Posted: 24 Sep 2008 9:37 am
Page 48 of 172
Posted: 24 Sep 2008 11:45 am
also, wearing a red shirt is bad luck. You will surly die.David Doggett wrote:No, that's an alternate universe. Warp speed is many times faster than the speed of light. And there are no acceleration and deccelaration effects - people stand around without holding on to anything as their ship goes in and out of warp speed. Also, everyone in the universe speaks English. Pajamas are military fashion. And, named main characters never die, only unnamed temporary characters.Alan Brookes wrote:...and I thought all those years watching Star Trek were just for entertainment....You might say it's nothing like our universe.
Posted: 30 Sep 2008 3:00 pm
If you were traveling at light speed, and turned on your headlights, they'd shine just like they do when you appear to be sitting still...or at least, that's what the physicists say. (Did you expect the beams to pile up in front of you, like toilet paper?) The speed of light is a constant, it always travels at the same speed.
Of course, long ago, I asked my physics professor why they always specify that light's speed must be measured in a vacuum, and he said light moves faster in a vacuum.
Yeah. That's what I thought, too.
Of course, long ago, I asked my physics professor why they always specify that light's speed must be measured in a vacuum, and he said light moves faster in a vacuum.
Yeah. That's what I thought, too.
Posted: 30 Sep 2008 4:29 pm
When you turn your headlights on you don't actually see the light, you see the light reflected off what is in front of you. If your were travelling the same speed as the light, the light wouldn't have time to get ahead of you and bounce back.
As Donny pointed out, light travels less than the speed of light through other substances. They also say that electricity travels at the speed of light, but I'm told electricity travels slower than that through high resistance. Maybe the "speed of light" is the maximum speed of light. Then the "speed of car" should usually be in the 140 m.p.h. range. At that speed let's hope everyone sees your headlights, except the Highway Patrol.
As Donny pointed out, light travels less than the speed of light through other substances. They also say that electricity travels at the speed of light, but I'm told electricity travels slower than that through high resistance. Maybe the "speed of light" is the maximum speed of light. Then the "speed of car" should usually be in the 140 m.p.h. range. At that speed let's hope everyone sees your headlights, except the Highway Patrol.
Posted: 30 Sep 2008 6:21 pm
If you are going at speed of light X
and light travels at X
Then the light goes from your vehicle at X+X
relative to a stationary object of reference.
Since the STARTING speed of the SOURCE of light
as it originates is x
this speed is then ADDED to the X of light's velocity.
and light travels at X
Then the light goes from your vehicle at X+X
relative to a stationary object of reference.
Since the STARTING speed of the SOURCE of light
as it originates is x
this speed is then ADDED to the X of light's velocity.
Posted: 30 Sep 2008 9:22 pm
Um, I think Alan is right. The speed of light is a constant, and nothing can go faster. If you are traveling at the speed of light, you will keep up with the light from your headlights and it won't have a chance to get out ahead of you.
Posted: 30 Sep 2008 9:48 pm
But it has been said there are potentially faster things.
The speed may be constant once created,
but it's starting point velocity,
I think, needs to be considered also.
If I am moving past you at the speed of light,
I could be actualy comepletly still
and you are moving behind me at the speed of light.
If you turn on YOUR head lights, the light won't come back to me.
But if MY headlights go one,
the light will be going away from you at TWICE the speed of light.
The speed may be constant once created,
but it's starting point velocity,
I think, needs to be considered also.
If I am moving past you at the speed of light,
I could be actualy comepletly still
and you are moving behind me at the speed of light.
If you turn on YOUR head lights, the light won't come back to me.
But if MY headlights go one,
the light will be going away from you at TWICE the speed of light.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 1:42 am
David Doggett wrote:If you are traveling at the speed of light, you will keep up with the light from your headlights and it won't have a chance to get out ahead of you.
So remember to turn on your car lights before you reach the speed of light.David L. Donald wrote:The speed may be constant once created, but it's starting point velocity,
I think, needs to be considered also.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 6:35 am
What is the speed of dark?
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 7:02 am
There is no speed faster than the speed of light. Light travels at that speed because it's the fastest nature allows light to travel. We shouldn't really refer to it as the speed of light, but rather as the maximum natural speed.
But we must remember that nothing in the universe is standing still. The Earth is turning, and orbiting the Sun, the Sun is orbiting the center of our Galaxy, and our Galaxy is moving through space. On top of that, space itself is still expanding. All these motions have to be subtracted, as relative motion, before calculating the maximum velocity (as opposed to speed). So, if we are travelling at 50,000 mph in a particular direction relative to absolute standstill, we have to subtract that from the speed of light to come up with the maximum possible speed in that direction.
