Poll: Are lasers cool?

[Freedomario]

ive been to a lazer light show once, it was awesome

Spoiler: Zap

 

[Talshere]

Yes, Yes they are.

Do you even need to ask that question. You're on a nerd forum. Of COURSE lasers are cool!

Fixed that for you.

Damn, caught out by the grammar police.

 

[TOTL_UNIALAYSHUN]

So far, 4 people have clicked the wrong button.

Seriously?

Go back to Youtube.

 

[Zyphonee]

Recent scientific studies have made extensive testing on the effects of lasers and the reception humans have towards them. While initial hypothesis claimed that lasers would result in mild amusement, prolonged examining proved that lasers are, as science would call them, fucking awesome.

 

[Sethzard]

I think that lasers are very cool. I love lasers because they are less messy than guns and they can do more damage more accurately than bullets could.

 

[rokkolpo]

Depends......can I actually burn stuff with it?

THEN YEEEEEES!

does it make a dot on someone's forehead?

then nooooo.

 

[TingaWinga]

well thats awesome and was confirmed as the laser month on my channel is going down well

Thanks for voting in my poll guys! you are all awesome

 

[AvsJoe]

Lasers are no longer as cool as they once were. They are becoming as mundane as previous technological marvels before them. They still have a massive potential for being cool though.

ive been to a lazer light show once, it was awesome

Spoiler: Zap

5secondfilms! I love those guys!

 

[Lukeje]

Well they function due to the fact that a negative temperature is created[footnote]i.e. a non-Boltzmann perturbed state[/footnote], so yes. They are rather cool.

[sup]Do you see what I did there?[/sup]

There is no such thing as negative temperature in science.
Seeing as heat energy is kinetic energy on an absolutely tiny scale (atoms), all temperatures are above Absolute Zero. AZ is when the atoms stop moving. You cannot have a negative temp. If you mean to say that when a laser is produced, the temperature is lowered, that would be acceptable.

A negative Boltzmann temperature. One can define a thermodynamic temperature in terms of the Boltzmann distribution (this is an equilibrium distribution). Lasers are inherently non equilibrium and can be interpreted as having a negative (thermodynamic) temperature. It's a quirk of statistical thermodynamics. Here, have a wiki [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature] article.

The information I gather from the article is very interesting.
"A substance with a negative temperature is not colder than absolute zero, but rather it is hotter than infinite temperature. "

It also leads me to believe that physicists should not be put in charge of naming or defining things.
1. Nothing is beyond infinity, that's fucking impossibly. The very meaning of infinity is that it has no end and thus possible was for anything to be greater in value.
2. It's still hotter dude, so this whole negative temp thing doesn't mean lasers are cool.
3. Did that Boltzmann guy miss the part of simple mathematics where positive and negative were joined at Zero, not ended on either side.

Yeah, it makes sense this whole laser thing if you ignore the logical inconsistencies. What with the end of infinity thing.

What is the point you are trying to make?

A few. Your joke about lasers still being cool because they have this negative temp was silly because you knew the definition of negative temp, being hotter than hot and all that shiznit.
My other point was that physicists are dumb-asses when it comes to naming things, or even ordering things mathematically. I mean seriously, Negatives are greater than positives now? And there is a finite end to infinity? And there is a zero on either side of the scale?

It's basically just what you get if you attempt to apply an equilibrium equation (the Boltzmann equation) to a non-equilibrium system. It does make more sense if you consider &#946=1/k[sub]B[/sub]T though. Which is why some physicists prefer to think of &#946 being fundamental, rather than T.

 

[TingaWinga]

Well they function due to the fact that a negative temperature is created[footnote]i.e. a non-Boltzmann perturbed state[/footnote], so yes. They are rather cool.

[sup]Do you see what I did there?[/sup]

There is no such thing as negative temperature in science.
Seeing as heat energy is kinetic energy on an absolutely tiny scale (atoms), all temperatures are above Absolute Zero. AZ is when the atoms stop moving. You cannot have a negative temp. If you mean to say that when a laser is produced, the temperature is lowered, that would be acceptable.

A negative Boltzmann temperature. One can define a thermodynamic temperature in terms of the Boltzmann distribution (this is an equilibrium distribution). Lasers are inherently non equilibrium and can be interpreted as having a negative (thermodynamic) temperature. It's a quirk of statistical thermodynamics. Here, have a wiki [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature] article.

The information I gather from the article is very interesting.
"A substance with a negative temperature is not colder than absolute zero, but rather it is hotter than infinite temperature. "

It also leads me to believe that physicists should not be put in charge of naming or defining things.
1. Nothing is beyond infinity, that's fucking impossibly. The very meaning of infinity is that it has no end and thus possible was for anything to be greater in value.
2. It's still hotter dude, so this whole negative temp thing doesn't mean lasers are cool.
3. Did that Boltzmann guy miss the part of simple mathematics where positive and negative were joined at Zero, not ended on either side.

Yeah, it makes sense this whole laser thing if you ignore the logical inconsistencies. What with the end of infinity thing.

What is the point you are trying to make?

A few. Your joke about lasers still being cool because they have this negative temp was silly because you knew the definition of negative temp, being hotter than hot and all that shiznit.
My other point was that physicists are dumb-asses when it comes to naming things, or even ordering things mathematically. I mean seriously, Negatives are greater than positives now? And there is a finite end to infinity? And there is a zero on either side of the scale?

It's basically just what you get if you attempt to apply an equilibrium equation (the Boltzmann equation) to a non-equilibrium system. It does make more sense if you consider &#946=1/k[sub]B[/sub]T though. Which is why some physicists prefer to think of &#946 being fundamental, rather than T.

i am loving the physics

 

[Ashcrexl]

13% of people dont like lasers, but i cant find a single post describing why!

 

[Naheal]

I dare you to say this isn't cool!!!

Magical girls with frikkin' lazer beams!

 

[Pielikey]

Are lasers cool?


Is a bird in the hand worth two in the bush?

 

[Sacman]

Lasers make everything better... except for maybe sex...<.<

 

[6unn3r]

IM A FIRIN' MA LAZAR!!!

Sorry, had to...

Yes they are cool.

Whats a LAZER?....its LASER, Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation, not, Light Amplification by...wait...ummm...what?

I never understood the need for a Z.

 

[AugustFall]

Let's examine the greatest weapon ever concieved: The Lightsaber.

Main component? LASER!


woooo go lasers.

Main component isn't a LASER, but superheated plasma in a magnetic envelope. If it were a LASER it would just go on to infinity.

No it wouldn't, the beam would dissipate somewhere down the road. LASERs do not project indefinitely.

I honestly can't believe you felt the need to correct me on this.

 

[thom_cat_]

I think all the people who voted no are just trying to confuse the rest of us.

 

[AugustFall]

Let's examine the greatest weapon ever concieved: The Lightsaber.

Main component? LASER!


woooo go lasers.

Main component isn't a LASER, but superheated plasma in a magnetic envelope. If it were a LASER it would just go on to infinity.

No it wouldn't, the beam would dissipate somewhere down the road. LASERs do not project indefinitely.

I honestly can't believe you felt the need to correct me on this.

I could say the same to you. XD

You can't compare arguing the mechanics of a fictional weapon with correcting physics. Also you started it

<..>

 

[Madara XIII]

I dare you to say this isn't cool!!!

Magical girls with frikkin' lazer beams!

Oh Touche Good sir!!

 

[Juven Ignus]

They are pretty much the best. Plasma comes in a close second.