SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6131|North Tonawanda, NY

Mitch wrote:

Excuse me, but no? That isn't a fact. That's a theory. Personally i don't believe that light is the greatest speed achievable. Not to say i know more than Albert E. but i just don't think light and time have a connection.
Is that something homeschooling taught you?

If you mean 'light and time have a connection' to be relativity, then I hate to break it to you, but parts of the theory have already been demonstrated.

In fact, Ashby reports that when the first Cesium clock was put in orbit in 1977, those involved were sufficiently skeptical of general relativity that the clock was not corrected for the gravitational redshift effect.  But—just in case Einstein turned out to be right—the satellite was equipped with a synthesizer that could be switched on if necessary to add the appropriate relativistic corrections.  After letting the clock run for three weeks with the synthesizer turned off, it was found to differ from an identical clock at ground level by precisely the amount predicted by special plus general relativity, limited only by the accuracy of the clock.  This simple experiment verified the predicted gravitational redshift to about one percent accuracy!  The synthesizer was turned on and left on.
Source.

I make no claims that superluminal travel is impossible.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6622|London, England

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

NOOOO!

What forces?

There are no forces pressing on your body if you are not accelerating.

Think about this:

You're travelling on a train, on a really smooth track, in a perfectly straight line and at a constant speed.
Now, if you throw a ball straight up into the air, will it, from your perspective, go straight up and down or not?

The answer is - It will go straight up and down.
Well, I'm no science wiz or anything, but when you're traveling at the speed of light...aren't you accelerating?
No. Acceleration is change in velocity. Light has a constant velocity. If you are travelling at a constant velocity, you are not accelerating.

It would take quite a long time to go from a standstill and move along the process of slowly accelerating to the speed of light, at a speed that wont kill you.
Correct, but irrelevant - no one said "Accelerating from stand-still to the speed of light in a short amount of time would kill you" they said "travelling at the speed of light would kill you".

One is true, the other isn't.
I think what he's trying to get across is that to achieve the speed of light you have to have infinite acceleration/finite amount of time or a finite amount of acceleration and an infinite amount of time. He's getting sort of confused but you're right Scorpio, if you do somehow manage to get to the speed of light and then keep it. You won't be accelerating, therefore no force. Although to get to the speed of light, see earlier on in my post!

You know what, I hope we're wrong though. I really do hope we can achieve faster than light travel. I'm not so much well versed into the theory of the wormhole etc.. but it seems interesting. It's just hard to get your mind around it, considering how you really do have to think outside the box when it comes to things like this. It really is a field on its own with its own set of rules and everything.

Last edited by Mek-Izzle (2008-03-21 07:08:16)

xBlackPantherx
Grow up, or die
+142|6344|California
That's not very great is we can only achieve the speed of light in the terms of interstellar travel, because, if I'm not mistaken, isn't the nearest Star (out of quadrillions upon quadrillions) already 4 years away traveling at the damned speed of light (670,616,630 miles per hour)?? If so, its gonna take a looong time to actually find advanced life (not life in general).
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6539|Long Island, New York

xBlackPantherx wrote:

That's not very great is we can only achieve the speed of light in the terms of interstellar travel, because, if I'm not mistaken, isn't the nearest Star (out of quadrillions upon quadrillions) already 4 years away traveling at the damned speed of light (670,616,630 miles per hour)?? If so, its gonna take a looong time to actually find advanced life (not life in general).
Alpha Centauri? Yeah, 4.30-something light years away, IIRC.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6767|Cambridge (UK)

Poseidon wrote:

if I'm not mistaken, isn't the nearest Star (out of quadrillions upon quadrillions) already 4 years away traveling at the damned speed of light (670,616,630 miles per hour)??
No, you are mistaken. The nearest star is approximately 8.317 light minutes away.





















Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-03-21 20:53:17)

Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6676|Canberra, AUS
Smartass.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6767|Cambridge (UK)

Spark wrote:

Smartass.

Why, thankyou.
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6539|Long Island, New York

Spark wrote:

Smartass.

QFT
ig
This topic seems to have no actual posts
+1,199|6523

Phrozenbot wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

NeXuS4909 wrote:

We'd treat them like a 3rd world country ofcourse.
so we let them into your country, treat them like royalty, let them spoonge off our economy and take our jobs




http://z.about.com/d/animatedtv/1/7/p/I … acks_2.jpg


" they took our jobs "
It's "they took er jarb!" nub EKEKEKEKEKEKE.

win

Last edited by ig (2008-03-22 10:34:03)

Noobeater
Northern numpty
+194|6448|Boulder, CO

beerface702 wrote:

they better bring bin bags

and quote me on that one!
Like that?

Personally I think it will depends completely on the circumstances in which we meet them. i.e. do they discover us or do we discover them. If its the second then we'd probably blow them up and rape their planet.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6557
Ship em back to Mexico.
Nappy
Apprentice
+151|6231|NSW, Australia

de tk ar jubbz
xBlackPantherx
Grow up, or die
+142|6344|California

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

if I'm not mistaken, isn't the nearest Star (out of quadrillions upon quadrillions) already 4 years away traveling at the damned speed of light (670,616,630 miles per hour)??
No, you are mistaken. The nearest star is approximately 8.317 light minutes away.
Well, for one, you put the wrong name into the quote. Two, don't take things so literally. One can automatically assume that I meant the first star beyond our own.

Last edited by xBlackPantherx (2008-03-23 20:34:50)

Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6767|Cambridge (UK)

xBlackPantherx wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

if I'm not mistaken, isn't the nearest Star (out of quadrillions upon quadrillions) already 4 years away traveling at the damned speed of light (670,616,630 miles per hour)??
No, you are mistaken. The nearest star is approximately 8.317 light minutes away.
Well, for one, you put the wrong name into the quote.
Oops, so I did, sorry Poseidon.

xBlackPantherx wrote:

Two, don't take things so literally. One can automatically assume that I meant the first star beyond our own.
But that's not what you said, was it. Making assumptions is a dangerous thing to do.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard