first of all, the 2 stars are not equally distant from earth, but lets assume they are, just for the sake of this argument. also, they are several light years away keep that in mind (it takes the light years to reach those stars)
also, lets ignore the fact that the laser pointer is not bright enough to reach that star
now, think of the laser beam you just pointed at the northstar like the water coming out of a hose. assuming there's no gravity (since in most cases gravity has a negligible effect on light), it would go straight at that star. but when you move your laser pointer / garden hose, what happens? in the case of the garden hose, you would observe the water's path bending in relation to the nozzle, even though each molecule would continue on its absolute path in a straight line at the speed it exited the nozzle
the same happens with the laser pointer, but much, much faster, so you can't see it. so even though would observe the light's path bending in relation to the tip of the laser pointer if you were to slow it down enough, each photon would still be travelling on the same linear path that it exited the laser pointer on at the speed of light
so no, you are not breaking the speed of light
therefore, your thread is stupid
< Message edited by Joolander -- 4/28/2008 3:18:06 PM >
_____________________________
quote:
ORIGINAL: QatarStang
You know I''ve always had a boner for your car, Joo.
Posts: 2254
Joined: 4/3/2004 From: Louisville, Ky Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Joolander
ok, lets go back to your laser pointer
first of all, the 2 stars are not equally distant from earth, but lets assume they are, just for the sake of this argument. also, they are several light years away keep that in mind (it takes the light years to reach those stars)
also, lets ignore the fact that the laser pointer is not bright enough to reach that star
now, think of the laser beam you just pointed at the northstar like the water coming out of a hose. assuming there's no gravity (since in most cases gravity has a negligible effect on light), it would go straight at that star. but when you move your laser pointer / garden hose, what happens? in the case of the garden hose, you would observe the water's path bending in relation to the nozzle, even though each molecule would continue on its absolute path in a straight line at the speed it exited the nozzle
the same happens with the laser pointer, but much, much faster, so you can't see it. so even though would observe the light's path bending in relation to the tip of the laser pointer if you were to slow it down enough, each photon would still be travelling on the same linear path that it exited the laser pointer on at the speed of light
so no, you are not breaking the speed of light
therefore, your thread is stupid
i appreciate the insight.
_____________________________
Don''''t be too proud of this technological terror you''''ve constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of Big Oil.
this is all theoretical that you had the money and time to build such a thing. not a light saber , but a big tower that moves on a henge
you're comparing light(weightless, massless, and material-less) to a big tower on a hinge
in space there is no gravity. but I would imagine a lot of torque twist.
... if it deals with light, its refraction you're talking about where light will bounce off of molecules in space. Or when you reach into a vessel full of water trying to grab something your hand is off by an inch or so if you aim directly for the thing you're trying to get. Light is bent by air or any material it goes through. Unless you can account for it, you will be off in your aim.
For the other item, there is no gravity in space so no centripital force, there would be forces acting on the rod over large distances though as it passes through graviational fields of other planets and suns. Again you have to account for that. Light would be a more efficient (easier) way to transmit something instead of a 'cable' or something else that is solid.
_____________________________
quote:
ORIGINAL: P Zero
He could strap a rocket to his ass and beat em on foot too. -P.
alright, lets dispel some of the stupidity that has rampantly taken over this thread, as well as started it. originally I didn't want to reply, I wanted to see how far the retardation got (I'm not going to name names or anything) but now I feel it's in the best interest of intelligence to reply.
1.The movement of Light is absolute - this means that where if you and I are moving, accelerating, it is relative to something else in space, whereas the "movement" of light is absolute. If you were hypothetically travelling at 670 million miles per hour relative to some other object in space, light would still seem to move at the speed of light from your perspective. You cannot, will not, and cannot grasp the idea that it is impossible to break the speed of light.
2. There is no gravity in space - I don't know where you got this idea, but gravity is the warping and distortions of the fabric of space and time, and as newton was proved wrong, gravity isn't even communicated at anything more than the speed of light (newtons theory said that gravity was communicated imidiately which was then proved wrong by einstein, and that gravity is communicated at exactly the speed of light, nothing more).
