Home | Community | Message Board

Mycohaus
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
InvisibleELECTRIC
I'm a Puppet

Registered: 07/21/05
Posts: 177
Loc: Bonded with string...
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4802108 - 10/14/05 01:26 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

"You'll have to be a little more precise:what exactly are you wondering about with respect to an event horizon?"


Sure, I'll attempt more precision in the qwery.


You stated: "So you can't go "faster" than the speed of light through space, because the speed of light is the only speed you can move at, anywhere."


I somewhat agree with that statement. I say somewhat because there may exist some kind of an exception; and I never rule out the possibility of an exception, no matter how slim the chances appear.




My knowledge is limited with respect to event horizons.


Have you, in your studies, ever come across the dynamics associated with an event horizon?


Although I've heard in passing that light may have a chance to escape an event horizon, my current knowledge of its dynamics makes me think that it cannot.


I've got a speculative question...

Suppose a beam of light were directed perpendicularily towards an event horizon's "outer skin"... Upon penetration to within the even horizon (assuming that the light does have the capacity to enter such an environment), is there any way that its velocity could accelerate to a value greater than C?


Could such an environment have a significant impact upon spacetime dynamics that various exceptions can manifest?


--------------------
Nos confido phasmatis occultus in vicis postulo nostrum tutela donatus futurus.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAliceDee
-L S D-
Male
Registered: 08/10/03
Posts: 3,957
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4802410 - 10/14/05 03:36 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

time is not distance... so no matter if your going twice the speed of light... it will still take a couple seconds to fly where your getting, and another couple seconds to get back... so all in all your actually loosing time instead of going the opposite way...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnom
※※※※※※
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 10 months, 6 days
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: AliceDee]
    #4802509 - 10/14/05 06:09 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

There is no logic discussion possible about the IF you're going twice the speed of light statement.

Try to get a better understanding of space and time or spacetime if you want to break your brains on something. Then you are thinking about something that is relevant to the way we experience and try to explain the universe. If your thoughts go directly to going faster than the speed of light, you are missing a lot of interesting thoughts/theories that are relevant to the world we live in.

Start with Newton, that sure isn't easy stuff you should skip if you want to find some logic about what space and time really are. It's amazing how much can be derived and explained/modeled from the simple and beautiful equation F=ma.

This, of course, is just my view. I've met many people who just don't care. I don't care about other things, it's a matter of taste and passion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: AliceDee]
    #4802540 - 10/14/05 06:59 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

so no matter if your going twice the speed of light

This is like saying "if 2 + 2 were equal to equal to 5". It's a meaningless statement and a false equation.

The reason is that anything exceeding the speed of light (the constant c) would create a consequence before the action that caused the consequence. This is what physicists refer to as a violation of causality.

It happens as a result of effects called 'relativistic effects' on time and space that we don't normally notice because they're exceedingly tiny at ordinary speeds. However, they become dominant at speeds approaching c.

In our world, 10kph + 20kph always equals 30kph, but if you measure very, very, very accurately, you would find that the above equation from the old Newtonian Theory of Mechanics is slightly wrong. The correct answer is a very tiny fraction less than 30kph.

This small error was, for a long time, too small to notice in daily life on Earth and so Newtonian Theory was the accepted theory. But in space, where masses and speeds are much larger than what we deal with here, then-inexplicable relativistic effects were starting to be seen by astronomers.

One of the first observations that suggested something was wrong with Newtonian Theory was the precession of the orbit of the planet Mercury. Although the orbit agreed very closely with the predictions of Newtonian Theory, there was a small discrepancy between the observed orbit and the orbit predicted by the theory. For a long time it was a mystery. The problem was finally resolved by Relativity Theory which precisely accounted for the discrepancy and predicted the corrected orbit for Mercury that to this day is accurate to the limits of our measuring instruments.

So, Relativity Theory is currently the best available theory.

Now, getting back to why 2 + 2 doesn't equal 5, here's a concrete example of why information can't travel faster than c.

Say your stereo could transmit music to your speakers faster than c and you decided to play a Beethoven symphony. Using Relativity Theory, you can calculate the time it would take for the propagation of the signal from the stereo to the speakers. The answer would be negative at any speed above c.

That means the music would come out of the speakers before you pressed the play button which makes no sense and leads to a paradox if you hear Beethoven, then change your mind and decide to play Tchaikovsky. :whoa:

I'm a little stoned, so I hope this makes sense...  :tongue:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4802546 - 10/14/05 07:02 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Well first off, an event horizon is not a physical thing, or an object.

