Author Topic: Faster than light  (Read 26252 times)

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2005, 04:52:08 PM »
Quote
And you can only communicate instantaeneously if the carrier medium can move the information from point to point instantaneously

If you are not moving the information from point to point instantaneously then you are not communicating instantaeneously. duh. Then its not called
Quote
communicate instantaeneously

Offline MightyPenguin

  • Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #31 on: March 04, 2005, 04:52:17 PM »
Let's consider that (as far as I know, it sounds a bit dodgy to me) an object moving faster than light is technically going backwards in time.

So in theory the arrow could arrive 20^202 years + 1 second before you fired it, and you would see the arrow hit before you fired it.

EDIT: Bots, you asked what comunicating instantly had to do with ftl. I told you.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2005, 04:54:28 PM by MightyPenguin »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #32 on: March 04, 2005, 04:54:25 PM »
But what happend to that " inertial frame " rule
Quote
The Twin Paradox
suddenly stuff like that dont apply ?

Offline MightyPenguin

  • Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #33 on: March 04, 2005, 04:55:49 PM »
You lost me. You're talking to a guy who is working from a basis of second year high school physics and cool shit scrounged from the odd science book/journal.

EDIT: I wikied it and I know what you're talking about now. Tell me what the paradox has to do with arrows moving backwards in time.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2005, 05:01:46 PM by MightyPenguin »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2005, 05:00:03 PM »
lol you say: "an object moving faster than light is technically going backwards in time" Well no, an object moving faster then light only ages slower so it has nothing to do with it.

So I say: "New Twin Rule"

Lets make more stuff up :)

Offline MightyPenguin

  • Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2005, 05:04:18 PM »
TIME SLOWS DOWN AS YOU SPEED UP. AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT, TIME STOPS. IF YOU GO BEYOND C, TIME REVERSES. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I MADE UP. THIS IS SOMETHING I READ.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2005, 05:04:31 PM by MightyPenguin »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2005, 05:11:10 PM »
ok sorry , I did not know that one.
Now all I need to do is figure out what happens after time stops , no one knows that, They think things go backwards in time, but who knows? I know now , the gods get an overflow error of some sort ...time to edit that universe code again.

Well now the stuff about light behaving like waves as well as particals makes sense.

New time past compered to old time 1 second past = 1second  * (1 - (speed^2/lightspeed^2))^0.5

 :blink:  :wacko:  :(
Now how am I supposed to program my vedio games, I dont want to have maid up physics but it apperars I have no choise...
« Last Edit: March 04, 2005, 05:53:10 PM by Botsareus »

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #37 on: March 04, 2005, 05:24:10 PM »
Technically people aren't sure what happens if you managed to go faster than light.  It'd undefined behavior.  The mathematical model says you'll go backwards in time, but the mathematical model wasn't designed to extrapolate like that.

Time dilation is something like this:
1/(1 + (v/c)^2)

or something very similar

Offline MightyPenguin

  • Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #38 on: March 04, 2005, 05:24:41 PM »
Which is why it always seemed iffy to me.

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #39 on: March 05, 2005, 12:12:28 PM »
Quote
PY, one gets old and dies because time from his perspective and that of his body is actually going faster, as I understand it.

Exactly

But the other one does exactly the same. they both get old and die before the other one  does.



 :blink:  PY  :blink:
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #40 on: March 05, 2005, 12:20:35 PM »
Quote
well, if they have the same speed compared to the same thing they will never become older compared to each other. they have the same flow of time. if they dont have the same speed or are compared to different thing one will have a slower flow of time and will be younger when they reach the same speed to compared to the same thing
 :lecture: zelos :lecture:
Everything has the same speed with respect to something.
You can cross reference every atom in the universe and find that every one can be said to moving at the same relative speed to some point somewhere. Then that point can be calculated to be moving at the same speed as another point, relative to yet another point. The whole lot would eventually cancel out in such a way that time dilation isn't possible under any circumstsnces.

That would make the whole of relativity superfluous and completely pointless.

My point is that from each of my two observer's frames of reference, they are the one who is going to die first while the other one stays young.

Let's just assume that there is a method of instantaneous communication over infinite distances, wormhole, subspace, whatever. Distance and speed should be completely irrelevent if the two observers are able to carry on a video conference with each other all the time.

In this case then each observer would see the other remain young while he himself aged.

It doesn't make sense.

 :wacko:  PY  :wacko:
« Last Edit: March 05, 2005, 12:20:49 PM by PurpleYouko »
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #41 on: March 05, 2005, 12:33:50 PM »
Quote
You should check it out. The question that you posed is a variant of the old "twin paradox" and it is explained right here: http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/relativit.../section15.html

Actually this isn't a version of the twins paradox since no change ever occurs in either observer's inertial frame of reference.

The twins paradox requires the twin on the spaceship to accelerate away from the (relatively) staionary twin and later to accelerate back towards him.

In my example I propose that both observers continue on in a completely unaltered straight line for eternity. All I need is a hypothetical method to instantly comunicate between the two for them to directly observe the aging phenomenon.
Of course it isn't actually necessary for them to observe it for it to happen.
Each observer ages faster than the other whether they actually see it or not.

"But they are each in a different frame of reference", the argument goes.

So what? This only means that the two frames of reference are at direct odds with each other. They cannot logically both exist since in each of the two frames, the observer is dead long before the observer in the opposite frame is.

I have been through all the math and all the logic I have spoken to supposed experts in the field and I have never got a satisfactory explanation for how this can be.


 :blink:  PY  :blink:
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #42 on: March 05, 2005, 01:06:41 PM »
No, PY, it is exactly the same situation.  If these two guys are observing each other from distance, each of them will see that the other is aging slower (first part of twin paradox scenario).  There is no contradiction.  But if they want to get together and compare their observations right next to each other, then at least one of them will have to brake and reverse direction.  At that point, it will look to that guy (who is braking and then accelerating) that his twin suddenly grew very old.  The simmetry is broken, because they are not in innert systems anymore.  Read that website, it does explain the whole thing pretty well and is quite short to go through in 15 minutes :)
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #43 on: March 05, 2005, 01:14:51 PM »
Relativity made sense to me in highschool.  I've since lost it, but I remember it used to make sense to me.  It's not an intuitive system, but it does solve alot of problems.  More than it creates.

If relativity is false, it is false in the same way newtonian physics is.  It's a special case.

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
Faster than light
« Reply #44 on: March 05, 2005, 03:29:05 PM »
Quote
each of them will see that the other is aging slower

I think I just came up with a good example how this can be and not be a contradiction.  Imagine two guys standing on sphere, but they don't know they are on a sphere.  They come close to each other and measure up - both are six feet tall.  Then they move apart.  They use instruments to measure each other's height.  Due to the curvature of the sphere it will appear to both of them that the other person is getting shorter.

This situation does not exactly replicate the situation with twins, but I just tought that it gives a good example that sometimes reality depends on your point of view.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam