RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit

RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (Full Version)

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

Message

FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 12:32:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Hey, dont fuck with that model. I am a child of he 70s!!! A BETTER LIFE THROUGH CHEMICALS!!!!!! In a generation, what is common knowledge about physics is likely going to make what th common 'we' think today look as dated as those little atom models do to the young people now. (they were obsolete even in the 1970's.) I try and stay up on physics, but am way dated, and as I actually went and took college courses way back when on the subject. Some of the quantum stuff they are now playing with would have been regarded as radical science fiction even 20 years ago. They have even acheived unity gain out of a Casimir device, teleported particles and sent them back in time, and HP even has a quantum pair encrypted network card on the market (when are they gonna make a quantum wireless is what I want to know.) Who knows what else is in the pipe. As for FTL, just what does that mean? Anything that will drive mass faster than light should be able to have the mass time travel too, (with some adjustments) and that is another can of worms.

Kirata -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 12:51:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail There is no aether. Michelson-Morley Between 1881 and 1930, Michelson, Michelson-Morely, Morley & Miller, Miller, Kennedy, Illingsworth, and Joos all found fringe shifts. The observed shifts ranged from .08 (Miller, 1926) to .0004 (Illingsworth, 1927). These shifts are too small (by several orders of magnitude) to support the theory of a stationary ether. But, the operative word in that statement is "stationary." The fringe shifts are there. K.

Kirata -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 1:00:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker Anything that will drive mass faster than light should be able to have the mass time travel too, (with some adjustments) and that is another can of worms. Nothing is going to drive a mass at light speed, let alone faster. Allowing for surprises, that's one thing we're pretty damn sure about. What remains to be seen, however, is whether or not we can manipulate the mass of an object. If would could do that, then ET wouldn't have to call home, we could take him. K.

Real0ne -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 1:12:36 AM)
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 anything exhibiting "radiation resistance" travels at the speed of light. everything vibtates. hence both a wave and particle.

FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 1:45:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker Anything that will drive mass faster than light should be able to have the mass time travel too, (with some adjustments) and that is another can of worms. Nothing is going to drive a mass at light speed, let alone faster. Allowing for surprises, that's one thing we're pretty damn sure about. What remains to be seen, however, is whether or not we can manipulate the mass of an object. If would could do that, then ET wouldn't have to call home, we could take him. K. True. But the devil is in the details. We have no clue about gravity yet, (think about what the Romans might have known about electricity) and that and mass are symbiotic. When we can tamper with one, we likely can tamper with the other, and that is when things will get real interesting. And then there is where the faster you go the more relative time slows down. Do you really need FTL to go somewhere assuming you don't care about what goes on 'behind' you? And do we really need to send the mass when information moves instantly in the universe? What is the most valuable thing you can carry on an interstellar flight but knowledge/information? Why carry gold when you can carry the information to produce as much as you want of it it for a fraction the effort? When you travel, what do you mostly acquire and bring back? Then there are the surprises

Real0ne -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 1:51:50 AM)
time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation.

Real0ne -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 1:58:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker Anything that will drive mass faster than light should be able to have the mass time travel too, (with some adjustments) and that is another can of worms. Nothing is going to drive a mass at light speed, let alone faster. Allowing for surprises, that's one thing we're pretty damn sure about. What remains to be seen, however, is whether or not we can manipulate the mass of an object. If would could do that, then ET wouldn't have to call home, we could take him. K. ok but wheatstone. tesla, messler, meyl all proved electricity can and does travel faster than the speed of light, now what? where does that leave us?

FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 2:11:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation. As otter noted earlier, time is generally considered to be a dimension by many people. In many cases they calculate things like how much time will it take x amount of energy to move y amount of mass over a certain distance, or how much time it takes to heat x amount of mass to y temperature, etc.. Because we are embedded in 'earth' time we may not be able to see it properly. Remember in the universal scheme we are on a rock in orbit at a high speed around a ball of fusion gases moving at a higher speed orbit around a galaxy moving at a very high speed away from what we think was the "Big Bang." Think about ants riding on the radiator fan of a semi cruising up the highway trying to consider speed and time, with what they can see with their ant vision.. Time, in theory moves slightly slower generally on the equator, for instance. And slightly slower and then slightly faster when we are in certain parts of our yearly orbit. At any rate we have just started on this great adventure.

crazyml -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 2:15:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation. But what if that aberration affects everything, every single thing?

