RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Termyn8or -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 10:46:21 PM)

"That's one of the funniest things (though not the funniest thing) I've read all evening. :D "

OK funnypants. If light curves around a star because of gravitational effect(s), then that means that as it approaches the star it accelerates, either that or the star moves toward it. I'm betting on the former rather than the latter. If neither happens it breaks the laws of physics, the same laws these people are selling to the sheeple, which are not quite the real McCoy. You got a better theory ?

I'm glad you think this is amusing. Don't take this seriously, the favor has already been returned.

T^T




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 10:52:41 PM)

no acceleration in that sense. it takes a different space-time path.




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 10:58:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

If you have infinite mass when you are going at light's speed, how much do you weigh when you are going faster then light?



An infinite amount? Do I get a nobel?


No. There is no infinite plus one.




I would never say there was an infinite plus one, just as I would say there is no pregnant plus one. If I take two infinite amounts I can put them on a scale they are equally infinite, even if one infinite amount is bigger than the other (the hotel problem)

Georg Cantor (mad as a hatter but could fuck with numbers) proved that unequivocally.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:01:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

Technically the negative mass you would have at the start of this process to have might be a problem. (Maybe that is what dark matter is.)

But since a photon moves at the speed of light, it must then weigh an infinite amount, no?

. . .



no, its massless, which is WHY it travels at the speed of light




Termyn8or -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:02:15 PM)

"If you have infinite mass when you are going at light's speed, how much do you weigh when you are going faster then light? "

Infinite mass cannot be concieved by humans. That makes it a it tough to respond However if the assertion that mass moving, or accelerated to C is no longer mass, the amount of mass would then be irrelevant.

See this theory can get out of hand really easily, so, what the fuck. To start, consider the Doppler effect. Blue light has a higher frequency than red, when moving toward stars the spectrogram reveals the signatures of the elements in the star to be shifted either red or blue which indicated whether the observer is moving toward or away, and the approximate velicoty if enough accuracy is possible.

Now imagne traveling at C. You take off from Earth and step on the gas and get up to C. Any mass you encounter tooling across the heavens is moving at you at C, relative. It is not mass. The light that follows you, no matter it's origin, as you match speed with it (inhabit the same velocity space), it is matter to you. What was stationary matter when you were at rest might be moving at you at C which is now energy, and what was energy is now matter. Get it ?

What's more this can be going on in a complete sphere, not just a 360 degree circle. Even the two dimensional circle would yield an infinite number of possibilities, and a sphere, another universe more - of universes than infinity.

Sure it is a farfetched theory, but you know what ? If you think about it just because if you put too much uranium together it blows up does not really prove that energy is mass "times" the speed of light squared. It really doesn't.

T^T




Termyn8or -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:04:38 PM)

"no, its massless, which is WHY it travels at the speed of light"

The problem with that is that photos are not massless.

T^T




Termyn8or -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:06:02 PM)

"Georg Cantor (mad as a hatter but could fuck with numbers) proved that unequivocally."

Yuo owe me four grains of salt for that. Pay up.

T^T




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:07:17 PM)

Well yeah, it does. It says (as Einstein said) mass and energy at celerity are equivalent and interchangeable.




FatDomDaddy -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:09:17 PM)

FR...

Just want to make sure... there is no such thing as settled science EXCEPT... Anthropogenic global warming, That's a done deal.

Any questioning of that and your are a bigot, racist, christian idiot who wants to destroy the world.

Is that about right?




FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:10:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

Technically the negative mass you would have at the start of this process to have might be a problem. (Maybe that is what dark matter is.)

But since a photon moves at the speed of light, it must then weigh an infinite amount, no?

. . .



no, its massless, which is WHY it travels at the speed of light


Er, in order to make it fit into certain equations, they assign a photon 'relativistic mass.'

Certain things a photon does makes it function like it has mass.

But since one only ever travels at the speed of light . . .




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:10:49 PM)

Nope, you are fuckin lost in this discussion Fats, you should bow out of it immediately. LOL. [8D]




FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:15:33 PM)

Yes, I am aware it gets way out of hand real fast.

But infinite mass is the mass of the universei tself  in theory, since since the pieces of the universe cannot weigh more then the universe itself does, in theory (unless there is some of that anti-mass out there to "unweigh" the universe.)

Like I noted the math gets really interesting when you run things at these speeds.




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:18:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

Technically the negative mass you would have at the start of this process to have might be a problem. (Maybe that is what dark matter is.)

But since a photon moves at the speed of light, it must then weigh an infinite amount, no?

. . .



no, its massless, which is WHY it travels at the speed of light


Er, in order to make it fit into certain equations, they assign a photon 'relativistic mass.'

Certain things a photon does makes it function like it has mass.

But since one only ever travels at the speed of light . . .




OH, GAWD....particle wave dualities.......its like talking to a mirror, innit?




FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:26:35 PM)

Yes, the old question, is it a particle or a wave . . . ?

But we need to catch a photon and then weigh it to know for sure  . . .

I don't make any "hard" statements about physics, too much has been learned ant it is changing by the month too.And I had a minor in it at one time. From what I am seeing Einstein just started the journey.






willbeurdaddy -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:30:03 PM)

Re: Are photons massless?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are two answers to this question. The theorist's answer is "yes, the photon is massless. Were it not, the elecric potential energy of a charged particle would vary like 1/re^(−mγr) instead of just 1/r, among other effects." The experimentalist's answer is "probably. Our best measurements of the photon's mass are consistent with 0 and the upper bound they set is 15 or 16 orders of magnitude smaller than any other known mass."




tweakabelle -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:30:13 PM)

quote:

Just a question though, before we dismiss the whole thing. Even if it is just to be intrigued by the String possibilities, how much faith do you have that what we now know about how the universe works, is any sort of final answer?


We don't know the final answer. We never have known. We never will know (Godel). 'Knowing' (in the sense of having a complete consistent proven explanation of anything/everything) is forever beyond human potential and the limits of reason.

We have some pretty neat explanations that work most of the time. We ought to keep investigating. It keeps the boffins off the streets, out of trouble and gives them something to boff on about.

But people have always had 'pretty neat explanations that work most of the time'. Genesis 'worked' for a few millennia and look how shonky that is in the light of evidence available today.

There never will be a final answer. The best humans can do is a best available explanation - a cute narrative. IMHO we need to remember that a lot more than the details of the current best available explanation, no matter how charming or intriguing they are - a bit of modesty is becoming here.




mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:40:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

Yes, the old question, is it a particle or a wave . . . ?

But we need to catch a photon and then weigh it to know for sure  . . .

I don't make any "hard" statements about physics, too much has been learned ant it is changing by the month too.And I had a minor in it at one time. From what I am seeing Einstein just started the journey.






all electromagnetic spectrum (light by any other name, or music, or cookery or whatnot) is for all intents and purposes a wave. and a particle. and a floorwax. and a dessert topping. Mathematics is not a perfect dicipline. there is always (and even in particle physics a close enough for government work and the instruments we fuck with) thing going on, since 1/0 is impossible and undefined. but something very akin to that is what we are measuring here so we gotta plug in a little somethin somethin.




DeviantlyD -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:50:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"That's one of the funniest things (though not the funniest thing) I've read all evening. :D "

OK funnypants. If light curves around a star because of gravitational effect(s), then that means that as it approaches the star it accelerates, either that or the star moves toward it. I'm betting on the former rather than the latter. If neither happens it breaks the laws of physics, the same laws these people are selling to the sheeple, which are not quite the real McCoy. You got a better theory ?

I'm glad you think this is amusing. Don't take this seriously, the favor has already been returned.

T^T


You missed the point! *LOL* I wasn't referring to the part about light bending. Will I have to say it outright? Or can you guess? :P




FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/28/2011 11:51:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker

Yes, the old question, is it a particle or a wave . . . ?

But we need to catch a photon and then weigh it to know for sure  . . .

I don't make any "hard" statements about physics, too much has been learned ant it is changing by the month too.And I had a minor in it at one time. From what I am seeing Einstein just started the journey.






all electromagnetic spectrum (light by any other name, or music, or cookery or whatnot) is for all intents and purposes a wave. and a particle. and a floorwax. and a dessert topping. Mathematics is not a perfect dicipline. there is always (and even in particle physics a close enough for government work and the instruments we fuck with) thing going on, since 1/0 is impossible and undefined. but something very akin to that is what we are measuring here so we gotta plug in a little somethin somethin.


It beats having to publicly fess up to how they just haven't got it quite right yet. Harder to get grants with the "we don't know how in hell the universe works" approach.

I still see the portrayals of atoms from the 1950s being shown about,. with the little electron balls in orbit around the nucleus.








mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 12:01:13 AM)

Hey, dont fuck with that model. I am a child of he 70s!!! A BETTER LIFE THROUGH CHEMICALS!!!!!!





Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875