User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 9:17:35 PM EDT
[#1]
m60308nato,
You're making quite a name for yourself with less than 40 posts on this board. I suggest you stop the name calling and attitude, and your stay here will be all the more enjoyable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 9:18:05 PM EDT
[#2]
m60308nato, it's obvious that you don't understand Newtonian physics much less the concepts presented by quantum mechanics. Now shut up and get back in line with the other mental midgets.
You prattle on about something that you know nothing about, without at least checking your basic facts first. Than indicates to me that you should have a long and rewarding career in management, but will probably never be able to deliver the goods yourself. Oh, and FYI, no one has ever, EVER obtained fission via splitting molecules. You must split ATOMS boy genius. I think we need to tell your mom to add this site to your browser's net nanny function or whatever. Now stop lying to that babysitter, we all know you're not allowed to stay up this late. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 9:57:42 PM EDT
[#3]
Damn,If I would have known this much fuss would have come out of me mentioning traveling at the speed of light. I would have kept my mouth shut![:X*]
Oh well its nights like these that make me miss ar15.com while at work.(Since AR15.com is banned only to me at my work):[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=115223 [/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 9:59:48 PM EDT
[#4]
Im just poping off this shit off to the best of my knowledge as fast as I can, im not going to web pages to check or look up anything I write, when im willing to bet you just went and looked up all those big words you used then went around and read all the website links people put up. then came back here to write a half assed paragraph about shit YOU yourself know nothing about.
you see im not so paranoid that i have to go and look up everything about everything i write just to make sure there are no flaws in it, i just slap it down to the best of my knowledge it is not worth the waste of my time to know most of this crap yet i do because stupid people are always bringing stuff like this up in an argument, is there life somewhere out there? maybe, we don't know, but if there is life out there, we would never be able to make it to them, and thay will never make it here. so is there any point to any of the posts on this subject? no. as my first post states there is no way in hell to safely fly faster then the speed of light or anywhere near it, period end of story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 10:14:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: whoop de fuckin do, now lets see them actually make something move faster then the speed of light, and when thay do..... try moving an object with a live animal in it faster then the speed if light... then when you have an animal crushed flatter then a piece of paper by the g-force of moving forward that fast, tell me you want to be the next one to try it. and then you still move back to the problem of space dust, and rocks, comets, asteroids, all that good junk that could get in the way That's what a navigational deflector (pushes space junk out of the way) and inertial damping system (absorbs inertial forces when traveling to light speed and keeps you from going SPLAT) are for. SHEEESH! Don't you watch Star Trek???? USPC40 [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/line.gif[/img] [url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url] [url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url] [img]www.ar15.com/members/albums/USPC40/alabamaflag.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 11:22:14 PM EDT
[#6]
YEA!!! B-O-G made it back... I see you chose the wonderous state of Wisconsin for your mythical home. By the way, how are the robots doing? Oh, there is also an FBI office in Milwaukee so don't go to that town. They may want to see your illegal M16 that you would use to gun down cops with.
Or perhaps they might want to see your unregistered rail gun... WEEEEE |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2002 11:46:41 PM EDT
[#7]
Here is a link from the Art Bell site. (I listen to him on the way home.) I didn't read the entire discussion but this guy seem to have tied together all of the conspiracy theorys except for planet X.
[url]http://www.anomalous-images.com/christo.html[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 12:27:18 AM EDT
[#8]
The genepool is in dire need of more chlorine.
"fission is the splitting of molecules". I am by no means a physicist but I remember being taught different in 4th grade physical science. Are you serious? Your just "poping" this shit off the top of your head. And your bitching because someone else has the audacity to actually research a topic before professing to actually know something about it. If I were you I would shut my suckhole and take this as a lesson learned. Next time, look it up before you embarrass yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 12:39:29 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: YEA!!! B-O-G made it back... I see you chose the wonderous state of Wisconsin for your mythical home. By the way, how are the robots doing? Oh, there is also an FBI office in Milwaukee so don't go to that town. They may want to see your illegal M16 that you would use to gun down cops with. Or perhaps they might want to see your unregistered rail gun... WEEEEE B-O-G? I never said anything about gunning down cops, and no I do not have a illegal M16 or a rail gun, that would be way to expensive of a hobby, replace copper rails every 100 shots, my electric bill would be insane, talk about the price of ammo and well try finding a sufficient backstop. not including every time you melt your rails, or weld your projectiles to the rails, and it cna only fire one shot at a time. not worth the $$$ if you ask me, but something fun for one of those rich pricks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 12:58:39 AM EDT
[#10]
A few tidbits of info for y'all (you too m60308nato):
1. UFOs are not terrestrial or extraterrestrial craft. In fact, they are not even crafts. 2. Speed does not produce g-forces, no matter how fast you are going. Even if you are going 99.999% of the speed of light. 3. FTL speeds ARE possible, and occur naturally every day. 4. There is no such thing as absolute motion. Everything's relative, even to the nonsentient. 5. We are currently clipping along at about 67,000 miles per hour around the Sun. That's 98,239.79 feet per second, if you like. 6. We are flying along at approximately 200 (plus or minus 50) kilometers per second around the center of this galaxy. That's 447,482.90 miles per hour. Or 656,167.97 feet per second, if you like. 7. But, remember #4. And #2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 1:06:04 AM EDT
[#11]
originally posted by b0ne
"A few tidbits of info for y'all (you too m60308nato): 1. UFOs are not terrestrial or extraterrestrial craft. In fact, they are not even crafts. 2. Speed does not produce g-forces, no matter how fast you are going. Even if you are going 99.999% of the speed of light. 3. FTL speeds ARE possible, and occur naturally every day. 4. There is no such thing as absolute motion. Everything's relative, even to the nonsentient. 5. We are currently clipping along at about 67,000 miles per hour around the Sun. That's 98,239.79 feet per second, if you like. 6. We are flying along at approximately 200 (plus or minus 50) kilometers per second around the center of this galaxy. That's 447,482.90 miles per hour. Or 656,167.97 feet per second, if you like. 7. But, remember #4. And #2. " Very well said, clear concise and articulate. M60308nato, pay attention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 1:16:36 AM EDT
[#12]
I am not even going to get into black holes, wormholes, quantum theory, folding space, warp speed, hyperspace, subspace, etc. etc.
I will leave that to the Star Trek, Star Wars, and Dune freaks. [s]"My schwartz is bigger than your schwartz."[/s] I have just been informed that the correct phrase was, "I see your schwartz is as big as mine." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 5:22:10 AM EDT
[#13]
Then how come they need those silly flashing or glowing lights everybody swears they see on them? They are paid to advertise....Coca Cola or Goodyears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 6:27:11 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Im just poping off this shit off to the best of my knowledge as fast as I can, im not going to web pages to check or look up anything I write, . you see im not so paranoid that i have to go and look up everything about everything i write just to make sure there are no flaws in it, i just slap it down to the best of my knowledge it is not worth the waste of my time to know most of this crap yet i do because stupid people are always bringing stuff like this up in an argument, If you "slap it down to the best of {your}knowledge it is not worth the waste of {your} time to know most of this crap" then you are spouting worthless and misleading information with a total disregard for honesty. Someone speculated in a post above that you may be about age 15. From the quality of your rantings, I think you've confirmed that publicly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 1:17:21 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well if you can travel at the speed of light,you can travel through time(Proven) no that is not proven, that is a theory. quote] I can't remember the name of the government project but I remember reading about an experiment that proved that time travel was possible. It may have been in Stephen Hawkins "A brief history of time", I can't remember right now. I know we talked about it in AE245 and in physics when I was in college but I did read about it somewhere else. Anyway they synchronized two atomic clocks and placed on in a B-25 and flew as fast as they could for as long as they could. When they landed the clock from the B-25 was a few thousandths slower than the clock left on the ground. This was all in an effort to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity but they ended up proving his theory valid. Am I the only person on Earth who thinks that Stephen Hawking is full of crap? I seriously think the only thing that makes his work stand out is that he is in a wheelchair and has to use an electronic voice...What a gimmick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 1:35:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Freakin rocket scientists...
