Physics

Al Bundy - anyone can write a book about anything. Just because you read it in a book doesn't mean that relativity is false. I have read similarly ludicrous "proof" that evolution is false. So far it has met the test of peer review and experimental observation. The speed of light has been measured thousands of times to an extremely high degree of accuracy and has *NEVER* been found to disagree with relativity. That said, relativity doesn't apply in all cases, ie to the very small - quantum mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by homerj31:
I do not believe science is right https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif
I took a history of science class and it makes you think about everything that we "known"

I just like the fact that "science" defines light in two ways to conform to popular theories.
What is it? waves? or packets?
What kind of light are talking about

---

You should have also learned in your science class that the "WAY" we go about doing science is fundamentally different now from the "WAY" science was conducted 500 years ago. In fact, it is not at all incorrect to say that science really didn't exist more than 500 years ago.

I'm speaking of course of the scientific method. People like Aristotle, while smart, did not use the scientific method and because of that their answers were quite often waaaay wrong.

Aristotle belived that all problems could be figured out through pure thought (as opposed to observation and experimentation). I read that once he postulated that a fly should have 4 legs like a table since that is all it needs to stand. It never even occurrred to him to look at a fly to see for sure.

Science was also hindered by religion (and still is in many ways).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by elimc:
I would say yes because when you traveled the speed of light to a planet and came back, you would be the same age as when you left. I believe that this is known as the twins paradox.

Edit
Except when you came back everyone you knew would be dead.

---

The "Paradox" of this is not the fact that one has aged. The paradox arises because Einstein (he came up with the Paradox :P) thought of it in two ways. From the point of view of the twin on Earth watching the spaceship go away, the spaceship would be travelling away at the speed of light (or close to)... so time would progress normally for the twin on Earth. So, when the spaceship comes back, the twin on the spaceship should be significantly younger than the twin on Earth.

However, Einstein also thought: what if the spacecraft was maintaining a constant velocity? Wouldn't that mean, from the point of view of the twin on the ship, that it was indeed the Earth that was travelling away from the ship at the speed of light (or close to)? Then, time should theoretically pass normally for the twin on the ship and the twin on Earth should be significantly younger when the Earth "came back".

Hence, the Twin Paradox. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif
------------------
AMD 1.333 gHz 266 FSB
Lian Li Case
300W PSU
Asus A7A266
512 MB Crucial DDR RAM
Asus V8200 Deluxe Geforce 3 64 MB
2 60 GB Quantum Fireballs
16X Pioneer DVD-ROM
Plextor 12X10X32 CDRW
Soundblaster Live! X-Gamer 5.1
Cambridge Soundworks DTT3500 Digital Speakers
Viewsonic PF790 19' Flat Screen CRT
Microsoft Optical Mouse
Microsoft Natural Keyboard Elite Pro
Logitech Rumblepad USB

[This message has been edited by Sparky_D (edited January 17, 2002).]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by russ_watters:
Al Bundy - anyone can write a book about anything. Just because you read it in a book doesn't mean that relativity is false... The speed of light has been measured thousands of times to an extremely high degree of accuracy and has *NEVER* been found to disagree with relativity...

---

russ_watters, note that the subject of the book isn't regarding the value of the speed of light in a vacuum at all - rather, it supplies several mathematical proofs of the mathematical invalidity of relativity theory itself. Remember that mathematics (which is known as "the language of science") is the one pure science that all client science disciplines stand upon. The proofs of mathematics are rigorously demonstrated and can be checked entirely and conclusively. The fact is that the mathematical basis of relativity theory, upon further investigation and research, has been found to contain several irrefutable and irreparable mathematical contradictions. When that happens, it is a devastating situation indeed for any scientific model - particularly those in mathematical physics.

I suggest that you might actually read the book, before criticizing or dismissing it in advance. It is in fact making quite an impact within scientific and academic circles, and has so far passed the harsh test of peer review. We should trust that mankind still has an awful lot to learn about nature - thankfully! https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif

Edit: Here's an interesting link regarding just how much we all still have to learn about nature: http://www.altenergy.org/3/new_energ...utchinson.html

[This message has been edited by al bundy (edited January 22, 2002).]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparky_D:
The "Paradox" of this is not the fact that one has aged. The paradox arises because Einstein (he came up with the Paradox :P) thought of it in two ways. From the point of view of the twin on Earth watching the spaceship go away, the spaceship would be travelling away at the speed of light (or close to)... so time would progress normally for the twin on Earth. So, when the spaceship comes back, the twin on the spaceship should be significantly younger than the twin on Earth.

However, Einstein also thought: what if the spacecraft was maintaining a constant velocity? Wouldn't that mean, from the point of view of the twin on the ship, that it was indeed the Earth that was travelling away from the ship at the speed of light (or close to)? Then, time should theoretically pass normally for the twin on the ship and the twin on Earth should be significantly younger when the Earth "came back".

Hence, the Twin Paradox. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif

---

Ah, I see the dilemma.

Using the relativity approach, wouldn't they both be the same age as BOTH of them are travelling near the speed of light with respect to each other?

