breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com

On 5 Feb 2005 10:25:14 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com>
wrote:

In the Baha'i faith no one of any age is permitted to ingest wine or
any other alcohol. (no one reply to this, I just had to say it. Stay on
the topic of breaking the light speed barrier, please)
:)
Click to expand...
Topic? This newsgroup has a topic?

John
 
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 09:01:45 -0800, ~~SciGirl~~ wrote:

This is a question I have had since reading about Maxwell's
equations... in each one of them, there is this upside-down triangle
symbol that looks just like the delta triangle flipped over. What is
this symbol and what does it mean???

I took a quantum physics test on allthetests.com (to find it just type
"quantum" in the search box, there is only one) and I scored 8 out of
12.
Click to expand...
I just took the quiz and rated it "very bad". Some of the questions don't
even make any sense in English.

And he doesn't tell you which ones you got wrong, or why.

It's sad that crap like this gets passed off just because so few people
know the jubject matter.

Thanks,
Rich
 
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 16:11:25 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

In article <pan.2005.02.05.03.23.48.430568@att.bizzzz>,
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
[...]
I designed a logic level convert circuit once that I spec'd with a
negative delay, at least until someone read it. I was *forced* to do
rise-times from 20-80 and delays from 50-50. The threshold wasn't at 50,
so until I showed the PHBs how stupid their requirements were, it had a
negative delay. ...and no, no electrons were hurt in testing the circuit.

I actually got a spec from some fairly smart people that said that one
pulse had to be produced before the other. The later pulse was called the
"trigger" and was supposed to be the external input to the circuit.

What they really wanted was a circuit that made two pulses that partly
overlapped. They didn't really want to have to provide the "trigger"
input.
Click to expand...
Was the other signal called the "latch", by chance?

--
Keith
 
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 13:21:19 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 12:21:20 -0800, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:
Click to expand...
<snip>

I developed a certain sloppy slide rule technique that produced
excellent data point scatter.

John


At MIT we called it "dry lab" ;-)
Click to expand...
At UIUC too. It was the *only* way to pass Chemistry.

--
Keith
 
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 12:24:05 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On 5 Feb 2005 10:25:14 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com
wrote:

In the Baha'i faith no one of any age is permitted to ingest wine or
any other alcohol. (no one reply to this, I just had to say it. Stay on
the topic of breaking the light speed barrier, please)
:)

Topic? This newsgroup has a topic?
Click to expand...
Sure, how else could we enjoy being OT?

--
Keith
 
"I think John Larkin said it best: "If there's something going faster
than c, it's not a photon." And, according to the definition of
"photon", that's absolutely true."

All right, so I'll rephrase that. No PHOTONS were going faster than c,
but we haven't proven that tracheyons aren't (I've seen that spelled so
many different ways, so I don't know if I'm spelling it right.) Is that
basically saying that, if a photon was to move >c, it would have to be
called a tracheyon?
 
"If you aim right, most of the angular momentum of the asteroid gets
transferred..."

And if you don't aim right, we all die.
 
"If you aim right, most of the angular momentum of the asteroid gets
transferred..."

And if you don't aim right, we all die.
 
"Conclusion: to travel beyond the speed of light, one must be able to
either:
a) warp space
b) stop time"

This still doesn't prove anything.

Also, it's believed by many that space is warped in many areas that we
have simply not located yet.
 
I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <dlba01tr5sra9bc0sm3c30gsacfmk592jr@
4ax.com>) about 'breaking the speed of light article on
howstuffworks.com', on Sat, 5 Feb 2005:
Some calculus would be involved.
Click to expand...
Sadist. (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
 
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 16:05:03 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

But if you assume that everything is qualitative and everything we
know may be wrong, you can't get a lot done. The working position is
"well, so far, this theory looks really good, so we'll work with it
until somebody proves something better." It's sort of an attitude
about life, I guess.

It ("everything we know may be wrong") makes life easy, since if you don't
believe in what we (think we) know there's no reason to do any work.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's the ease of cynicism. Since everything is doomed to
failure and life is a p.o.s., we can kick back and whine, sneer at
people who have hope, and laugh when things go wrong. Beats working!

John
 
On 5 Feb 2005 13:47:07 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com>
wrote:

"If you aim right, most of the angular momentum of the asteroid gets
transferred..."

And if you don't aim right, we all die.
Click to expand...

Well, that's not a very cheerful attitude. Just keep the engineering
units right.

John
 
If I cant escape the calculus, I'll have to learn the calculus. Darn.
I've been given the name of a good calculus book by someone earlier,
but I need somewhere to learn precal first. I'm up to the challenge but
I'll probably try it over the summer. I won't have time now, and I
really doubt I'll understand much of it. I learned almost everything I
know about physics between September and now, but math doesn't come
that easily.
 
Well it's true! If someone makes the slightest calculation error we'd
all be dead. I wouldn't trust someone to change the Earth's orbit with
an asteroid. I'm usually pretty optimistic, but that seems... too
risky.

Luckily, I won't be around then so I won't have to worry about it. I
like the time period in which I live.
 
Maybe I just think that because I make so many calculation errors, lol.
 
It's 'tachyon' - 'fast particle'. 'Tracheyon' would be 'windpipe
particle' (cough, cough!).

lol! windpipe particle... I should have known that, it comes from
trachea.

Traveling has one L, not 2. That I'm pretty sure of.
 
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 21:59:21 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <isaa011n7plsije0ucj8ek3hdjirteuvak@
4ax.com>) about 'breaking the speed of light article on
howstuffworks.com', on Sat, 5 Feb 2005:

The working position is "well,
so far, this theory looks really good, so we'll work with it until
somebody proves something better." It's sort of an attitude about life,
I guess.

It's also excellent science. We still use Newtonian mechanics to design
cars, planes and ships, even though we know it's not quite right. But it
doesn't work for TV cathode-ray tubes.
Click to expand...
What sort of voltage does it take to get electrons to relativistic
speeds? I used to know that. Maybe the voltage that, ignoring
relativity, would boost an electron to C. Something roughly 100 KV, I
recall.

John
 
"Brian" <brian@w3gate.com> wrote in message
news:mbCdndsoVZ3ooZjfRVn-oQ@centurytel.net...
Conclusion: to travel beyond the speed of light, one must be able to
either:
a) warp space
b) stop time
Click to expand...
Only if you're a photon. :)
 
"At some point you should receive the lecture about how, in beginning
classes, there are plenty of simplifications and outright mis-truths
told in
order to make understanding easier. The supposed "law" of conversatoin
of
energy only applies under certain specific scenarios and -- while those

scenarios are quite common in everyday life -- once you start playing
with
quantum mechanics you've violated the assumptions upon which the "laws"
were founded."


"the ideal gas" comes to mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top