Teempakguy:
er . . . okay, well . . . I guess that's . . . kind of right . . .

But consider,

The energy conservation principle dictates that energy cannot be created or other wise destroyed. But may be converted from one form to another.

This follows that if energy in some form is observed spontaneously in a location, some other form of energy MUST have existed.
In nuclear bombs, a blast of heat energy is suddenly created. We know it wasn't created. So, where did it come from? Another from of energy. Which happens to be two radioactive pieces joined together. We also know that after the explosion, some mass is seen to have disappeared.

It then follows that mass was indeed converted into heat energy. And that hence, mass is a form of energy. How much do you weigh? Divide that by 10 to get your mass and multiply it by c². That's how many joules you're worth.

You might wonder why then mass doesn't seem so "energy like"

Welcome to quantum chromodynamics.

Cool!



So whose mass is gonna be converted to energy when you travel in the speed of light?

RobinHez:

Cool!



So whose mass is gonna be converted to energy when you travel in the speed of light?

it's actually the other way round. the energy used to drive the object is unwittingly converted into mass. and then, even more energy is needed to drive the craft. Which only increases the mass. Starting an infinite series of energy-mass battle ending with the object having infinite mass and requiring an infinite amount of energy to drive it.

Talk is Cheap. Below is a Lorentz factor equation stating what exactly will happen to the body as it approaches the speed of light.

[img]http://www.patana.ac.th/secondary/science/anrophysics/relativity_option/images/relmass.gif[/img]

m₀ is the original mass of the object.

m is the increased mass of the object.

v is the speed at which the object is travelling.

c is of course the speed of light.

I'm sure you can readily see what is going to happen as v approaches c.

If you can't, just plug in some numbers and plot a mass-speed graph.

Teempakguy:
it's actually the other way round. the energy used to drive the object is unwittingly converted into mass. and then, even more energy is needed to drive the craft. Which only increases the mass. Starting an infinite series of energy-mass battle ending with the object having infinite mass and requiring an infinite amount of energy to drive it.

Talk is Cheap. Below is a Lorentz factor equation stating what exactly will happen to the body as it approaches the speed of light.

[img]http://www.patana.ac.th/secondary/science/anrophysics/relativity_option/images/relmass.gif[/img]

m₀ is the original mass of the object.

m is the increased mass of the object.

v is the speed at which the object is travelling.

c is of course the speed of light.

I'm sure you can readily see what is going to happen as v approaches c.

If you can't, just plug in some numbers and plot a mass-speed graph.

You're good!
Very good!

So do you think the 'human body' can go through all these process?
If I can't see what will happen? I'm I a kid?

Anyways

Maybe im wrong, buh i feel increasing d speed of an object nd keeping d distance constant wld reduce d time....following dis logical hypothesis(no theoretical or practical back up) at an imaginably high velocity and at a fixed distance maybe time (t) cld start approaching -t wch is d past.....(using d formula t=d/v).....even d sci-fi fictional movie flash series showed smfin of such

Teempakguy:

The energy used to drive the object is unwittingly converted into mass. and then, even more energy is needed to drive the craft. Which only increases the mass.

so you are saying that if a craft moves at the speed of light, the new mass it gains properly arranges itself atom by atom, molecule by molecule in the same configuration as that of "initial spacecraft"? Hmm.

timonski:
so you are saying that if a craft moves at the speed of light, the new mass it gains properly arranges itself atom by atom, molecule by molecule in the same configuration as that of "initial spacecraft"? Hmm.

I'm sorry, but I think you are confusing mass with matter. Matter is a cocktail of many different species of particles that grant it it's unique characteristic.
Your classical matter is made of baryons. Which, under color confinement, keep it compact, leptons, which enable it to occupy space, and bosons, which transmit energy. Higgs boson is a type of boson. It transmits mass. And as we know, bosons can increase in energy. As the speed increases, scientists speculate that either of two things happen. Either the boson increases in energy, or more bosons are produced. Hence, the mass increase without any change to the atomic structure.

Cc robinhez.

The human body can withstand this easily because of special relativity. While the changes occurring are subatomic, and bosonic. , on the macroscopic scale, nothing happens. In fact, as you are right now, anytime you move, your mass increases.
I am in fact currently looking for a formula that equates kinetic energy and the behaviour of the higgs boson.

