| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
   |
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:40:00 -
[61] - Quote
Altina McAlterson wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:Altina McAlterson wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:
celerity is the speed limit. Even if you could exploit entanglement the particles still only travel at speeds of C or less.
What? No one was talking about entanglement were they? Instantaneous transfer of information is the only exception to celerity, but speed doesn't apply in the same way. You don't have to get all huffy about your imaginary things. Who's getting huffy? I was just wondering because it just came out of nowhere talking about it.
there was a scientist studying cultures of bacteria he observed they would begin to act strange roughly 8minutes before a solar flare. Some of the particles in the water were entangled with particles in hydrogen atoms in the sun. The eight minutes was how long the light took to reach earth. The bacteria were affected instantaneously because of entanglement, however nothing traveled faster than light. Why? The particles were once part of the sun and traveled here at C or less at some time in the past. Traveling faster than light cannot be achieved. |
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:42:00 -
[62] - Quote
Altina McAlterson wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:
how is manipulating space time different than using a worm hole?
There are no wormholes in the tech of either series so what does it matter?
do you know what a worm hole is? |
Altina McAlterson
Pure Innocence.
EoN.
733
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:44:00 -
[63] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Altina McAlterson wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:
how is manipulating space time different than using a worm hole?
There are no wormholes in the tech of either series so what does it matter? do you know what a worm hole is?
Yes. So which series uses wormholes? The warp drive of star trek or the hyperspace of star wars? Both are actual FTL drives as in the ships reach superluminal velocity. Which is not how wormholes work (if they even actually exist).
"STFU I'm awesome, all your points are invalid as I kill proto's all the time nubs." - Infinite Diversity IDIC
|
Thurak1
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
467
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:47:00 -
[64] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Thurak1 wrote:Fizzer94 wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Hyper space makes more sense than warp drive because hyper space is the act of using a worm hole to travel through space, but warp drive is just going faster than light. Technically speaking, going through a worm hole is more likely, at least in modern science. That isnt how warp drive works at all. That is a gross oversimplification. Also, wormholes are just as theoretical as warp drives. The only difference is, we can possibly make warp drives, but to use a wormhole, you have to find it. Yes warp drives are called warp drives because they "warp" time and space. You dont nescisarily "travel" fast but you manipulate space to cover greater distances in far less time. found this tidbit that you might find interesting. http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive how is manipulating space time different than using a worm hole?
I guess the devil is in the details. Using a worm hole is generally though of as using something that already existed and is compared to going through a tunnel.
Warp drive can be explained as folding space around the ship. The ship itself does not travel it manipulates space around it. |
Altina McAlterson
Pure Innocence.
EoN.
733
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:50:00 -
[65] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Traveling faster than light cannot be achieved.
Tachyons. Theoretical I know, I'm just pointing them out.
Accelerating to the speed of light is impossible.
But just so we're clear are you saying that both star wars and star trek use technology that is technically impossible as we currently understand the universe? Because you're right and I believe I said that already.
Or are you saying the Alcubierre drive and its variants are impossible? Because at least on paper they should work and you would be wrong.
"STFU I'm awesome, all your points are invalid as I kill proto's all the time nubs." - Infinite Diversity IDIC
|
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:52:00 -
[66] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Thurak1 wrote:Fizzer94 wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Hyper space makes more sense than warp drive because hyper space is the act of using a worm hole to travel through space, but warp drive is just going faster than light. Technically speaking, going through a worm hole is more likely, at least in modern science. That isnt how warp drive works at all. That is a gross oversimplification. Also, wormholes are just as theoretical as warp drives. The only difference is, we can possibly make warp drives, but to use a wormhole, you have to find it. Yes warp drives are called warp drives because they "warp" time and space. You dont nescisarily "travel" fast but you manipulate space to cover greater distances in far less time. found this tidbit that you might find interesting. http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive how is manipulating space time different than using a worm hole?
altina, lets go back to where you did not answer this question, but asked your own. |
Jason Pearson
3768
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:55:00 -
[67] - Quote
People.
When stating something as a fact such as "You cannot travel faster than the speed to light" please state your evidence, all material along with a report as to why it is what it is. Also please include documentation from your college/university in which you studied and gained your degree and knowledge, thanks.
King of the Forums // Vehicle Specialist for Hire.
You're a total git, Jason. - Kingbabar
|
Altina McAlterson
Pure Innocence.
EoN.
