| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scorpyn
   |
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:31:00 -
[151]
 Originally by: Nelisa
It cant both be moving (your velocity + C) and <C at the same time no matter what its made of. Otherwise your saying its in two different places at once.
This is what causes the time distortion if this theory is correct.
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:31:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Nelisa
It cant both be moving (your velocity + C) and <C at the same time no matter what its made of. Otherwise your saying its in two different places at once.
This is what causes the time distortion if this theory is correct.
|
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:52:00 -
[153]
Originally by: BoBoZoBo
Can you put your paper up here... I would very much like to read your theory.
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated. |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:52:00 -
[154]
Originally by: BoBoZoBo
Can you put your paper up here... I would very much like to read your theory.
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated. |
Sphalerite
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:57:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Nelisa
Ok the question was that they were both moving at 3/4 the speed of light away from each other.. combined velocity 1 1/2 times the speed of light, so the light wouldnt make it because it cant go faster than C.
Thank god you never taught me phsyics
Originally by: A real
Its not so far fetched considering its quite possible the primary characteristic that determines a particles properties is its velocity. Considering the awesome speed of photons its quite possible that what causes photons to red or blue shift isnt a change in wavelength but rather its velocity. Simply because our instruments are not sensitive enough to detect the variation doesnt mean its not there.
The Earth moves around the sun at a speed of about 30 km/s, so if velocities added vectorially as Newtonian mechanics requires, the last 5 digits in the value of the speed of light now used in the SI definition of the metre would be meaningless. Today, high energy physicists at CERN in Geneva and Fermilab in Chicago routinely accelerate particles to within a whisper of the speed of light. Any dependence of the speed of light on reference frames would have shown up long ago, unless it is very slight indeed.
|
Sphalerite
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:57:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Nelisa
Ok the question was that they were both moving at 3/4 the speed of light away from each other.. combined velocity 1 1/2 times the speed of light, so the light wouldnt make it because it cant go faster than C.
Thank god you never taught me phsyics
Originally by: A real
Its not so far fetched considering its quite possible the primary characteristic that determines a particles properties is its velocity. Considering the awesome speed of photons its quite possible that what causes photons to red or blue shift isnt a change in wavelength but rather its velocity. Simply because our instruments are not sensitive enough to detect the variation doesnt mean its not there.
The Earth moves around the sun at a speed of about 30 km/s, so if velocities added vectorially as Newtonian mechanics requires, the last 5 digits in the value of the speed of light now used in the SI definition of the metre would be meaningless. Today, high energy physicists at CERN in Geneva and Fermilab in Chicago routinely accelerate particles to within a whisper of the speed of light. Any dependence of the speed of light on reference frames would have shown up long ago, unless it is very slight indeed.
|
Vex Seraphim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:58:00 -
[157]
Thought is faster than light.
it was a mistake, btw, to measure time by light.
-------------------
:: finite horizon :: killboard ::
:: bio :: blog ::
|
Vex Seraphim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:58:00 -
[158]
Thought is faster than light.
it was a mistake, btw, to measure time by light.
-------------------
:: finite horizon :: killboard ::
:: bio :: blog ::
|
BoBoZoBo
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:04:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Nelisa
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated.
LOL...OK
A summary would be fine
=========================
Operator 9 |
BoBoZoBo
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:04:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Nelisa
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated.
LOL...OK
A summary would be fine
=========================
Operator 9 |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:05:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Sphalerite
Originally by: Nelisa
Ok the question was that they were both moving at 3/4 the speed of light away from each other.. combined velocity 1 1/2 times the speed of light, so the light wouldnt make it because it cant go faster than C.
Thank god you never taught me phsyics
Originally by: A real
Its not so far fetched considering its quite possible the primary characteristic that determines a particles properties is its velocity. Considering the awesome speed of photons its quite possible that what causes photons to red or blue shift isnt a change in wavelength but rather its velocity. Simply because our instruments are not sensitive enough to detect the variation doesnt mean its not there.
The Earth moves around the sun at a speed of about 30 km/s, so if velocities added vectorially as Newtonian mechanics requires, the last 5 digits in the value of the speed of light now used in the SI definition of the metre would be meaningless. Today, high energy physicists at CERN in Geneva and Fermilab in Chicago routinely accelerate particles to within a whisper of the speed of light. Any dependence of the speed of light on reference frames would have shown up long ago, unless it is very slight indeed.
If you want to explain special relativity to them be my guest it was an oversimplified answer to an oversimplified question.
As for your second point your assuming photons have sufficient mass for variations in tragectory or velocity to be readily apparent under non-relativistic conditions. |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:05:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Sphalerite
Originally by: Nelisa
Ok the question was that they were both moving at 3/4 the speed of light away from each other.. combined velocity 1 1/2 times the speed of light, so the light wouldnt make it because it cant go faster than C.