By the way, the idea of switching on one's headlights at the speed of light has to consider the vehicle's shape. If the headlights are projecting forward, no light will escape from the headlights because they can't exceed the speed of the car, and the car obscures the view for those travelling behind.
But we must remember that nothing in the universe is standing still. The Earth is turning, and orbiting the Sun, the Sun is orbiting the center of our Galaxy, and our Galaxy is moving through space. On top of that, space itself is still expanding. All these motions have to be subtracted, as relative motion, before calculating the maximum velocity (as opposed to speed). So, if we are travelling at 50,000 mph in a particular direction relative to absolute standstill, we have to subtract that from the speed of light to come up with the maximum possible speed in that direction.
By the way, the idea of switching on one's headlights at the speed of light has to consider the vehicle's shape. If the headlights are projecting forward, no light will escape from the headlights because they can't exceed the speed of the car, and the car obscures the view for those travelling behind.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 7:06 am
No. Instead of thinking about light, which travels so fast it's difficult to imagine, think about water squirting from your headlights. If you go faster than the water is squirting, the water's speed will not be added to the car, the car will be pushing the water out of the way, or the water will build up at the front of the car.David L. Donald wrote:If you are going at speed of light X
and light travels at X
Then the light goes from your vehicle at X+X
relative to a stationary object of reference.....
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 7:36 am
Dude... you've never tried Charlie Carter's pills...Alan Brookes wrote:maximum natural speed.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 7:44 am
Only if there is a friction or such to slow it more.
If two particles going at the speed of light collide
they believe that the collision can make particles going faster than either. Part of CERN's studies.
If that is the case, then it's not unreasonable
to think this happens in nature.
If two particles going at the speed of light collide
they believe that the collision can make particles going faster than either. Part of CERN's studies.
If that is the case, then it's not unreasonable
to think this happens in nature.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 8:01 am
"Nothing from nothing leaves nothing...."
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 8:20 am
Nothing happens in a vacuum!
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 8:41 am
You've never had a drunk all nighter, have you?David L. Donald wrote:Nothing happens in a vacuum!
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 9:33 am
Sober as a judge!
But I AM in Thailand,
so I can be bought!
Well at least hired!
Well when Sasha was here last month we did get pretty
face down drunk on around 200 bottles of Singha beer
and 4, fifths of polish vodka between the 12 of us...
It was russian night at my friends Jamaican barbeque joint.
http://www.sashapivovarova.com/home.html
But I AM in Thailand,
so I can be bought!
Well at least hired!
Well when Sasha was here last month we did get pretty
face down drunk on around 200 bottles of Singha beer
and 4, fifths of polish vodka between the 12 of us...
It was russian night at my friends Jamaican barbeque joint.
http://www.sashapivovarova.com/home.html
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 1:47 pm
test
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 2:16 pm
It seems b0b is trying to tell us nothing. 
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 3:07 pm
He keeps checking this thread to see if it is still going, and always finds nothing.
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 3:15 pm
I think it should be closed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
NOTHING going on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
farris
NOTHING going on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
farris
Posted: 1 Oct 2008 4:09 pm
Fazz, ya old git, for once I agree with you.
You should be making the most of your recently bestowed knighthood. Queenie, Donna, has given you a title which is richly(squms) deserved. Give up your 'shine business and join the realish world.
Get yourself a bar gain, folks, by purchasing cheap booze from this Elliot Mess clone.
Arch.
You should be making the most of your recently bestowed knighthood. Queenie, Donna, has given you a title which is richly(squms) deserved. Give up your 'shine business and join the realish world.
Get yourself a bar gain, folks, by purchasing cheap booze from this Elliot Mess clone.
Arch.
Posted: 2 Oct 2008 6:43 am
No, No, No. There's nothing to close....Farris Currie wrote:I think it should be closed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
Nothing is going on here, but nothing ever was.
There's the same amount going on here now as when the subject was brought up.
NOTHING.
Posted: 2 Oct 2008 6:46 am
The Queen is giving knighthoods for playing the steel guitar ?!?!?!?!?!Archie Nicol wrote:Fazz, ya old git, for once I agree with you.
You should be making the most of your recently bestowed knighthood. Queenie, Donna, has given you a title which is richly(squms) deserved. Give up your 'shine business and join the realish world.
Get yourself a bar gain, folks, by purchasing cheap booze from this Elliot Mess clone.
Arch.
Posted: 2 Oct 2008 7:55 am
Consistancy is the hobgoblin of little minds.
But nothing leaves us content.
But nothing leaves us content.