733
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:55:00 -
[68] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:Thurak1 wrote:Fizzer94 wrote:DeadlyAztec11 wrote:Hyper space makes more sense than warp drive because hyper space is the act of using a worm hole to travel through space, but warp drive is just going faster than light. Technically speaking, going through a worm hole is more likely, at least in modern science. That isnt how warp drive works at all. That is a gross oversimplification. Also, wormholes are just as theoretical as warp drives. The only difference is, we can possibly make warp drives, but to use a wormhole, you have to find it. Yes warp drives are called warp drives because they "warp" time and space. You dont nescisarily "travel" fast but you manipulate space to cover greater distances in far less time. found this tidbit that you might find interesting. http://io9.com/5963263/how-nasa-will-build-its-very-first-warp-drive how is manipulating space time different than using a worm hole? altina, lets go back to where you did not answer this question, but asked your own.
It's more or less the same thing. But it's irrelevant because wormholes are not part of the warp drive or the hyperdrive,
"STFU I'm awesome, all your points are invalid as I kill proto's all the time nubs." - Infinite Diversity IDIC
|
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:56:00 -
[69] - Quote
Altina McAlterson wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:Traveling faster than light cannot be achieved. Tachyons. Theoretical I know, I'm just pointing them out. Accelerating to the speed of light is impossible. But just so we're clear are you saying that both star wars and star trek use technology that is technically impossible as we currently understand the universe? Because you're right and I believe I said that already. Or are you saying the Alcubierre drive and its variants are impossible? Because at least on paper they should work and you would be wrong.
we could argue this, yet it would be speculation. One would have to know the margins of error, assumptions, and variables not considered.
I can write god created everything on a piece of paper and it can not be disproven. |
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:58:00 -
[70] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:People.
When stating something as a fact such as "You cannot travel faster than the speed to light" please state your evidence, all material along with a report as to why it is what it is. Also please include documentation from your college/university in which you studied and gained your degree and knowledge, thanks.
sorry. Please refer to the standard model. |
|
|
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:03:00 -
[71] - Quote
Look. I am not trying to ruffle feathers. I'm going to bed. The improbability matrix is my chosen fantasy for getting around space. |
Altina McAlterson
Pure Innocence.
EoN.
734
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:10:00 -
[72] - Quote
Jason Pearson wrote:People.
When stating something as a fact such as "You cannot travel faster than the speed to light" please state your evidence, all material along with a report as to why it is what it is. Also please include documentation from your college/university in which you studied and gained your degree and knowledge, thanks.
You cannot accelerate to the speed of light:
e=mc^2
Relativistic speeds are no problem as 2 ships traveling at .75c away from each will have a relative velocity of 1.5c which isn't a problem. You require a Lorentz shift along a particular axis to determine absolute velocity. Using the x-axis e=mc^2 becomes:
e=1/((1-(v/c)^2)^1/2
where v=velocity and c=speed of light
if v=c (traveling at the speed of light) the you get:
e=1/(1-1^2)^1/2
e=1/(1-1)^1/2
e=1/0
So the energy required to accelerate to the speed of light approaches infinity as v approaches c.
"STFU I'm awesome, all your points are invalid as I kill proto's all the time nubs." - Infinite Diversity IDIC
|
Thurak1
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
467
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:16:00 -
[73] - Quote
Amarrgheddon wrote:Look. I am not trying to ruffle feathers. I'm going to bed. The improbability matrix is my chosen fantasy for getting around space.
That requires a cup of luke warm tea right? |
Shokhann Echo
Chatelain Rapid Response
Gallente Federation
147
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:18:00 -
[74] - Quote
They are completely different series, the only thing they have in common is the space travel. there both in space, they both use ships.
Star Trek is based in the milky way galaxy, they have never left the milky way galaxy in any of the series they produced.
Star Wars is based on an ancient galaxy very far away, NOT the milky way, heck nobody even knows the lor of where this galaxy is even located at, the only clue we have is "in a galaxy far far away" meaning its nowhere close to the milky way. The physics and species of star wars fits the entire thing because earth doesn't exist there, so there are more species involved, more advanced technology.. need I say more?
Youtube
Alt # 1
Back on main 3-31-2014
|
Amarrgheddon
Warcaste
32
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:23:00 -
[75] - Quote
Thurak1 wrote:Amarrgheddon wrote:Look. I am not trying to ruffle feathers. I'm going to bed. The improbability matrix is my chosen fantasy for getting around space. That requires a cup of luke warm tea right?
42.
I really am going to bed now. |
Sgt Kirk
Fatal Absolution
3983
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:24:00 -
[76] - Quote
I can't say which is better but I love Star Trek for it's themes in storyline, especially the first series.
Also, no. My name is not based on Captain Kirk. My last name is actually Kirk and it's happens to be a coincidence Star Trek is my favorite show of all time. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |