Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 74295	2006-11-17 17:14:00	Speed Of Light Exceeded?	SurferJoe46 (51)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
500008	2006-11-19 16:41:00	hm.....interesting.......now.....someone here has to know how to get your head around this one..... imagine that you have a physical rod of steel or whatever substance.....it's length is not particularly relevant.....now this rod is 'tapped' (with a hammer or some other tool) on one end.....the 'tap' obviously happens at the other end at the same time ......is this not 'faster than light' ?......is the transmission of the physical movement in the rod not instantaeonous ? or what ? is there some 'give' in the atomic structure of the rod ? does the first atom 'pass on' the tap to the second and etc and if so is there some time gap involved ? Yeah, I like that one too. There was a very impressive explanation, (although I also believe that ol' Albert got involved in this one too)..... that stated that since the rod is the same object, end-to-end, then it is equivalent to a singular point in time/space and therefor was not a good extrapolation to use as travel through or over a distance. The rod is contiguous from one end to the other and the impressed energy of motion does not actually travel thru space or a different medium, to the other end. Obviously there is SOME inter-atomic or molecular compressions at the moment of the tap..but it isn't a factor here. Maybe we are talking about Doppler effect thru a semi plastic solid.	SurferJoe46 (51)
500009	2006-11-19 16:54:00	yeeeessss......... but is the transference of energy FTL ?	drcspy (146)
500010	2006-11-19 17:00:00	is the transference of energy FTL ? This isn't another chocky-fish is it? <Youse New Zealander guys got the funniest language> FTL = ?	SurferJoe46 (51)
500011	2006-11-19 17:13:00	FTL= faster than light.....	drcspy (146)
500012	2006-11-19 18:30:00	FTL= faster than light . . . . . OK . . . . I don't think FTL is an issue here . . . . . . it has perceptions that appear to be that, but I believe far from it . Physical-ity and things we can put our hands upon are probably more understandable by mere humans, so the desire to see this as an obvious explanation of what is not the same ilk is indeed tempting . Taking this thought of the miniscule size of molecules and atoms is the same concept that, on a grander scale, can be shown as the train and cars following it . Transmission of energy through space or voids or on conductors that do not achieve dynamic motion themselves from such flow or travel is one thing . . . . hooking up a bunch of boxcars behind an engine is something else . Loosely stated, the train cars can represent the molecules or atoms, the connections between the cars as bonds or atomic valance . The engine is the energy source, and the cars are the individual carriers of dynamic energy once they are in motion, potential energy while they are at rest . There is always a lapse or degradation of motion where there is a sloppy (read: non-absolute, physically) bond, either molecularly or at the connections of the cars via the couplings, and some energy flow is delayed at that juncture . This can be displayed in some ways like this: acceleration from a stop, by applying the throttle of the engine adding more energy (power) to increase velocity or stopping the motion entirely by using the brakes . Or . . . in the case of the rod: acceleration from rest by hitting the end with a hammer hitting it again to make it move faster/farther allowing the rod to hit a non-moveable object Clunks and shudders and thrashing of the couplings on the cars is evidence of this loose connection: on the same level, but at a much smaller scale at the atomic or molecular bonds . That part is the Doppler effect I mentioned: the compression or rarification of sound waves is easy to apply to physical objects too . . . only the scale is vastly different . This should satisfy the compression thought on the case of the rod . . . which obviates that FTL is not an issue on the molecular side of the coin pertaining to the rod's acceleration beyond the speed of light . Now as to the actual speed of light and passing beyond . . er . . thereof part of the question: Unfortunately, and as I have tried to explain, the speed of light barrier cannot be overcome with tricks . It doesn't matter whether an object that is flying straight is approaching the speed of light or the tip of a rotating object . The result is the same: no object with mass (when it is at rest) can reach or exceed the speed of light . Rotating the rod is an easier concept to show the effect of rate of speed and acceleration . Linear motion of your rod is also under the same gun of substantiation in physical laws . Classically you would compute the speed v at the tip of your rod as v = 2*pi*f*r . . . . . where f is the rotation frequency in rotations/second (multiply this number by 60 to get it in rotations/minute or RPM) and r is the length of your rod from the center to the tip . The 2*pi is needed because the motion is on a circle . Now you could put a number in for r and calculate which value you need for f to reach the speed of light c . However . . . . . . this formula becomes invalid when v approaches c, as the time elapsed for the tip of the rod and the length of the circle change for high speeds . What physically prevents the rod from reaching the speed of light is the fact that according to Einstein's theory (proven over and over) the