Thank god you never taught me phsyics
Originally by: A real
Its not so far fetched considering its quite possible the primary characteristic that determines a particles properties is its velocity. Considering the awesome speed of photons its quite possible that what causes photons to red or blue shift isnt a change in wavelength but rather its velocity. Simply because our instruments are not sensitive enough to detect the variation doesnt mean its not there.
The Earth moves around the sun at a speed of about 30 km/s, so if velocities added vectorially as Newtonian mechanics requires, the last 5 digits in the value of the speed of light now used in the SI definition of the metre would be meaningless. Today, high energy physicists at CERN in Geneva and Fermilab in Chicago routinely accelerate particles to within a whisper of the speed of light. Any dependence of the speed of light on reference frames would have shown up long ago, unless it is very slight indeed.
If you want to explain special relativity to them be my guest it was an oversimplified answer to an oversimplified question.
As for your second point your assuming photons have sufficient mass for variations in tragectory or velocity to be readily apparent under non-relativistic conditions. |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:55:00 -
[163]
Originally by: BoBoZoBo
Originally by: Nelisa
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated.
LOL...OK
A summary would be fine
Basically my theory is that the electron clouds in a piece of matter cannot be syncronized to give it a completely neutral directional charge, another piece of matter placed nearby will also have a positive or negative average directional charge, the larger the mass of the object the greater its field. The two opposing charges draw the bits of matter closer to each other and as they get closer the strength of the attraction increases.
Thats basically the gist of it though way oversimplified and leaving out the math and probabilities. |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:55:00 -
[164]
Originally by: BoBoZoBo
Originally by: Nelisa
Sorry but Ive heard that one before, then I get a call from a college somewhere asking if I gave <insert name here> a copy of it because they just turned it in as their term paper.
Ill summarize it if you like but it wont be complete and gets kinda complicated.
LOL...OK
A summary would be fine
Basically my theory is that the electron clouds in a piece of matter cannot be syncronized to give it a completely neutral directional charge, another piece of matter placed nearby will also have a positive or negative average directional charge, the larger the mass of the object the greater its field. The two opposing charges draw the bits of matter closer to each other and as they get closer the strength of the attraction increases.
Thats basically the gist of it though way oversimplified and leaving out the math and probabilities. |
Ge0rge Bush
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 22:29:00 -
[165]
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
|
Ge0rge Bush
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 22:29:00 -
[166]
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
|
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 00:27:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Ge0rge Bush
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
Just make your own.. if Im right its not that hard.. just create a device that emits an electromagnetic field in opposition to the planetary charge. Of course the kicker is that you will have to make it change polarity millions or more times per second by reading the polarity of the gravitational field and compensating in real time.
Piece of cake  |
Nelisa
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 00:27:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Ge0rge Bush
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
Just make your own.. if Im right its not that hard.. just create a device that emits an electromagnetic field in opposition to the planetary charge. Of course the kicker is that you will have to make it change polarity millions or more times per second by reading the polarity of the gravitational field and compensating in real time.
Piece of cake |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 11:34:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Nelisa
Originally by: Ge0rge Bush
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
Just make your own.. if Im right its not that hard.. just create a device that emits an electromagnetic field in opposition to the planetary charge. Of course the kicker is that you will have to make it change polarity millions or more times per second by reading the polarity of the gravitational field and compensating in real time.
Piece of cake
Using an electromagnetic field to defy the force of gravity is NOT anti-gravity.
That is like saying a helicoptor is an anti-gravity device.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 11:34:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Nelisa
Originally by: Ge0rge Bush
All this talk of Gravity reminds me .. I wonder if Santa will get me the anti gravity gun that I asked for. I saw one on Half Life 2 and thought .. dammit .. I must get those for my army. They didn't have any down at Walmart though so Santa is my last hope.
Just make your own.. if Im right its not that hard.. just create a device that emits an electromagnetic field in opposition to the planetary charge. Of course the kicker is that you will have to make it change polarity millions or more times per second by reading the polarity of the gravitational field and compensating in real time.
Piece of cake
Using an electromagnetic field to defy the force of gravity is NOT anti-gravity.
That is like saying a helicoptor is an anti-gravity device.
______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots.
They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 15:18:00 -
[171]
Edited by: Scorpyn on 22/12/2004 15:18:43
Originally by: Avon
Using an electromagnetic field to defy the force of gravity is NOT anti-gravity.
That is like saying a helicoptor is an anti-gravity device.
Actually that depends what gravity is... if Nelisas' theory about gravity is correct, then using an electromagnetic field to counter gravity is indeed correct (unless I misunderstood something somewhere).
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2004.12.22 15:18:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Scorpyn on 22/12/2004 15:18:43
Originally by: Avon
Using an electromagnetic field to defy the force of gravity is NOT anti-gravity.
That is like saying a helicoptor is an anti-gravity device.
Actually that depends what gravity is... if Nelisas' theory about gravity is correct, then using an electromagnetic field to counter gravity is indeed correct (unless I misunderstood something somewhere).
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:10:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Nelisa
Exactly why I dont publish my alternate theorum of gravity "Gravity as a macroscopic manifestation of cumulative Van De Whals Forces".. I dont want to get lynched for thinking outside the box.
chuff! i was gonna read the whole post first, but chuff chuff. Post it hear, post it anywhere and give a link.
Post it here; Linky
And then let us know please!
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:10:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Nelisa
Exactly why I dont publish my alternate theorum of gravity "Gravity as a macroscopic manifestation of cumulative Van De Whals Forces".. I dont want to get lynched for thinking outside the box.
chuff! i was gonna read the whole post first, but chuff chuff. Post it hear, post it anywhere and give a link.
Post it here; Linky
And then let us know please!
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:19:00 -
[175]
Originally by: mahhy
I don't know a damn thing about this topic, really, but I refuse to believe its impossible to travel faster than light. There simply has to be a way of moving from point A to point B faster. Otherwise its going to be next to impossible to actually explore the galaxy, let alone the entire universe. Since that would be a huge disapointment, I think one day a way will be found to exceed the speed of light 
Just wish it would be in my lifetime 
Yeah you know, thats pretty much my theory. I try and flesh it out and ***** my ears up when someone uses inteli-speak to justify it, but im happy beleiving it cause its a good thing to beleive the rest of the time.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:19:00 -
[176]
Originally by: mahhy
I don't know a damn thing about this topic, really, but I refuse to believe its impossible to travel faster than light. There simply has to be a way of moving from point A to point B faster. Otherwise its going to be next to impossible to actually explore the galaxy, let alone the entire universe. Since that would be a huge disapointment, I think one day a way will be found to exceed the speed of light
Just wish it would be in my lifetime
Yeah you know, thats pretty much my theory. I try and flesh it out and ***** my ears up when someone uses inteli-speak to justify it, but im happy beleiving it cause its a good thing to beleive the rest of the time.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:22:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Avon
I think you are talking about quantum entanglement.
The effect is certainly faster than light, but being able to use it to transmit information...that is the real problem.
Being a quantum effect it is bound by the uncertainty principle, and uncertain information isn't all that useful.
Hehe, you should listen to politicians its their life blood :)
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:22:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Avon
I think you are talking about quantum entanglement.
The effect is certainly faster than light, but being able to use it to transmit information...that is the real problem.
Being a quantum effect it is bound by the uncertainty principle, and uncertain information isn't all that useful.
Hehe, you should listen to politicians its their life blood :)
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:24:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Solant
Originally by: Nelisa
Originally by: MrBinary
Buncha EvE geeks trying to act smarter than one another. Classic comedy.
Some of this earths brightest minds, spend tens of thousands of dollars, and many years of thier lives studying this stuff in high end universities around the globe.
And some of you gaming geeks think you have the answer?
Yer all a bunch of looooosers. :)
Cheers,
MrBinary
Actually Im a college professor with a phd in physics and an interest in quantum mechanics.
So I do know what Im talking about and you shouldnt make broad overgeneralizations about people you know nothing about.
yeah, everyone and their cousin is. and im sure there others in this thread that are huge physics buffs, working for the gov't, what have you.
doesn't change the situation- Mr Binary has it down pat. my hats off to you sir for pointing out the silliness of gaming forum "what is the meaning of life" -esque topics.
People who dont want to think about things "above their station" should leave others to do so in peace. the lack of imagination is a terrible affliction, usually caught in adolescance and suffered till death.
Look ma, a star!
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.12.23 18:24:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Solant
Originally by: Nelisa
Originally by: MrBinary
Buncha EvE geeks trying to act smarter than one another. Classic comedy.
Some of this earths brightest minds, spend tens of thousands of dollars, and many years of thier lives studying this stuff in high end universities around the globe.
And some of you gaming geeks think you have the answer?
Yer all a bunch of looooosers. :)
Cheers,
MrBinary
Actually Im a college professor with a phd in physics and an interest in quantum mechanics.
So I do know what Im talking about and you shouldnt make broad overgeneralizations about people you know nothing about.
yeah, everyone and their cousin is. and im sure there others in this thread that are huge physics buffs, working for the gov't, what have you.
doesn't change the situation- Mr Binary has it down pat. my hats off to you sir for pointing out the silliness of gaming forum "what is the meaning of life" -esque topics.
People who dont want to think about things "above their station" should leave others to do so in peace. the lack of imagination is a terrible affliction, usually caught in adolescance and suffered till death.
Look ma, a star!
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |