On April 11 2010 00:55 spets1 wrote:
when you see it...
i noticed it immediately. one might ask if that's a good or bad thing?
thats bascially the 2nd place i look, bad place to put it in a forum full of guys
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us and as we let our own lights shine we unconsciously give other people permision to do the same
*Today, my girlfriend dumped me proclaiming she wanted someone more like her "Edward". I asked her who Edward was. She held up a copy her "Twilight" book. She was talking about a fictional vampire. FML
* Today, I was fooling around with my girlfriend for the first time. She put her hand on my penis over my jeans and said "Get hard for me." I was hard. FML
Jas0n United States. Apr 11 2010 18:17. Posts 1866
1
yorcadon United States. Apr 11 2010 22:15. Posts 1
I've been watching this thread since it started, and never once had a desire to post anything. In fact just now I went to create a login only to realize I actually already had one that I must have made years ago. It is distressing to see you all arguing about the "transmit information faster than light" argument. I hope I can put that to rest and we can get on with the rofls.
I'll start by saying that it IS NOT possible to do anything faster than the speed of light, as far as our currently available technology is concerned. Taken from what I remember of a particular text by a particular physicist; If we take our current spacetime position 4-vector x=(ct,(x1),(x2),(x3))=(ct,(x-> )) we can produce the velocity 4-vector u=dx/dT, where T is the proper time defined by dT^2=dt^2-c^-2(d(x1)^2+d(x2)^2+d(x3)^2). So the "speed through spacetime" is the magnitude of the 4-vector u, sqrt(((c^2dt^2-d(x-> )^2)/(dt^2-c^-2d(x-> )^2))) which is precisely the speed of light, c. If we rearrange the equation c^2(dt/dT)^2-(d(x-> )/dT)^2 = c^2 to be c^2(dT/dt)^2+(d(x-> )/dt)^2=c^2, this shows that an increase in an objects speed through space, sqrt((d(x-> )/dt)^2) must be equal to a decrease in it's speed through time, dT/dt.
What this shows is that the faster you travel through one of the three spacial dimensions, the slower you travel through the dimension of time. This sets a maximum speed limit, the speed of light. And in fact photons, the particles of light, do not age or travel through time, at all. Nor does the graviton, the particle that transmits gravity. This is because they travel through the spacial dimensions at maximum speed already, allowing no movement through time. This has been proven time and time again through experimental observation, again, to the best of our current technological capabilities. This alone is sufficient to disprove your 5-light-year length rod. Besides all the mathematical proof, the idea is stupid. Nothing exists that could be strong enough over that distance, but lets pretend that it is. The "message" to move in one direction, even a tiny amount, is still passed on from particle to particle, and this message, cannot ever be transmitted beyond the speed of light. Take a rod, or whatever, a baseball bat. Lay it on the ground and push it in a direction a tiny bit. It would appear that the other end moves in the same direction instantly. It does not. A slight delay exists, just on a scale that we cannot perceive through our own eyes alone. This minute scale of distance and time on a baseball bat, would become extremely obvious when put on the scale of several light years. When we push one end of the rod, there would be a severe delay in the other end moving. This is simply the way our universe works. Photons of light (as well as other particles such as gravitons) already contain no mass, therefore moving at maximum speed. It just doesn't get any faster. This of course ignores the fact that to make a rod spanning 5 light years in length would require more matter than exists in our solar system.
To whoever posted the clip from Event Horizon, that is all theoretical. It's theoretical in the sense that it is possible for every last bit of understanding we have developed through our amazing technology about how the universe operates, could theoretically be complete nonsense. After all Newton's equations for gravity existed and were accepted for centuries before Einstein came along.
Edited to remove the stupid smiley faces.
TL;DR No, you cannot transmit information (or anything else) faster than the speed of light.
Last edit: 11/04/2010 22:23
1
hubmaster United States. Apr 11 2010 22:35. Posts 586
On April 11 2010 21:15 yorcadon wrote:
I've been watching this thread since it started, and never once had a desire to post anything. In fact just now I went to create a login only to realize I actually already had one that I must have made years ago. It is distressing to see you all arguing about the "transmit information faster than light" argument. I hope I can put that to rest and we can get on with the rofls.
I'll start by saying that it IS NOT possible to do anything faster than the speed of light, as far as our currently available technology is concerned. Taken from what I remember of a particular text by a particular physicist; If we take our current spacetime position 4-vector x=(ct,(x1),(x2),(x3))=(ct,(x-> )) we can produce the velocity 4-vector u=dx/dT, where T is the proper time defined by dT^2=dt^2-c^-2(d(x1)^2+d(x2)^2+d(x3)^2). So the "speed through spacetime" is the magnitude of the 4-vector u, sqrt(((c^2dt^2-d(x-> )^2)/(dt^2-c^-2d(x-> )^2))) which is precisely the speed of light, c. If we rearrange the equation c^2(dt/dT)^2-(d(x-> )/dT)^2 = c^2 to be c^2(dT/dt)^2+(d(x-> )/dt)^2=c^2, this shows that an increase in an objects speed through space, sqrt((d(x-> )/dt)^2) must be equal to a decrease in it's speed through time, dT/dt.
What this shows is that the faster you travel through one of the three spacial dimensions, the slower you travel through the dimension of time. This sets a maximum speed limit, the speed of light. And in fact photons, the particles of light, do not age or travel through time, at all. Nor does the graviton, the particle that transmits gravity. This is because they travel through the spacial dimensions at maximum speed already, allowing no movement through time. This has been proven time and time again through experimental observation, again, to the best of our current technological capabilities. This alone is sufficient to disprove your 5-light-year length rod. Besides all the mathematical proof, the idea is stupid. Nothing exists that could be strong enough over that distance, but lets pretend that it is. The "message" to move in one direction, even a tiny amount, is still passed on from particle to particle, and this message, cannot ever be transmitted beyond the speed of light. Take a rod, or whatever, a baseball bat. Lay it on the ground and push it in a direction a tiny bit. It would appear that the other end moves in the same direction instantly. It does not. A slight delay exists, just on a scale that we cannot perceive through our own eyes alone. This minute scale of distance and time on a baseball bat, would become extremely obvious when put on the scale of several light years. When we push one end of the rod, there would be a severe delay in the other end moving. This is simply the way our universe works. Photons of light (as well as other particles such as gravitons) already contain no mass, therefore moving at maximum speed. It just doesn't get any faster. This of course ignores the fact that to make a rod spanning 5 light years in length would require more matter than exists in our solar system.
To whoever posted the clip from Event Horizon, that is all theoretical. It's theoretical in the sense that it is possible for every last bit of understanding we have developed through our amazing technology about how the universe operates, could theoretically be complete nonsense. After all Newton's equations for gravity existed and were accepted for centuries before Einstein came along.
Edited to remove the stupid smiley faces.
TL;DR No, you cannot transmit information (or anything else) faster than the speed of light.
Soooooo not ROFL
You ship me your monies, I ship you my gratitude.
1
Silver_nz New Zealand. Apr 11 2010 22:42. Posts 5647
1
Jas0n United States. Apr 12 2010 00:16. Posts 1866
LOL, that bear one is so awesome
0
woodbrave1 United States. Apr 12 2010 00:23. Posts 666
On April 11 2010 21:15 yorcadon wrote:
I've been watching this thread since it started, and never once had a desire to post anything. In fact just now I went to create a login only to realize I actually already had one that I must have made years ago. It is distressing to see you all arguing about the "transmit information faster than light" argument. I hope I can put that to rest and we can get on with the rofls.
I'll start by saying that it IS NOT possible to do anything faster than the speed of light, as far as our currently available technology is concerned. Taken from what I remember of a particular text by a particular physicist; If we take our current spacetime position 4-vector x=(ct,(x1),(x2),(x3))=(ct,(x-> )) we can produce the velocity 4-vector u=dx/dT, where T is the proper time defined by dT^2=dt^2-c^-2(d(x1)^2+d(x2)^2+d(x3)^2). So the "speed through spacetime" is the magnitude of the 4-vector u, sqrt(((c^2dt^2-d(x-> )^2)/(dt^2-c^-2d(x-> )^2))) which is precisely the speed of light, c. If we rearrange the equation c^2(dt/dT)^2-(d(x-> )/dT)^2 = c^2 to be c^2(dT/dt)^2+(d(x-> )/dt)^2=c^2, this shows that an increase in an objects speed through space, sqrt((d(x-> )/dt)^2) must be equal to a decrease in it's speed through time, dT/dt.
What this shows is that the faster you travel through one of the three spacial dimensions, the slower you travel through the dimension of time. This sets a maximum speed limit, the speed of light. And in fact photons, the particles of light, do not age or travel through time, at all. Nor does the graviton, the particle that transmits gravity. This is because they travel through the spacial dimensions at maximum speed already, allowing no movement through time. This has been proven time and time again through experimental observation, again, to the best of our current technological capabilities. This alone is sufficient to disprove your 5-light-year length rod. Besides all the mathematical proof, the idea is stupid. Nothing exists that could be strong enough over that distance, but lets pretend that it is. The "message" to move in one direction, even a tiny amount, is still passed on from particle to particle, and this message, cannot ever be transmitted beyond the speed of light. Take a rod, or whatever, a baseball bat. Lay it on the ground and push it in a direction a tiny bit. It would appear that the other end moves in the same direction instantly. It does not. A slight delay exists, just on a scale that we cannot perceive through our own eyes alone. This minute scale of distance and time on a baseball bat, would become extremely obvious when put on the scale of several light years. When we push one end of the rod, there would be a severe delay in the other end moving. This is simply the way our universe works. Photons of light (as well as other particles such as gravitons) already contain no mass, therefore moving at maximum speed. It just doesn't get any faster. This of course ignores the fact that to make a rod spanning 5 light years in length would require more matter than exists in our solar system.
To whoever posted the clip from Event Horizon, that is all theoretical. It's theoretical in the sense that it is possible for every last bit of understanding we have developed through our amazing technology about how the universe operates, could theoretically be complete nonsense. After all Newton's equations for gravity existed and were accepted for centuries before Einstein came along.
Edited to remove the stupid smiley faces.
TL;DR No, you cannot transmit information (or anything else) faster than the speed of light.
Soooooo not ROFL
No this actually made me LOL OWNAGE
Do not give in to evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it.
Contact Users: 189 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 23:48
Canada. Apr 11 2010 16:29. Posts 20070