It is simply the distance from the singularity (at the center of the black hole) where the escape velocity exeeds the speed of light.

So no, light does not travel any faster when entering a black hole. If it did, the hole wouldn't be black, because some light could escape (or, at least, the event horizon would be MUCH smaller).

Once you do cross the event horizon, all notions of "speed" and "distance" cease to make any sense, so there really isn't any point to discussing the velocity of light once it enters a black hole.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnom
※※※※※※
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 10 months, 6 days
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4802707 - 10/14/05 08:12 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Here is a very interesting article about the Information Paradox. It has to do with black holes and the event horizon and what happens with information when it enters a black hole, is it destroyed or does it come back?

Black Holes and the Information Paradox by Leonard Susskind - Special Physics Edition of Scientific American, 2003

I'm not sure, but I think I read Hawking was 'wrong' in later SciAm. He agreed with van t Hoofd and others a few months ago.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: Annom]
    #4802723 - 10/14/05 08:29 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Didn't he come out with a different explanation, recently?

It went something like:

There are infinite universes, one for each possible configuration. A black hole may exist in one (or some) universe, but it doesn't exist in an infinite number of others. So the information "destroyed" by a black hole isn't really destroyed in "the big picture" - all the universes where that black hole doesn't exist cancel out the information loss in the ones where it does.

To be honest, it seemes like a cop-out to me...but who am I to argue with Stephen Hawking? :smirk:


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleELECTRIC
I'm a Puppet

Registered: 07/21/05
Posts: 177
Loc: Bonded with string...
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: Diploid]
    #4803456 - 10/14/05 01:20 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

"Say your stereo could transmit music to your speakers faster than C and you decided to play a Beethoven symphony. Using Relativity Theory, you can calculate the time it would take for the propagation of the signal from the stereo to the speakers. The answer would be negative at any speed above C.

That means the music would come out of the speakers before you pressed the play button which makes no sense and leads to a paradox if you hear Beethoven, then change your mind and decide to play Tchaikovsky."



Didn't you hear? That's gonna be the "new technology" of the future... It's gonna sample parts of your mind VIA time travel and play what you wanted all along... 

See...  It's gonna 'all-of-a-sudden' play a song that you've previously determined that you've already wanted to listen to, and then, before you even register that you have a change of heart towards that music, it plays something else... After the fact, you go: "...Yeah!  That's right!  I wanted to listen to Opeth instead anyways...:eek:  [cue Twillight-zone music]



But seriously, your statement reminds me of experiences such as thinking ahead of what I want to say to someone and then, when the time comes to talk, I say something completely different and out-of-the-blue; only later registering that THAT was not what I had initially planned to say... 

Sometimes what came out was better than the previously planned script anyways..


Sometimes not.  :lol:


--------------------
Nos confido phasmatis occultus in vicis postulo nostrum tutela donatus futurus.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4803558 - 10/14/05 01:42 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Didn't you hear? That's gonna be the "new technology" of the future

I can't wait till they add it to the iPod!  :tongue:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleELECTRIC
I'm a Puppet

Registered: 07/21/05
Posts: 177
Loc: Bonded with string...
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4803663 - 10/14/05 02:09 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

First, to Annom...  Nice link.  :thumbup:






Yeah, Trendal, I'm with ya that the event horizon is not a physical thing nor an object, per se.



"It is simply the distance from the singularity (at the center of the black hole) where the escape velocity exeeds the speed of light. (Italics added)

So no, light does not travel any faster when entering a black hole. If it did, the hole wouldn't be black, because some light could escape (or, at least, the event horizon would be MUCH smaller)."



I'm in agreance with you on the first part, pretty much in full.

I'm not, however, quite convinced about the second part.



I'm slightly out of my league here, but I'd like to discuss escape velocities for a second.


Let's try this example first, and maybe it can be transposed to the event horizon dynamics..



Neglecting air resistance so as to remove as much friction a possible, here on earth, if I throw something up, it stops at the peak, changes direction, and lands at the same velocity (different direction) that I had initially throw it at.


Earth's escape velocity is in the neighbourhood of 11km/sec. I can never reach such a velocity because as a person, I am very limited as to how fast I can move around. A space shuttle, however, has more energy potential than me, so it CAN escape.


