I don't know how forgiving this forum is, and if the type of questions I would like to ask are of a nature a similar forum would be better suited for, please inform me.

I was wondering about two things as of late.

1. I was wondering if the reason light is bright is because it is matter traveling so fast that it becomes more see through. As in, matter is dark, black, or what have you, and light is not because it is closer to nothing, or it is allowing us to see closer to nothing. I think that when nothing is blocking your view, you can see a lot further. I was told that the reason light is bright is because it's vibrating or moving the size of molecules that we see, or it's just operating on that spectrum. Like certain types of light, are not bright to us because we cannot see what they are effecting. Any thoughts? Please go easy on me, just some wandering questions.

2. In baseball, when you hit the base ball with the bat, what is going on there? Imagine swinging the bat, feeling the inertia in the bat as you swing, impacting the ball, the kinetic energy in the bat transferring to the ball, and the ball eventually flying in hopefully the Babe Ruth sort of fashion.

In thoughts of my second question: The bat is transferring KE to the ball, and eventually the ball flies off. I know that the only thing in the bat is matter, set to a certain density. Which really mystifies me as to what KE could be... But anyway, the mass is directly involved. What is going on in the bat as you swing it? Then when it hits the ball, I can only guess that the bat is transferring a matter wave which goes into the ball. And when the ball absorbs what it does, it is sent flying off.

What really bothers me is that I don't think that the ball should be flying at all given my understanding of what's going on. If nothing *given a fictional universe* was transfered into the ball, it would either never have moved or it would have just barely moved out of the way of the bat. But it flying off altogether, something has to be in the ball I'd think. What is going on there? It shouldn't fly should it?

Thanks for reading, I hope I didn't make that too tiresome. Any questions would be highly appreciated, as this does indeed bother me, and it bothers me quite a bit.

I take it the questions are retarded.

Some of the really interesting things in physics are the things that haven't been solved yet. Take inertia for example, something that boggles the minds of everyone looking into it.

From having read a few threads on this site, I can tell that the popular view is that there is no such thing as an Aether. I'll be honest and say that I don't really understand what an Aether is, although wiki might solve that problem for me... I 'll have to look into it.

Tesla and Einstein thought there was an Aether however, I think the latter person considered that spacetime was the Aether.

I'm not trying to collect hate mail. *chuckles*

Anyway, I was thinking about kinetic energy, like I said in the beginning post. I had figured that when the baseball bat hit the ball, what happened is this:

The bat hits the ball and for a lack of a better word, compacts the part of the ball that it hits. That creates a high pressure zone in the side of the ball closest to the bat. The low pressure zone attracts the high pressure zone, pulls it in so as to occupy that space. That means that the ball doesn't need any form of propulsion, but is pulled.

The intensity of the balls kinetic energy, in my mind, has a lot to do with the intensity of the contrast between the high and low pressure zones.

I thought that inertia might be that the high pressure zone never caught up with the low pressure zone, because the waves that would cause the instability to be stabilized don't go fast enough to catch up unless there is some outside resistance. But after thinking about it, I'm not so sure I'm right.

The reason is that water isn't able to compress it's self in any way. So if you take, well lets say a ball of ice, inertia acts the same way as in any other object. This leaves me scratching my head in wonder.

I dreamed, in a wet kind of way, that it would be possible to recreate artifically the effects of kinetic energy with out work. But skip the work and just create the kinetic energy with the desired amount of intensity in the area of the object that you want it to go in.

But I don't know anymore, what with the water example. I think for the time being, it's just over my head.

If you read this, thanks. If you reply to this, even more so, thanks.

There was a lot of work to be done in the second question in mathematics alone. You may not even encounter a question like that in high school physics because they can restrict themselves to adding vectors in 2 dimensions. You were dealing with 3 which you might only encounter in high school in an algebra and geometry course.

If you are still interested this may be a good site to answer questions on mechanics http://soap.ddart.net/science/physics/phys...l/Default2.html