You're all missing the point. When you send an atomic clock (which is synched to an atomic clock on Earth) into space, or make it travel at a high rate of speed, you are MAYBE proving ONE of two things: 1. That the atomic clock is innacurate when subjected to high speeds. or. 2. The atomic clock acts differently in a zero-g environment, compared to one on earth. The experiment proves nothing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 2:24:17 PM EDT
[#17]
duh
[:K] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 2:27:40 PM EDT
[#18]
Any U.F.O. questions you may have...
[url]www.dreamlandresort.com[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 3:10:00 PM EDT
[#19]
m60308nato, when you were anally probed did it hurt??????
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 6:39:30 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: Freakin rocket scientists... You're all missing the point. When you send an atomic clock (which is synched to an atomic clock on Earth) into space, or make it travel at a high rate of speed, you are MAYBE proving ONE of two things: 1. That the atomic clock is inaccurate when subjected to high speeds. or. 2. The atomic clock acts differently in a zero-g environment, compared to one on earth. The experiment proves nothing. Otherwise you are just another advocate of "junk science." I am [b]supremely[/b] confident that you will [b]never[/b] be able to fine one [b]shred of fact[/b] that supports your foolish statements. That is because various research laboratories, working completely independently, have collaborated the scientific basis of Einstein's theory of General Relatively completely. Unlike your wild a$$ed assumptions, the time dilation effect at extreme velocities is a proven fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 7:28:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: A few tidbits of info for y'all (you too m60308nato): 1. UFOs are not terrestrial or extraterrestrial craft. In fact, they are not even crafts. .... Okay, so I get the rest of your points, but what does this mean? Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 7:28:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: Freakin rocket scientists... You're all missing the point. When you send an atomic clock (which is synched to an atomic clock on Earth) into space, or make it travel at a high rate of speed, you are MAYBE proving ONE of two things: 1. That the atomic clock is inaccurate when subjected to high speeds. or. 2. The atomic clock acts differently in a zero-g environment, compared to one on earth. The experiment proves nothing. Otherwise you are just another advocate of "junk science." I am [b]supremely[/b] confident that you will [b]never[/b] be able to fine one [b]shred of fact[/b] that supports your foolish statements. That is because various research laboratories, working completely independently, have collaborated the scientific basis of Einstein's theory of General Relatively completely. Unlike your wild a$$ed assumptions, the time dilation effect at extreme velocities is a proven fact. Actually Ron clocks run differently in different gravity strengths. This is also part of Einstein's special theory of relativity, so he is right about number two. The stronger the graviy field, the faster the clock will go, that is why you have temporal/spatial frame dragging when a massive object moves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2002 9:48:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Well, first off, I was only hypothesising the OBVIOUS. Secondly, No 'scientist' has come close to the speeds neccesary to even simulate the a time warp.
Here are some more hypothesis'. 1. If you travel faster than the speed of light, you will not "go back" in time, you will ONLY beat the lightwaves that you passed on the way to the destination. If it's 5:00 pm on a planet 50 light years away, and you start here at 5:00 and it only takes you 30 minutes to get there, it will be 5:30 pm when you arrive there. 2. If you travel at the speed of light (which is impossible) you can only be light. 3. An atomic clock is accurate because it works off of (measures) radioactive discharge/halflives...If you subject it to extraterrestrial radiation (such as the Van Allen belts) it is bound to be screwed-up by higher radiation levels which WILL make it innacurate. 4. These are the same 'scientists' that, 25 years ago, claimed we were heading into another ice age. 5. Scientists cannot even explain GRAVITY, a fundamental part of science. Sure, they can tell you all 'about' it, but they do NOT know why it's there. As far as [red]"various research laboratories, working completely independently, have collaborated the scientific basis of Einstein's theory of General Relatively completely."[/red] Sure I believe you...Doesn't mean they proved it. I believe the scientific basis is there, but it is something that even Einstein could never prove, that is why he realized that there HAD to be a Creator =) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 12:10:49 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: A few tidbits of info for y'all (you too m60308nato): 1. UFOs are not terrestrial or extraterrestrial craft. In fact, they are not even crafts. .... Okay, so I get the rest of your points, but what does this mean? Thanks. Ahh, because UFO stands for 'Unidentified Flying Object' (emphasis on 'unidentified'). It means exactly what it stands for. But apparently, to certain people "UFO" seems to mean "Aliens have come to give me a butt probe", instead of "I have no idea what the hell that thing is". [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 3:56:22 AM EDT
[#25]
[i]m60308nato[/i] hunt and pecked : [b]Im just poping off this shit off to the best of my knowledge as fast as I can... im not going to..look up anything I write... you see im not so paranoid that i have to go and look up everything about everything i write just to make sure there are no flaws in it... i just slap it down to the best of my knowledge... it is not worth the waste of my time to know most of this crap yet i do because stupid people are always bringing stuff like this up in an argument[/b]
*LOL* Yes folks, no doubt a splendid example of [i]yure publik edd-ewe-kay-shun cestym[/i] at work! This lazy ass has access to the best information from the best minds in the world, but he can't be bothered to look it up. Waste of time, ya see. One bright side, however - though this person can't be bothered with the details of physics, perhaps with luck he'll get a first hand lesson in evolution theory and become a Darwin Candidate... hopefully before he's discovered by Wall Street and becomes an investment broker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 5:30:24 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: You have posted [i]nothing[/i] more than an unsupported opinion. If you have a different hypothesis, or better yet if you subscribe to a theory published by a respected researcher that has undergone peer review, then post it. Otherwise you are just another advocate of "junk science." I am [b]supremely[/b] confident that you will [b]never[/b] be able to fine one [b]shred of fact[/b] that supports your foolish statements. That is because various research laboratories, working completely independently, have collaborated the scientific basis of Einstein's theory of General Relatively completely. Unlike your wild a$$ed assumptions, the time dilation effect at extreme velocities is a proven fact. no its not proven fact until it has been done, and we wont ever be moving at light speed, so there wont ever be proof. you see I get pissed off when people start talking about things that no one knows how to make, nor do thay even have a theory on how to make it, and yet thay say, OH, we will have this in the future... like shields, sure using the forces of magnetism you could block metal objects but not the biggest problem in space, ROCK. also if you do invent Shields thay will have to be transparent so you can see through them, that means light passes through them, that also means thay cant and wont be able to stop LASERS, should thay ever be made. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 5:58:25 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: 2. Speed does not produce g-forces, no matter how fast you are going. Even if you are going 99.999% of the speed of light. 3. FTL speeds ARE possible, and occur naturally every day. Speed dose make G-forces, when accelerating. why do you think your back gets pushed into the seat of your car when you floor it? I am guessing that to make light speed, the initial jump would be very very fast. "FTL speeds ARE possible, and occur naturally every day." what do you know of that moves faster then light that occurs every day? nothing moves faster then light BUT light itself. Maybe solar flares move faster then light, but tell me how your going to harness the most destructive force in the universe? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 6:32:35 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Speed dose make G-forces, when accelerating. why do you think your back gets pushed into the seat of your car when you floor it? I am guessing that to make light speed, the initial jump would be very very fast. "FTL speeds ARE possible, and occur naturally every day." what do you know of that moves faster then light that occurs every day? nothing moves faster then light BUT light itself. Maybe solar flares move faster then light, but tell me how your going to harness the most destructive force in the universe? Erm Velocity (speed) has no inherent 'G-force' within it. Now ACCELERATION (either positive, or negative) does, that is 'G-Force' you feel, the effects of ACCELERATION not the effects of velocity. As to the whole solar flare thing I dunno were you get that sorta information. The earth is 8 light minutes (it takes light coming from the surface of the sun 8 minutes to reach the earth)from the sun (give or take a few secs), yet it takes solar flares (or spikes in the solar wind), made up primarily of Hydrogen plasma days/weeks to reach the earth. And actually the most destructive force in the 'uiverse' is up for debate, I am not sure a singularity (the infinite mass at the center of a black hole) still qualifies as being in THIS Universe, but they are far more detructive than anything we could ever control. But that is also were their is a DAILY faster than light travel, of course it is hidden behind a barrier (the event horizon of the Black Hole) that cannot be penetrated by any means known to man. But then again, you could almost argue that anything behind the event horizon is not entirely within our Universe anymore. BTW light doenst even travel faster than light. Light has a constant speed in a vacuum . Light emitted by a stationary source and that same source traveling 99.99999999999999999% the speed of light still travel at the same velocity. One will have a normal 'color' and the other will be Blueshifted, to an outside observer, if the moving source is traveling towards the observor, if the source is traveling away from the observer the light will be Redshifted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2002 6:58:13 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: sure using the forces of magnetism you could block metal objects but not the biggest problem in space, ROCK. Funny, but this "rock" you are talking about is made out of a nickel-iron alloy. It has magnetic properties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:26:33 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: no its not proven fact until it has been done, and we wont ever be moving at light speed, so there wont ever be proof. you see I get pissed off when people start talking about things that no one knows how to make, nor do thay even have a theory on how to make it, and yet thay say, OH, we will have this in the future... like shields, sure using the forces of magnetism you could block metal objects but not the biggest problem in space, ROCK. We already have demonstrable forcefields. The problem now is solving energy requirments and strength requirements. There are plenty of things we have now that folks were talking about centuries ago. Because they talked about them, then made plans, they were finally able to be produced. If people only discussed what was already available, there would be no invention whatsoever.I am beginning to think that not only are you 15, but that you may be borderline impaired with an IQ in the 70s. also if you do invent Shields thay will have to be transparent so you can see through them, that means light passes through them, that also means thay cant and wont be able to stop LASERS, should thay ever be made. I am assuming when you say "thay" you are referring to the shields and not the LASERs, since any cretin can see them regularly in use at the corner store. Why stopping LASER beams would be of paramount importance, I have no idea. Why you need to be able to see at all at relativistic speeds I have no idea. You ain't gonna turn. You would want to block light anyway due to blue shift. We use magnetic bottles for containment in Tokamaks and to transport antimatter. They work pretty well. A scaled up version would probably do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:42:12 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Speed dose make G-forces, when accelerating. why do you think your back gets pushed into the seat of your car when you floor it? Speed=velocity. Velocity is constant. At any given speed the acceleration is zero provided you are no longer accelerating. No G force at any constant speed, even C. I am guessing that to make light speed, the initial jump would be very very fast. Why? because you saw it on Star Wars and Star Trek? Why not just accelerate steadily at 1 G? Using the equation: Vf=Vi+at we find that 2.99x10 to the 8th power m/s= 0+(.981m/sec sq x t) t therefore equals 303771661 secs, or 5062861 min, or 84341 hrs, or3515 days, or 9.6 years. If you steadily accelerate at 1 G you could hit light speed in 9.6 