Now, say, I was at the 'edge of earth's pull upon me'..  Out in space (again neglecting air resistance to remove terminal velocity) and I began to fall towards earth's centre...  By the time I'd hit the centre region, I would have reached earth's escape velocity.


If my last statement is wrong, then just lemme know why...  Perhaps I'll understand.


So, the potential associated with earth's escape velocity as t=0 becomes a kinetic velocity as t=n.

My personal potential cannot exceed that of earth's, because it exceeds my speed potential.

(..ouuuf...  That was a flaky statement, but I hope you know what I mean by that..)



So...  Back to the event horizon...


If it's escape velocity surpasses C, and once in there, light does not have enough ooumph to get out, then wouldn't it begin a trajectory towards the centre singularity, if even in a spiral formation? 

As pointed out in the link supplied by Annom, to the outside observer, there is an apparent  "spreading upon the event horizon's surface membrane", while to the traveller, there is motion within...  T'ill it collapses, or gets crushed as the link stated.


So, concerning the light, taking the stance of the travellor, and using the final velocity concept of earth's escape velocity (and please don't say that earth is not like a black hole..  I was merely using that example to illustrate a concept), as the light reached the local of the singularity, would it's velocity not EQUAL that of the black hole's escape velocity? 

Being equal still does not give it the possibility of escape from the even horizon. So the observation of the event horizon would not be in any way affected...  Perhaps, however, heat could be detected, if you could make some sort of regisrty... 



"Once you do cross the event horizon, all notions of "speed" and "distance" cease to make any sense, so there really isn't any point to discussing the velocity of light once it enters a black hole."

Why do you say that?  How does it not make any sense?  What are the limits that seem to exceed understanding? Does it refer only with respect to an observer, or does it include the traveller also?


Why is there no point in discussing it?


Could you possibly wager a speculative educated guess?









:tongue:


--------------------
Nos confido phasmatis occultus in vicis postulo nostrum tutela donatus futurus.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4803848 - 10/14/05 03:10 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Now, say, I was at the 'edge of earth's pull upon me'.. Out in space (again neglecting air resistance to remove terminal velocity) and I began to fall towards earth's center... By the time I'd hit the center region, I would have reached earth's escape velocity.

Essentially, yes, though there is no real "edge" of the earth's gravitational field. It extends into infinity, or at least to a rough sphere around 10 billion light-years diameter (which is as far as the gravitational waves from the newly formed earth could have traveled in the time since).

But yes, if you throw an object up and note its peak height then dropping an object from that height will result in the object impacting with the same velocity you threw it up with (disregarding air resistance).

So, concerning the light, taking the stance of the traveler, and using the final velocity concept of earth's escape velocity (and please don't say that earth is not like a black hole.. I was merely using that example to illustrate a concept), as the light reached the local of the singularity, would it's velocity not EQUAL that of the black hole's escape velocity?

No. The problem with comparing the escape velocity for an object - a chunk of matter- and a light wave is that light waves are not affected in the same way by gravity as matter is.

Matter responds to the spacetime warping effect of gravity by experiencing a force in the direction of the center of gravity - so things fall down. Light, however, does not "fall down" nor experience any physical force in any direction due to gravity. Instead, light is affected by gravity because gravity is a warping of spacetime and light itself is a wave in spacetime - thus the light waves are altered by the warp.

If you shine a laser beam towards the moon, so that it just misses the horizon, it will be "bent" slightly as it passes the moon due to the moon's gravity. However that bend is only from our perspective. From the perspective of the light-beam itself, could one be inside it, is that it doesn't bend at all - it always follows a straight line. Again this is due to the warp - a straight line through a warp in spacetime is itself curved when viewed from unwarped (or less-warped) spacetime.

The warp effects the wavelength of the light as well, which is the cause of the "black" part of black holes and the reason light cannot escape. If I shine a laser beam directly away from the earth's center of gravity, as the light moves out of the gravity well its waves are stretched out - increasing the wavelength and resulting in a red-shift. The opposite is true during approach - as a light wave falls towards a center of gravity its wavelength is decreased - blue-shifting the light. The key point is that light does not speed up or slow down as it moves towards or away from a source of gravity - instead it is the wavelength that increases/decreases.

The stronger the source of gravity, the stronger this effect is. If a source is strong enough, at some distance from the center the force will be so strong that any light leaving from that point will be red-shifted out of existence. The waves are stretched out until there is no amplitude left.

