EVE Search - Lightspeed?!?

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Lightspeed?!?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Taviko Momentum. Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.05.14 14:13:00 - [1] If you travel in space at the speed of light and then turn on your headlights, will there actually be any light coming out from the headlights????
Ealiom Infinitus Morti R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.14 14:24:00 - [2] yes. Executioner Model Blackbird Model
Thuul'Khalat Gallente Phoenix Wing The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2007.05.14 14:27:00 - [3] The speed of light is relative to the one observing the light. So, yes. --- We are Recruiting!
Ealiom Infinitus Morti R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.14 14:33:00 - [4] what you should have asked is if someone is travelling towards you from the opposite direction. Would they see the headlights? These questions and many like them have been asked and answered on these forums - lots. eve search: Headlights speed of light Executioner Model Blackbird Model
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.14 15:00:00 - [5] Of course, it's the travelling at the speed of light bit which is the difficult part. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.14 15:07:00 - [6] You can't actually travel at the speed of light, but let's say you went at 99% the speed of light. It would appear to be coming out of your headlights, and indeed it would appear to come out at the speed of light. Special Relativity, the theory that describes how this works, is entirely based on previous physics combined with two assumptions. These assumptions can be used to derive all the math describing how time dilation and so forth work. 1. Physical laws are the same in all reference frames. 2. Light's speed appears to be constant, from all reference frames. This means regardless of your velocity or position, light always appears to be going at the speed of light. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Bosie	Posted - 2007.05.14 15:10:00 - [7] Originally by: Dark Shikari You can't actually travel at the speed of light No one knows if we can or can't all we have is a theory that says we can't. When I was a lad we could not travel at the speed of sound yada, yada, yada... "There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND."
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.05.14 15:15:00 - [8] Originally by: Bosie Originally by: Dark Shikari You can't actually travel at the speed of light No one knows if we can or can't all we have is a theory that says we can't. When I was a lad we could not travel at the speed of sound yada, yada, yada... Your OLD dude! everyone knows the theorys we have at the moment are correct! EVERYONE!!! -------------------------------------------- Stay away from my signature all of ya!!! IM WARNING YOU!! PEW PEW PEW PEW!
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.14 15:20:00 - [9] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 14/05/2007 15:24:05 Originally by: Bosie Originally by: Dark Shikari You can't actually travel at the speed of light No one knows if we can or can't all we have is a theory that says we can't. When I was a lad we could not travel at the speed of sound yada, yada, yada... And the theory has been tested to be correct up to 99.9999999999999% the speed of light, easily. Let's say that the theory magically breaks down at 99.999999999999999999% the speed of light. The energy required to reach that, even for a SINGLE PARTICLE, is beyond the scope of the entire human race. Therefore, even if the theory is wrong, we still can't travel locally at the speed of light, in normal space. There are ways to bypass the limit, but they involve specific spacetime constructions. They still don't allow velocity locally to exceed the speed of light. There has to be a limit to skepticism; next thing you're going to claim that you could move a spaceship by sitting inside of it and pulling on a rope tied to the other end of it Theories rarely prove to be "wrong"; they prove to be inaccurate in special cases. Newton's laws were never proved to be wrong; they were merely proven to be in accurate at high velocities. And so forth. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
defiler Mad Hermit	Posted - 2007.05.14 16:12:00 - [10] Originally by: Dark Shikari There has to be a limit to skepticism; next thing you're going to claim that you could move a spaceship by sitting inside of it and pulling on a rope tied to the other end of it Actually you can, but the difference in mass between you and the spaceship means that you would move far more than the ship. Also, walking inside it would be easier and have the same effect.</nitpick> *Mad Hermit - Minding our own business since 2004.*
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.14 16:23:00 - [11] Originally by: defiler Originally by: Dark Shikari There has to be a limit to skepticism; next thing you're going to claim that you could move a spaceship by sitting inside of it and pulling on a rope tied to the other end of it Actually you can, but the difference in mass between you and the spaceship means that you would move far more than the ship. Also, walking inside it would be easier and have the same effect.</nitpick> Well you're not moving the center of gravity of you and the ship. Technically if you don't count yourself as part of the ship, you're moving the ship's center of gravity slightly, of course. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
ReaperOfSly Gallente Lyrus Associates Betrayal Under Mayhem	Posted - 2007.05.14 21:14:00 - [12] Originally by: defiler Originally by: Dark Shikari There has to be a limit to skepticism; next thing you're going to claim that you could move a spaceship by sitting inside of it and pulling on a rope tied to the other end of it Actually you can, but the difference in mass between you and the spaceship means that you would move far more than the ship. Also, walking inside it would be easier and have the same effect.</nitpick> Well, the ship would start to move very slowly, but would stop again as soon as you hit the back of it. Conservation of momentum anyone? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Beer is my religion. Guinness is my God.
