• Something's boiling at CERN: Press conference concerning Higgs announced
    69 replies, posted
black holes
[QUOTE=rosthouse;33627450]For any object with a mass, getting over the speed of light requires infinite energy (with traditional propulsion methods anyway) and that would break everything.[/QUOTE] It's getting AT c that requires infinite mass. If you can somehow skip the part where you go at c (which in current physics is bloody impossible), then FTL is feasible.
[QUOTE=Kendra;33627925]It's getting AT c that requires infinite mass. If you can somehow skip the part where you go at c (which in current physics is bloody impossible), then FTL is feasible.[/QUOTE] I'm just thinking about how you could do that. I mean, you have to accelerate an object, which is a continuous action. You can't just skip anything. Maybe you need to, I don't know, slip in another dimension, accelerate there to your desired speed and then jump back in our dimension, where you then travel FTL. But this sounds even more impossible to me v:v:v
[QUOTE=Kendra;33627925]It's getting AT c that requires infinite mass. If you can somehow skip the part where you go at c (which in current physics is bloody impossible), then FTL is feasible.[/QUOTE] I was under the impression that due to time dilating as you approached c, travelling faster than it would imply negative time which breaks causality and is therefore not possible. Don't quote me on this though, I'm probably wrong
It's so awesome watching you guys talk. I need to read science threads more often.
Holy shit this thread showcased some of the worst posting known to man, there are about 5 terrible posts in a row
Hmm, how does a particle give something mass? [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] Kind of confused atm.
[QUOTE=smurfy;33628431]Holy shit this thread showcased some of the worst posting known to man, there are about 5 terrible posts in a row[/QUOTE] I kept on thinking "well surely the next guy has a chance to nail him for that bit of ridiculous posting now" but then the next reply was terrible and this repeated several times
[QUOTE=smurfy;33628431]Holy shit this thread showcased some of the worst posting known to man, there are about 5 terrible posts in a row[/QUOTE] Yep. Everyone who rated this agree [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/hall_of_shame.PNG[/img] And this disagree [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/hall_of_shame_2.PNG[/img] Should go and educate themselves about the scientific method. [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jookia;33627006]North [b]American[/b] Space Agency vs United Kingdom (British).[/QUOTE] uh it actually stands for National Aeronautic and Space Administration [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Kendra;33627422]There is nothing that says that FTL travel can't exist. The problem is that with acceleration you have to pass through every value of speed, so that means you have to pass through 3*10^8 m/s, but that is impossible with current knowledge, and therefore [I]getting to[/I] FTL speeds is thought of as impossible, but if you were somehow possible to skip directly to speeds that are faster than c, you could do it fine. You might have to deal with negative time dilatation then, but, that's another story.[/QUOTE] p sure that's not how relativity works
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;33629472]Yep. Everyone who rated this agree [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/hall_of_shame.PNG[/img] And this disagree [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/hall_of_shame_2.PNG[/img] Should go and educate themselves about the scientific method. [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] uh it actually stands for National Aeronautic and Space Administration [editline]8th December 2011[/editline] p sure that's not how relativity works[/QUOTE] "[B]A respected scientist from the Cern particle physics laboratory has told the BBC he expects to see "the first glimpse" of the Higgs boson next week.[/B]" Followed by "derp maybe they couldnt find it :downs:"
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33629529][b]"[B]A respected scientist from the Cern particle physics laboratory has told the BBC he expects to see "the first glimpse" of the Higgs boson next week.[/B]" Followed by "derp maybe they couldnt find it :downs:"[/QUOTE] Yes because as well all know, science works from authority figures. Besides, he might have been misquoted. Either way, it's poppycock to say that science doesn't work by "not finding things"
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;33629541]Yes because as well all know, science works from authority figures. Besides, he might have been misquoted. Either way, it's poppycock to say that science doesn't work by "not finding things"[/QUOTE] But you're taking it out of context of this news article for arguments sake.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33629556]But you're taking it out of context of this news article for arguments sake.[/QUOTE] how am i taking anything out of context
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;33629575]how am i taking anything out of context[/QUOTE] Because you're taking my mocking catch-phrasing literally. And seriously.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33629529]"[B]A respected scientist from the Cern particle physics laboratory has told the BBC he expects to see "the first glimpse" of the Higgs boson next week.[/B]" Followed by "derp maybe they couldnt find it :downs:"[/QUOTE] if you read the whole article it doesn't actually say that they're going to announce that they found it
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33629585]Because you're taking my mocking catch-phrasing literally. And seriously.[/QUOTE] "i was just trolling guys!"
