I might not understand physics and sh*t, but I still say if we managed to create a vehicle that can travel at 99.9999999% the speed of light with a human on board, get it up to max speed, then the guy gets up and runs from the back of the ship to the front, he would be breaking light speed.
Yet, you would be wrong.
inertial frames motherf**ker
Take this troll to /sci/. The speed of light can be broken, yes.
No matter how fast you go, the speed of light will always be a constant from your point of reference. It seems counter-intuitive but that's how sh*t goes down.
derp velocity is relative
Dear OP,
That's not how it works. You can't add those velocities. Feel free to design and build a space ship which can travel at .99c and prove math wrong.
Nope. He would slow the vehicle down to the point that he would be going 99.999999999% the speed of light.
George Kollias's feet have already broken the speed of light man
Dear OP,
That's not how it works. You can't add those velocities. Feel free to design and build a space ship which can travel at .99c and prove math wrong.
Nope. He would slow the vehicle down to the point that he would be going 99.999999999% the speed of light.
No he wouldn't god damnit f**k your math if the ships going that fast hypothetically and he's on it, gets up, and runs forward, HE'S MOVING FASTER THAN THE SHIP.
No he wouldn't god damnit f**k your math if the ships going that fast hypothetically and he's on it, gets up, and runs forward, HE'S MOVING FASTER THAN THE SHIP.
>f**k your math
Yes, of course. An idiot with no idea how physics works somehow outsmarts the system with "f**k your math". Someone get a Nobel Prize in here for this man.
Herp a derp.
V=velocity
Vc with respect to a =/= Vc with respect to B+Vb with respect to a
Vc with respect to a == (Vc with respect to B+Vb with respect to a)/reduction factor
reduction factor=1 + (Velocity of A with respect to B/c)x(Velocity of B with respect to C/c)
you're right, OP. You dont understand physics at all.
Your vehicle would have the mass of a party of elephants eating spaceships.
Can someone calculate 0.0000001% of c?
I'm pretty sure it's faster than a human can run
No he wouldn't god damnit f**k your math if the ships going that fast hypothetically and he's on it, gets up, and runs forward, HE'S MOVING FASTER THAN THE SHIP.
Yeah, you're right, you have just invalidated 3 years of university for me with a post on web.
You have unwound all of modern physics with "a dude on a spaceship, running".
Make a gauss gun that shoots other gauss guns in an endless cycle until you reach light speed.
Can someone calculate 0.0000001% of c?
I'm pretty sure it's faster than a human can run
0.3 m/s. Maybe faster than you can run.
0.3 m/s. Maybe faster than you can run.
QUICK DO A MILE IN UNDER 4 SECONDS GO
Wouldn't work. As you approach the speed of light, time slows down for you, so to an outside observer you would just be going a little closer to the speed of light without ever actually getting there. If you travel at the speed of light, time stops for you, making it impossible for you to get up from the frame of reference of someone outside. Rather neat how that works out, I think.
0.3 m/s. Maybe faster than you can run.
I can roll that fast though.
When you travel at really high speeds (close to c), you can't simply add the speeds like you do in Newton's physics.
Let's say you're on the ship which travels 1 km/h less than the speed of light. You leap 2 km/h forward. People on the ship would see you travel 2 km/h forward. Other observers (who stand still, not on the ship), would see you jumping 0.00000000000001 km/h.
e=mc^2
He wouldn't break the speed of light he'd just gain mass
Obvious troll, you f**s always fall for this sh*t.
F**KING SPECIAL RELATIVITY, OP, LEARN IT.
Also, magnets
You're trolling in the wrong board sir.
/sci/ is that way --->
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
What would make you think the signal was transmitted faster than the speed of light?
What would make you think the signal was transmitted faster than the speed of light?
To add on, the most obvious answer is that you would not be able to push with enough force to push the ball on the other end out.
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
Nice old as the internet image translated into text.
What would make you think the signal was transmitted faster than the speed of light?
i was wondering if the ball out the other end would come out instantaneously or not.
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
Yes. This is how the flow of electrons creates electicity. Which, as the old adage (rightly, though misleadingly) goes, "Travels at the speed of light".
Yes. This is how the flow of electrons creates electicity. Which, as the old adage (rightly, though misleadingly) goes, "Travels at the speed of light".
thats what gave me the idea, although if i had used electrons someone wout have said hurr durr resistance of the wire
Yes. This is how the flow of electrons creates electicity. Which, as the old adage (rightly, though misleadingly) goes, "Travels at the speed of light".
Holy crap there is so much wrong with this post it makes negative sense.
I think a less trollsy question would be to ask "If I flew in an airplane going 99.9% the speed of sound and then ran to the front, would I create a sonic boom?"
And the answer would still be "No".
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
Yes but no actual ball would travel at the speed of light, the balls themselves would travel very very slowly.
thats what gave me the idea, although if i had used electrons someone wout have said hurr durr resistance of the wire
i was wondering if the ball out the other end would come out instantaneously or not.
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
Oh btw im pretty sure it wouldnt travel faster than the speed of light by i just cant figure out why.
thats what gave me the idea, although if i had used electrons someone wout have said hurr durr resistance of the wire
Hurr Durr Friction
But wouldn't 99.9999999%... be 1?
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
No, the energy transfered through the balls moves at the speed of sound of the material the balls are made out of.
Hurr Durr Friction
derpy didlly derpy derp
Oh btw im pretty sure it wouldnt travel faster than the speed of light by i just cant figure out why.
Also, it isn't even moving in that sense. Really, each of the balls is moving a certain distance (Diameter of the ball) in a certain time (However long it takes to push) which isnt even going to be close to the speed of light.
Same for however small you make the rod
You need infinite energy to travel C.
Also, it isn't even moving in that sense. Really, each of the balls is moving a certain distance (Diameter of the ball) in a certain time (However long it takes to push) which isnt even going to be close to the speed of light.
Same for however small you make the rod
By "that sense" I mean, it isn't like one ball is moving all the way through the tube to get to the other side, like light would be
Also, it isn't even moving in that sense. Really, each of the balls is moving a certain distance (Diameter of the ball) in a certain time (However long it takes to push) which isnt even going to be close to the speed of light.
Same for however small you make the rod
but the distance each ball moves is irrelevant, the point is that if you push one end, the balls move together simultaneously. so the ball at the other end would move out of the tube....like a signal of sorts
so over a light year, the ball would move out of the tube faster than light could get from one end of it to the other.
I might not understand physics and sh*t, but I still say if we managed to create a vehicle that can travel at 99.9999999% the speed of light with a human on board, get it up to max speed, then the guy gets up and runs from the back of the ship to the front, he would be breaking light speed.
Speed of light is relative to your speed. It is moving at the speed of light faster than whatever you are.
Its essentially infinitely faster than anything else.
but the distance each ball moves is irrelevant, the point is that if you push one end, the balls move together simultaneously. so the ball at the other end would move out of the tube....like a signal of sorts
so over a light year, the ball would move out of the tube faster than light could get from one end of it to the other.
>if you push one end, the balls move together simultaneously
No.
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
My head is full of f**k.
f**khead
>if you push one end, the balls move together simultaneously
No.
ok, lets take it to be an incompressible material with no space between each ball, what now?
but the distance each ball moves is irrelevant, the point is that if you push one end, the balls move together simultaneously. so the ball at the other end would move out of the tube....like a signal of sorts
so over a light year, the ball would move out of the tube faster than light could get from one end of it to the other.
Imagine if you had a massive rod, one light year long, and you pushed it. At the same time you "fired" some light at the same place, which one would get there first?
The rod (Provided you had enough energy). Does that mean that it is traveling faster than light? I don't think so.
ok, lets take it to be an incompressible material with no space between each ball, what now?
actually, even better, one single piece of incompressible matter a light year long (inb4 matter's grav properties and other forces)
start pushing it somehow, does the other side start moving straight away?
actually, even better, one single piece of incompressible matter a light year long (inb4 matter's grav properties and other forces)
start pushing it somehow, does the other side start moving straight away?
Lawl, learn2 refresh
Imagine if you had a massive rod, one light year long, and you pushed it. At the same time you "fired" some light at the same place, which one would get there first?
The rod (Provided you had enough energy). Does that mean that it is traveling faster than light? I don't think so.