Bosie	Posted - 2007.05.14 21:35:00 - [13] Originally by: Dark Shikari And the theory has been tested to be correct up to 99.9999999999999% the speed of light, easily. Theories rarely prove to be "wrong"; they prove to be inaccurate in special cases. Newton's laws were never proved to be wrong; they were merely proven to be in accurate at high velocities. And so forth. So what you are saying is that 2+2=4.2 is not wrong just inaccurate... Again, you can't say it's impossible just because we lack the means and the understanding to make it so. To do so is ignorant. "There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND."
Glassback M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.05.14 21:40:00 - [14] Sometimes, when I'm alone, I touch myself. If Eve was just a game, it would have a pause button.
Derovius Vaden	Posted - 2007.05.14 21:44:00 - [15] 1. You cannot reach the speed of light, as your mass approaches infinite. 2. Because the speed of light is considered "constant" for all intensive purposes, if you could somehow travel at the speed of light, no light would eminate. It would be similar to zero gravity and water; you would try and pour it out, but it would be suspended. 3. The major problem is not as DS described, its more an emphasis on ever-increasing mass (and therefore an ever increasing need for energy to propel it further). DS just jumped to the reason why, and didn't explain it.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.14 22:30:00 - [16] Originally by: Derovius Vaden 1. You cannot reach the speed of light, as your mass approaches infinite. 2. Because the speed of light is considered "constant" for all intensive purposes, if you could somehow travel at the speed of light, no light would eminate. It would be similar to zero gravity and water; you would try and pour it out, but it would be suspended. 3. The major problem is not as DS described, its more an emphasis on ever-increasing mass (and therefore an ever increasing need for energy to propel it further). DS just jumped to the reason why, and didn't explain it. Correct, good explanation. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Feng Schui Minmatar The Ninja Coalition Phobos Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.14 22:47:00 - [17] Originally by: Glassback Sometimes, when I'm alone, I touch myself. at the speed of light? My opinion is my own, not of my corp or my alliance. If you have problems, we can have a "who can do L4 missions faster" duel >:)
R'olyat Gallente Raging Phoenix Incorporated North Star Confederation	Posted - 2007.05.16 03:52:00 - [18] Originally by: Feng Schui Originally by: Glassback Sometimes, when I'm alone, I touch myself. at the speed of light? Win. ___________________________ Fixed sig for t3h sig ninjaz.
Shameless Avenger	Posted - 2007.05.16 04:02:00 - [19] and why the mass increases? is teh pilot eating donuts or something? PS: I'm not trolling, I really wanna know. Collegue was ages ago and I forgot.
defiler Mad Hermit	Posted - 2007.05.16 05:20:00 - [20] Originally by: ReaperOfSly Originally by: defiler Originally by: Dark Shikari There has to be a limit to skepticism; next thing you're going to claim that you could move a spaceship by sitting inside of it and pulling on a rope tied to the other end of it Actually you can, but the difference in mass between you and the spaceship means that you would move far more than the ship. Also, walking inside it would be easier and have the same effect.</nitpick> Well, the ship would start to move very slowly, but would stop again as soon as you hit the back of it. Conservation of momentum anyone? Indeed, but that's beside the point - the ship moves if you move. And you could just make sure you don't hit anything, by going out the drone bay for instance. What happens to you after that is yet again beside the point. *Mad Hermit - Minding our own business since 2004.*
mamolian M. Corp M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.05.16 07:11:00 - [21] Originally by: Glassback Sometimes, when I'm alone, I touch myself. I had the post read and thought for a second.. hmm whats this got to do with the speed of light.. then almost spat my coffee on the screen. -------------------------------
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 1 Shot 1 Kill	Posted - 2007.05.16 10:48:00 - [22] Edited by: Sokratesz on 16/05/2007 10:46:48 Read up on Einstein en Richard Hawkings. Higher velocity = increase in mass = more energy needed to accelerate further. At 10% of the speed of light, the mass of an object is increased by 1%. At 90%, its close to double. At Lightspeed, its infinite. Hence, not possible. And as DS said, light always travels at the speed of light regardless of the observer. sig down temporarily Originally by: welsh wizard You might not be able to kill anything but you can sure as hell ignore it and go about your business
Ealiom Infinitus Morti R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.16 10:52:00 - [23] Edited by: Ealiom on 16/05/2007 10:52:49 Originally by: Sokratesz Read up on Einstein en Richard Hawkins. Higher velocity = increase in mass = more energy needed to accelerate further. At 10% of the speed of light, the mass of an object is increased by 1%. At 90%, its close to double. At Lightspeed, its infinite. Hence, not possible. Surely that can't be accurate. As a general principle i have a problem with infinites. I understand that you can't make a mass travel at the speed of light however when they say that at the speed of light mass=infinite hmmmmm. at 99.999% your mass = what? Regardless if it is a huge number or not adding an extra 0.001% should not make any number however huge into an infinite. Just seems completely wrong to me. Executioner Model Blackbird Model
Jernau Gurgeh Gallente	Posted - 2007.05.16 11:08:00 - [24] Originally by: Sokratesz Edited by: Sokratesz on 16/05/2007 10:46:48 Read up on Einstein en Richard Hawkings. Higher velocity = increase in mass = more energy needed to accelerate further. At 10% of the speed of light, the mass of an object is increased by 1%. At 90%, its close to double. At Lightspeed, its infinite. Hence, not possible. And as DS said, light always travels at the speed of light regardless of the observer. Richard Hawkings - is he some sort of Stephen Hawking/Richard Dawkins hybrid? There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not.
