• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Hang on tight : Speed of LIGHT!

EarlyMon said:
Not really. They're imaginary, figuratively and mathematically, although the first part may be proven wrong at some point.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between imagination and theory, they are thought to exist but can't be proven yet.

And let's not forget, Hawking is trying to prove faster than light is possible, if anybody in our time can do it, he's the one.
 
Aside from tachyon field theory and a number of string and m-theory outcomes involving them, many physicists fully believe it's imaginary in the figurative sense.

Evidence of their existence, like so many things in the discipline, is likely to be part of package deal in discovery, should it ever occur. To date, I'm not aware that it has.
 
SamuraiBigEd said:
And let's not forget, Hawking is trying to prove faster than light is possible, if anybody in our time can do it, he's the one.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping that he succeeds in producing a paper putting forth such proof.

I have been intrigued by inflationary theory, which suggests space expanded at billions of times the speed of light for a brief fraction of a second, a tiny fraction of a second after the big bang.
 
To answer the OP's question: No you wouldn't be able to see anything as you would be dead.
 
Is String Theory dead now? It was an interesting theoretical exercise that cannot be tested with current technology. As far as I know, there was nothing that it proves that cannot be proven with modern physics.
 
Back in the mid 90s there was a report about applying string theory to some black hole observations having to do with thermodynamics.. that was the last I'd seen of it.
 
String theory gave rise to m-theory, membrane theory, stating that two universes' boundary layers (membranes) rattled together creating a kinda interstitial reaction resembling vibrating strings, aka our universe. This provided proper constraints in dimensionality previously undefined in string theory's multiple solution sets.

That's the best that I recall from a number of years back.

AFAIK, that development essentially validated string theory and relegated it to tool status.

I _think_ that's right.

One set of string calculations did lead to an elaboration of tachyon fields consistent with the existing work. Don't know if that's valid within m-theory context, tho.
 
Well, the notes I saw about the black hole stuff seemed to include string theory as having been validated then, because it predicted the same results as other physics disciplines having to do with thermodynamics.
 
EarlyMon said:
Fun with physics - here goes.

At speeds close to the speed of light, time changes compared to what you'd consider normal.
Click to expand...

Hmm howcome i recall we have been able to get close to the speed of light with small particles somehow but i cannot remember how we did this now? Hmm damn I am very forgetful these days :(

Ahhhh!

Yes i remember now!!! We have had particles get close to the speed of light. Yes VERY close but no cigar :( . It is basically a type of particle accelerator :)

The Large Hadron Collider.... it's circumference is about 27 km long here:

Large Hadron Collider - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is 3 metres per second slower than the speed of light! :)

It is currently the biggest particle accelerator in the world ( there are others i think)

It cost BILLIONS i think lol :)

Particle accelerator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope this helps the OP's thread somehow lol :D

Keep well

Stinky
 
Stinky Stinky said:
Hmm howcome i recall we have been able to get close to the speed of light with small particles somehow but i cannot remember how we did this now? Hmm damn I am very forgetful these days :(

Ahhhh!

Yes i remember now!!! We have had particles get close to the speed of light. Yes VERY close but no cigar :( . It is basically a type of particle accelerator :)

The Large Hadron Collider.... it's circumference is about 27 km long here:

Large Hadron Collider - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is 3 metres per second slower than the speed of light! :)

It is currently the biggest particle accelerator in the world ( there are others i think)

It cost BILLIONS i think lol :)

Particle accelerator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope this helps the OP's thread somehow lol :D

Keep well

Stinky
Click to expand...

^^^Apparently those particles increased in mass and became smilies.
 
Frisco said:
Well, the notes I saw about the black hole stuff seemed to include string theory as having been validated then, because it predicted the same results as other physics disciplines having to do with thermodynamics.
Click to expand...


I'd not seen that one. I can imagine any number of agreements, but will have to ponder dissipation and entropy, intuitively, they'd have been referring to that...
 
Stuntman said:
Is String Theory dead now? It was an interesting theoretical exercise that cannot be tested with current technology. As far as I know, there was nothing that it proves that cannot be proven with modern physics.
Click to expand...

Really theories can almost never be proven and why they call them theories. Its what a persons thinks to be fact through mathematics. Then when they hit a snag they invent a new partical or matter or whatever to make their theory work. I think its neat listening to these theories but at the same time wonder how much smoke they are blowing up our skirts lol.
 
EarlyMon said:
Well, a counterpoint to that is that gravity is a theory and I wouldn't jump out the window to test it.
Click to expand...

You realise that there are ways to test gravity without risking personal injury. For instance, you can always jump out of a ground floor window. :D
 
Well, that wouldn't prove that gravity existed outside of the 12th floor window.

I am saddened at remembering the report some years back on the college students insisting that the moon had no gravity because it was up in space - and that the astronauts were able to stay on the ground because they wore heavy boots.

I wish I were making that up. Because I'm not, I've invented the 12th floor gravity test.
 
EarlyMon said:
Well, that wouldn't prove that gravity existed outside of the 12th floor window.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any way you can truely prove that gravity or any laws of physics work the same everywhere in the universe and for all time. All you can do is increase your confidence that this is the case with every new experiment.
 
In fact, for singularities (black holes) a number of those laws seem to completely break down.

And then there's the theory that c has not always had the value it has today.

And then there's the fact that despite what we know about atomic particles, we have yet to unify that knowledge with chemistry using first principles - so physics and chemistry remain separate disciplines.

It's not a case of knowing the right answers - we're way at the beginning of learning to ask the right questions, really.
 
Frisco said:
I'm hoping that he succeeds in producing a paper putting forth such proof.

I have been intrigued by inflationary theory, which suggests the deficit expanded at billions of times the speed of light for a brief fraction of a second, a tiny fraction of a second after the loans from China.
Click to expand...


Your confusing physics with Obamanomics here!:D:rolleyes:
 
EarlyMon said:
Well, that wouldn't prove that gravity existed outside of the 12th floor window.

I am saddened at remembering the report some years back on the college students insisting that the moon had no gravity because it was up in space - and that the astronauts were able to stay on the ground because they wore heavy boots.

I wish I were making that up. Because I'm not, I've invented the 12th floor gravity test.
Click to expand...

You should have thrown that student out the 12th floor window, thereby eliminating the risk of harm to yourself, proving your theory and improving the gene pool!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom