WC Movie was Starlancer Preview

Originally posted by Dekkar
what next theories on how to transmute wood to gold?
Click to expand...

Actually, with a series of nuclear fussions and fissions, theoretically this can be done. :)
 
We aren't speculating about whats going on in WC, we are assuming that the WC universe is relativly parallel to our own and thus that has the same physics. With that out of the way, the only speed that would be a ship's max speed would be .999999999999999 you get the picture of the speed of light. While it would be impracticle as hell to go at this speed becuase of primarily inetia, the possibility still exists
 
Actually, inertia becomes greater the faster once accelerates towards the speed of light. As one approaches the speed of light, mass approaches infinity (on a logorithmic scale). So that as you get closer to light speed, your mass increases so you need more energy to overcome inertia. Eventually, you (would theoretically, since you can't actually reach it)would hit infinite mass and would require infinite energy to contine accelerating.
 
Hmm... interesting posts, but why are you all assuming that
1) the speed of light is indeed the fastest you can go
2) the speed of light is constant?
Seems to me that if the smartest scientists aren't sure, you can't be either :)
 
No one has shown even the tiniest bit of proof that it would be possible to make any object with mass reach or surpass the speed of light. There are no scientists that I have ever heard of that have said otherwise. And the speed of light is not a constant, it only attains it's fabled speed in a pure vacuem. It has been slowed down and recently even stopped and some scientists have even speed it up apparently past light speed. But unless something seriously major happens to change physics, the light speed barrier is in no danger of being broken by any object with mass. No experiment has managed to even begin to push a particle of matter to the speed of light and every experiment has only shown that Einstien was correct on that matter.
 
That's how many people have thought about a lot of things, until someone proved otherwise :)
 
Yes, but I'm talking about actual evidence. I would love it to be otherwise and hopefully somebody will find a way that no one has thought of. But we have sent objects with mass towards the speed of light and what Einstien said would happen did. They gained mass and took more and more energy to approach the speed of light.
 
I saw a documentary on the subject a few weeks back. A scientist claiming that the speed of light was much faster in the early days of the universe, and that it's been slowing down ever since. Or it might have been the other way around, I forgot. I also hate physics.
 
What you are speaking of is a highly controversial theory that still does not have a shred of proof to it. It is mostly used by creationists to explain how Earth is only 6000 years old. On a side note, though the energies required are pretty much prohibitive, Gravity appears to travel instantly. While this is virtually impossibe to test easily, they do indicate that, for example, if the sun disappered and was somehow taken away, we would be immediatly thrown out of our orbit, DESPITE the fact that we would not know that the sun was gone for over a full 8 minutes. Unfort, how to use that in any way to travel through space is another matter entirely.
 
No, it wasn't about that at all, it wasn't some dumb religious freak trying to force the bible into the real world :) It was a serious study...

On the other matter... I believe gravitational pull in relation to the earth and sun is often explained with a ball on a cord anology. You have a ball on a cord, and you spin it around. If you cut the cord while that ball is spinning, it flies off instantly. If you imagine a cord the length of one AU, and you cut it, it'd still fly off instantly.
 
That is not how gravity works though. Gravity is caused by the warping of space by mass. But instead of an expected ripple effect (think of ripples in a pond) taking time to reach us, scientists now believe (based off of observations) that it would happen instantly, which means there are either no ripples or that those ripples travel instantly fast. Also I did not say that it was a theory put out by creationists but that it is a very contriversial theory that has become a favortie of creationists.
 
Well, let's not just brand it because some whackjobs happen to cling to it. :) I can't even begin to understand any of those theories, but throughout history people have always said "that's the way it is", "that's not possible" and they've consistently been proven wrong. So the odds of the speed of light being the fastest you can travel don't look good :)
 
I did not say that was why. Quite simply, there is not one single shred of evidence for the thoery that you are talking about. Meanwhile there are tons of evidence for light being the absolute speed limit. Just wishing it was otherwise cannot make it true. It's not the same as saying that the speed of sound could not be broken (plane designers thought that when the craft broke the sound barrier that the vibrations would tear it apart - while it is a rough transition, it is nothing near as bad as they thought). On the other hand, scientists have pushed atoms in particle accelerators up to .999999c. And guess what? It DID gain mass and DID require more and more energy as they approached ligth speed. Wishing it was otherwise will not make it true. Where there is hope is finding ways to bypass the speed limit. But for massed objects even reaching it are impossible. Heck, If you hit the speed of light how would you stop your craft? Time would be frozen so you could never stop anyway. So you wouldn't even want to travel at that speed.
 
I must agree with Voodoo, The speed of light is as far as we know is an unattainable speed. When the scientists slowed the speed of light to that of a bycicle (the precurser to stopping it altogether), if anything was in that chamber, it would only be able to go at .9999999 that of a bycicle and it would have next to infinite mass b4 it could go faster than that.
Af for FTL there are several theories as to how to do it, but one can never go at the speed of light, only just a little slower, or if those theories are correct a little or a lot faster.
 
Hrmmm...

Hey, I think my computer is broken! I can't see any of the posts by Voodoo :( Vondoom, can you see any?
 
I CAN!

But that's because I'm too stupid to read a name correctly. It's just in big letters at the begining of each post :)

TC
 
There is one theory that would say that gravity is every where at once that goes along with the big bang theory. It says that after the big bang all the matter was spread outward by the big bang but becasue gravity is constant the rate of that expansion, which theoretically is still happening now, is slowing because of teh pull of gravity. No matter how small a pull it is, it is always at work and eventually in however many billions of years it takes, all the matter of the universe will start falling back in on itself till we have a reverse big boom. THat would mean that gravity is every at any time no matter how far into deep space you are.
 
true, but matter did not exist for many millions of years after the original big bang, originally only energy existed then it was converted into matter via a process which I no longer remember but I can ask my Cosmology teacher.

Gravity does exist everywhere becuase it is a constant force, but there is also evidence that it exists without a speed. Also some quarks exist in 2 places at once so there are things that travel instantaneosly (sp). Finally the problem with the pulsating theory (the universe will colapse upon itself) is that according to astronomers there is not enough gravity to overcome the forces for expantion simply because there is not enough matter in the universe unless there is significantly more dark matter than we know of. Because of the inverse square law, the gravitational force of the Sun has for all intents and purposes no gravitational pull (it is so insignificant it is irrelevant) on lets say another galaxy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top