increasing kinetic energy of the rod (i . e . its energy of motion) is equivalent to an increasing mass . Thus the rod becomes heavier and heavier the faster it rotates or accelerates in a straight line, with the tip of the rod first approaching infinite mass as it approaches the speed of light . This applies to the rod in length, traveling in a straight linear line or rotating about an axis at the other end . . . the effect and rules are the same . Of course, infinite mass cannot be accelerated further . In other words, instead of further accelerating the forward or outermost part of the rod just increases its mass . Achieving the velocity of light on a physical object would require an infinite amount of energy . Your "hammer" is not a large enough source, and besides, it is momentary and not constantly applying energy to achieve the speed of light . So, as far as your question goes: Suppose we could accelerate a rod with 100 feet length (your 30 m) to reach the speed of light at the tip, this would create an enormous centripetal force*, (the force that is necessary to keep the tip on a circle, pulling it constantly inward away from the straight path that it wants to go otherwise) . The rod would want to move in all directions exceeding it's outward cylindrical or tubal dimensions and the losses of energy would further diminish the acceleration effect . centripetal force* is the radial component of the net force acting on a body when the problem is analyzed in an inertial system . The force is inward toward the instantaneous center of curvature of the path of the body . The size of the force is mv 2 /r, where r is the instantaneous radius of curvature . c/o:Wikipedia This force would turn out to reach approx . 1012 times, or one trillion times, the gravitational pull on the Earth's surface . No known material is strong enough to withstand such an enormous force . As you can see from all the verbage above, it is impossible to have a bar that is perfectly rigid . There is a sound speed (ie, Doppler) through materials that limits the response to motion . Hitting the rod at one end would only set up a compression wave that would travel down the rod at this sound speed, which is much less than the speed of light . Visualize what is happening is that you are putting a force on just a few atoms, which then move closer to the next layer of atoms, which are repelled by the first layer and are accelerated away (which takes a finite amount of time) and so on . <removing myself from the soapbox now . . but golly, it was fun to compose this . . . thanks!>	SurferJoe46 (51)
500013	2006-11-19 19:32:00	OK, that's fine for a heavy rod, but for a LIGHT rod ?	R2x1 (4628)
500014	2006-11-19 21:28:00	OK, that's fine for a heavy rod, but for a LIGHT rod ? Ok, I wasn't going to join in this discussion, as we've been through it all last time when I said that Einstein never actually said that nothing could ever travel faster than light. Which he didn't of course, but we'll leave that one. However, ponder on this, suppose you have a powerful laser beam, and you shine it at the moon. What angular speed do you have to rotate at in order for the beam to scan across the face of the moon at the speed of light? If you turn a bit faster then the tip of the beam will travel faster than light...or will it ? :) Here is the basic data in round figures from which the calc. can be done: Distance Earth to Moon = 385,000km Speed of light = 300,000km/sec v=r.ω = r.2.π.N/60 N is rotational speed in rpm I get just 7.5 rpm, turn any faster and the beam exceeds the speed of light across the face of the moon. Questions: Could you see this beam? How could you actually measure the speed of the tip of the beam in order to verify that it is actually travelling at or greater than the speed of light. If it not possible to measure then we fall back on an act of faith which does not conform with the scientific method. math.ucr.edu	Terry Porritt (14)
500015	2006-11-19 22:07:00	lol, also, dark must be faster than light, otherwise, how would it get out of the way? :p How right you are! Here is a paper I wrote on the subject many years ago . Alas, I was too far ahead of my time and it sank without trace into the scientific morass and I never received the Nobel prize or any of the other honours to which I was entitled . :( Dark Travels Faster Than Light FOR YEARS it has been believed that electric light bulbs emitted Light, however recent research has finally disproved this theory . It is now established scientific fact that light bulbs do not emit Light at all, they actually suck Dark . Researchers have now succeeded in proving their long-held theory that Dark has a measurable mass that is actually heavier than Light . They have also proved for the first time that Dark travels faster than Light . Further research has thrown the whole scientific world of Dark and Light into turmoil and now it is known that there are actually two entirely different classes of Dark Sucker, active and passive . Active and Passive Dark Suckers: Take for example the windows in the room you are in right now . Windows are passive Dark Suckers, and no doubt you will have observed that there is usually much less Dark right next to them than there is anywhere else in the room . Although passive, these are quite sophisticated forms of Dark Sucker and their capabilities are able to be regulated using devices known as curtains, blinds or shades . One very effective form of regulator was known as a black-out curtain, which is