Scratch

MasterOfDeception wrote:

JeanTheFox wrote:

I think this is true. 

I have a theory that when matter goes past the speed of light, it goes so fast that light cannot keep up with it; therefore the retinas in human eyes cannot pick up the light bouncing off the object, so the matter going faster than light becomes invisible.

Actually, if an object goes past the speed of light, than you will see two copies of the object, only one will be redshifted and the other will be blueshifted.

And yah, the topic post makes perfect sense to me.

Apparently not. Red-shifted? Blue-shifted? What on earth are you talking about? Objects going faster than the speed of light? Impossible.

recycle49 wrote:

12three wrote:

Hmm... I have never been one to question the ideas of somebody who's smarter than me, and it does make a lot of sense. I say true.
-12three-

Yay, 2 trues,  eintein is smarter than all of us....

Just because someone is "smarter" than you doesn't mean you shouldn't challenge their thoughts. Scientists (and the rest of the world who didn't challenge them because they were "smarter") once said the earth was flat 

MasterOfDeception wrote:

JeanTheFox wrote:

I think this is true. 

I have a theory that when matter goes past the speed of light, it goes so fast that light cannot keep up with it; therefore the retinas in human eyes cannot pick up the light bouncing off the object, so the matter going faster than light becomes invisible.

Actually, if an object goes past the speed of light, than you will see two copies of the object, only one will be redshifted and the other will be blueshifted.

And yah, the topic post makes perfect sense to me.

Great, now we have brought up red shifts, i know about them, the farther away it is, it will redshift more, at least with galisies, im not sure with what you are talking about

Harakou wrote:

Are you saying that you think matter can go past the speed of light; we just can't see it? I sort of doubt that theory, to be honest. We can still hear things that travel past the speed of sound.

Well, the speed of sound is different than the speed of light; the speed of sound is a LOT slower than the speed of light, like 12three said, so we can hear the sound matter is making when it's going at that pace. However, the speed of light is so fast that it could possibly create a noise and and emit g-forces that could, it theory, destroy everything glass and such around the matter.

Also is the fact that your optical nerve needs light to refract off an object for the retinas to be able to receive the object. So if something is going so fast light cannot even catch up, you'll either get a blur where the thing is or you won't see it at all.


Now if my theory is incorrect about matter become energy, think about the g-forces. Going at light speed will most likely kill you unless you're in a futuristic mega-pressure suit that can withstand more than the pressure at the bottom of the ocean. That's just if you somehow manage to travel by yourself without a spaceship or vehicle. And if you do add a vehicle into the mix, everything gets more complicated.

Due to inertia, traveling at light speed can become dangerous. I you hit the brakes (Let’s just pretend that there is some kind of break that can stop a vehicle at light speed), everything is going to get moved forward with amazing amounts of pressure. Your organs could punch through your skin, and that could never be a pleasant experience.

Any questions?

Ace-Of-Diamonds wrote:

Jean, that would happen with speeds not even at the speed of sound.

Elaborate, please 

Last edited by JeanTheFox (2010-10-12 19:40:56)

Ace-Of-Diamonds wrote:

JeanTheFox wrote:

Ace-Of-Diamonds wrote:

Jean, that would happen with speeds not even at the speed of sound.

Elaborate, please 

Your guts popping if you stop while moving at a fast speed 

Something tells me you just wanted to say 'guts popping' 

I'm to tired to answer. Try again tomorrow 

MasterOfDeception wrote:

JeanTheFox wrote:

I think this is true. 

I have a theory that when matter goes past the speed of light, it goes so fast that light cannot keep up with it; therefore the retinas in human eyes cannot pick up the light bouncing off the object, so the matter going faster than light becomes invisible.

Actually, if an object goes past the speed of light, than you will see two copies of the object, only one will be redshifted and the other will be blueshifted.

I'm sorry. I did not get you. I dont know/forgot what red and blue shifts were. Could you please explain them ???

Ace-Of-Diamonds wrote:

Subh wrote:

Another question - Light is slower in water. So can an object in water be faster than light itself is in water ????

Yeah it's slower by a small percent. There's still nothing faster than light. And if light was slowed down in water, what makes you think the object wouldn't slow down either?

The object surely will slow down but might not slow down as much as light slows down when it comes from air to water (33 % - Thats not small ). So still there might be a chance that we go faster in light

My point is -
"With the correct choice of medium and object, we MIGHT get an object which is faster than light in that media".

So atleast theoretically, it is not impossible.

steppenwulf wrote:

recycle49 wrote:

12three wrote:

Hmm... I have never been one to question the ideas of somebody who's smarter than me, and it does make a lot of sense. I say true.
-12three-

Yay, 2 trues,  eintein is smarter than all of us....

Just because someone is "smarter" than you doesn't mean you shouldn't challenge their thoughts. Scientists (and the rest of the world who didn't challenge them because they were "smarter") once said the earth was flat 

Of course we can challenge them. But not until we are smart enough to understand what they have to say and have a counter to their point. Or else we will be fools, just like the thousands of folls in History who tried to challenge every Great discovery.

recycle49 wrote:

Great job Subh, i love your responces, sure you can help. And light will never catch up to us, so we will never see the whole universe

Thank you very much.

How do I help you ??

I doubt your third point. Surely, light will catch to us, if only after a billion years. Its like running on a road which increases in length by 3 cm every minute. That 3 cm might make a difference and it might take us longer to run the entire distance but we can surely say that we will reach our destination.

