only 500,000,000 years to go before we can see
[img]http://heavenawaits.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/god-creator.jpg[/img]
God damn you guys will argue about everything.
[QUOTE=Jewsus;18823218]only 500,000,000 years to go before we can see
[img]http://heavenawaits.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/god-creator.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
uh excuse me the universe was created 6,000 years ago haven't you read the bible
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18823231]God damn you guys will argue about everything.[/QUOTE]
Some people enjoy to argue.
Here's a thought, if you went out into space far enough that the light from the earth in 1940 had only just reached there, and you had some sort of super telescope, could you look at the earth and see the earth in 1940 and see Hitler, and then you had some sort of super sniper rifle that shot bulets far faster than the speed of light, then you could kill Hitler.
[QUOTE=lettuce_head;18824163]Here's a thought, if you went out into space far enough that the light from the earth in 1940 had only just reached there, and you had some sort of super telescope, could you look at the earth and see the earth in 1940 and see Hitler, and then you had some sort of super sniper rifle that shot bulets far faster than the speed of light, then you could kill Hitler.[/QUOTE]
No you wouldn't. Travelling at relativistic speeds doesn't reverse time.
So if I went to a place where the light from 1940s earth had only just reached, and used my awesome telescope, I would see earth in the 1940s right?
Woah...
Wait, what?
:psyduck:
[editline]06:37PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jewsus;18823218]only 500,000,000 years to go before we can see
[img]http://heavenawaits.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/god-creator.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Woah, what if you COULD see jesus walking around and doing miracles and shit.
Cash would be so shit.
[QUOTE=lettuce_head;18824536]So if I went to a place where the light from 1940s earth had only just reached, and used my awesome telescope, I would see earth in the 1940s right?[/QUOTE]
Yes, however, because light's the fastest thing in the universe it kind of fucks your plan up. You'd need to cheat the system somehow, slip through a worm-hole or something to get ahead of the light. Good luck finding the exotic matter to make that work (the wormhole, that is).
[QUOTE=lettuce_head;18824536]So if I went to a place where the light from 1940s earth had only just reached, and used my awesome telescope, I would see earth in the 1940s right?[/QUOTE]
Yes.
That means we could view historical events all over again :D
well not really cause we'd have to travel faster than light to get to a point where we can view the Earth in the past :(
And to think NASA wants to throw away this amazing piece of technology by deorbiting it once it becomes obsolete.
Imo they should capture it and bring it back down so it can be kept as an example to human innovation.
[QUOTE=CivilProtection;18825007]That means we could view historical events all over again :D
well not really cause we'd have to travel faster than light to get to a point where we can view the Earth in the past :([/QUOTE]
And I think the creation of faster than light travel itself would by far dwarf the combination of any and all other historical events or accomplishments ever.
[QUOTE=sltungle;18825086]And I think the creation of faster than light travel itself would by far dwarf the combination of any and all other historical events or accomplishments ever.[/QUOTE]
Compress space in front of you, expand it behind you.
[QUOTE=Yumyumbublegum;18825123]Compress space in front of you, expand it behind you.[/QUOTE]
The problem isn't "what", but rather, "how"?
It's amazing how it works, and what beauty the hubble has captured, i don't even think gailaio could have imageined what their is beyond the moon and planets of our solar system.
[QUOTE=CanibalMonke;18825208]The problem isn't "what", but rather, "how"?[/QUOTE]
Pretty much. An Alcubierre drive would require a ridiculous amount of energy to work. You'd probably have to take every last bit of matter in the entire solar system and convert it to 100% usable energy to make the thing work.
If you need to destroy an entire star system each and every time you use the thing, it's not a feasible idea.
[QUOTE=sltungle;18825255]Pretty much. An Alcubierre drive would require a ridiculous amount of energy to work. You'd probably have to take every last bit of matter in the entire solar system and convert it to 100% usable energy to make the thing work.
If you need to destroy an entire star system each and every time you use the thing, it's not a feasible idea.[/QUOTE]
Which means until we find a source of energy stronger and more attainable than nuclear, travel as such is impossible.
My brain really hurts now...
[QUOTE=CanibalMonke;18825287]Which means until we find a source of energy stronger and more attainable than nuclear, travel as such is impossible.[/QUOTE]
Or until we find a less energy demanding way (I have no doubt that any method of FTL travel WOULD demand an incredible amount of energy, but hopefully it would still be a feasible amount).
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;18820648]Hubble is the coolest thing NASA ever put into space.[/QUOTE]
One of the oldest things too, it was supposed to be replaced/retired years ago. But Congress's massive budget cuts to NASA have forced them to keep using it. Hubble is basically held together with baling wire and duct tape at the moment.
SCIENCE :science:
[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;18825491] Hubble is basically held together with duct tape at the moment.[/QUOTE]
I see no problem.
[quote=sltungle]Or until we find a less energy demanding way (I have no doubt that any method of FTL travel WOULD demand an incredible amount of energy, but hopefully it would still be a feasible amount).[/quote]
I heard somewhere that there isn't enough energy in the entire UNIVERSE to move a weighted object at the speed of light.
[img]http://llnw.image.cbslocal.com/33/2009/09/09/320x240/hubble4.jpg[/img]
We are so very....very.. small.
:(
[QUOTE=StormHammer;18827244][img]http://llnw.image.cbslocal.com/33/2009/09/09/320x240/hubble4.jpg[/img]
We are so very....very.. small.
:([/QUOTE]
Makes you wonder, what the fuck blew up to make all this? Yes I realize we have theories, but that's it. Just theories. Untill the Hubble can see what blew up first, I won't believe that one particle did it, or two random ones collided by chance. Hell I'd rather believe that the universe is in an unstoppable loop. Everything explodes out, collides back in, and explodes out again. That seems more logical to me.
[QUOTE=CanibalMonke;18827202]I see no problem.
I heard somewhere that there isn't enough energy in the entire UNIVERSE to move a weighted object at the speed of light.[/QUOTE]
Correct.
[editline]03:14AM[/editline]
That's why you have to move space, not yourself.
[QUOTE=Yumyumbublegum;18827288]Correct.
[editline]03:14AM[/editline]
That's why you have to move space, not yourself.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. But if we're not able to meet the maximum of our physics, how are we supposed to completely shatter them?
[QUOTE=CanibalMonke;18827311]Indeed. But if we're not able to meet the maximum of our physics, how are we supposed to completely shatter them?[/QUOTE]
What?
[QUOTE=Yumyumbublegum;18827418]What?[/QUOTE]
We cannot achieve the maximum of what we already know. How are we supposed to do something better than what we know, but is unknown?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.