quite risible now that we know it was really a "black-in" curtain . This curtain stopped all the dark being sucked out of the room as this would otherwise have made the window very bright, thus letting aeroplanes aim at it from high in the sky and drop explosive Dark Suckers on it that would suck out the remaining Dark so fast that the whole building would collapse . Active Dark Suckers powered by electricity are called Lamps or Bulbs, and the larger the Dark Sucker, the greater its capacity to suck Dark . However, as with all these things, Dark Suckers do not last forever and once they are full of Dark they can no longer suck . This can be proven by observing the presence of a black spot on the side of a full bulb-type Dark Sucker (or at the ends of a tubular or 'flourescent' Dark Sucker) . The candle was one of man's earliest and most primitive Dark Suckers . A new candle has a white wick, but you will notice that after the first use the wick is turned black by all the Dark it has sucked . When it is full of Dark, all that is left is a small curl of Dark-saturated wick in a puddle of wax . At the other end of the scale, the Sun is an enormous natural Dark Sucker but it is not capable of continuous operation and gradually stops sucking Dark after about twelve hours, depending on the temperature outside . Also, when it restarts it takes some time to suck Dark effectively and it can be an hour or more before all of the leftover Dark is sucked up . In winter the Sun sucks less Dark than it does during the hot summer weather therefore we have had to introduce daylight saving during summer to make sure there is enough Dark-Sucking capacity to see us through the cold winter days . The Sun will be able to suck Dark for a long time yet, but it is getting full in places . Patches of Dark called 'sunspots' can be seen on its surface sometimes . These are caused by reflections from spacecraft and high flying aeroplanes which temporarily overload its ability to suck Dark evenly across its surface . We will know when it is nearly full because the colour will change from yellow to red because of all the Dark trapped inside, and the friction and pressure will make it swell to many times its present size . It will then be called a Red Giant . There is also a very old White-Dwarf Dark Sucker called the Moon which is so weak it can only suck a little bit of Dark before it fills up completely and goes black . It can only manage to suck a few times a month and this is usually at night when it tries to mop up the bits of Dark left behind when the Sun is full . It doesn't do a very good job and even when it is sucking its hardest you can see the blotches of stored Dark all over its surface . As Dark Suckers go it is not very important and I don't know why the Americans spent all that money to go there to look at it . They should have drilled a hole around the back to let some Dark escape to outer space while they were there . Then we wouldn't need to have so many Dark Suckers around the streets at night to see where we are going . Dark is not only heavier than light, it also has far greater mass, and as the Dark rushes into a Dark Sucker the friction of all that mass squeezing into such a small area generates a lot of heat . You will already have noticed that in summer, during the middle of the day when the Sun is sucking maximum Dark, it gives off so much heat that it will burn you if you stay outside too long, but in the winter when not so much Dark is sucked, you hardly notice any heat at all . Simple Experiments you can do at home to show that Dark is heavier than Light and has greater mass: You can perform a simple experiment to prove that Dark has greater mass by using a candle (which you will remember is a primitive Dark Sucker) . Unfortunately these Dark Suckers are not very powerful and have limited range but they are ideal for our experiment because the Dark is being sucked straight into a solid wick instead of a large glass bulb and this generates more localised heat than the more powerful electric Dark Suckers . Set a candle-type Dark Sucker operating, then bring the forefinger and thumb of one hand close to each side of the wick . This will cause the dark to pass very close to your finger and thumb as it is sucked into the candle and you will easily be able to feel the heat being generated . Because of the inefficient design of this type of Dark Sucker, some Dark often escapes and this can be seen by holding a piece of paper a couple of inches above the operating Dark Sucker for a couple of seconds . When you take it away you will be able to see some of the dark that escaped still stuck on the paper . Do not hold it too close or even though it is not very powerful the Dark Sucker will suck Dark right through it . This will make a hole right through the middle and when this happens the paper itself will start to suck Dark . Be careful if this happens because it may suck Dark very close to your hand and burn it . If it does start sucking Dark, don’t drop it or it might turn your whole house into one enormous Dark Sucker . It is a good idea to keep some Anti-Dark handy while you are doing this experiment, so that if your paper starts to suck dark during the experiment you can pour the Anti-Dark over it and this will make it stop sucking . There is a common type of Anti-Dark called water available in every home which you can get from any tap . If you are doing this outside you may have to use some other type of Anti-Dark, which is alright as long as