years and NEVER feel an ounce of G force over and above what you feel right now at your computer. what do you know of that moves faster then light that occurs every day? nothing moves faster then light BUT light itself. Maybe solar flares move faster then light, but tell me how your going to harness the most destructive force in the universe? Tachyons and neutrinos are not bound by what we normally ascribe to subatomic particles behaviorwise. They seem to exceed the speed of light. We have also created conditions right here on earth where the speed of light has been broken for data tranfer. Ummm...how can a car go faster than itself? It can't How can light go faster than itself? It can't. Do you have any pictures of you Mom when she was pregnant with you? Was she holding bottles of booze or crack pipes in the majority of these pictures? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:42:43 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: They must have a reason. Anyone with common sense knows we have visitors.Non believers are dumbasses,period. all I can say is, fuck you too. you can go on believing in littel green men if you want, I however look at the facts, it is not possible for anyone to move faster then the speed of light, have you ever though about the structural strain and stress? damn man we are lucky to reach mach 3 (3x the speed of sound 3,264FPS) in a plane with out disintegrating. now try moving at over 1,000,000 FPS to make the speed of light. good luck wont happen. if you can move this fast, how will you know what is in front of you? moving at faster then one million feet per second you better know where every littel pebble and speck of dust in the universe is. you hit anything moving that fast your fucked. I thought that the people on this web sight would understand this.... YOUR GUNS CANT SHOOT FASTER THEN 3,300FPS It moves because it uses negative energy to expand space-time behind the warpship and contract it in the front. The object really isn't moving at all, it is space-time that is infact moving. You are thinking way too conventionally, we will never be able to reach the stars by simply adding more and more thrust. By the way, we have many vehicles that are capable of exceeding Mach 3. Such as the X-15 which exceeded Mach 6.72. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:43:12 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: There Turn Signals IMHO. Sgtar15 I can just hear the complaints now: 'You know, Jake-El, I just followed your ass here for 50 million light years, and your friggin left turn strobe was on the whole damn way!' Eric The(Prick!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:45:10 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: If you get a projectile with enough mass going fast enough you don't really need spin due to moment of inertia. Of course you could always launch finned projectiles to solve that problem. Sir Poikilotrm, is there any chance you could explain this whole moment of inertia thing to me? a definition would suffice. i can recall my knobgobbler of an AP Physics teacher talking about it but no one ever really understood just what he meant... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 6:46:48 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: what do you know of that moves faster then light that occurs every day? nothing moves faster then light BUT light itself. Maybe solar flares move faster then light, but tell me how your going to harness the most destructive force in the universe? Oh yeah. I forget to answer this part/. Solar flares move at a rather stately pace. They can take a week to get here to earth, which is a mere 8.5 light minutes away from Mr. Sun. That ain't FTL. It is just hot charged plasma, ya know? The 4th state of matter? Bet you don't know the other 3. BTW, what is the most destructive force in the universe? Habeneros? Kippers in Tabasco and mustard sauce on an empty stomach washed down with warm Schaeffer's beer? Tell me please, deign to cast your pearls before swine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 7:10:27 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Sir Poikilotrm, is there any chance you could explain this whole moment of inertia thing to me? a definition would suffice. i can recall my knobgobbler of an AP Physics teacher talking about it but no one ever really understood just what he meant... Sir Poikilotrm, geez, now I am being approached by a King Arthur wannabe. Yes a duck floats, but very small rocks do not. Moment of inertia is simply part of rotational inertia. It is the rotational analog of mass. Honestly I meant to say simple inertia in the post you are referring to, thanks for bringing it to my attention. When you impart spin, it steadies the mass gyroscopically, and that is moment of inertia. Here is a link since I am notoriously inarticulate: [url]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mi.html[/url] Sorry for the confusion. Remember, if the launched mass is heavy enough, spin isn't necessary. Big bullets fly better than little ones. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 7:29:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Dude, Change your name, come back as somebody else.
