of traffic lights in a perfectly silent car, next to some mussel brained hoon, in a hotted up heap, then blowing him away, is very appealing.

Maybe one day Tesla Motors will be big enough to donate to the Smithsonian and they will include some display of Tesla's work

A friend of mine lives in San Carlos, and the company he works for was asked to come over to Tesla Motors to give a presentation. While there, they got the full tour... Yes, the cars perform exactly as advertised! Though for the price I'd rather buy a slightly used Ferrari with five hundred + horsepower!

Masu warns: "...when you plug 110 V US designed electronics into 240 V Australian power sockets."

-----

Hi Masu! Did you know that when you plug U.S.-designed SC telescopes into 240 V Australian power sockets ("pluggers" my Emily calls them), you can get great close-up pictures of comets? You might be pleased to know that your pic (not the NASA one) figured prominently in a lecture one of our astronomers gave to this year's crop of Astronomy majors. Per my instructions, he credited the work to "Masu: Astronomer Extraordinaire From The Land Down Under."

You're famous!

-e

Space is any area that cannot be sensed by humans....

Really? Then, would the area [volume] between any two, more or less matching, pinnae constitute space? So that "space" is that which is thought about, as well as that which is thought with?

Eu, are we going to get that limerick...anyone?

Perhaps, in your case....But not generally speaking...

Eureka! So we agree.

Okay, a random, off-topic limmerick:

A mathematician named 'Klein'

Thought the Möbius band was divine.

He said, "If you glue

the edges of two,

you'll get a weird bottle like mine."

and another, equally nerdy:

A mathematician confided

that the Möbius band is one-sided.

He said with a laugh,

"If you cut one in half

it stays in one piece when divided."

Okay, that does it. I'm going to bed.

-e

Bravo!!!

Sadly, I'm only the messenger.

-e

Where it is, was, or will be; or not.

So we mustn't let it get to us; or not.

Wow,When did this thing start ?

Space is the nothingness with three dimensions (Cartesian?) into which our universe and any other universes are doing their (current) thing.

Our Universe consists of interconnected sub-elementary-particle globs of energy which by their interactions coalsce to form the elementary particles and thereby exhibit the rudiments of what we call gravity on the macroscopic scale.

How else to explain the fiction of fields, gravitational, electical, magnetic etc etc.

Remember that experiment that disproved the existence of the aether. Well they just got the wrong aether, they disproved the ether.(Michelson-Morley)

Maxwells equations showed that e-m radiation shouldn't need a property of the aether to propagate itself but it assumed an awful lot about magnetic and electric fields.

Hey ho it's late and I need this shooting down.!

So you're saying it's just something--as in, nothing--to get hung up on?

Does a thought occupy space, independent of the source?If so, this forum and others like it are probably responsible for the increasing rate of expansion of the universe.

How about the reciprocal of E=MC2?

Ouch! Now I've got a headache.........

Hi duikerbok, I missed this one in this very tiring thread, but when you wrote: "How else to explain the fiction of fields, gravitational, electrical, magnetic etc etc.", was it tongue in the cheek, a mistype or what?

And are you sure that "Maxwell's equations showed that e-m radiation shouldn't need a property of the aether to propagate itself but it assumed an awful lot about magnetic and electric fields."?

You may be right, but I have never quite looked at it that way! Care to elaborate a bit?

Oh, I forgot the length of the thread! Maybe just start another one...

Regards Jorrie

No. This is serious stuff. Sorry I have come away from Spain at moment so I missed replying to yours regarding reality and it is difficult to follow the threads with such a large volume.

I meant to say that fields seem real in that they account for various effects within them but can you find a reasoned explanation for them that doesn't depend on some a priori (?) given. What is an electron ? A whole industry has been developed in the last century or so and I still haven't seen an explanation of what it is only what it does and its parameters.

Rearding models I'd drafted a reply to you about Einstein and his models eg Space-time and its relation to reality, and his relativity theories following thought experiments related to his own observation of travel being extrapolated to higher and higher speeds - following on others theories including the M-M null experiment that wa s a turning point which may have been a dead end route we have been following - hence the title of a recent article The Wrong Aether.

You seriously have a broad mind. Space is just a vast area of emptyness according to me, and it is expanding with every second passing because the universe seems to be expanding

space = space. Well, that helps. -e

Hmm! Hold on a minute. If space is expanding (per time) could not that lead to the conclusion that the universe in not expanding? Or conversely? Too much a mind bender you say?

Oh Jorrrieee! You're neeeeded here.

When these two independent research groups presented their finding at the 200(?) astrophysical convention, many a pants were pooped! "We will drive them like rats across the tundra!!!"

And it must be emphasised that we're not talking about the matter in the Universe moving outward at an increasing rate. To the contrary, space, itself, is expanding at an accelerating rate!!!

Kind of bends your brain, doesn't it!

Hi Guest, you wrote: "If space is expanding (per time) could not that lead to the conclusion that the universe in not expanding?"

It depends on the coordinate system you use. Cosmologists like to use "co-moving coordinates", in which space is actually NOT expanding! The "ruler" of this coordinate system expands with space, so a quasar that is observed at 3 Gpa (Gigaparsec) was and will remain at 3 Gpa forever (one parsec is 3.216 light years).

Regards, Jorrie

PS: I've given up on the original question of what is space long ago...

Jorrie resigns: "PS: I've given up on the original question of what is space long ago..." ----- Yeah, me too. What's really bugging me now is "What is Thyme?" Or, more to the point, "Where is Thyme?" I'm serving Sunday Brunch to Parsley, Sage, and Rosemary, and Thyme is late. -e

The original song lyrics were "parsley, sage, rosemary, and seasoning salt."

My friend Paul says you need to eat more bran. :-)

Ah come on, Jorrie. Don't give up now!

If you create a 5" X 5" X 5" box with transparent sides, and you (magically) pump all the air out of it, what is that which is left? It's so damn mysterious!!!

Can't afford a good vacuum pump but have plenty of time? Fill the box with helium, and then wait for all the helium to diffuse through the walls, leaving nothing inside (no container made of ordinary matter can contain helium indefinitely). What's left? The subject of this thread. -e

I've heard that before! That's pretty cool. I imagine a few helium atoms will hang around, though. If I remember correctly, in the most empty parts of outer space, there's still about one atom per cubic meter.

Hi vermin, you wrote: "If you create a 5" X 5" X 5" box with transparent sides, and you (magically) pump all the air out of it, what is that which is left?"

I guess virtually nothing, because the virtual particles popping in and out of existence in there would also vanish if you dare to peek inside...

Regards, Jorrie

Jorrie,

Yes, but something still exists within the cube - that which separates the walls. So if matter and energy cannot be destroyed, just converted, does that mean that space and time cannot be destroyed, just converted. Oooooooooh, now there's an idea!!!

I worked a very long time for the property I now own. Might this be an example of converting time to space? How would the reverse be true?

-e

T= m$²

Hi vermin, what separates the walls? Foam, quantum foam! From Wikipedia article with this name:

"Quantum foam is theorized to be created by virtual particles of very high energy. Virtual particles appear in quantum field theory, where they arise briefly and then annihilate during particle interactions, in such a way that they affect the measured outputs of the interaction even though the virtual particles are themselves never directly observed. They can also appear and annihilate briefly in empty space, and these "vacuum fluctuations" affect the properties of the vacuum, giving it a nonzero energy known as vacuum energy, a type of zero-point energy (however, physicists are uncertain about the magnitude of this energy."

The last sentence is what intrigues me - how much vacuum energy is there in your "empty" cube and how can we exploit it?

Jorrie

Jorrie, google "Casimir forces" for an interesting side-trip into the world of quantum unsense and its Real Effects On Big Stuff.

