GolfGTIforum.co.uk

General => General discussion => Topic started by: VW BUSH on 18 November 2011, 19:21

Title: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: VW BUSH on 18 November 2011, 19:21
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15791236

Is Albert wrong?
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Thom89 on 18 November 2011, 19:29
Of course we can travel faster than SOL, how the hell would Warp Drive work otherwise :rolleyes:

Thom
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Seanl on 18 November 2011, 19:33
Every past theory will be proved wrong eventually. Thats why its just a Theory!
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: The Mighty Elvi on 18 November 2011, 19:34
You need to go onto iplayer and watch the iirc Horizon programme about this. It was on about 3 weeks ago. With that Prof djalili chap.  Apparently is not true as the boffins miscalculated the distance from underneath the mountain to the detector. Fascinating though.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 18 November 2011, 19:38
You need to go onto iplayer and watch the iirc Horizon programme about this. It was on about 3 weeks ago. With that Prof djalili chap.  Apparently is not true as the boffins miscalculated the distance from underneath the mountain to the detector. Fascinating though.
i saw that too. trying so hard to disprove einstein seems they forgot all about newton

what they used

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/55556000/jpg/_55556200_cern_624_v2.jpg)

what einstein used

(http://www.whitcombauto.com/images/photos/notepad_and_pencil.gif)
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Adam on 18 November 2011, 19:43
Einstein wouldn't be able to live in todays world with computers as he spent his last dying days trying to disprove transistor theory.

Next question - is light a wave or a particle?
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: clipperjay on 18 November 2011, 19:45
It can be both
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: The Mighty Elvi on 18 November 2011, 19:52
Is it not a particle that forms a wave.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Gti_Jamo on 18 November 2011, 19:56
Its a particle when stationary and a wave when moving but can be both stationary and moving at the same time. Or something like that. Its a facinating subject physics and quantum physics more to the point. I don't believe that science has even scratched the surface with it yet. More complex than the human brain could comprehend. The true origin of reality.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 18 November 2011, 19:59
but is it stationary when being viewed by an observer traveling the same speed..
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 18 November 2011, 20:08
but is it stationary when being viewed by an observer traveling the same speed..

No because they will always be travelling at a different speed to some extent.


The true origin of reality is this:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: clipperjay on 18 November 2011, 20:11
The speed at which the light hits your eyes for you to notice its stationary  :wink:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 18 November 2011, 20:14
at which point you're only seeing your brains interpretation of electrical signals from the optic nerve anyway.. so does light even really exist? i <3 quantum mechanics
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 18 November 2011, 20:16
It exists, yes. However we only see a small portition of the spectrum, I bet there are colours we don't even see :cool:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Mitching on 18 November 2011, 20:17
at which point you're only seeing your brains interpretation of electrical signals from the optic nerve anyway.. so does light even really exist? i <3 quantum mechanics
Mind = blown.

It's like saying "If a tree falls in a forest  but no one is around to hear it, does it make a noise?"

My answer is that it creates the sound waves, but it won't become a noise until it hits the eardrum and is converted into a signal recognisable by the brain.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 18 November 2011, 20:21
It exists, yes. However we only see a small portition of the spectrum, I bet there are colours we don't even see :cool:

think about what you just said. if you don't still get it pick up your tv remote and find a sunscreen advert... 2 birds one stone.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: clipperjay on 18 November 2011, 20:24
The flux capacitor SAYS NO on a friday :rolleyes:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: snifferdog on 18 November 2011, 21:07
Light propagates as a wave and interacts as a particle so is therefore truly neither. :nerd:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: MrBounce on 18 November 2011, 21:08
Cheeseburger please.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 18 November 2011, 21:15
Light propagates as a wave and interacts as a particle so is therefore truly neither. :nerd:

wavicle.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Khare on 18 November 2011, 22:27
E=MC2 is WRONG because 0 + 1 = 0.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: R32UK on 19 November 2011, 07:15
E=MC2 is WRONG because 0 + 1 = 0.

thats it!! it all makes sense now  :smiley:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: cняis on 19 November 2011, 08:14
Wait for the God squad to arrive as disprove all your theories  :evil:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: The Mighty Elvi on 19 November 2011, 08:18
(http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr182/the_flying_elvi/father_ted_down_with_this_sort_of_t.jpg)
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: gibby on 19 November 2011, 15:16
I don't get why 0 + 1 = 0 :huh:

Example, I have 0 £s in my bank account, I then find £1 on the floor, I put that in my bank account so I now have £1. So 0 + 1 = 1 surely ? Or am I missing something ? :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 19 November 2011, 15:17
Missed it. Ask Lenda how 0+1=1 :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: gibby on 19 November 2011, 15:24
Ah, if Len said it then it must be true. :rolleyes:

Any links ?
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Mr Blue on 19 November 2011, 15:28
I don't get why 0 + 1 = 0 :huh:

Example, I have 0 £s in my bank account, I then find £1 on the floor, I put that in my bank account so I now have £1. So 0 + 1 = 1 surely ? Or am I missing something ? :grin:

exactly.

Sod this speed of light crap. What a waste of money. i have far more important things to sort.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 19 November 2011, 15:40
Lenda at her finest :grin:

http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=211985.msg1964606#msg1964606

Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: cняis on 19 November 2011, 19:26
Lenda at her finest :grin:

http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=211985.msg1964606#msg1964606




Should that be Len-derrrrrrr  :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 19 November 2011, 19:47
 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: VW BUSH on 20 November 2011, 10:54
lol love the new theories being developed, maybe we should sell this forum as a think tank for the enlightened....

Looking at the new method to measure the particles/waves/cheeseburgers under the alsps, it seems as though it has broken the speed of cheeseburger/light.
If true we have to start re thinking some of our flormulae.

With this new knowledge maybe we could actually make a warp engine, how to bolt it into a Mk3 is another story as I dont think the ABF gearbox can stand that much torque :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: gibby on 20 November 2011, 14:22
Lenda at her finest :grin:

http://www.golfgtiforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=211985.msg1964606#msg1964606

Classic. :laugh: A pound to a penny says he still thinks he's right. :rolleyes: .......but if you win and I do give you that pound, you'll still only have £0 in your pocket as 0 + 1 = 0 you see. :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 20 November 2011, 14:25
 :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: danny_p on 20 November 2011, 16:00
ummm  wonder what happens if one swaps speed of light out for speed of nutreno as the cosmic speed limute.   anyway i wants a time machene  thatway the mk3 golf will never happen  :evil:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: snifferdog on 20 November 2011, 16:34
ummm  wonder what happens if one swaps speed of light out for speed of nutreno as the cosmic speed limute.   anyway i wants a time machene  thatway the mk3 golf will never happen  :evil:

4000 posts on a golf forum and you havent figured out that the mk3 is the best gti to date  :tongue: :grin: :grin:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: rob.043 on 20 November 2011, 17:22
but is it stationary when being viewed by an observer traveling the same speed..

No because they will always be travelling at a different speed to some extent.


The true origin of reality is this:

Apparently, the speed of light is NOT relative. From Einsteins theories, the speed of light is constant, regardless of the relative motion of the observer. As such, an observer on an asteroid (say) hurtling towards the sun at 100,000 mph, will measure the speed of the light (usually about 300,000,000 m/s in a vacume) emitted form the sun to be 300,000,000 m/s, and not 300,000,000 - 100,000...  Similarly, when moving at the same speed away from the sun, its still measures 300,000,000 m/s.  :nerd:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 20 November 2011, 17:54
did you even read any of this thread? :laugh:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: trog_nfs on 20 November 2011, 17:55
ummm  wonder what happens if one swaps speed of light out for speed of nutreno as the cosmic speed limute.   anyway i wants a time machene  thatway the mk3 golf will never happen  :evil:

4000 posts on a golf forum and you havent figured out that the mk3 is the best gti to date  :tongue: :grin: :grin:

Or how to spell  :shocked:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Adam on 20 November 2011, 18:58
If a car hits a wall at 30mph, its a 30mph total collision
If a car hits a car at 30mph and the other car is doing 30mph, its a 60mph total collision
If light hits light at the speed of light what is the total collision speed?
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 20 November 2011, 19:20
If a car hits a wall at 30mph, its a 30mph total collision
If a car hits a car at 30mph and the other car is doing 30mph, its a 60mph total collision
If light hits light at the speed of light what is the total collision speed?

geek hat on.

total collision speeds are a simple newtonian mechanical calculation (V = V1 + V2) to explain what happens to the forces/momentum of an object with mass.

photons are massless and you need to move over to special relativity which would define the formula as V = (V1 + V2)/(1 + V1* V2/c²)

so your answer is tomato.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: The Mighty Elvi on 20 November 2011, 21:00
If a car hits a wall at 30mph, its a 30mph total collision
If a car hits a car at 30mph and the other car is doing 30mph, its a 60mph total collision
If light hits light at the speed of light what is the total collision speed?

There is no collision.

Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: danny_p on 20 November 2011, 21:05
Or how to spell  :shocked:

i'm actualy quite dyslexic and have probaly put more effort in to spelling than most people and to not make errors in spelling usally require me to read through something a few times thats dosent usally happen when posting on forums.    if you wish to take the piss you are more than welcome to do so as long as you do it in person if and when i ever meet you in person. ( i'll leave it up to you to decide if thats a good idea )

 thankfully spelling is not an issue for me in ether of my jobs. in one i have very littel paperwork to do in one of them and the other i have someone to who ether translates my scribbelings or takes notes and types it up.  


tho what you have acheved is reduceing the amont of avalible bothered to reply with usefull infomation and or advice to questions ect on forums in general and a garantee of unhelpfull  pokeing with stick type comments to any problem or question posted by yourself
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: trog_nfs on 20 November 2011, 21:14
Or how to spell  :shocked:

i'm actualy quite dyslexic and have probaly put more effort in to spelling than most people and to not make errors in spelling usally require me to read through something a few times thats dosent usally happen when posting on forums.    if you wish to take the piss you are more than welcome to do so as long as you do it in person if and when i ever meet you in person. ( i'll leave it up to you to decide if thats a good idea )

 thankfully spelling is not an issue for me in ether of my jobs. in one i have very littel paperwork to do in one of them and the other i have someone to who ether translates my scribbelings or takes notes and types it up.  


tho what you have acheved is reduceing the amont of avalible bothered to reply with usefull infomation and or advice to questions ect on forums in general and a garantee of unhelpfull  pokeing with stick type comments to any problem or question posted by yourself


Thanks for proving my point.  :smug:
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Jay on 20 November 2011, 21:31
Thanks for proving my point.  :smug:

Being dyslexic is not fun and it's not something that you should mock, and it most certainly does not mean someone is thick. Danny has a wealth of knowledge which he has proved over and over, comes on here and helps people out FOC when he charges for doing the same thing at work. Be grateful to people like him, they're the kind that keep online communities a source of knowledge for others.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: trog_nfs on 20 November 2011, 21:38
Thanks for proving my point.  :smug:

Being dyslexic is not fun and it's not something that you should mock, and it most certainly does not mean someone is thick. Danny has a wealth of knowledge which he has proved over and over, comes on here and helps people out FOC when he charges for doing the same thing at work. Be grateful to people like him, they're the kind that keep online communities a source of knowledge for others.

Yes dyslexia is no fun. At no point was any comment about his intelligence. And I'm sure he has a great wealth of knowledge.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Adam on 20 November 2011, 21:39
If a car hits a wall at 30mph, its a 30mph total collision
If a car hits a car at 30mph and the other car is doing 30mph, its a 60mph total collision
If light hits light at the speed of light what is the total collision speed?

There is no collision.



In one.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 20 November 2011, 21:49
^yet to be proven.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: clipperjay on 20 November 2011, 22:13
Thanks for proving my point.  :smug:

Being dyslexic is not fun and it's not something that you should mock, and it most certainly does not mean someone is thick. Danny has a wealth of knowledge which he has proved over and over, comes on here and helps people out FOC when he charges for doing the same thing at work. Be grateful to people like him, they're the kind that keep online communities a source of knowledge for others.

Yes dyslexia is no fun. At no point was any comment about insulting his intelligence. And I'm sure he has a great wealth of knowledge.
 :lipsrsealed:

Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Diamond Hell on 20 November 2011, 22:22
Thanks for proving my point.

Really?  Is that the best come-back you can make?

Precisely what point of yours did Danny prove?

Always delighted to see people just opening the taps and roaring into the distance in comparison to me in the 'being a c*nt' stakes and you are world-class on the evidence in this thread.
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Adam on 21 November 2011, 01:44
^yet to be proven.

Do explain?
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: topher on 22 November 2011, 00:29
the idea of a 90 degree interaction of photons has been around for donkeys, and comes attached with scary stories of matter/antimatter creation, but the probability is so close to 0 that it can't be/hasn't been detected.

some bedtime reading http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0510/0510076v2.pdf
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: Thom89 on 22 November 2011, 00:57
the idea of a 90 degree interaction of photons has been around for donkeys, and comes attached with scary stories of matter/antimatter creation, but the probability is so close to 0 that it can't be/hasn't been detected.

some bedtime reading http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0510/0510076v2.pdf

 :grin: :grin:

Thom
Title: Re: E=MC2, not any more
Post by: stealthwolf on 22 November 2011, 13:48
They might be wrong:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15830844