Oh, and by the way, maybe you should quit going to a univercity in in Wisconsin and go to Michigan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 7:40:00 PM EDT
[#38]
I was going to say the same thing except add:
"keep your mouth shut" |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 7:43:21 PM EDT
[#39]
testing
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 7:43:42 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Dude, Change your name, come back as somebody else. Oh, and by the way, maybe you should quit going to a univercity in in Wisconsin and go to Michigan. No no no! He isn't really a college student is he? No one in any college is that drool on yourself stupid out side of the humanities and education! Please say he isn't a college student! Please! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 11:52:54 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: also if you do invent Shields thay will have to be transparent so you can see through them, that means light passes through them, that also means thay cant and wont be able to stop LASERS, should thay ever be made. [url]oakley.com/ostore/military/si_m_frame_laser/[/url] Yes, this is on a small scale with non-weapon type lasers, I know. However, if it can be done on a small scale, it most likely can be done, albeit differently, on a larger scale. Who the hell knows what's coming in the future. BTW, it is indeed impossible to hit actual lightspeed (or go faster) in LOCAL SPACE, according to general relativity. However, I'm not going to give away the reason why, and you haven't said what it is. I'll give you a hint: I don't think you have enough energy to simply Google it and find out! Only real way to go "FTL" (even though it's not real FTL) is with some other method, such as wormholes, "warp drive", etc. etc. But of course all that is a damn long way off, not to mention purely hypothetical. But even if high-speed low-time space travel is possible, I don't think we'll get around to discovering it or using it. Civilizations don't generally last long enough for the amount of time I think it'd take to discover something as big as that. Here is some interesting reading for everyone: [url]math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2002 11:55:53 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Quoted: also if you do invent Shields thay will have to be transparent so you can see through them, that means light passes through them, that also means thay cant and wont be able to stop LASERS, should thay ever be made. [url]oakley.com/ostore/military/si_m_frame_laser/[/url] Yes, this is on a small scale with non-weapon type lasers, I know. However, if it can be done on a small scale, it most likely can be done, albeit differently, on a larger scale. Who the hell knows what's coming in the future. BTW, it is indeed impossible to hit actual lightspeed (or go faster) in LOCAL SPACE, according to general relativity. However, I'm not going to give away the reason why, and you haven't said what it is. I'll give you a hint: I don't think you have enough energy to simply Google it and find out! Only real way to go "FTL" (even though it's not real FTL) is with some other method, such as wormholes, "warp drive", etc. etc. But of course all that is a damn long way off, not to mention purely hypothetical. But even if high-speed low-time space travel is possible, I don't think we'll get around to discovering it or using it. Civilizations don't generally last long enough for the amount of time I think it'd take to discover something as big as that. Here is some interesting reading for everyone: [url]math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html[/url] I am pretty sure FTL will be solved some time in the late 21'st century or at least early 22'nd. We will probably at least make first contact this century if we have not already. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 12:15:06 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: I am pretty sure FTL will be solved some time in the late 21'st century or at least early 22'nd. We will probably at least make first contact this century if we have not already. so what your saying is that aliens are going to come here in your life time, and hand over millions of years of technology to us? HA! you know what would happen, we would shoot them down and salvage what we could. what makes us any different then all the generations before us? why haven't thay come earlier? why would a more intelligent race have any interest in us? other then to kill us and take our planet. I think your all nut jobs, even if you could travel at light speed, you wouldn't live long enough to reach the nearest galaxy. YOU really think aliens are flying around in UFO's without someone picking it up on radar? if it is picked up on radar, it would be shot down. and I don't think your glowing flying saucers would be stealth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:04:34 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Time dilation has been measured and has been proven. It is a done deal. Crack a book. The monstously uneducated bile you spew is beginnning to get more than a little noisome. We already have demonstrable forcefields. The problem now is solving energy requirments and strength requirements. There are plenty of things we have now that folks were talking about centuries ago. Because they talked about them, then made plans, they were finally able to be produced. If people only discussed what was already available, there would be no invention whatsoever.I am beginning to think that not only are you 15, but that you may be borderline impaired with an IQ in the 70s. I am assuming when you say "thay" you are referring to the shields and not the LASERs, since any cretin can see them regularly in use at the corner store. Why stopping LASER beams would be of paramount importance, I have no idea. Why you need to be able to see at all at relativistic speeds I have no idea. You ain't gonna turn. You would want to block light anyway due to blue shift. We use magnetic bottles for containment in Tokamaks and to transport antimatter. They work pretty well. A scaled up version would probably do. SO WHAT now your talking about time dialation again and not the subject at hand, FTL travel. maybe you can move through time, but you wont be moving FTL ever. "We already have demonstrable forcefields" then show me one because it hasent been done. in order to block light your shields would have to be constructed of some material that is not transparent. NOT POSSABLE. lasers can and will be used as a weapon in the near future, we already have tablesaws that use lasers to cut sheets of metal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:14:32 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Why? because you saw it on Star Wars and Star Trek? Why not just accelerate steadily at 1 G? Using the equation: Vf=Vi+at we find that 2.99x10 to the 8th power m/s= 0+(.981m/sec sq x t) t therefore equals 303771661 secs, or 5062861 min, or 84341 hrs, or3515 days, or 9.6 years. If you steadily accelerate at 1 G you could hit light speed in 9.6 years and NEVER feel an ounce of G force over and above what you feel right now at your computer. Are you going to wait 9.6 years just to get moving at light speed? I think not. now answer how many times you could speed up faster then light and slow back down to a stop in your life time. your line of bullshit here, makes FTL travel worthless. why even make it? it would take AT LEAST 20% of your life to just get moving faster then light and slow back down to a stop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:16:25 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: Quoted: Time dilation has been measured and has been proven. It is a done deal. Crack a book. The monstously uneducated bile you spew is beginnning to get more than a little noisome. We already have demonstrable forcefields. The problem now is solving energy requirments and strength requirements. There are plenty of things we have now that folks were talking about centuries ago. Because they talked about them, then made plans, they were finally able to be produced. If people only discussed what was already available, there would be no invention whatsoever.I am beginning to think that not only are you 15, but that you may be borderline impaired with an IQ in the 70s. I am assuming when you say "thay" you are referring to the shields and not the LASERs, since any cretin can see them regularly in use at the corner store. Why stopping LASER beams would be of paramount importance, I have no idea. Why you need to be able to see at all at relativistic speeds I have no idea. You ain't gonna turn. You would want to block light anyway due to blue shift. We use magnetic bottles for containment in Tokamaks and to transport antimatter. They work pretty well. A scaled up version would probably do. SO WHAT now your talking about time dialation again and not the subject at hand, FTL travel. maybe you can move through time, but you wont be moving FTL ever. "We already have demonstrable forcefields" then show me one because it hasent been done. in order to block light your shields would have to be constructed of some material that is not transparent. NOT POSSABLE. lasers can and will be used as a weapon in the near future, we already have tablesaws that use lasers to cut sheets of metal. All you would really have to do is have it block certain wavelengths of light, because that is all a laser really is. It would block the laser, and you would still be able to see. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:21:50 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: sure using the forces of magnetism you could block metal objects but not the biggest problem in space, ROCK. Funny, but this "rock" you are talking about is made out of a nickel-iron alloy. It has magnetic properties. NO im talking about ROCK, normal ROCK chiped off asteroid's SLAMMING INTO EACH OTHER, and tons of ROCK blasted into space from asteroids, comets, ect. ect. SLAMMING into planets, littel chunks of ROCK and ice flying around at about 17,000MPH that your going to run into flying around through space at FTL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:27:31 PM EDT
[#48]
This thread is hillarious!! Oh and m60308nato, please tell me you are kidding, and all your posts were a joke! Please! Bwaahahahaha
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:28:52 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: All you would really have to do is have it block certain wavelengths of light, because that is all a laser really is. It would block the laser, and you would still be able to see. Now your talking about shit no one knows how to make AGAIN, HOW are you going to make something out of thin air that blocks different waveleangths of light? HOW? tell me or dont bring it up. AND lasers can be made all different colors and waveleangths, including IR. so unless you block all light even IR you wont stop lasers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2002 1:41:46 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: This thread is hillarious!! Oh and m60308nato, please tell me you are kidding, and all your posts were a joke! Please! Bwaahahahaha I definitely hope he is kidding, but I fear that he is not... It really is terrible how ignorant some people can be, especially when its a willing choice... Jonathan |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