Why do you say that? How does it not make any sense? What are the limits that seem to exceed understanding? Does it refer only with respect to an observer, or does it include the traveler also?

What I mean is that the gravitational curvature becomes so severe at the event horizon that traditional notions of "space" and "time" cease to make any sense. I think the gravitational warping becomes so strong at this point that space and time themselves are warped out of existence - or perhaps are warped around the event horizon as a sort of skin.

That article hints towards an idea I've had before about black holes, that the event horizon is not a physical barrier so much as the edge of spacetime surrounding a singularity. If we neglect all gravitational effects for a moment and just imagine the warp itself I think I can make my point.

Imagine you traveled towards one side of this spherical warp. As you approach the "event horizon" you know that there is 1km of space between this side of the horizon and the opposite side (a horizon of 1km diameter). You pass "through" the event horizon but instead of entering the interior of the black hole you immediately "exit" through the opposite event horizon - each point on the horizon is connected to the opposite point.

Imagine a bubble opening up in spacetime, from an infinitely small point. As it opens it "pushes" away spacetime in all directions, so that spacetime "ends" at the skin of the bubble. Inside does not exist as part of our universe - it is completely outside of the universe. No "tear" has opened in spacetime, and no part of spacetime has been destroyed or cut off in any way from the rest of spacetime. I think this could be what a black hole is.

So when light, or matter, falls "into" a black hole, it doesn't actually make it past the event horizon - because there is nothing past the event horizon. You can think of all the light and all the matter that "falls into" a black hole as existing in an infinitely thin and dense "skin" surrounding the black hole itself (though again, nothing ever actually goes in the hole).

Just an idea, anyway, I have no math to back it up :smirk:


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineCatalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: poke smot!]
    #4804262 - 10/14/05 05:22 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Special relativity forbids objects from going faster than the speed of light within space-time, however it does not forbid the movement of space-time itself.

In the "inflationary universe" model of the big bang, it is thought that space actually expanded faster than the speed of light in the beginning. Theoretically, a device which could expand space-time behind it while contracting space-time in front of it could travel faster than light. It is called the Alcubierre warp drive.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleELECTRIC
I'm a Puppet

Registered: 07/21/05
Posts: 177
Loc: Bonded with string...
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4809917 - 10/16/05 01:58 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

That was a real nice explanation, Trendal. :thumbup:

I imagined and followed it quite well.

I get what you mean by the warping of spacetime: it's synonymous to how our sun's mass warps its surroundings which appears to affect Mercury's orbit around it, right?

I'm not exactly sure, but it might even have been Eintein that made the calculation that accurately predicted Mercury's orbit within the sun's warping effect.



So, to the observer, Mercury's orbit is affected...  But, suppose you could BE Mercury and take the path of the traveller, would it appear that your orbit is not being affected because you are IN the warp?

I'm just trying to follow the "lazer past the moon's horizon" example that you pointed out, and trying to see if the same applies to a chunk of mass.






Ok...  Let's talk about warp for a second...


I'm drinking water out of a glass right now.



I just passed my finger in behind the glass.  The image of my finger that I saw, as I passed my finger behind the glass, was of a stretching finger.  From the perspective of the outside observer, me, I saw my finger "cover more ground" as it  passed by.  The tip of my finger stretched, and appeared to accelerate, relative to the base of my finger, which did not change velocity.


Now I know that my finger moved with a constant velocity, but I saw it accelerate.


What I saw was an obvious illusion created by the properties associated with the water in the glass.


So, taking this example, and applying it to the characteristics of spacetime warping, could we be observing nothing more than 'large scale cosmic illusions'?




BTW...  I'm curious...

Do you happen to know if a black hole has a particular lifetime?

And if yes, what happens to it when it stops being a black hole?




You really got my brain going with your explanation...  I may even jump back to some of your other points a little later.






"...there is nothing past the event horizon."

I like how you said that. Although I haven't contemplated this relative to black holes, I have thought about "nothing" before.

I've even entertained the idea that you can have a temendous-whole-hell-of-a-lot of "nothing", hidden completely out of sight, within something.

It involved unnoticed warping from the vantage point from outside of the "nothing", where as from within the "nothing", you could even possibly observe up to an infinate amount of space(I don't really want to be using the word 'space' here as it can possibly result in confusion, but it's the tentative term I've got right now).