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;33629678]"i was just trolling guys!"[/QUOTE] I wasn't trolling though. Even if I do believe Jookia to be a grade A brainwrong. Half the posts of facepunch contain a degree of unstable irony. Relax.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;33629706]I wasn't trolling though. Even if I do believe Jookia to be a grade A brainwrong. Half the posts of facepunch contain a degree of unstable irony. Relax.[/QUOTE] ok, sorry
[QUOTE=Killuah;33627227]Basically, everything we know in Physics is tied to a particle as a "carrier", light and EM fields have the photon and so on. These carriers need to have no mass for the Math to work but in fact, we have proven they have. So there needs to be this Higgs Boson(actually more than one) to serve as an explanation to the mass we see. Because we THINK that we only see a part of the picture and the Higgs would complete that, making our Math consistent in itself.[/QUOTE] So it won't bring us any closer to hover cars? ... GOD DAMNIT SCIENCE, I WAS PROMISED HOVER CARS BY 2015!
350 trillion collisions, holy fuck!
[QUOTE=madmanmad;33629956]So it won't bring us any closer to hover cars? ... GOD DAMNIT SCIENCE, I WAS PROMISED HOVER CARS BY 2015![/QUOTE] Actually we've already reached the first stage of hovercars. Something about "quantum suchandsuch". Be assured it was really cool and sciency, whatever it was called. I think that, what they did was, they dipped a magnet in liquid nitrogen and it sort of hovered over some metal. But as you can probably guess, I don't know much about it.
[QUOTE=Cone;33630576]Actually we've already reached the first stage of hovercars. Something about "quantum suchandsuch". Be assured it was really cool and sciency, whatever it was called. I think that, what they did was, they dipped a magnet in liquid nitrogen and it sort of hovered over some metal. But as you can probably guess, I don't know much about it.[/QUOTE] I think you mean quantum levitation. [video=youtube;VyOtIsnG71U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyOtIsnG71U&feature=related[/video] This only works on a track though, so it's not free. No hovercars here.
[IMG]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/57192000/jpg/_57192392_jex_1257640_de27-1.jpg[/IMG] I want this man's beard. It is glorious. He looks like a scientific Gandalf.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;33630885][IMG]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/57192000/jpg/_57192392_jex_1257640_de27-1.jpg[/IMG] I want this man's beard. It is glorious. He looks like a scientific Gandalf.[/QUOTE] Also his head seems to be floating in mid-air.
[QUOTE=rosthouse;33630787]I think you mean quantum levitation. [video=youtube;VyOtIsnG71U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyOtIsnG71U&feature=related[/video] This only works on a track though, so it's not free. No hovercars here.[/QUOTE] Hovertrains.
[QUOTE=madmanmad;33629956]So it won't bring us any closer to hover cars? ... GOD DAMNIT SCIENCE, I WAS PROMISED HOVER CARS BY 2015![/QUOTE] I don't think you have any idea on how much of a fiasco hover cars would actually be.
[QUOTE=LarparNar;33632243]Hovertrains.[/QUOTE] [img]http://ninpope-physics.comuv.com/maglev/images/slideshow/maglev01.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=LarparNar;33632243]Hovertrains.[/QUOTE] We technically already have that, it's called Maglev.
[QUOTE=smidge146;33630540]350 trillion collisions, holy fuck![/QUOTE] That's nothing really, especially when you consider a gram of pure 1-hydrogen consists of 6.022*10^23 atoms of hydrogen, which is a lot more than a trillion which is 10^12.
Something that I have always found difficult to understand is this: If a particle in the collider is traveling at .9C, and the Earth is spinning at 465.1 m/s, while orbiting the sun at 107,200 km/h, and all of this in turn is spinning around the galaxy at dickshattering speeds, doesn't that somewhere add up to more than C? Could any of our FP physicists clear it up for me?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.