Teempakguy:
I'm sorry, but I think you are confusing mass with matter. Matter is a cocktail of many different species of particles that grant it it's unique characteristic.
Your classical matter is made of baryons. Which, under color confinement, keep it compact, leptons, which enable it to occupy space, and bosons, which transmit energy. Higgs boson is a type of boson. It transmits mass. And as we know, bosons can increase in energy. As the speed increases, scientists speculate that either of two things happen. Either the boson increases in energy, or more bosons are produced. Hence, the mass increase without any change to the atomic structure.

Cc robinhez.

The human body can withstand this easily because of special relativity. While the changes occurring are subatomic, and bosonic. , on the macroscopic scale, nothing happens. In fact, as you are right now, anytime you move, your mass increases.
I am in fact currently looking for a formula that equates kinetic energy and the behaviour of the higgs boson.

lol. So how do we apply this your definition of mass in a universe with a single LONE object?

timonski:

lol. So how do we apply this your definition of mass in a universe with a single LONE object?

I don't understand this . . . what do you mean by single Lone object?

A lone object must have mass. And the fact remains that nothing is really a single lone object. Everything is made up of some other things.

Anyway, let us assume that your lone object does not have mass. Or any other thing . . . it would be a photon. Which already travels at the speed of light.

Anyway, this is just a quick explanation. I don't really get what you mean by a universe with a single lone object. Besides, the above definition of mass is not mine. I also saw it in a physics lecture video. And the mathematics made sense, so . . .

Teempakguy:

The human body can withstand this easily because of special relativity. While the changes occurring are subatomic, and bosonic. , on the macroscopic scale, nothing happens. In fact, as you are right now, anytime you move, your mass increases.
I am in fact currently looking for a formula that equates kinetic energy and the behaviour of the higgs boson.

Mass increases?

Relative mass you mean

Cuz I know, mass is constant everywhere in the universe!


I still don't believe that a 'human body' will move with the speed of light and not feel any effects of it.

Remember, time is moving forward very fast! So its possible, say, a person destined to die in 20 years time now moves with the speed of light...He's gonna die in the blink of an eye!


^^^

RobinHez:


Mass increases?

Relative mass you mean

Cuz I know, mass is constant everywhere in the universe!


I still don't believe that a 'human body' will move with the speed of light and not feel any effects of it.

Remember, time is moving forward very fast! So its possible, say, a person destined to die in 20 years time now moves with the speed of light...He's gonna die in the blink of an eye!


^^^

1. Nothing is constant. That's exactly what relativity means. Newton thought like this, but it was later proven that his physics could not work at very high speeds and at sub atomic scales. I know we were taught that mass is constant everywhere in the universe. But that was secondary school. With advanced physics, most of these claims are countered. Mass is only constant everywhere in the universe with the same inertial frame. I.e, everywhere in the universe where the speed is the same.

2. I totally understand that it is kind of weird that a soft body such as a human's, can travel at such high speeds. But it only seems wierd because you're thinking of speed as acceleration. Once you discover the fundamental difference, throw in a little relativity, it will suddenly become clear.

3. Oh boy . . . . actually, the faster you move, the slower time goes for you. Again, talk is cheap. Kindly view another Lorentz factor equation detailing the behavior of time.

[img]http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/equations/timedial.gif[/img]

v and c have already been defined as velocity and lightspeed.

t is the normal time

t' is the increased time.

From this above equation, you'd be shocked to find that prettytasha is actually right . . . of sorts. At speeds faster than that of light, we get a complex number as our time value. I'm guessing that means we're going back to the time. Or it means we're destroying the universe, or we create a wormhole, or merge two universes, anything, I guess.

At exactly the speed of light, time . . . . stops. Forever. You will never age.

As you approach the speed of light, time slows down.

This is the reason for the "twin paradox"

You should read up on that.

Teempakguy:

1. Nothing is constant. That's exactly what relativity means. Newton thought like this, but it was later proven that his physics could not work at very high speeds and at sub atomic scales. I know we were taught that mass is constant everywhere in the universe. But that was secondary school. With advanced physics, most of these claims are countered. Mass is only constant everywhere in the universe with the same inertial frame. I.e, everywhere in the universe where the speed is the same.

