On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint > <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement, >> >> “Resonance is very much a part of brute force physics.” >> >> >> >> I think I need to explain resonance to you… >> >> Resonance is an interesting phenomenon where SMALL INputs of force or >> energy into a system results in VERY LARGE OUTputs. There is nothing >> resonant about using EXTREMELY powerful magnets cooled with liquid helium to >> accelerate atomic particles to EXTREMELY hi velocities and smashing them >> head-on into each other. > > > I guess it depends what you mean by brute force physics. To me, when I push > a child on a swing, I'm using brute force physics. And I know intuitively > that if I push at the natural frequency of the pendulum, the amplitude of > the oscillation is much higher. That's resonance. If I push at a random > frequency, energy will be dissipated, and the child will cry. Resonance > allows the efficient storing of energy, so it can be built up after multiple > cycles. The output energy does not exceed the input energy. > >
Joking aside....as they say on Star Trek if you can match the shield harmonics you can pass through the shield. If resonance plays a role it might be to bring about a kind of frequency matching among the charged particles. This of course implies the 19th century notion of charge as a discrete and static property of matter is a simplication. Harry
