Well that makes no sense what so ever. You're saying that you can't reach half the speed of light. That's gotta be false. The mathematics only point to the fact that you can't exceed the speed of light. There's no theory saying you can't add up to it. So when a collision happens equivical to that, something interesting is going to happen. Whether it be a big explosion, or just alot of heat, or maybe something a little bit more wierd, I'd still like to know.
The speed of light cannot be surpassed. The LHC won't destroy the Earth and they haven't actually collided anything in the LHC, it's sometime around Halloween. GuitarSolo: I'll quote a bit of text from my link: Hope that cleared it up. This is the complete page: http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/velocity.html for anyone interested.
Okay, there's a law saying nothing can go faster than the speed of light. What the Hadron Collider does is launch particles (atoms) suuuuper fast by using super huge, super cooled magnets (a quick fact: the magnets are kept a an icy temperature of 1.9 kelvins. 0 Kelvins is absolute zero, or the point to where it's so cold atoms stop moving altogether). So, people are saying since the atom are colliding so fast, they might recreate what the big bang did. Or create mini black holes that will suck us all up! So yeah. it's getting confusing for me too with all the jargon. But it's starting to make sense ( a little).
I never said you can't reach HALF the speed of light! You could theoretically reach 99.9999999% of the speed of light, but it would take infinite energy to get the other 0.0000001%, and the universe does not contain infinite energy. To reach 100.0000001% of the speed of light would require more than infinite energy. That translates to impossible from the definition of infinite.
Still life - it's pretty simple. The speed of light is a barrier beyond which nothing can travel. This limiting factor has repercussions for writers whose stories involve great distances or speeds. Any speculation of speed greater than light is purely that - speculation without current basis in science. On the other hand, many good fiction writers ignore such limitations and tell great stories while including highly speculative "science" like time travel, trans-c speed, alternative or parallel universes, ignoring of time-dilation effects, etc. The real present-day science only becomes an issue if you are writing sc-fi in near future settings where authenticity provides believability.
The Halo books did this rather nicely: To travel faster than light they entered another dimension which didn't have the same laws of physics as this one.
That's an Einstein-Rosen Bridge, also known as a wormhole. There is not much in the way of supporting evidence for the existence of wormholes, but there's also not any real mathematical model to make it an actual theory. So for now, it's speculation, and fair game for SF writers with technically savvy reader bases. If you can't beat the rules, you step through to where they don't apply. Hyperspace is pretty much the same thing. Warp drive, however, is somewhat shaky. It tries to straddle the line of staying in this universe while tapping into another, and it leaves quite a few contradictions with hard science. It;s good enough for entertainment, but those with a stronger scientific background have to suspend their disbelief for the sake of story.
I read an article about this on msn.com. Many scientists said that the black holes are microscopic and will be unstable, so that seconds after they appear they will likely disappear.
Okay. I think we're talking about two total different things. But Acglaphotis gave me a formula and I got it. Well, as confusing as this has been, I think I'll leave here a bit smarter! Thanks for the info dude. And for a good argument. I now see your point. Or correct me if I don't. You're saying that nothing can exced he speed of light, and that two objects traveling at any possible velocity can't collide and equal out to the speed of light? Is this right?
That is correct. If there is anything to faster than light travel, it cannot take place in the framework of spacetime. And if you REALLY want a headache, there is no such thing as simultaneity. Any two events that can be observed as simultaneous in any observational frame can occur in either order in other frames, and no one frame is "more correct" than another. This single fact will raise pluperfect hell with any sort of FTL theory that steps outside of spacetime as well.
As far as I could make out from the News Report just on, it was nothing. Pushing positive atoms around an accelerater untill they collide, it's how they make Anti-Matter.