Anyways, I'm just playing around here, but in this context, "nothing" becomes a "something".




:grin:


--------------------
Nos confido phasmatis occultus in vicis postulo nostrum tutela donatus futurus.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4810222 - 10/16/05 08:05 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

So, taking this example, and applying it to the characteristics of spacetime warping, could we be observing nothing more than 'large scale cosmic illusions'?

In essence, yes. The spacetime is curved, so an object will follow that curve, and while it appears to be moving in a curve to an outside observer (outside of the warp) on a local level the object is always following a straight line.

I liked your example with the bottom of a glass, good thinking!! :smile:


Do you happen to know if a black hole has a particular lifetime?

And if yes, what happens to it when it stops being a black hole?


Yes, I think most black holes have a specific lifetime after which they literally cease to exist. Others are much more stable, and will theoretically exist forever (or until the end of the universe).

For those who do dissipate over time, it is a result of Hawking Radiation. At points just a few atoms "outside" of the event horizon, the gravitational effect is truly mind-boggling. It is standing on the edge of infinity.

"Virtual particles" are pairs of particles which randomly pop into existence in any vacuum. They always consist of a particles of matter and its anti-particle cousin. The two particles usually hit each other and annihilate each other after only a brief instant. In this way, the energy "borrowed" to create the virtual pair is "payed back" to the surrounding vacuum.

Now imagine this happening very close to the event horizon of a black hole. The gravity is so strong here that, sometimes, one of the virtual particles in a pair will be sucked "inside" the event horizon. This leaves the other particle free to fly off into space. Normally this would be a total violation of the laws of Thermodynamics - you would have "new" particles appearing literally from "nowhere" (instead of annihilating as per normal).

What Hawking realized is that these particles can be said to be coming from the black hole. It is as if the black hole gives off radiation, very slowly. A black hole has "heat" to it, that it slowly gives off (note that it is VERY tiny - a black hole is only a degree or two above absolute zero). Over time, this means that the black hole will actually lose mass. If it is unable to obtain new mass from the surrounding space, it will eventually simply radiate itself away into space.

This ties in to that article posted earlier about the Hawking Paradox. Hawking has always said that when a black hole ceases to exist, all the information that black hole has consumed also ceases to exist - which is a BIG problem for informational science which, like thermodynamics, states that NO information can ever be "lost" from existence.

Other physicists disagree with Hawking, and think that the information does come out of a black hole - even if severely corrupted.


Anyways, I'm just playing around here, but in this context, "nothing" becomes a "something".

Exactly! We see it as nothing because it does not exist within this universe...but from a vantage point outside of our universe (should such a place exist) it is certainly something.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4810228 - 10/16/05 08:10 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Oh, I should point out one other thing:

In your example with your finger and the glass, if this were really spacetime and a gravity warp your finger really would have followed a curved path according to the relative viewpoint of your eye. According to your finger itself, it followed a STRAIGHT path through spacetime.

Thanks to Einstein, both cases are 100% correct.

As Mercury orbits the sun, we see its orbit altered slightly as it moves through the sun's gravity warp. From our relative viewpoint, Mercury actually is following a curve through spacetime (and not just the curve of its orbit). From Mercury's perspective, this isn't the case - it is following a perfectly elliptical orbit around the sun, no funny business.

So it all depends on where you are relative to what you're looking at :wink:


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleyousuck
Stranger

Registered: 05/22/05
Posts: 616
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4812148 - 10/16/05 06:34 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Thoughts travel faster than light




Apparently you dont talk to too many people.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleELECTRIC
I'm a Puppet

Registered: 07/21/05
Posts: 177
Loc: Bonded with string...
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: trendal]
    #4812197 - 10/16/05 06:44 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

It's been a while since I've experienced a really nice mental stretch.

Thanx.



Ok...  Since Einstein's name has been brought to the table, and since I'd like to keep this thread on topic somewhat, and if you feel like it, let's talk about the famous equation:


E=mc^2.


From what I gather, and please correct me if I am mistaking, as units, E= energy, m= mass and c= speed (or velocity) of light squared.


...But together, as an equation, what does it describe?





Also, using a bit of concept multi-tasking, it has also been brought to the table that as one approaches the speed of light, 'something' appears to slow down. 

Can we discuss this as well?

