Theoretically, it's not impossible to travel at the speed of light. I mean, light does it! If it comes down to it, we could invent a teleportation method that works by transferring the data via hyper-efficient fibre-optic cables (that use light to transmit signals).
Paradox Theory
(104 posts) (26 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Well, speed can mean two things, distance/time or displacement/time. So if we created a method of teleportation that used complicated wormhole systems, we could theoretically travel faster than the speed of light(we would never go as fast as light, but we could be able to cover more distance than light could in the same time).
That is of course is if wormholes exist...Posted 1 year ago # -
Speed, scientifically, always refers to distance over time. Where distance is the measurement of travel in regular space. Even if we're travelling through wormholes, we won't be travelling faster than the speed of light, because we're still moving through normal speed in space that is warped. We'd be able to get to our destination FTL though.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Speed. What an amazing gift..
This signature requires LEVEL 4 CLEARANCE, which you OBVIOUSLY dont have. Have a nice day.
click herePosted 1 year ago # -
yeah, an gift i dont have.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yes I agree time travel will never be possible, but is it possible to move at the speed of light? Well technically its impossible to know because we dont know what light truly is, or how fast it actually moves. Think about it, if you have no other light source other than the sun, and you hold something that casts a shadow, why is it not complete darkness? You could answer this by saying that light is a particle, not being fully stopped by the object, but if so, then if you have a window or other transparent object, why does light pass through it? You could say that light is a wave, contradicting your earlier statement. And if it is possible to move at the speed of light, would that make light itself a manipulatable (I think thats the word) object? What do you think about this.
Posted 6 months ago # -
It's reflecting from things nearby. If you have a box and there is no space for light to get in on the sides, it makes it pitch black.
Have you ever played with a box as a kid? If not, you have no childhood.
Kidding, but seriously. Play with a box before your youth gives out.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Wizard, that's because light is an electromagnetic radiation, just like other ones like the gamma-rays, the radio-waves, the micro-waves, the infrared, etc. The only difference is that visible light has another frequence. And electromagnetic radiations from different frequences interact with matter in different ways. Visible light doesn't interact with glass, passing right through it, but does interact with other objects, being "stopped" (or partially stopped) by them. (There are radiations of certain frequencies that interacts with glass, meaning that if we could "see" this radiation, glass wouldn't be a transparent object)
And we know how fast it is, though, it is impossible to move at its speed, which is proved by the Einstein's equations that say that such a thing would require an infinite amount of energy.Posted 6 months ago # -
pixelScientist said:
Time travel completely ignores the law of conservation of mass! How come nobody has ever though of this?any and all of Newtons laws can be disproved like all of Scientific data in existence.
all of it can also be proved true, so in effect they are all truths that can be falsified.
a good that can be evil.
as Harvey Dent put it, 'You either die a hero, or become the villain.'
that is why Science is more human then faith.
and there lies its true beauty.
also Timetravel ftfwmofo.
Posted 6 months ago # -
By our current understanding of physics, it is impossible to move as fast (or faster) than light. There is actually a good explanation for this.
I'm sure everyone's seen the famous equation: E=mc^2. Where E is Energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light.
But that's just the equation for objects that aren't moving. The full equation is as follows: E^2 = (mc^2)+(pc)^2. All the variables are the same and p represents the momentum of the object. If you look closely, you can show this equation as a right-angled triangle through Pythagoras, with E being the hypotenuse. Making (mc^2) and (pc) the other two sides of the right-angled triangle.
With this method, you can see very easily that when an object has no momentum (i.e. p=0) then you end up with the equation E=mc^2.
Now, how does explain not being able to travel at the speed of light? Well, when m=0 you achieve the equation E=pc. So, it's essentially saying that the smaller the mass the closer it is the behaving like light.
As an example, you can calculate an objects velocity by the following equation:
v = c*(pc/E). As your momentum gets larger, the (pc/E) bit will get closer and closer to 1. If you don't understand it, think of the right-angled triangle where the 'mc^2' side is tiny causing the 'pc' side to be close to the hypotenuse (the 'E' side).So, using the above equation to calculate velocity. The larger the momentum, the closer you are to light speed. When (pc/E) = 1, then you are travelling at light speed!
But wait! The only possible way to achieve (pc/E) = 1, is when you're mass=0. Which is theoretically impossible...
Posted 6 months ago # -
wingdemon said:
any and all of Newtons laws can be disproved like all of Scientific data in existence.all of it can also be proved true, so in effect they are all truths that can be falsified.
a good that can be evil.
as Harvey Dent put it, 'You either die a hero, or become the villain.'
that is why Science is more human then faith.
and there lies its true beauty.
also Timetravel ftfwmofo.
*than
But yeah, I guess that could make sense. It would give support to characters dying in the past.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Grammar thing here, you should either get rid of the word 'because' or the word 'meaning', because they conflict in a redundant pattern. I'm not going to tell you to avoid using 'like,' because it's the internet and I don't care about that. It's when sentences are awkward, redundant, or both that I step in.
So basically, we've all been telling a wizard how incorrect he is. Sorry, bro.
Posted 6 months ago # -
A Wizard said:
Then why is it when you look at a star chances are it has already died yet it is many light years away so we are still seeing it as it was many years ago.Light is the fastest thing in the universe (that we know of!) but even then it takes a while to travel the vastness that is space. It takes about 8 mins for light to get to us from the Sun. The stars you see in the sky are millions of magnitudes further away. We even have a unit of measurement for these distances: Light Years. One light year is the distance light will travel in one year's time (a very long time).
The closest star to Earth is Proxima Centauri. It resides 4.243 light years away. That's 2.49424747 × 10^13 miles and this is the closest star.
That being said, even if it takes millions of years for the star's light to reach you. It's probably not dead because most can live up to billions of years (Earth has been around for something like 4.5 billion years).
Posted 6 months ago # -
I would like to think that time travel has to parts, fixed points and non-fixed points. Basically there are events in time that cannot be changed, and some that can. Say for instance if you could time travel back in time, you probaly could not stop Abraham Lincoln from being shot, it is too big an event. The only problem with time travel in general is if you went back, changed an event, and stayed in tht timeline. If you do this there is the possibility of making a whole new timeline in which the other timeline, might overlap in. Basically total collapse of the timeline you just created. I would also lie to think that FTL would be a great idea, just not for time traveling. I would suggest finding some kind of catchers mitt to *catch* the FTL pod with a person inside. Of course you would have to have some kind of protection perhaps, maybe some type of gel chamber? Basically it comes down to the simple fact that right now we don't have the technology we need to make time travel or even teleportation. And even then, the prospect of time travel might be a bit too much to handle, unless you have a *doctor who* to stop all the bad guys. But I still think that the options are unlimited and there is a chance it could happen, but the technology and resources needed, along with all the risks, are very big indeed. I would suspect time travel will happen, but not in this generation.
I have nothing to say, except what I just said but don't be unreasonable.
DON'T TOUCHPosted 3 months ago # -
Ahhhh! Don't bring back this topic! I made myself look like an idiot in this topic with my lack of knowledge about light and space time and dimensions and stuff. I started rambling about something and I had no idea what I was talking about and it was obvious!
Okay, you can bring back the topic...
But time travel = never possible.
Posted 3 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.