Lets revisit this idea one more time. The light that you emmit, the photons that you are putting out are the same age the moment they reach this distant planet, star, or object as they are the moment they leave whatever device you emit them from. At the speed of light, time stops, nothing ages, and to say that it does, well is just retarded considering this was proved a whole century ago.
I don't get what the original question is though. Even light cannot travel at faster than the speed of light, otherwise it would arrive at the destination Before it is emmited, and that's just logically impossible. My god people, pick up a textbook sometime, this is century old physics that has already been discussed and it makes no sense arguing about it again. (sorry, I'm in a bad mood today)
oh and if you want to know why this is, it's quite simple. The faster you go, the more massive you become. Photons, namely the particles of light, are massless. Not that they have so little mass that we cannot measure it, but it has ZERO mass. No matter how fast it goes, it still has zero mass, and therefore, it doesn't take any effort to make it go the speed of light (if it were in a particle accelerator that is)
Even the lightest particle besides this known to man, namely, the Gluon (the messenger particle for the Strong Force) has a mass, and therefore, the faster it goes, the more massive it becomes, and therfore the more energy it requires to make it go faster. Infinity times even the smallest number, is a large number, duh, it's infinity. Infinity times zero is still zero.
let me boil down the original question as i understood it
kirby thought that the dot emitted by the laser pointer could move faster than the spped of light since he thought it would move like the end of a steel beam from one star to the other as both are light years from one another. basically, he thought he could swing the end of the light beam around like a lever arm
if you read my post i answered what i think was his question in laymans terms
< Message edited by Joolander -- 4/28/2008 4:14:22 PM >
_____________________________
quote:
ORIGINAL: QatarStang
You know I''ve always had a boner for your car, Joo.
What do you mean they were fired at super luminal speeds? If they had traveled faster than 670 million miles per hour or more than 2.99x10^8 meters per second, then it would have appeared as if the beam had arrived at its destination before it had been fired, and something like that would have made front page news of every physics journal in the world.
Even the biggest particle accelerators, which are around 54 miles in length, firing Gluons, the lightest particle known at the moment, which is something like .0001 x the mass of the electron, has only been able to achieve something like 95% of the speed of light. If something had traveled faster than that, I think that the world would have to rewrite their laws on logic, because it would defy anything intuitive, and every philosopher that has existed would have been proved wrong. I doubt that it is going to happen
Posts: 3498
Joined: 5/4/2005 From: Western MD Status: offline
Ok, I have 2 thoughts of my own...
In space there is no gravity (per se) and thus no weight. Here on Earth I cant pick my car up, but in space that wouldnt be difficult to carry my car around (assuming I have something to stand on. So, what is the limit? 2k lbs, 10k lbs, 100k lbs? Again, in theory, you would need something to stand on otherwise you would just pick yourself off the object your trying to lift...
And 2, something I find awkward. Fact: Time is effected by gravity and velocity. If you syncronize two watches, leave one on Earth and put the other in empty space, time will go faster here on Earth than empty space. Not to scale, but for example, 6:00 on Earth but 5:00 in space. Clocks in our satellites automatically compensate this difference to keep balanced with Earth's clocks. Also, velocity effects time. The faster you travel, the slower time passes by. A clock on a stationary ship will remain normal, while one on a ship traveling a million miles an hour will be considerable slower.
SOOOOOO, if it is impossible to travel at the speed of light but possible to travel just under it, time would go by at a fraction of the current rate. Could you travel universe without the problem of unthinkable amount of time?
< Message edited by baddog671 -- 4/28/2008 6:39:53 PM >
well i believe the traveller's time would be fairly managable and comprehensible travelling almost the speed of light across the galaxy, but to anyone on earth or another planet, the time it takes for the traveller would seem much longer in comparison
_____________________________
quote:
ORIGINAL: QatarStang
You know I''ve always had a boner for your car, Joo.
Posts: 3498
Joined: 5/4/2005 From: Western MD Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: Joolander
well i believe the traveller's time would be fairly managable and comprehensible travelling almost the speed of light across the galaxy, but to anyone on earth or another planet, the time it takes for the traveller would seem much longer in comparison
Interesting..kinda like The Chronicles of Narnia but in reverse. Leave for only a short while but come back and its 4008
Printable Version
RE: Breaking the speed of light. - 