2. I totally understand that it is kind of weird that a soft body such as a human's, can travel at such high speeds. But it only seems wierd because you're thinking of speed as acceleration. Once you discover the fundamental difference, throw in a little relativity, it will suddenly become clear.

3. Oh boy . . . . actually, the faster you move, the slower time goes for you. Again, talk is cheap. Kindly view another Lorentz factor equation detailing the behavior of time.

[img]http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/equations/timedial.gif[/img]

v and c have already been defined as velocity and lightspeed.

t is the normal time

t' is the increased time.

From this above equation, you'd be shocked to find that prettytasha is actually right . . . of sorts. At speeds faster than that of light, we get a complex number as our time value. I'm guessing that means we're going back to the time. Or it means we're destroying the universe, or we create a wormhole, or merge two universes, anything, I guess.

At exactly the speed of light, time . . . . stops. Forever. You will never age.

As you approach the speed of light, time slows down.

This is the reason for the "twin paradox"

You should read up on that.

Ok...nice analysis..

Although I was only joking with the last post as u can see the smiley below it...
But thanks anyways, its been a while discussing science. (Like I even have an idea about all these things )

*carries bag*

Back to business o... I'm still around tho

Teempakguy:

1. Nothing is constant. That's exactly what relativity means. Newton thought like this, but it was later proven that his physics could not work at very high speeds and at sub atomic scales. I know we were taught that mass is constant everywhere in the universe. But that was secondary school. With advanced physics, most of these claims are countered. Mass is only constant everywhere in the universe with the same inertial frame. I.e, everywhere in the universe where the speed is the same.
2. I totally understand that it is kind of weird that a soft body such as a human's, can travel at such high speeds. But it only seems wierd because you're thinking of speed as acceleration. Once you discover the fundamental difference, throw in a little relativity, it will suddenly become clear.
3. Oh boy . . . . actually, the faster you move, the slower time goes for you. Again, talk is cheap. Kindly view another Lorentz factor equation detailing the behavior of time.
[img]http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/equations/timedial.gif[/img]
v and c have already been defined as velocity and lightspeed.
t is the normal time
t' is the increased time.
From this above equation, you'd be shocked to find that prettytasha is actually right . . . of sorts. At speeds faster than that of light, we get a complex number as our time value. I'm guessing that means we're going back to the time. Or it means we're destroying the universe, or we create a wormhole, or merge two universes, anything, I guess.
At exactly the speed of light, time . . . . stops. Forever. You will never age.
As you approach the speed of light, time slows down.
This is the reason for the "twin paradox"
You should read up on that.

RobinHez:

Mass increases?
Relative mass you mean
Cuz I know, mass is constant everywhere in the universe!
I still don't believe that a 'human body' will move with the speed of light and not feel any effects of it.
Remember, time is moving forward very fast! So its possible, say, a person destined to die in 20 years time now moves with the speed of light...He's gonna die in the blink of an eye!
^^^

It pains me when all this knowledge and brains are buried in the skull and not put into practice.
Nigeria got so many potential scientists but only few if not non put it into practice.
I will advice you guys to go find some foreign forums with relative mindset to share such genius minds with.

I for one is a mathematician but the environment I find myself in makes me shake my head.

ladokuntlad:

It pains me when all this knowledge and brains are buried in the skull and not put into practice.
Nigeria got so many potential scientists but only few if not non put it into practice.
I will advice you guys to go find some foreign forums with relative mindset to share such genius minds with.

I for one is a mathematician but the environment I find myself in makes me shake my head.

Appreciate!

ladokuntlad:

It pains me when all this knowledge and brains are buried in the skull and not put into practice.
Nigeria got so many potential scientists but only few if not non put it into practice.
I will advice you guys to go find some foreign forums with relative mindset to share such genius minds with.

I for one is a mathematician but the environment I find myself in makes me shake my head.

thanks for the advice.
I'm currently on numerous foreign forums. Most scientific,

As for the practice part, you need not worry yourself, I do practice these things to the best of my abilty.

Thanks though.

And he always wants to show off
What happened to just saying "thanks for the advice"

Teempakguy:
thanks for the advice.

[s]I'm currently on numerous foreign forums. Most scientific,

As for the practice part, you need not worry yourself, I do practice these things to the best of my abilty. [
/s]

Thanks though.