FirstQuaker -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 2:19:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation. But what if that aberration affects everything, every single thing? The ants on the fan measuring things . . .

StrangerThan -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 3:33:20 AM)
I'll put full faith in science when I quit reading at least three headlines a year over some discovery "rewriting what we know about...". That doesn't mean I believe scientists to be brainless, silly or always barking up the wrong tree. It means they don't know what they don't know. It also means that history is rife with smug beliefs that assumed we already knew most or all of what we needed to know. It means while I do believe Einstein was a genius, so was Newton. Envision the shrug. Final answers are relegated to the realm of what we know. For the most part, searches are also based upon what we know or suspect. It's like... studying for life on Mars based upon how life on Earth reacts to given compounds. Personally, I think if you took all we know and transformed it into grains of sand, you couldn't make enough beach to spread a blanket on. But you could step over into what we don't know, spread your blanket and spend the day getting wet, sandy and tanned.

DomKen -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 6:24:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail There is no aether. Michelson-Morley Between 1881 and 1930, Michelson, Michelson-Morely, Morley & Miller, Miller, Kennedy, Illingsworth, and Joos all found fringe shifts. The observed shifts ranged from .08 (Miller, 1926) to .0004 (Illingsworth, 1927). These shifts are too small (by several orders of magnitude) to support the theory of a stationary ether. But, the operative word in that statement is "stationary." The fringe shifts are there. K. And are due to the tiny irregularities in the appartuses not from any kind of light transmission medium.

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 7:42:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker Anything that will drive mass faster than light should be able to have the mass time travel too, (with some adjustments) and that is another can of worms. Nothing is going to drive a mass at light speed, let alone faster. Allowing for surprises, that's one thing we're pretty damn sure about. What remains to be seen, however, is whether or not we can manipulate the mass of an object. If would could do that, then ET wouldn't have to call home, we could take him. K. ok but wheatstone. tesla, messler, meyl all proved electricity can and does travel faster than the speed of light, now what? where does that leave us? Uh, no. Decidedly not. All electromagnetic radiation, including light, radio transmission and electricity, travels at approximately 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) per second; more than seven times around the equator in one second. More precisely, the speed is 299,792,458 meters per second in a vacuum. electricity is light it is just not in the human's visible spectrum.

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 7:44:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirstQuaker We have no clue about gravity yet, (think about what the Romans might have known about electricity) and that and mass are symbiotic. When we can tamper with one, we likely can tamper with the other, and that is when things will get real interesting. Gravity, I fall down drunk. I tamper with that shit all the time.[:)]

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 7:50:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail There is no aether. Michelson-Morley Between 1881 and 1930, Michelson, Michelson-Morely, Morley & Miller, Miller, Kennedy, Illingsworth, and Joos all found fringe shifts. The observed shifts ranged from .08 (Miller, 1926) to .0004 (Illingsworth, 1927). These shifts are too small (by several orders of magnitude) to support the theory of a stationary ether. But, the operative word in that statement is "stationary." The fringe shifts are there. K. Ah, well, but the mirrors on the granite slab floating in mercury definitively proved there is no motile or moving aether. If it aint stationary and it aint moving, it aint. Simply put.

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 7:51:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation. But what if that aberration affects everything, every single thing? It does. It is called a 'frame of reference'. We are in the soup. And a correction. Time is not a definite interval. It is a figment of imagination at this point. A tachyon of time.

Real0ne -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 8:21:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne time is a definite interval, if time speeds or slows it does not matter if you use an atomic clock its not time that is the problem it is your measuring equipment and peoples lack of knowledge of the forces that cause the aberation. But what if that aberration affects everything, every single thing? well if I decide to fudge a second to be a second and 1/2, that would curve the amount of time it would take for ron to fall down drunk.

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 8:23:44 AM)
but would not in anyway compromise your pervasive incorrectness and total lack of understanding of so many subjects.

Real0ne -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 8:35:49 AM)
looking for yet another bloody nose are ya? LOL

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking the ultimate speed limit (9/29/2011 8:57:33 AM)
LOL, you havent given ANYONE out here a bloody nose, in every case you have been whipped soundly and shown to be ineptly tinfoiling. Like your comment that some number of people proved that electricity (light) exceeds the speed of light. Trust me, if someone did that, even thru error, it would make the news, as this news did.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625