Topic: If you are travelling in a ship going at the speed of light..
Green started this discussion 11 years ago #39,262
and you fire a gun from the very front of the ship, will the bullet be travelling faster than the speed of light? Will the bullet travel back in time and hit you in the head before you fired it?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #522,247
It's a fallacy to assume matter can travel at the speed of light.
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #522,250
Anonymous B replied with this 11 years ago, 36 seconds later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #522,251
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 32 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #522,253
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #522,254
No, because nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. The bullet would simply remain there.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 31 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #522,260
Not a physicist, but objects with mass can't travel at the speed of light. Also I remember reading once on the internet (so you know it's true) how to solve this kind of equation here. The tl;dr is finding the velocity of a projectile is never simply adding the velocity of A plus the velocity of B, but for all speeds not near the speed of light, the difference is so miniscule it isn't worth the hassle.
(Edited 3 hours later.)
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,272
The bullet would travel at the same speed that it would normally be despite if you were traveling at the speed of light
Anonymous B replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,284
Meta joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,285
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 10 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,290
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,315
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 53 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,317
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,322
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,324
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,328
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 51 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,329
@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
Sorry. When I drink this much wine, I get a little too honest. Don't worry about it.
Sorry. When I drink this much wine, I get a little too honest. Don't worry about it.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,331
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,334
DasSheeple joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 18 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,348
I once travelled at the speed of light and tried to pee in the direction of travel. Ended up with kidney damage because I couldn't pee what ended up to be hours and hours... my conclusion was that nothing can travel faster than light...
Also, the machine I used to fly so fast was invented by syntax.
Also, the machine I used to fly so fast was invented by syntax.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,349
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 29 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,351
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 53 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,353
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,354
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,356
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 36 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,358
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 47 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,361
@522,284 (B)
> retarded
>
ah yeah its totally retarded actually thinking about the physics behind it and providing a logical answer, suck my dick shit idiot
> retarded
>
ah yeah its totally retarded actually thinking about the physics behind it and providing a logical answer, suck my dick shit idiot
Syntax joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 38 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,387
@522,349 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)> Well of course. Syntax is the gratest inventor of all time.
Wot? One Invention Becky needs is more better wine.
As to speed of light and can such be exceeded?
A Paper published Oct 3 2012 Journal Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences.
> Scientists said the theory actually lends itself easily to a description of velocities that exceed the speed of light.
Scientists Hill and Cox have extended the theory to accommodate
> an infinite relative velocity.
Given Infinity is greater then the static Physics value of the speed of light...One really needs to read the Journal article
And
> Its "a natural extension of Einstein's equations"
Also Einstein equations as a lot of current math end up not as valid or even useful in Quantum Mechanics. Math for String theory may prove the speed of light is not a limit in the Quantum world.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 5 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,548
@OP
It would not be possible to fire the gun, because of the time-dilation factor. At precisely the speed of light, all time ceases, meaning that you, the gun, and the bullet would all be frozen. This is why photons and other particles containing no intrinsic mass can cross the entire universe - a journey which from our viewpoint takes billions of years is only a spit-second for a beam of light.
It would not be possible to fire the gun, because of the time-dilation factor. At precisely the speed of light, all time ceases, meaning that you, the gun, and the bullet would all be frozen. This is why photons and other particles containing no intrinsic mass can cross the entire universe - a journey which from our viewpoint takes billions of years is only a spit-second for a beam of light.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 52 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,552
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 20 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,558
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,568
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Although I wonder, if an object could reach the speed of light and thus exists in a plane outside of time, does it cease to exist altogether?
Although I wonder, if an object could reach the speed of light and thus exists in a plane outside of time, does it cease to exist altogether?
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,570
Anonymous M replied with this 11 years ago, 3 hours later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,609
@522,568 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
It would lose at least one spacial dimension, which would for all intents and purposes end its existence within a three dimensional universe.
It would lose at least one spacial dimension, which would for all intents and purposes end its existence within a three dimensional universe.
Anonymous D replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,610
Owen Delong just drove a ship going the speed of light past my space station.
