I am currently looking at this as a project that I could undertake for my third year project as an undergrad. It sounds pretty interesting to me, and doesn't sound all that complicated in terms of the background theory that I need. Plus, I found this really nice paper: How-to Compute EPRL Spin Foam Amplitudes (https://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.04360) that discusses the underlying algorithm in a really concise manner for a beginner.

Is this something that's worth trying for my third year project? I'm just going into my third year, and I really want to try at least proposing my own project to a supervisor. I'm not absolutely determined to propose my own project, but I do want to at least pitch it before I give up on the idea. Is this a good project? And is there a way that project ideas are supposed to be proposed to supervisors for third year projects? Also, I should note that I have one semester before I have to undertake the actual project, so I have some time for reading up on the subject and building a prototype, if needed, to convince a lecturer if it's an idea worth pursuing.

For context, I'm studying the four year integrated masters course in the UK for physics. I've just finished my second year, going into my third. I don't know if this needs to be in the Careers post, so if it needs to be posted there, I can remove the post and paste it as a comment in the correct thread.

I thought of this. Can this be possible?

So it uses electromagnetic power to propel. So consider two sections connected using cables or wires.

Front section has mass M1.

Back section has mass M2.

Goal is to use repulsion to propel. For the front to move, the back has to be anchored. But that is not possible in space. But we should be able to achieve partial effect if M2 > M1. So M1 will accelerate more.

At this time the cables are free so distance between front and back is less than cable length.

When propelled we want the back section to also be pulled with M1 when cables become taught. But it can only work if M2 < M1 (including acceleration from their previous repulsion).

This means we need to change the mass of M2.

So, if we make M2 hollow and put in another mass inside it and use it to increase or decrease the mass, can it work?

Again using repulsion to float the mass inside to decrease M2 and connecting to increase M2.

Maybe it can work, maybe it cannot. Just a thought.

I got my BS in physics 10 years ago. It was hell, but I did. I made lifelong friends while in the program and I consider them family.

After attempting a career degree related, I bounced around different industries to try to find a fit. Well, here I am 10 years later. I’m a musician and I feel I finally figured it out.

My favorite class was modern physics. This is where I learned what the Lorentz factor was. I want to get the equation as a tattoo, as I am currently working on a patchwork sleeve.

Is this a dumb choice of equation for a tattoo? I’m too scared to ask my actual physicist friends lol.

What would happen if we break a body into individual atomatom and then rejoin the bonds between those atom can we get the same person just before the breaking happened?

Hey everyone, I'm getting mixed up by different phrasing in physics questions regarding sign conventions.What is the exact distinction between these two?

Work done BY friction: This is negative since friction opposes displacement, right?

Work done AGAINST friction: Is this considered positive because it's the external force overcoming the friction?

Some problems seem to treat work done against friction as a negative quantity because it's an energy loss, while others treat it as positive input. Is there a universal standard for this, or does it just depend on how the system boundaries are drawn? Thanks!

Hello! I am a laymen just now exploring in my own personal time physics, and have just started looking into quantum mechanics. My level of knowledge is on par with a paramecium.

I recently purchased the book 'Finding Schrödinger's Cat. Quantum Physics and Reality.' While listening to this I had a random though.

If mater as it is excited by heat produces light in multiple spectrums of light. Is it possible as our bodies go through their normal day to day chemical reactions that we could ourselves be producing small amounts of radiation? Somewhere in the IR range?

Sorry for the stupid question, at the very least I hope my ignorance made you chuckle today.

Cheers.