If that does not cancel the "effect", tell me why not - I need more enlightment.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rado:
Ah, I see the dilemma.

Using the relativity approach, wouldn't they both be the same age as BOTH of them are travelling near the speed of light with respect to each other?

If that does not cancel the "effect", tell me why not - I need more enlightment.

---

From the point of the view of the twin on Earth, he/she is stationary. Only the spacecraft is moving away.

From the point of view of the twin on the spaceship, he/she is stationary. Only the Earth is moving away. Hence, there is no "cancelling" effect.


------------------
AMD 1.333 gHz 266 FSB
Lian Li Case
300W PSU
Asus A7A266
512 MB Crucial DDR RAM
Asus V8200 Deluxe Geforce 3 64 MB
2 60 GB Quantum Fireballs
16X Pioneer DVD-ROM
Plextor 12X10X32 CDRW
Soundblaster Live! X-Gamer 5.1
Cambridge Soundworks DTT3500 Digital Speakers
Viewsonic PF790 19' Flat Screen CRT
Microsoft Optical Mouse
Microsoft Natural Keyboard Elite Pro
Logitech Rumblepad USB

The interesting thing about physics is that eventually all old theories are superceeded by more complex / accurate theories eventually. Newtons fundamental laws were once thought to be perfect but in the past 50 or so years they have been shown not to break down when traveling near the speed of light or when dealing with fundamental particles. The same thing will happen with relativity - it will be improved upon.
This is one of the reasons why I do mathematics - once something is prooved, it will never be replaced with something thats "more accurate" (Althrough a "better" proof can sometimes be submitted).

------------------
Life is what happens while we're doing other things!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rado:
Maybe you could ask yourself (the other you who arrived) how the trip was BEFORE starting. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/6.gif

These are the sort of absurdities we run into when time travel is "emulated" in our brains.

---

One of the many problems with having a human brain!!

------------------
Life is what happens while we're doing other things!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by elimc:

Pretty weird, but a couple of experiments have confirmed it.

---

That cannot be confirmed at all unless it has actually been done.

The concept has been proven. An astronaut will be younger than if had stayed on earth.

------------------
*Creative Statement*

The speed of light is constant to any observer in any frame of reference. The fact that you are moving 0.99999999 times the speed of light relative to the earth or any other object has no impact on how you see the light from the headlights. It won't be bent, slowed, or otherwise altered.

Einstein's 2 postulates (All motion is relative, and the speed of light is constant to all observers) are true, and are the only explanation for why everybody always measures the same speed for light, no matter how fast they are moving. So imagine the man in the car. All motion is relative, so he could think that he's not moving at all and everyone else is zooming at him at almost the speed of light. He puts on his headlights and it looks completely normal because the speed of light is constant. For the others watching him, however, they see him moving at almost the speed of light and his headlights going a little faster than he is, since the lights to them will be going at the same speed of light. As for time slowing down, it has to be true! If someone is moving very very fast and shoots a light out at a mirror moving with him and measures the time it takes for the light to bounce back, he will use the time and the distance to get the speed of light. But a stationary observer doesnt see the light go out and back in a straight line. He sees the light go up diagonally and then back down (like this: /\ and not like this | ) since the person holding the light is moving so fast. For the stationary observer to get the same speed for light and r=d/t, and since d increases, so does time increase. That's why time has to change.

------------------
What good is it if you've got everything but the one thing that you really need?
---
Athlon 1.2ghz
384mb sdram
Asus A7V133 Motherboard
GeForce2mx
Soundblaster Live 5.1
DVD-Rom 16x
Two 40 gig 7200rpm HD's
Win2k Pro

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparky_D:
(1)From the point of the view of the twin on Earth, he/she is stationary. Only the spacecraft is moving away.

(2)From the point of view of the twin on the spaceship, he/she is stationary. Only the Earth is moving away.

(3)Hence, there is no "cancelling" effect.

---

***added (1),(2) and (3) in quote for reference.***

Thank you for the reply.

Unfortunately, that is not what I was trying to get to.

Statement (1) and (2) are a no brainer, my question is about what happens when the spaceship gets back to earth (lets ignore the backward journey and the complexities involved with it).

You are looking at the situation from two different points of reference - statement 1 and 2 during the journey.

(1) would mean that the twin travelling would be younger. Agreed?

(2) would mean that the twin on earth would be younger. Agreed?

The problem starts AFTER the journey...

When the spaceship arrives on earth and COMES TO A HALT, there is only one frame of reference from the point of view of both twins.

Certainly, both twins cannot be younger than the other (absurd conclusion here).
That's why I hypothesized the "cancelling effect" because both of them were moving relative to each other at the same speed/acceleration. (see: 1 would mean and 2 would mean.... a few lines before this.)

I am sorry, but your statement (3) is only valid up to the point when the spaceship is moving - I am interested in what happens when the spaceship lands back on earth i.e. when both twins see each other after the journey.

The possible conclusions could be:

1. Both of them are younger than the other (doesn't make sense)

2. The effect is cancelled. (difficult to explain this one)

3. Something missing/wrong about the theory of relativity.

4. We need some other theory/tool to crack this one.

5. It's time to stop overintellectualizing and get on with life.

6. Anyone else?

PS: I know I have made some unconventional statements without proof and other statistical data, but I am not implying that the cancelling effect is true, the discussion is only hypothetical and the intention is to gain knowledge.

https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif

[This message has been edited by Rado (edited January 26, 2002).]

This is the answer. When the travelling twin turns around, he experiences accelerations. THis alters the frame of reference drastically.

For more on this topic: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...n_paradox.html

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rado:

2. The effect is cancelled. (difficult to explain this one)

---

[This message has been edited by sww (edited January 26, 2002).]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sww:
This is the answer. When the travelling twin turns around, he experiences accelerations. THis alters the frame of reference drastically.

For more on this topic: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...n_paradox.html



[This message has been edited by sww (edited January 26, 2002).]

---

Thanks. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/06/5.gif

if you travel at the speed of light then you'll be a pile of bones by the time you end your trip unless you are frozen or mummified or something.

a light year is ameasure of distance not time.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Moridin:
Hmmm, how about this brainteaser.

Since nothing can exceed the speed of light is it possible to complete a 100 000 light year trip in YOUR lifetime given a sufficiently fast spacecraft? Why/Why not. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif

---

------------------
Go into a drugstore, get some RAID and your computer will never have bugs in it ever again (literaly), I guarantee it.

My future system

Quote:

---

Originally posted by sww:
This is the answer. When the travelling twin turns around, he experiences accelerations. THis alters the frame of reference drastically.

For more on this topic: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...n_paradox.html


[This message has been edited by sww (edited January 26, 2002).]

---

There's a reason why this is called Einstein's Twin Paradox. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif

------------------
AMD 1.333 gHz 266 FSB
Lian Li Case
300W PSU
Asus A7M266 AMD 761 Motherboard
512 MB Crucial DDR RAM
Asus V8200 Deluxe Geforce 3 64 MB
2 60 GB Quantum Fireballs
16X Pioneer DVD-ROM
Plextor 12X10X32 CDRW
Soundblaster Live! X-Gamer 5.1
Cambridge Soundworks DTT3500 Digital Speakers
Viewsonic PF790 19" Flat Screen CRT
Microsoft Optical Mouse
Microsoft Natural Keyboard Elite Pro
Logitech Rumblepad USB

100,000 light years by whose reference frame? But yes, it is possible because time changes according the the frame of reference, meaning that you could do it, but nobody or nothing you remember would still be around when you returned...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Moridin:

Since nothing can exceed the speed of light is it possible to complete a 100 000 light year trip in YOUR lifetime given a sufficiently fast spacecraft? Why/Why not. https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/.../2005/08/2.gif

---

there is a locked topic on how to make a H-bomb!!! is this real??? reading it was a good laugh!
some people are quite crazy.
this is goint on my list as the funnyest forum topics ever.

------------------
hehehe here is my system.
Sega master system overclocked to 800mhz and cooled w/ a single ice cube.

yeah i noticed that i scrolled to the bottom of the page, because i was sure it had already been closed

------------------
Ma$e

Quote:

---

Originally posted by fbs1992:
yeah i noticed that i scrolled to the bottom of the page, because i was sure it had already been closed

---

Why?

------------------
blah blah blah

I can't believe I just read it https://www.sharkyforums.com/images/...2002/02/11.gif !!

------------------
AMD 1.4 @ 1540 on a Dragon+
System Specs
tekime.trigun.cc

Don't get too close to my fantasy, don't be afraid to clutch the hands of your creator; stare into the lion's eyes and if you taste the candy, you'll get to the surprise...

hrmm... yeah, maybe it was a bad idea to post that here.

even though it contains factual information on the inner workings of Nuclear bombs, I found to to be quite humorous at the same time... hehe

probably should have kept it to myself... (you never know who could be eyeing these forums)

------------------
The slave thinks he is released from bondage...
only to find a set of stronger chains.

The AUP specifically forbids SPAM. Since the topic was not computer related and didn’t present the opportunity for discussion that is what I considers it to be. I often let highly technical, non-computer related discussions go if they look like they can generate interesting, technical discussions, but that didn’t seem to be the case here

There also a second possible issue around it. It appears to be a cut and past of someone else’s article which would be a violation of the original authors copyright.


------------------
Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts.

actually... it wasn't an article, but an e-mail i recieved from a friend. No those are not my words, and i should have specified. But, spam?... I don't think so, yes this is the "highly technical PC forum" but this seemed like the best place to post it. None of the other forums are more closely related. While i'm on the subject,... well, you could plan the building of the H-Bomb in a 3d modeling program such as 3d studio max for visuals and MS Project for workflow...
that ties it in to PC's doesn't it...
j/k
well... kind of

------------------
The slave thinks he is released from bondage...
only to find a set of stronger chains.

ok... i see it has been deleted now.
That is probably the best thing to do. Just trying to make a contribution

------------------
The slave thinks he is released from bondage...
only to find a set of stronger chains.