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #522,611
@522,609 (M)> It would lose at least one spacial dimension, which would for all intents and purposes end its existence within a three dimensional universe.
Currently in Quantum theory Strings - Superstrings - Ghosts - far more dimensions then 3. Currently 11 dimensions has more Science people on its side with 26 spacetime dimensions that hold up the 11 dimension theory. Currently the math is still most difficult to follow but I am Slowly plugging my way through
spacetime to have eleven dimensions
@522,568 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
> Although I wonder, if an object could reach the speed of light and thus exists in a plane outside of time, does it cease to exist altogether?
One wonders if instead of cease to exist altogether it as that Atom - can exist in two places at same time. Only because its not a finite object but instead its a string.
@522,552 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
> Right, which is why it is not possible to travel backwards in time.
Steven Hawkings agrees with this
> Hawking says, because it "violates a fundamental rule that cause comes before effect."
> If moving backwards through time was possible, a person could shoot their former selves.
> “I believe things cannot make themselves impossible,” Hawking said.
(Edited 55 seconds later.)
squeegee joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 19 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #522,790
@previous (Syntax)
it's not really a string, though. it's basically the "edge" of an object. so like if you bisect an apple with a 2d plane and pass the apple through it the shape the plane "sees" is just a continuous loop of varrying shape. now pass other 3d shapes through this 2d plane and depending on the complexity of the shape the "loop" that is seen might change from large to small very quickly, it might appear to vibrate and move around, it might even split into more than one loop and recombine in ways that may not make any sense to a 2d lofeform living in a 2d world.
likewise it is the same in our world, except the 3d "trisection" of a larger 4d object appears to us as matter and at a fundamental level we see "strings that are open or closed."
so basically what the universe is, is an object of higher dimension that we experience "edge on." it would be an incredibly complicated shape as well, and it is rotating faster than anything imaginable.
we are all part of that shape, too, interestingly enough, which means even though we experience only 4 dimensions we actually exist as higher dimensional beings.
it's not really a string, though. it's basically the "edge" of an object. so like if you bisect an apple with a 2d plane and pass the apple through it the shape the plane "sees" is just a continuous loop of varrying shape. now pass other 3d shapes through this 2d plane and depending on the complexity of the shape the "loop" that is seen might change from large to small very quickly, it might appear to vibrate and move around, it might even split into more than one loop and recombine in ways that may not make any sense to a 2d lofeform living in a 2d world.
likewise it is the same in our world, except the 3d "trisection" of a larger 4d object appears to us as matter and at a fundamental level we see "strings that are open or closed."
so basically what the universe is, is an object of higher dimension that we experience "edge on." it would be an incredibly complicated shape as well, and it is rotating faster than anything imaginable.
we are all part of that shape, too, interestingly enough, which means even though we experience only 4 dimensions we actually exist as higher dimensional beings.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #522,804
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #522,863
@522,790 (squeegee)
A Quick reminder. One need not even consider the 2D vs 3D case. In the Quantum world with yes larger items such as Atoms - Their is already a Nobel prize for the proof that a single Atom can exist in two places at the same time.
And for proofs of string theory this is really worth a read n its a fast read
http://phys.org/news/2014-01-scientists-theory.html
But I disagree with you and agree - Strings R and the agree is your example of how wot we see depends on how it is viewed which is again covered by what I put in border text
A Quick reminder. One need not even consider the 2D vs 3D case. In the Quantum world with yes larger items such as Atoms - Their is already a Nobel prize for the proof that a single Atom can exist in two places at the same time.
In the quantum world discovered by Niels Bohr, Erwin Schroedinger and other giants of early 20th-century physics, tiny objects such as electrons can be in two places at once, and can behave as a particle one moment and as a wave the next, depending on how an observer tries to measure it.
In other words, the mere act of observation determines which form they take and even what reality is.
In other words, the mere act of observation determines which form they take and even what reality is.
