Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

stargazine_ep2_banner.thumb.jpg.e37c929f88100393e885b7befec4c749.jpg

George Gearless

Earth is faster than the speed of light?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, JamesF said:

He's getting the first round in :D

James

LoL ..... I guess if you all only earn 19 -21K a year I will have to ?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pig said:

LoL ..... I guess if you all only earn 19 -21K a year I will have to ?

Yep we are all theoretical physicists - (armchair variety) :) 

Jim 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 22/08/2018 at 18:41, George Jones said:

Special relativity prohibits speeds greater than the speed of light

Actually it doesn't.  It prohibits objects travelling AT the speed of light due to exponential energy requirements but those requirements are reversed if something is travelling at GREATER than the speed of light, in which case it becomes impossible to slow down to the speed of light.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, saac said:

Can't help but see so much misunderstanding here

Your writeup is very informing, and certainly clears a lot up regarding the term "Big Bang" and how it is interpreted, very nice writeup, thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

Your writeup is very informing, and certainly clears a lot up regarding the term "Big Bang" and how it is interpreted, very nice writeup, thanks.

I hope I got it right, I wouldn't be surprised if I have my own misinterpretations :)  Hopefully anybody who can speak with authority will correct anything that needs correcting. It is an amazing story though don't you think - utterly fascinating and complex as it should be too. If you ever get an opportunity to visit CERN in Geneva I would thoroughly recommend it - the history of the universe exhibition is wonderful :) 

Jim 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, saac said:

If you ever get an opportunity to visit CERN in Geneva I would thoroughly recommend it - the history of the universe exhibition is wonderful :)

I think i would pee myself at CERN, i would volunteer to be atomized and collided, just for the sake of science lol.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sunshine said:

I think i would pee myself at CERN, i would volunteer to be atomized and collided, just for the sake of science lol.

If they read that, don't hold your breath waiting for a complimentary ticket ?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sland said:

Actually it doesn't.  It prohibits objects travelling AT the speed of light due to exponential energy requirements but those requirements are reversed if something is travelling at GREATER than the speed of light, in which case it becomes impossible to slow down to the speed of light.

I have a hypothesis that something moving faster than the speed of light is indistinguishable from something moving slower than light in the opposite direction.

Edited by Stub Mandrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pig said:

LoL ..... I guess if you all only earn 19 -21K a year I will have to ?

Qualified or Unqualified, rich or poor, I see us all as "Scientists"! A lot of *erudite* 
discussion here leave me much in awe. And often, frankly, quite totally baffled! ?

When looking for a postgrad opportunity, I was persuaded to have an *informal* 
interview with the Uni's THEORY Professor... His previously "forbidding" character
softened considerably... His secretary made me coffee, he treated me with great
respect and kindness. He encouraged me to apply...  But he also (equally kindly!)
pointed out that "Theorists" needed a VERY GOOD (sic!) 1st class hons degree. ?

I couldn't imagine a BAD First Class honours degree? lol (Bit like Spike Milligan's 
"fate worse than death" joke!). But I got the message (lol). I settled for "ordinary"
Particle Physics. The greater mix of jobs, more my thing? Despite "merry banter",
Theoretical Physicists (these days Brian Cox too) have my respect. "Solidarity"! ?

As an inspiration: https://twitter.com/CERN_JOBS/status/1035437032678608897

Edited by Macavity
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

duplicate post ignore

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 05/09/2018 at 08:22, Stub Mandrel said:

I have a hypothesis that something moving faster than the speed of light is indistinguishable from something moving slower than light in the opposite direction.

????? No!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/09/2018 at 00:05, saac said:

I hope I got it right, I wouldn't be surprised if I have my own misinterpretations :)  Hopefully anybody who can speak with authority will correct anything that needs correcting. It is an amazing story though don't you think - utterly fascinating and complex as it should be too. If you ever get an opportunity to visit CERN in Geneva I would thoroughly recommend it - the history of the universe exhibition is wonderful :) 

Jim 

The only observation I would make is that the current view is that the uiverse has and always has been spatially infinite. It is spacetime that had the singularity.

Regards Andrew 

PS Must has missed this thread  some how.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Marco Mo
      Hello all. I have a question about my background, as you can see from the image I have a really bad magenta color cast, and I don't know how to fix this. I tried with some plug-ins to remove the gradience and flatten the background but I end up with a very unnatural looking image so I avoid them. The image is stacked in Deep Sky Stacker.
      Camera is Canon 600D/T3i modified
      42x300sec UHC filter
      30x Dark frames
      50x Flat frames
      50x Bias frames
      I'm processing images with photoshop, so I would really appreciate any suggestions or is anyone knows what am I doing wrong.
      Thanks in advanced.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.