Atoms

[Liteninbolt]

@Philihp

@Liteninbolt

Everything in the universe is supposed to be made of entities called “atoms”. Therefore, the brain is made of atoms. The brain is presumably the mechanism through which we perceive (and attain our understanding of) the universe. But, how can we gain any real understanding of the universe (which, since the universe is made of atoms, is equivalent to gaining an understanding of atoms) by using the very entities (atoms, which make up the brain) that we’re trying to understand? Isn’t there something circular going on here?

Everything in the universe is made of energy. Atoms are just one representation of it. We break atoms up and the part that breaks off we experience as time. The remaining part we experience as sub-atomic particles.

So if nothing breaks off, then there’s no representation of time for us to perceive?

[Philihp]

@Liteninbolt

@Philihp

So if nothing breaks off, then there’s no representation of time for us to perceive?

Yes. But it breaks off naturally anyway, given enough time. Time is our perception of a system going from order to disorder.

[Gaiaguerrilla]

philihp- I never really thought more carefully about the particle → time transition. I knew that a particle could simply be energy. But in a thermonuclear blast . . . is the . . . “energy” from the blast that we experience like a kind of time differentiation? Like the universe in that spot suddenly happens faster than the rest of the world, so it produces sudden frictin/heat/ etc? I don’t understand the concept well enough to even formulate the questions properly.

[Mastriani]

Effects of a nuclear explosion

The energy released from a nuclear weapon comes in four primary categories:

Blast 40-60% of total energy
Thermal radiation - 30-50% of total energy
Ionizing radiation - 5% of total energy
Residual radiation (fallout) 5-10% of total energy
The amount of energy released in each form depends on the design of the weapon, and the environment in which it is detonated. The residual radiation of fallout is a delayed release of energy, the other three forms of energy release are immediate.
The dominant effects of a nuclear weapon (the blast and thermal radiation) are the same physical damage mechanisms as conventional explosives. The primary difference is that nuclear weapons are capable of releasing much larger amounts of energy at once. Most of the damage caused by a nuclear weapon is not directly related to the nuclear process of energy release, but would be present for any explosion of the same magnitude.

The damage done by each of the three initial forms of energy release differs with the size of the weapon. Thermal radiation drops off the slowest with distance, so the larger the weapon the more important this effect becomes. Ionizing radiation is strongly absorbed by air, so it is only dangerous by iteself for smaller weapons. Blast damage falls off more quickly than thermal radiation but more slowly than ionizing radiation.

When a nuclear weapon explodes, the bomb’s material comes to an equilibrium temperature in about a microsecond. At this time about 75% of the energy is emitted as primary thermal radiation, mostly soft X-rays. Almost all of the rest of the energy is kinetic energy in rapidly-moving weapon debris. The interaction of the x-rays and debris with the surroundings determines how much energy is produced as blast and how much as light. In general, the denser the medium around the bomb, the more it will absorb, and the more powerful the shockwave will be.

When a nuclear detonation occurs in air near sea-level, most of the soft X-rays in the primary thermal radiation are absorbed within a few feet. Some energy is re-radiated in the ultraviolet, visible light and infrared, but most of the energy heats a spherical volume of air. This forms the fireball.
In a burst at high altitudes, where the air density is low, the soft X-rays travel long distances before they are absorbed. The energy is so diluted that the blast wave may be half as strong or less. The rest of the energy is dissipated as a more powerful thermal pulse.

The issue is time to thermal equilibrium, (microsecond), with the energy output as heat and light in varying forms of radiation, and dependent upon density of the environmental materials for absorption of radiation/heat/light.

If one chooses to question the validity of the atom, or any of it’s antecedent particulars, feel free to ask a survivor of Hiroshima or Nagasaki … I’m sure their answer would be “enlightening”.

[kingdaddy]

@Liteninbolt

Everything in the universe is supposed to be made of entities called “atoms”. Therefore, the brain is made of atoms. The brain is presumably the mechanism through which we perceive (and attain our understanding of) the universe. But, how can we gain any real understanding of the universe (which, since the universe is made of atoms, is equivalent to gaining an understanding of atoms) by using the very entities (atoms, which make up the brain) that we’re trying to understand? Isn’t there something circular going on here?

You forgot the unexplainable energy that makes the building blocks of an atom vibrate and be “alive”, so to speak, no one knows where this energy comes from, only that it does not seem to be of the physical world.

I would guess that it is the same energy that in s the source of intelligence, which, IMO is understanding.

IOW, there is something else.