And for proofs of string theory this is really worth a read n its a fast read
http://phys.org/news/2014-01-scientists-theory.html
But I disagree with you and agree - Strings R and the agree is your example of how wot we see depends on how it is viewed which is again covered by what I put in border text
The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 day later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,330
@522,548 (M)
> It would not be possible to fire the gun, because of the time-dilation factor. At precisely the speed of light, all time ceases, meaning that you, the gun, and the bullet would all be frozen.
Not from your frame of reference though, you'd only be frozen to an outside observer
The gun firer would just see the bullet fire off like a normal bullet
(einstein asked a similar question to this before special relativity and the paradoxical answer was what led him to the conclusion its impossible for an object with mass to travel at c)
> It would not be possible to fire the gun, because of the time-dilation factor. At precisely the speed of light, all time ceases, meaning that you, the gun, and the bullet would all be frozen.
Not from your frame of reference though, you'd only be frozen to an outside observer
The gun firer would just see the bullet fire off like a normal bullet
(einstein asked a similar question to this before special relativity and the paradoxical answer was what led him to the conclusion its impossible for an object with mass to travel at c)
Anonymous M replied with this 11 years ago, 8 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,472
@previous (The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo)
Not sure about that. The bullet wouldn't be able to go anywhere, as it would've gained infinite mass, and the gun doesn't have an infinite energy source to propel it. For that matter: you, the firearm, and the space ship itself would all have gained infinite mass, which leads us back to the inevitable paradox.
Not sure about that. The bullet wouldn't be able to go anywhere, as it would've gained infinite mass, and the gun doesn't have an infinite energy source to propel it. For that matter: you, the firearm, and the space ship itself would all have gained infinite mass, which leads us back to the inevitable paradox.
The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo replied with this 11 years ago, 27 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,479
@previous (M)
thus the conclusion to the thought experiment is that it is impossible for the ship to be in that situation in the first place
better question would be for a ship at near light speeds firing a laser
thus the conclusion to the thought experiment is that it is impossible for the ship to be in that situation in the first place
better question would be for a ship at near light speeds firing a laser
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,481
@previous (The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo)
Since light speed is a constant, I believe the laser light would move at the same speed as any other light in the area.
Since light speed is a constant, I believe the laser light would move at the same speed as any other light in the area.
The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo replied with this 11 years ago, 46 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,482
@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
not if you're inside the moving ship! (at least it would look that way)
not if you're inside the moving ship! (at least it would look that way)
(Edited 11 seconds later.)
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,483
@previous (The Owl !xi8/JKFwzo)
Since light has no mass, the ship cannot impart any momentum when firing the laser, it is simply a source.
Oh, you meant perspective. That does make things a bit stickier...
Since light has no mass, the ship cannot impart any momentum when firing the laser, it is simply a source.
Oh, you meant perspective. That does make things a bit stickier...
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,488
@OP
...then I geniunely pity you.
...then I geniunely pity you.
Syntax replied with this 11 years ago, 3 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #523,523
@523,483 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
> Since light has no mass, the ship cannot impart any momentum when firing the laser, it is simply a source.
>
Damn am I glad someone wrote this one up that is clear enough because I wood have made a mess of it trying to explain
http://www.desy.de/user/projects/Physics/Relativity/SR/light_mass.html
I pay a lot of attention to this because if you read the short article you will see the light trapped in a mirrored box discussion. I have a patent application in process that uses the box idea for something unique and it depends on the light producing a pressure on the mirrors. Very small but very useful.
> Since light has no mass, the ship cannot impart any momentum when firing the laser, it is simply a source.
>
Damn am I glad someone wrote this one up that is clear enough because I wood have made a mess of it trying to explain
Does light have mass?
The short answer is "no", but it is a qualified "no" because there are odd ways of interpreting the question which could justify the answer "yes".
The short answer is "no", but it is a qualified "no" because there are odd ways of interpreting the question which could justify the answer "yes".
http://www.desy.de/user/projects/Physics/Relativity/SR/light_mass.html
I pay a lot of attention to this because if you read the short article you will see the light trapped in a mirrored box discussion. I have a patent application in process that uses the box idea for something unique and it depends on the light producing a pressure on the mirrors. Very small but very useful.
