ok here is something I just thought of. I have a laser pointer and i can shine it on the wall and such. I can make the point go from the top of the wall to the bottom of the wall rather fast.
So i went outside and shined the point out in an open field from a balcony in a barn. The point zipped across the field covering a large distance in no time.
so then i put my laser pointer into the sky. I pointed it at the north star and then moved it over across the sky onto another star. Bother stars are equal distance from me but millions of miles away from each other.
Now replace my laser pointer with something that has a solid beam, like a light saber that is 1 billion miles long. Now place a vessel at the end of the light saber. With me on the ground or any stationary point I just have to move my end a little bit to make the other end move billions of miles in only a few seconds.
This works the same way that if a sniper is off just a degree of an angel , his bullet hits feet or yards off.
ideas?
First, great thought pattern if you are talking about a probe riding a beam of light (if not then I have no idea what your thread is about
Second it's been thought of and theorized before, which is to have an ultra small and light (weight wise) vessel that can ride the front of the beam of light in interstellar space and report what it discovers. In effect a light speed probe.
Theoritically super possible but hard in its execution.
There are so many volitale occurences in space that we wouold have to be real lucky for it to work. (as an exmaple it can collide with microscopic debree at light speed and vaporize etc..)
< Message edited by MK2_GT -- 4/28/2008 7:01:34 PM >
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?
There is gravity in space, it may be miniscule(by definition), but in theory it is there.
Posts: 3504
Joined: 5/4/2005 From: Western MD Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 03mustgt
quote:
ORIGINAL: baddog671
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?
There is gravity in space, it may be miniscule(by definition), but in theory it is there.
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?
Posts: 3504
Joined: 5/4/2005 From: Western MD Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: 03mustgt
quote:
ORIGINAL: baddog671
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?
I think your misunderstanding young man... read better
Okay, I guess you guy's really don't undersand any of these concepts (except for a few people who seem to grasp it).
Even if you were to travel at almost the speed of light, your sense of time would only be different compared to whosever position your basing your speed off of. as in, if you were travelling at 660million miles per hour compared to someone here on earth (keep in mind you aren't traveling this speed absolutely, only relative to something else, wheareas if you were to turn on a light, it would still seem to you that light was travelling at 670million miles an hour, as if you were standing still)
The only feaseable way to "time travel" was to get close to the event horizon of a black hole, but not too close, at which the gravitational field would be so strong that your time is distorted, but you probably wouldn't be able to live at those gravitational levels.
i think Carl Sagan did a Cosmos special on the effects of traveling at the speed of light on time passage Cosmos is on tuesday night on the Discovery/ Discovery Science Channel
or if you really want to travel faster than the speed of light then just take a ride in my "TOURQE MONSER'' 4.0
The only question I have, is what ever happened to reading a book? The discovery channel is based upon theory upon theory, most of which hasn't been proven, nor even experimentally tested, the only reliable source your going to get any information at all is through a book.
First, great thought pattern if you are talking about a probe riding a beam of light (if not then I have no idea what your thread is about
Second it's been thought of and theorized before, which is to have an ultra small and light (weight wise) vessel that can ride the front of the beam of light in interstellar space and report what it discovers. In effect a light speed probe.
Theoritically super possible but hard in its execution.
There are so many volitale occurences in space that we wouold have to be real lucky for it to work. (as an exmaple it can collide with microscopic debree at light speed and vaporize etc..)
I hope you don't truely believe it's possible. It would disprove Feyman, Einstein, And some of the greatest physicists EVER.
Especially if string theory proves to provide a true explanation of the universe, it means that this idea would be truely impossible, mainly because of the 11 demensions in existence, rather than "our" 3 intuitive demensions.
Bottom line, this whole Idea is completely impossible, both by means of current technilogical limits, and logically. If the smallest partical even theorized to be possible, the gluon, which is ligher than an electron, becomes more massive than a lead particle in it's solid state, at only 2/3's of the speed of light. It is IMPOSSIBLE bottom line
The only question I have, is what ever happened to reading a book? The discovery channel is based upon theory upon theory, most of which hasn't been proven, nor even experimentally tested, the only reliable source your going to get any information at all is through a book.
+5 bajillion
discovery,tlc,history and national geagraphic used to be SOOOOO much better only a few years ago... TLC ESPECIALLY has pissed me off recently with stupid **** like "flip that house"
seriously go to a CC and take a basic physics course or read a book.
AZ can you recomend any good basic physics books?
_____________________________
quote:
ORIGINAL: Blownsvt I Know alot of guys personally with 600+ hp rides so in my personal circle 40050whp cars are a dime a dozen and not considered anyhting extreme.
some very good books that I have found, along with math books, were actually required reading for some of my physics courses. The really good one I have found is "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene, "The Labyrinth of Time" is actually pretty good. They go into the basic principals of each theory, but they don't go very in depth. They are good for basic understanding. If you want to learn the math and the more fundamental equations, I would suggest anything written by Stephen Hawking, such as "God Created the Integers", and that goes into some higher math, including some mathematical modeling
2000, I understood the last two sentences of your comments. Put it in Chemistry terms, and it is easy to grasp.
I dunno about the rest of you guys, but I barely humped it through high school fizzics.
Well, Luckily for you, this is far more in depth than high school physics. High school physics deals with basic concepts such as velocity, acceleration, and some of newtons laws, it doesn't even go into relativity.
Normally, people such as you and I believe that there are three spatial dimensions, height, depth, and width, or in terms of math, an X, Y, and Z coordinates.
General relaitivity had a bunch of different consequences, one being that now time is considered to be another dimension. Basically time turned into the fourth dimension.
With string theory, in which the most basic constituent of matter is tiny little strings, vibrating in unison, in different ways (the different ways they vibrate determining what particle they are) says now that there are 11 dimensions to the universe. The four that we are familiar with, and 7 others
Grab a ruler. Point it in one direction, rotate 360 degrees. It traveled however far (not doing the math for you guys.. lol)
next Grab a yard stick. Point it in one direction, rotate 360 degrees. The same amount of travel on your end, yielded a longer distance for the end of the yardstick when compared to the ruler.
_____________________________
Hopefully running by the weekend. Gonna run her good too!
well, technically we are all familiar with all four dimensions, including time, we all experience it, and while we usually don't think of it in this way, it isn't too difficult to do so, whereas the other 7 spatial dimensions are so small that they cannot be experienced in the same way, and are much harder to conceptualize
Printable Version
RE: Breaking the speed of light. - 
"TOURQE MONSER''