JeanTheFox wrote:

Harakou wrote:

Are you saying that you think matter can go past the speed of light; we just can't see it? I sort of doubt that theory, to be honest. We can still hear things that travel past the speed of sound.

Well, the speed of sound is different than the speed of light; the speed of sound is a LOT slower than the speed of light, like 12three said, so we can hear the sound matter is making when it's going at that pace. However, the speed of light is so fast that it could possibly create a noise and and emit g-forces that could, it theory, destroy everything glass and such around the matter.

Also is the fact that your optical nerve needs light to refract off an object for the retinas to be able to receive the object. So if something is going so fast light cannot even catch up, you'll either get a blur where the thing is or you won't see it at all.

Now if my theory is incorrect about matter become energy, think about the g-forces. Going at light speed will most likely kill you unless you're in a futuristic mega-pressure suit that can withstand more than the pressure at the bottom of the ocean. That's just if you somehow manage to travel by yourself without a spaceship or vehicle. And if you do add a vehicle into the mix, everything gets more complicated.

Due to inertia, traveling at light speed can become dangerous. I you hit the brakes (Let’s just pretend that there is some kind of break that can stop a vehicle at light speed), everything is going to get moved forward with amazing amounts of pressure. Your organs could punch through your skin, and that could never be a pleasant experience.

Any questions?

Mostly correct but I would like to correct the second point. Inorder to see anything, we need light to Bounce off it. Light not catching up to it has NO relation whatsoever to it. So even if light cannot catch up From Behind, light in front of the object can always bounce off it and you will see it. Only that you might see it After the object has gone.

Also, I would like to add that we are mainly discussing theory here, not practical things. There are many other things that wont happen in Practical life. However, there will be NOTHING in practical life that does not have a theory behind it (Please dont try to counter this point by lame examples)

It's a theory, so I don't really call it true (nor false) until it's proven.

Anyway, here' an interesting fact: Every time you look into the night sky, your looking back in time.    Really. Light takes time to travel, and if the stars you see are millions of miles away, than the light would need to take time to travel to your eye. It's believed the the farthest galaxy we have ever seen was 13 billion light years away. The Hubble telescope has seen 13 billion years into the past.    It's amazing what us humans have achieved.

Yeah instead of linking to wikipedia articles, you can try explaining them yourself because I'm sure you don't understand anything about them.

And about the scientists saying the Earth is flat thing - That's just a myth, nobody who knew something about science thought that.

Have you guys ever heard of quasars?

antimonyarsenide wrote:

Well, I've heard that strong gravity bends space and time (    ) but I'm not sure about the theory itself.

That's why if you ever were to be sucked into a black hole, you would technically never reach it, time slowing more and more the closer you get.  Of course, for everything outside its field of gravity it would take much less time and would happen.

And you'd still be dead.

@militarydudes: I believe 1 lightyear =/= 1 year back in time lightwise.  And you'd only see the image of it back in time, but its still cool.  Plus, even looking at something really far away on Earth would be nanoseconds (or less, probably) back too.  Freaky.

Last edited by Kileymeister (2010-10-13 19:50:55)

militarydudes wrote:

It's a theory, so I don't really call it true (nor false) until it's proven.

Anyway, here' an interesting fact: Every time you look into the night sky, your looking back in time.    Really. Light takes time to travel, and if the stars you see are millions of miles away, than the light would need to take time to travel to your eye. It's believed the the farthest galaxy we have ever seen was 13 billion light years away. The Hubble telescope has seen 13 billion years into the past.    It's amazing what us humans have achieved.

Correct.

Actually, the same is for EVERYTHING you see (even as you look into your computer). Only that the night sky has the stars so far away that we can easily understand the difference.

MasterOfDeception wrote:

Here is a little backround on faster than light travel (THEORETICLY Ace-Of-Whatever suit you are now) and the math involved and if you look to the side, there is a little box that shows how you would see two copies of the object:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon
And on redshifting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift
And on blueshifting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blueshift

Hope I helped.

I've been thinking about that. In my opinion, it is really cool AND kind of Ironic, beacuse a lot of people think that seeing into the past will come far after their lifetime, and all you have to do is look up a the night sky.

Thank you. You did really help. 

I get the irony. It somehow makes me smile. There are also a lot more things that we do without realising. For example, did you know that you move the earth slightly every time you jump ??    Funny, isn't it ?? Who could have thought that we were strong enough to do such a thing ??

johndo77 wrote:

Have you guys ever heard of quasars?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 … i6I671a6M=

Yeah, surely. THEY ARE SPECTACULAR

To anybody else, a quasar is just the extremely bright (supposed to be the brightest in the universe) part that surrounds a large black hole , comprising of matter that is being sucked into the black hole.

Kileymeister wrote:

antimonyarsenide wrote:

Well, I've heard that strong gravity bends space and time (    ) but I'm not sure about the theory itself.

That's why if you ever were to be sucked into a black hole, you would technically never reach it, time slowing more and more the closer you get.  Of course, for everything outside its field of gravity it would take much less time and would happen.

And you'd still be dead.

@militarydudes: I believe 1 lightyear =/= 1 year back in time lightwise.  And you'd only see the image of it back in time, but its still cool.  Plus, even looking at something really far away on Earth would be nanoseconds (or less, probably) back too.  Freaky.

Absolutely correct. No comments