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.16 11:09:00 - [25] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/05/2007 11:08:31 Originally by: Ealiom Edited by: Ealiom on 16/05/2007 10:52:49 Originally by: Sokratesz Read up on Einstein en Richard Hawkins. Higher velocity = increase in mass = more energy needed to accelerate further. At 10% of the speed of light, the mass of an object is increased by 1%. At 90%, its close to double. At Lightspeed, its infinite. Hence, not possible. Surely that can't be accurate. As a general principle i have a problem with infinites. I understand that you can't make a mass travel at the speed of light however when they say that at the speed of light mass=infinite hmmmmm. at 99.999% your mass = what? Regardless if it is a huge number or not adding an extra 0.001% should not make any number however huge into an infinite. Just seems completely wrong to me. The mass increases exponentially rather than linearly. Additionally, subjective time also slows down as v increases, meaning that it would take a very long time to accelerate. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.16 11:10:00 - [26] Originally by: Ealiom Edited by: Ealiom on 16/05/2007 10:52:49 Originally by: Sokratesz Read up on Einstein en Richard Hawkins. Higher velocity = increase in mass = more energy needed to accelerate further. At 10% of the speed of light, the mass of an object is increased by 1%. At 90%, its close to double. At Lightspeed, its infinite. Hence, not possible. Surely that can't be accurate. As a general principle i have a problem with infinites. I understand that you can't make a mass travel at the speed of light however when they say that at the speed of light mass=infinite hmmmmm. at 99.999% your mass = what? Regardless if it is a huge number or not adding an extra 0.001% should not make any number however huge into an infinite. Just seems completely wrong to me. It isn't that simple. You're not "adding an extra 0.001%"--as you approach the speed of light, more and more of your energy goes into raising your Lorentz factor (raising effective mass, etc), and so it becomes harder and harder to go that "extra 0.001%". The math is surprisingly simple and can be derived, as I previously said, from basic assumptions. And its proven to be unbelievably accurate up through speeds like 99.99999999999999999999% the speed of light, by analyzing cosmic rays and using particle accelerators. It is, next to Quantum Electrodynamics, probably one of the most accurate scientific theories ever made. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Angor The JORG Corporation FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.16 11:59:00 - [27] Originally by: Taviko If you travel in space at the speed of light and then turn on your headlights, will there actually be any light coming out from the headlights???? Build the enterprise and find out :P _______________________________ Who the f*k stole my sig...
Xtreem Gallente Pulsar Wind Labs	Posted - 2007.05.16 12:08:00 - [28] does this mean if in theory we got to the speed of light, or at near as it can be possible.. the light comming out of the said headlights would be traveling at 2x the speed of light if measured from a point stationary? as if light emitter was already going at the speed of light, then emitted light that traveled the speed of light from that emitter then must it not being going 2x the speed of light from a stationary perspective?
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.16 12:21:00 - [29] Originally by: Xtreem does this mean if in theory we got to the speed of light, or at near as it can be possible.. the light comming out of the said headlights would be traveling at 2x the speed of light if measured from a point stationary? as if light emitter was already going at the speed of light, then emitted light that traveled the speed of light from that emitter then must it not being going 2x the speed of light from a stationary perspective? No. The best way to imagine this is to imagine that you're another massless particle that can go at the speed of light, and you're emitting light for one reason or another. Since you're going at the speed of light also (and therefore in the same reference frame as the light), you'd find yourself flying next to it; you'd never get ahead of it or behind it. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Ealiom Infinitus Morti R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.16 12:37:00 - [30] I know that the mass increase and energy required would not be linear. The problem i have is that you can never simple add a number and recieve an infinite. At a mere fraction away from the speed of light we have a fixed number for the mass and energy required. Yet pushing it that tiny fraction more results in an infinite. Even if the rise in mass and energy required is hugely exponential I dont understand how a clearly defined number can flip to an infinite simply by giving it 'more' Executioner Model Blackbird Model

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.