I'm no expert, but wouldn't the rod have to be perfectly rigid for that to happen? Does such a material exist?
Imagine if you had a massive rod, one light year long, and you pushed it. At the same time you "fired" some light at the same place, which one would get there first?
The rod (Provided you had enough energy). Does that mean that it is traveling faster than light? I don't think so.
IM NOT SAYING THE ENTIRE THING IS MOVING FASTER THAN LIGHT.GODDOMOT
actually, even better, one single piece of incompressible matter a light year long (inb4 matter's grav properties and other forces)
start pushing it somehow, does the other side start moving straight away?
You can't apply the laws of physics to materials that you explicitly state do not obey the laws of physics. It's like asking what the circumference of a square circle would be.
You can't apply the laws of physics to materials that you explicitly state do not obey the laws of physics. It's like asking what the circumference of a square circle would be.
Its 4xpi you idiot.
IM NOT SAYING THE ENTIRE THING IS MOVING FASTER THAN LIGHT.GODDOMOT
see
one thing ive always wondered is this:
lets say you had a massive tube fulled with touching balls(inb4 gay) in single file.
you push a ball in one end and at the other end one falls out.
now lets make this bigger:
you have a tube a light year in length fulled with these balls and you put one in one end. does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
Ive never found an answer for this.
pic related
>does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
>does the signal get transmitted faster than light?
>faster than light?
9999999
0.0000001% of lightspeed is about 107 kilometers per hour. Your astronaut would have to run 107 kilometers an hour (about 70 miles an hour).
probably 0.000000001% of light speed is way above 15km/h
see
>does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
>does the signal get transmitted faster than light?
>faster than light?
>paraphrasing out of context
nice job :D
see
>does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
>does the signal get transmitted faster than light?
>faster than light?
Umm
>does the signal (the ball falling out the other end) get transmitted faster than light?
>does the signal get transmitted faster than light?
> signal
Bet you feel stupid now right?
You can't apply the laws of physics to materials that you explicitly state do not obey the laws of physics. It's like asking what the circumference of a square circle would be.
um, i study engineering, we do it all the time
also see an ideal gas.
I think a less trollsy question would be to ask "If I flew in an airplane going 99.9% the speed of sound and then ran to the front, would I create a sonic boom?"
And the answer would still be "No".
You don't create a sonic boom in that situation because you're inside the plane, away from what creates a sonic boom. The air pressure.
The right question would be "Are you moving at faster than sound speed?"
Lets scale it down a bit.
If you were in an environment without air resistance, on top of a plane going at 100km/h, and you started running at 7km/h, how fast would you be going?
Relative to the earth that is.
Lets scale it down a bit.
If you were in an environment without air resistance, on top of a plane going at 100km/h, and you started running at 7km/h, how fast would you be going?
Relative to the earth that is.
>relative to the earth
f**k off with this f**k. it's 107 km/h.
FORCHAN SOLV ALL WOLD MYSTERIES!
>relative to the earth
f**k off with this f**k. it's 107 km/h.
AHA, BUT YOU SEE, IF IT WAS IN SPACE, WHO KNOWS?
um, i study engineering, we do it all the time
also see an ideal gas.
I know, I'm a physics student. Ideal gas is a simplification of a complex model. You did something else.
AHA, BUT YOU SEE, IF IT WAS IN SPACE, WHO KNOWS?
it's not in space.
The problem with your belief, OP, is you are not approaching the problem with the correct theory. In newtonian physics, yes, you would be right.
But newtonian physics isn't precisely how reality works, it's just a good model for present day practical applications.
At such high speeds, more and more of the energy added to the entity gets converted to added mass instead of acceleration, and this happens on a logarithmic scale. So as you approach the speed of light, the energy requirements for the additional acceleration necessary asymptotically reach infinity (as does the mass of the entity correspondingly).
Thus, it is impossible unless you can expend an infinite ammount of energy in accelerating the object.
Lets scale it down a bit.
If you were in an environment without air resistance, on top of a plane going at 100km/h, and you started running at 7km/h, how fast would you be going?
Relative to the earth that is.
Depends on the vector of the plane, person and earth.
The problem with your belief, OP, is you are not approaching the problem with the correct theory. In newtonian physics, yes, you would be right.
But newtonian physics isn't precisely how reality works, it's just a good model for present day practical applications.
At such high speeds, more and more of the energy added to the entity gets converted to added mass instead of acceleration, and this happens on a logarithmic scale. So as you approach the speed of light, the energy requirements for the additional acceleration necessary asymptotically reach infinity (as does the mass of the entity correspondingly).
Thus, it is impossible unless you can expend an infinite ammount of energy in accelerating the object.
There are particles that move faster than the speed of light.
ITT: f**s and trolls
when trolls = f**s (and they always do)
then ITT = f**s + f**s
hence ITT = 2 f**s
there are only 2 f**s in this thread samef**ging
Depends on the vector of the plane, person and earth.
God damnit no it doesn't. It doesn't matter which way they're going, the velocity is the same.
In relation to the plane he's traveling 7km/h. in relation to the earth, if he's sitting still on the plane, he's traveling at 100km/h.
If he gets up and runs 7 km/h faster than he's going now, that's 107km/h total.
There are particles that move faster than the speed of light.
No, there aren't. Tachyons are made up. Watch less Star Trek.
No, there aren't. Tachyons are made up. Watch less Star Trek.
QUARKS FOOLISH ONE
God damnit no it doesn't. It doesn't matter which way they're going, the velocity is the same.
In relation to the plane he's traveling 7km/h. in relation to the earth, if he's sitting still on the plane, he's traveling at 100km/h.
If he gets up and runs 7 km/h faster than he's going now, that's 107km/h total.
If he was running at 107km/h, he'd propel himself off the plane and go flying forward into the sky. This is not how relative velocities work. Or anything.
jesus christ, this entire thread is full of idiots.
God damnit no it doesn't. It doesn't matter which way they're going, the velocity is the same.
In relation to the plane he's traveling 7km/h. in relation to the earth, if he's sitting still on the plane, he's traveling at 100km/h.
If he gets up and runs 7 km/h faster than he's going now, that's 107km/h total.
>doesnt matter which direction they are goin in
>velocity is the same
>Doesn't know velocity is a vector quantity
If he was running at 107km/h, he'd propel himself off the plane and go flying forward into the sky. This is not how relative velocities work. Or anything.
in relation to the earth he's moving at 107. Go to hell.
QUARKS FOOLISH ONE
Quarks don't travel faster than c you retard.
in relation to the earth he's moving at 107. Go to hell.
No this is not how math works I am sorry.
God damnit no it doesn't. It doesn't matter which way they're going, the velocity is the same.
In relation to the plane he's traveling 7km/h. in relation to the earth, if he's sitting still on the plane, he's traveling at 100km/h.
If he gets up and runs 7 km/h faster than he's going now, that's 107km/h total.
youre and idiot. velocity is entirely based on direction
ITT: f**s and trolls
when trolls = f**s (and they always do)
then ITT = f**s + f**s
hence ITT = 2 f**s
there are only 2 f**s in this thread samef**ging
this is a very very nice post
No, there aren't. Tachyons are made up. Watch less Star Trek.
L2relativity.
Tachyons are mad whack yo.
L2relativity.
Tachyons are mad whack yo.
I know relativity, herp derp physics student. They're a though experiment, nothing more. No evidence for them has been found, as of yet at least. No model really needs them.
What happens when you break the sound light barrier anyway? durr
What happens when you break the sound light barrier anyway? durr
it makes a light sound lolololol!
youre and idiot. velocity is entirely based on direction
Whatever, speed then. If something is moving in a direction, and something that is inside that object uses it's own force to move ahead in the same direction their vehicle is already traveling, then they are moving at the speed of the vehicle + the speed of their own propulsion.
What happens when you break the sound light barrier anyway? durr
>>sound light barrier
god dammit, stop being an idiot
I might not understand physics and sh*t, but I still say if we managed to create a vehicle that can travel at 99.9999999% the speed of light with a human on board, get it up to max speed, then the guy gets up and runs from the back of the ship to the front, he would be breaking light speed.
Before this was possible we'd have to develop a form of simulated gravity, as I don't think it would be possible on Earth.
No comments:
Post a Comment