Is there any condition, perhaps some kind of a limit, where there is such a speed/velocity where 'something' stops?




...And lastly ( I know I'm asking alot here, but my brain just exploded and I've got questions ),  I'd like to talk about mathematical semantics ( I have no idea if the word semantics is an appropriate term here )...

Here's what I mean...


When there is 1 and you divide, say 1/2, you are cutting something in half.  When you are multiplying, there is some kind of a proportionnal increase..


Well, what is going on when you are taking a square root of something?



And more importantly, with respect to this very post I'm making, what is going on here with the description of 'c':


E=mc^2

c=(root)(E/m) ?



These questions are, by all means, open to anyone... 


I'm just trying to solidify a foundation and check out my bearings with the intent on taking the discussion of this thread a little further.


:smile:


--------------------
Nos confido phasmatis occultus in vicis postulo nostrum tutela donatus futurus.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibletrendalM
J♠
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada Flag
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: ELECTRIC]
    #4812958 - 10/16/05 09:03 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

...But together, as an equation, what does it describe?

It means that mass and energy are not entirely separate. They may not be the same thing, but they do equate eachother in some sense. We know that mass can become energy. The atomic bomb is a stark example of that - converting a tiny portion of the mass of a bunch of atoms into energy results in such a tremendous explosions.

Energy can also become mass. Another part of Relativity is that the faster you go, the more mass you will have. This is due to the energy contained in a moving object - the energy you put into an object by accelerating it adds to the weight (mass) of the object.

Is there any condition, perhaps some kind of a limit, where there is such a speed/velocity where 'something' stops?

Are you referring to Time? It is usually said that "time slows down" as you approach the speed of light, which is essentially correct. Technically it is you who are slowing down - slowing down your movement through Time. At the speed of light there is no movement through time - time "stops".

Think of a soccer field as spacetime - the sidelines axis is "space" and the end-zones axis is "time". I think earlier I mentioned that you can only ever move at the speed of light through spacetime - your combined speed through Time and Space will always equal the speed of light. So you can run around the soccer field at the speed of light. If you run straight from one side to the other, along the goal line, you will ONLY be moving through Time, not Space - because you are only moving along one axis of the field. This is equivalent to "sitting still" in space - the fastest you will ever move through time.

If you instead run straight down the field, along the Space axis, you will not be moving through Time at all. All of you speed will be put into moving through space. Most of the time we are moving through both time and space - moving in a diagonal along the field. As you put more of your speed into either space or time, your speed through the other slows down.


I don't know the answer to your question about square roots, sorry.

And more importantly, with respect to this very post I'm making, what is going on here with the description of 'c':

'c' isn't a variable in the equation, it's a constant - the speed of light. You could write the equation as:

E = 9x10^10 m

But it's just much easier to write it as 'c^2' when the meaning of c is so well known.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDj_sIntjsboh
Stranger

Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 43
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: poke smot!]
    #10321242 - 05/11/09 07:02 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

sure u can:grin:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineInsomnolence
Stranger
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/20/09
Posts: 52
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
Re: I can travel faster than the speed of light. [Re: Dj_sIntjsboh]
    #10326965 - 05/12/09 12:12 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

This thread has really elucidated my understanding of the theory of relativity and the energy-mass-equivalence and how it is all interrelated.




I don't have much to add besides that...

:cool2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Left Coast Kratom Kratom Powder For Sale   PhytoExtractum Kratom Powder for Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Time Travel
( 1 2 all )
Galvie_Flu 2,825 23 05/18/04 03:03 PM
by Sterile
* Light Speet and Time Travel? Bacteria 1,104 6 10/24/13 06:39 AM
by OrgoneConclusion
* Imagery of Time Travel Ravus 836 9 06/08/04 01:40 AM
by Zero7a1
* speed of light/ atomic clock lowrider 2,276 12 09/05/02 02:30 PM
by Anonymous
* Time is speeding up
( 1 2 3 all )
plexus 1,584 41 09/15/04 09:40 PM
by DieCommie
* Even more time travel. recalcitrant 1,381 16 09/19/03 12:31 PM
by Strumpling
* Spacetime Path Ravus 726 7 02/06/06 07:44 PM
by it stars saddam
* Spacetime Continuum with Terence McKenna skaMariaPastora 1,196 6 01/17/02 01:13 PM
by Siphersh

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,758 topic views. 2 members, 3 guests and 25 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 15 queries.