you have enough available and can get to it easily using only one hand . Any colour of Anti-Dark will do . When you have stopped the paper from sucking Dark you will be able to see some of the Dark still trapped at the edges of the hole . If you used Anti-Dark from a tap to stop it sucking this is quite safe to touch but if you used single-handed Anti-Dark it will still suck Yellow Dark and might not be quite so safe or pleasant to touch . There is an easy and safe experiment you can safely perform in your own home to prove that Dark is faster than light, and you can use this as a party trick to amaze your friends and win the attention and admiration of women . Put your friends in a Dark room (one without an operational Dark Sucker and with good quality Black-in curtains) and close the door on them so that you are outside in an un-Dark room . When they give a pre-arranged signal, open the door to the room very slowly . Then ask them if they saw the light slowly appear in the room as the door opened and you can be sure that they will reply Yes! Now ask them if they saw the Dark leave the room and they will have to answer no because it happens so fast that they could not possibly see it go . No matter how many times they try to catch you out, the result will always be the same . They will think you are truly incredible and want to buy you drinks and stuff or even ask to spend the night at your house if you get really lucky . If you want to practise you can try this on your own, but remember it will only work if you are inside the room that doesn't have an operating Dark Sucker and you will have to open the door yourself, so don't forget the signal! Just to be safe you should take a portable Dark Sucker with you . Portable Dark Suckers: Portable Dark Suckers are very clever because they cannot store all of the Dark themselves so they use a dark storage unit or 'Battery' to hold the rest of the Dark that they suck . The smaller portable Dark Suckers use a dry, replaceable Dark storage unit and because they can only suck Dark in small quantities, and for a short time, they do not get hot except very close to the glass bulb where all the Dark is focussed as it is sucked in . It then travels down short wires to the Dark storage unit . Because they do not get hot you can safely cut one of these units open when it is full and you will then be able to see all the Dark stored inside . Once this type of Dark storage unit is full it must either be emptied or replaced before the portable Dark Sucker will work again . There are much more powerful portable Dark Suckers available and these use special high capacity Dark storage units or 'Wet-Cell Batteries' . They are called this because they are liquid cooled so that they do not get too hot . The Dark is stored in a special liquid inside the Dark storage unit and you should never cut one of these open because even though it may not feel hot on the outside there is a lot of stored up or latent heat in the cooling fluid and it will cause very bad burns if it touches your skin . If this fluid accidentally splashes in your eyes they may become so full of concentrated Dark that they cannot suck even the tiny amount of extra Dark you need to be able to see and you will be blind . Electronics and the Dark Sucker: In recent years Science has developed semiconductor Dark Suckers called LED's (or Light Eliminating Diodes) some of which are very cleverly designed to suck different colours of Dark . They cannot suck very much Dark and are easily overloaded if you try to make them suck too hard . They take the Dark that they suck away down thin wires to special semiconductor 'Dark Tanks' called 'Chips' which store it up in different locations around a circuit board . These are only temporary storage units and when the LED Dark Sucker is turned off they gradually leak the Dark out through their legs until it is all gone . This happens so slowly that you cannot see it going, no matter how little Dark is being sucked when you are looking . LED Dark Suckers do not get very hot, even when they are sucking Dark beyond their rated capacity, because it all goes into the Dark tanks . If the chips are overloaded with Dark sometimes they get warm, but you can safely feel them with your finger as they do not get hot enough to burn . If the Dark Tanks get too full, sometimes they release a huge surge of Dark all at once and this is channelled through lots of different wires until it reaches a special surge tank or 'Dark Expansion Chamber' called a Fuse . When the surge arrives at the surge-tank it expands out very quickly indeed, making the expansion chamber hot and black on the inside from expanded Dark . If it is a very bad overload, sometimes a popping noise can be heard as the Dark expands into the chamber, and if you are watching closely as it happens you may see a brief flash of light as the Dark expansion chamber suddenly gets too full to hold any more Dark . There are special types of Dark Expansion Chambers used to contain Very Large Dark Surges (VLDS) and these are made of white ceramic Anti-Dark material that does not let you see the Dark when it arrives inside . These were designed by a spoilsport who didn't want anybody to know when he overloaded a Dark Sucker Controller but believe me, the Dark is in there alright . Optical Fibre Dark Pipes: There is also an amazing invention called Fibre Optics . Fibre Optics can suck Dark for huge distances through very thin tunnels, and they are waterproof so that they can even suck Dark under oceans, which are, of course, made up almost entirely of Anti-Dark . Because the Dark is being sucked through such a tiny space it gets especially hot and sometimes this may create smoke . This only happens over long distances and is sometimes used to transmit messages . If the smoke is allowed to escape from the receiver, the messages are lost . Despite their amazing ability to suck Dark over huge distances, Fibre Optics can only suck very small amounts of Dark, even less than a Light Eliminating Diode and this makes them useless if there is a lot of Dark to be sucked in one place . They are best for shifting very small amounts of Dark from one place to another . They are particularly good for carrying Dark Secrets to other places . Special types of Dark: Finally there is a special type of Dark called Infra-RED (Randomly Expandable Dark) which is very unpredictable in its behaviour . Little is known about this rare form of Dark but it is believed to be capable of burning people at a distance without even being touched . There is another and even rarer form of Dark called Ultra Violent Dark or UV-Dark which travels in dark rays and is even more dangerous . This is known to cause skin burns even on partly un-Dark days . Ultra-Violent Dark comes in three common types: UV-A, UV-B and UV-C . UV-A (UV-Agressive) is quite harmful if your skin sucks up to much of this it will go red and fall off . UV-B (UV-Bad) is much worse and not only will it make your skin all wrinkly, when it has absorbed too much UV-B you can get black patches called Melanomas that are full of really nasty Dark that can kill you . UV-C (UV-Can’t) is not a problem because it is too weak and can’t get throught the residual Dark in the atmosphere, even on a bright summers day when almost all of the Dark has been sucked up by the Sun . Eventually we hope our research will lead to the development of new and more effective types of Dark Sucker for the benefit of all mankind . Cheers Billy 8-{) BTW If you Google Darksucker you will find that this paper has been plagiarised all over the Web by wannabe scientists, but you will not find anything like this, which is the full version as submitted for the Nobel Prize (philistines!) . This is the first time ever that it has been placed on the web in its full unexpurgated form . *cough* I will admit that I did receive some inspiration from earlier researchers into dark sucking techniques, but that's what science is all about isn't it? Giants following in the footsteps of pygmys?	Billy T (70)
500016	2006-11-19 23:00:00	At the other end of the scale, the Sun is an enormous natural Dark Sucker but it is not capable of continuous operation and gradually stops sucking Dark after about twelve hours, depending on the temperature outside . Also, when it restarts it takes some time to suck Dark effectively and it can be an hour or more before all of the leftover Dark is sucked up . In winter the Sun sucks less Dark than it does during the hot summer weather therefore we have had to introduce daylight saving during summer to make sure there is enough Dark-Sucking capacity to see us through the cold winter days . The Sun will be able to suck Dark for a long time yet, but it is getting full in places . Patches of Dark called 'sunspots' can be seen on its surface sometimes . These are caused by reflections from spacecraft and high flying aeroplanes which temporarily overload its ability to suck Dark evenly across its surface . We will know when it is nearly full because the colour will change from yellow to red because of all the Dark trapped inside, and the friction and pressure will make it swell to many times its present size . It will then be called a Red Giant . To resolve this theory, several Australians Astronauts have volunteered to actually go to the sun and measure it's potential filling of Dark . When told by the US NASA team that travel to the sun was impossible and if they even got close they'd all burn up, the Australians answered: "We know the risks, so we are going at night just to be safe" .	SurferJoe46 (51)
500017	2006-11-20 05:43:00	hm.....interesting.......now.....someone here has to know how to get your head around this one..... imagine that you have a physical rod of steel or whatever substance.....it's length is not particularly relevant.....now this rod is 'tapped' (with a hammer or some other tool) on one end.....the 'tap' obviously happens at the other end at the same time ......is this not 'faster than light' ?......is the transmission of the physical movement in the rod not instantaeonous ? or what ? is there some 'give' in the atomic structure of the rod ? does the first atom 'pass on' the tap to the second and etc and if so is there some time gap involved ? there will be a speed at which the vibration (in the form of a wave) will travel from end to end... yes there is some give in the structure of a metallic solid, just as there is in air, so a longitudinal (or transverse) mechanical wave would take time due to intertia of the atoms etc etc, just like sound (which would also travel through the steel at the same speed as the 'tap' would. and besides, we would normally consider the whole rod as one mass/object, not it's two ends. so no there wouldn't be instantaneous transmission of energy, there would be squishing... ever seen a golf/tennis ball being hit in slow motion? no different to a metal solid, just less apparent i could go into more depth, but i'd just get confusing	motorbyclist (188)
1 2 3 4 5