Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 1:47 pm
(October 21, 2015 at 10:00 am)robvalue Wrote: Fuck all this stuff. I can go as fast as I want.
Actually,
from our stay at home on earth perspective, your trip at 99.99whatever%C to the Andromeda Galaxy took you 2 million years.
- - -HOWEVER- - -
at your extremely high speed you age, let's say 40 years. So, from YOUR perspective (and after all, what is more valid than that??) you've traveled 2 million light years and you did it in 40 years, which means you did in fact travel at 50,000 times the speed of light.
Really.
Hope you were in the passing lane . . .
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
Posts: 869
Threads: 143
Joined: September 11, 2015
Reputation:
11
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 7:42 pm
(October 21, 2015 at 1:47 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: (October 21, 2015 at 10:00 am)robvalue Wrote: Fuck all this stuff. I can go as fast as I want.
Actually,
from our stay at home on earth perspective, your trip at 99.99whatever%C to the Andromeda Galaxy took you 2 million years.
- - -HOWEVER- - -
at your extremely high speed you age, let's say 40 years. So, from YOUR perspective (and after all, what is more valid than that??) you've traveled 2 million light years and you did it in 40 years, which means you did in fact travel at 50,000 times the speed of light.
Really.
Hope you were in the passing lane . . . Does his age even matter? He's still going at the same speed from our point of view and from his point of view, age is just the resulting factor of general relativity but his speed is still constant, is it not?
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 7:52 pm
From his perspective, realizing at launch Andromeda is 2 million light years away, and then arriving there 40 years later, he can do the math and calculate how fast he was going, and the number is 50,000X.
As for us pudgy stay at homes, we've seen multiple ice ages come and go, and probably forgot all about our wayward traveler pretty early on.
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
Posts: 869
Threads: 143
Joined: September 11, 2015
Reputation:
11
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 8:38 pm
(This post was last modified: October 21, 2015 at 8:52 pm by Heat.)
(October 21, 2015 at 7:52 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: From his perspective, realizing at launch Andromeda is 2 million light years away, and then arriving there 40 years later, he can do the math and calculate how fast he was going, and the number is 50,000X.
As for us pudgy stay at homes, we've seen multiple ice ages come and go, and probably forgot all about our wayward traveler pretty early on. Yeah but that does not mean that he was in fact going 50,000 times the speed of light during his trip that's just the illusion given because of our choice to accept general relativity.
It only appears to be 50,000X if we don't do the math, if we were(as in us observing him) we would still get the same conclusion that he got if we factored in the same events he experienced.
This might be a bad example, if it is, sorry, i barely understand this stuff as it is;
But say for example you saw a video of a baseball being thrown to a catchers glove, and then just as the ball leaves the pitchers hand, the ball suddenly goes 20 times faster while in air, and only after making contact with the catchers mitt everything seems normal speed again. Sure, it seems like it is going 20 times that speed to the viewer, and to the ball it will seem like it traveled the same amount of distance in the air in a much shorter time span, but if we factor in the fact that the video was sped up and deduct the speed that was added, we will come to the same conclusion of how fast the ball actually traveled in air as the ball would.
I'm not just arguing for the sake of arguing 
I just find all this stuff so fascinating. For the past year i've had my sights set on being an astronomer one day if possible. I can't accept that people can somehow not find space interesting. It's like saying you don't find anything interesting, because space by definition is everything. This doesn't really pertain to the response I gave you but i'll just post this anyway cause it's my favorite video of all time:
Posts: 4196
Threads: 60
Joined: September 8, 2011
Reputation:
30
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 9:21 pm
Just for sake of argument, let us say that we have the necessary material and technology to build a wormhole from point A to point B.
How long would it take the wormhole to form? It would have to be limited by c or violate causality.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
Posts: 869
Threads: 143
Joined: September 11, 2015
Reputation:
11
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 9:40 pm
(October 21, 2015 at 9:21 pm)IATIA Wrote: Just for sake of argument, let us say that we have the necessary material and technology to build a wormhole from point A to point B.
How long would it take the wormhole to form? It would have to be limited by c or violate causality. I don't know any of the math behind this, but could we even answer that considering we don't have any observable example to compare it to?
On second thought, maybe a reasonable answer would be that it depends what the technology is, that would determine how long it took? To give a more reasonable answer(even though I know you said you wanted us to assume we had the technology already for the sake of questioning) -
I'm sure that if we do end up developing the technology to "create" a worm hole, ignoring that this will be an exponentially long time from present date, I think it will be in a much much different/weird/creative way than we think. Anything that life changing that has been discovered in history was discovered in a totally bizarre and odd way that strayed from what the "normal" view was on how to accomplish it/even theories thought to be "close" in attempts to accomplish it. I don't think it will be thought up, or discovered, or whatever in the traditional sense. Maybe we discover it without the use of technology at all?[Even though that seems pretty implausible considering a society in the future will most likely be running on almost 100% technology], but that's the type of odd way I would expect, cliche, expect the unexpected  .
Posts: 3837
Threads: 197
Joined: August 28, 2013
Reputation:
38
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 10:37 pm
(October 20, 2015 at 2:43 pm)Alex K Wrote: (October 20, 2015 at 2:31 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: I see. What is negative energy exactly?
Well... It needs to be a material that lowers the energy content of the space it inhabits below that of the vacuum... Ordinary matter raises it by E=mc^2...
Now where can we get some of this shit?
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Posts: 8363
Threads: 40
Joined: March 18, 2014
Reputation:
54
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 11:14 pm
(October 21, 2015 at 10:00 am)robvalue Wrote: Fuck all this stuff. I can go as fast as I want.
Anyone read L. Ron Hubbard's "Mission Earth?" This is essentially what he proposed in that piss poor story.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 11:23 pm
(October 20, 2015 at 9:34 am)Alex K Wrote: Or better yet, Antiunobtanium!
That would be readilyobtainedium.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Travelling at the speed of light?[Question]
October 21, 2015 at 11:24 pm
(This post was last modified: October 21, 2015 at 11:25 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(October 21, 2015 at 10:37 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: (October 20, 2015 at 2:43 pm)Alex K Wrote: Well... It needs to be a material that lowers the energy content of the space it inhabits below that of the vacuum... Ordinary matter raises it by E=mc^2...
Now where can we get some of this shit?
Star Trek. You have to know very little, but just enough to really bullshit. Star Wars wouldn't enough even though the threshold is low.
|