Hey! Do you think maybe this is what really powers the mythical Perendev Magnetic Motor?

-e

Remember that while these particle pairs exist for only a short period of time (generally, because that depends on the craps shoot of quantum physics) both matter and anti-matter respond the same to gravity, and thus have a short lived but real gravitational force on the rest of the Universe!

LMVAO!

Space is an illusion, the universe began as nothing and nothing has changed!

So does that make me your God? If yes, send more money.

Of course, do you accept illusionary currency "IE" US$?

You didn't really write your post, either, because doing so would ultimately result in a minute change in the entropy of the Universe. But as "nothing has changed," neither have I written this reply. And if space is an illusion, why do you have to keeping putting petrol in your car if it's going nowhere? You must be the muse for the Beatles' hit "Nowhere Man." -e

space = 00100000 = ASCII character 32, the 33 character.

Also, 111111111= space, the 256 ASCII character.(alt 255)

That should settle it.

Next question.

Space is room to breath and an horizon to look at. After that, everything else is can take a hike. Literally.

P.S. It's bigger then all this anyway.

Space is just like the force.

It is Here, between you..me..the tree..the rock..everywhere!

Even between this land and that ship!

Yoda-

the distance between your left and right

EAR

another space cadet

As much as I have tried,I cannot seem to abandon this forum.I know the plot is never going to end,but I keep coming back, I guess, in hopes that someone will have a EUREAKA moment and come up with the answer to the cosmos.We have strayed somewhat far afield form the original post at times, but we always seem to return to the main topic.Brainstorming is good for everyone,even if there is an occasional storm surge, and some people are submerged in the wave of knowledge (myself for one).It is always good to examine the undefineable, for in the process, we examine ourselves, and our place in the universe.

As Dr Seuse's "Cat in the hat " said:

"If you want to know where something is, first you must find out where it's not."

We have looked a lot of places where it is not, and perhaps by process of elimination, in a million years or so,we may find out where it is, or in this case what it is.

Some proclaim "I am! Therefore I think!" Others declare: "I think! Therefore I am"

I say start with the premise that you do not exist, and see how far you get with that.

We may find that reality itself is an illusion, as Einstein said in my signature, but a very convincing one.

HTRN

HiTek quotes the Doctor as saying: "If you want to know where something is, first you must find out where it's not."

-----

I want to know where Conference Rooms 1, 2, and 3 are. And the Kitchen.

-e

Tell me all the places where they are not, and I will tell you where they are.

That's how I found my lost car keys: I searched exhaustively. Everywhere. By the time I finished turning over the last leaf on that big tea plantation in Sri Lanka, I went back to my car and found them in the ignition. This goes to show you that the last place you look for something, there you find it.

-e

So where is the last place we would expect to find space, and probably the last place we will look?

In a black hole?

Perhaps we are in a giant black hole as we speak.

Irony of ironies!

An off-topic post: I don't know what you see under you your CR4 editor, but my browser shows these "Make It Happen" fast-forward adverts by Microsoft. How ironic, from a company whose products are ALWAYS late...

-e

There is One who said "I AM THAT I AM". In the book of Proverbs (25:2) is written "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of Kings is to search out a matter."

I have been reading this thread without really thinking too deeply on the topic in terms of the principles of relativity theory, quantum mechanics, cosmological calculations, etc., etc. These subjects are way beyond my education level and field of expertise.(you think you get a cosmolograine......imagine never having made it out of the "primordial soup" in terms of educational achievement). I must say, however that you guys who are versed in these matters are, according to the Scriptures, in good company. Your Majesties, I salute you!!

Keep searching, something may yet be revealed to benefit us all.

Space, it seems to me, is "threaded" thru all matter at the smallest levels.Space has to take a circuitous and tortured path to navigate all of the ins-and -outs of matter at the minutest levels.Space is "bent" by taking a longer path than if it did not encounter matter.An electron beam can be bent by magnetic force, and I think space is bent by (matter/=/energy).Matter is merely concentrated energy, and thus has a more pronounced effect on space than energy.The threading of space thru matter is nescessary for matter to remain in this universe(dimension).A denser object has a longer and "tighter" path for space to navigate.This also means a longer path for spacetime, thus an apparent slowing of time by "gravity", so gravity is merely "stretched out spacetime")It still takes the same amount of time to go from point A to B at the edge of a black hole, as viewed from within, but appears to "stop when viewed from "Flat" spacetime.If we could design a space wing, using similar principles as for nrormal flight(slow moving air vs fast moving air) perhaps we could use spacetime itself as a propulsion force.It would require objects of 2 different masses connected together at a critical distance.We could ride the wave much as a surfer.

Space must be infinitely "pliable", and cannot "break", or a black hole would leave no trace behind.It would fall thru the hole,like a fish breaking a net, and space would spring back to it's normal "flat" dimensions.Quantum effects may be due to "turbulence" around very small objects, caused by the sharp angles that space must take thru them, and this "turbulence" dissappears at a distance, absorbed by the main flow of spacetime.

Of course, this could be the Tequila worm talking. "I don't mind hearing voices, I just can't get a concensus on the answers."

HTRN

Physics Section

I don't know what space is, but I know some of what it does.

It allows linear motion and rotational motion. Anything that is in motion (rotational or linear) stays in motion. It doesn't seem to allow things to be still as I have never heard of something that doesn't move and rotate.

It curves when exposed to mass (relativity).

It stretches or expands (Inflation).

Matter is mostly space. In fact, the smaller things get (rock, molecules, atoms, protons, quarks), the more space you find.

Metaphysics Section

All that said, to me, space seems to be something, not nothing. Everything else that is "something" seems to be a one form or another of energy. So personally, I believe space is just a form of energy, like photons or matter. Of course, I have nothing to back this up so saying so is nothing more than speculation. Of course, if Scientists never speculated, we wouldn't get anywhere.

Building on your thoughts, an object in motion could create a "Wave" of sorts, in the energy field we call space (ZPEF?), and be riding on that wave, thus it would tend to stay in motion.An increase in speed would result in a higher wave, similar to a higher orbit, and would require more energy to aquire. A decrease in speed would require giving up some energy to assume a lower "orbit". In this case I use wave height and orbit synonymously. 2 objects approaching at different speeds and colliding would result in an energy release equivilent to the differences in their velocity or "Wave Height" or orbital height.

That little Tequila worm is talking again....I should never have let him out of the bottle and into my brain....he is creating wormholes thru my spacetime within....

HTRN

Space is that which doesn't exist between everything that does.

I Harbinger, you defined space as

Space is that which doesn't exist between everything that does.

I like that the best of all so far!

I disagree with that definition. Space cannot be nothing, afterall, it has clearly defined properties.

Picture a cube of space with no matter or photons in it (for the record, such a thing doesn't exist in nature, there is always something in space (cosmic background radiation)).

If you were to take an electron from the space you are in and put it in the isolated cube of space, you could predict what the electron would do.

It would travel in straight lines,

Curve the space around it a very specific amount based upon its energy.

If in motion the electron would not suddenly stop.

The intrinsic spin of the electron would not change.

The point is, space has properties that we expect and can predict. It is terribly orgainzed, it just takes other things to see the organization.

If that sounds obtuse, consider this, the only way you would know an electron is charged is if it interacts with and electric field. Without and electric field around, you would never know the electron has charge. Does that mean that an electron has no charge when there is no electric field around? I don't think so. I think charge is an intrinsic property of matter.

In the same way, I think that space has intrinsic properties that can only be revealed by objects in motion. I think that if space has intrinsic properties, it is incorrect to define it as "the absence of something" just as its incorrect to imply charge is absent when not in the presence of an electric field. Space must be something, not nothing.