RobinHez:
And he always wants to show off
What happened to just saying "thanks for the advice"

neither of us are complaining . . .

Teempakguy:
neither of us are complaining . . .

Yimmu

Interesting Miss Tasha. Impressive. Hardly comes across a lady with potentials like yours in the Physical sciences. Got NASA or CERN in sight? Won't be surprised at all............. Why don't we hook up Miss...... Strictly on Science-related Business and Ideas sharing....... Hey! Don't be reluctant coz I've always thought Nigeria's got the best potentials in Science and beyond and bingo! Here you are............

You're one out of a few I've met already and in league with and like them, You're pretty talented Brain-wise. So what do you say?

Ok..... It's your call...... meet me on my thread in the education section, "What's your dream institution?.........". You'll locate it easily on my profile/DP area. Come on now Brainiac, I got first-class brains of a sister and a brother in the physical sciences too and a fast-rising genius for a younger brother. Me? You'll find out a little about me from my thread. But what you won't see there is my On-The-side physics(nuclear, astro, particle, thermo-nuclear, etc) interests and strong inclinations. I got awesome siblings related by blood to myself but bonded by Science. We're like a league and a team and Soon we'll likely make it an official thing. *winks* Ok...... Enough's been said.


The call is yours.......... Nice to meet you all the same. (Even though it's kinda one-sided rite now). *smiles*

For the records: I love the way you talk and see yourself. Your personal text says a lot. Shows you're higly motivated to super dominate any field. Like one of my top role models once said, "Imagination is Everything"......... *smiles*

prettytasha:
The topic time travel is a very interesting topic that ignites the curiosity of everybody . time travel maybe possible , but am sorry you cannot travel back in time and see how the pyramids were built ,or witness the french revolution , but some scientists like albert einstein and rosen proposed theories that says its possible to travel into th future . These theories were special relativity and quantum mechanics.


WORMHOLES;Einstein suggested the theoretical existence of "bridges" through time and space – often referred to as wormholes. His theory has been further developed by numerous physicists including Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne.

"The basic idea if you're very, very optimistic is that if you fiddle with the wormhole openings, you can make it not only a shortcut from a point in space to another point in space, but a shortcut from one moment in time to another moment in time," Professor Brian Greene, a prominent string-theory physicist,

PROBLEM; No wormhole has ever been discovered, and even if it was, it would be far too small for scientists to manipulate for the purposes of time travel – measuring just a billion-trillion-trillionth of a centimetre across. They also pose a significant risk, bringing with them the threat of sudden collapse, high levels of radiation and contact with dangerous exotic matter, Space.com warns.

Wormholes are unstable because of the feedback created by this radiation, "So although tiny wormholes do exist, and it may be possible to inflate one someday, it won't last long enough to be of any use as a time machine."


Cosmic strings
Described as one-dimensional "cracks in the universe" and some of the strangest structures observed by cosmologists, cosmic strings could help us navigate through time. "Cosmic strings are either infinite or they're in loops, with no ends", "So they are either like spaghetti or Spaghetti Os."

Problem: Again, cosmic strings only exist only in theory. "This is a project a super civilisation might attempt," says Gott. "It's far beyond what we can do. We're a civilisation that's not even controlling the energy resources of our planet."

Supermassive black hole;
black holes are so dense that they have a dramatic impact on time, slowing it down more than anything else in the universe. If a spaceship were to orbit a black hole, those on board would only experience eight minutes of time for every 16-minute orbit.

Problem: 
Black holes are more practical than wormholes because they don't present the same paradoxes and won't be destroyed by feedback. "but its quite dangerous "It's a long way away and it doesn't even take us very far into the future

Travelling at the speed of light
Another possibility would be travelling at the speed of light, a constant, finite speed of 186,000 miles per second. "If you go fast, your clock runs slow relative to people who are still "As you approach the speed of light, your clock runs so slow you could come back 10,000 years in the future

Problem: According to the laws of physics, nothing can travel as fast as the speed of light – let alone a spaceship. Even the Large Hadron Collider, the strongest particle accelerator in the word, can't make protons move that fast. ". Also, the human body would not be able to withstand time travel at all, as travelling at nearly the speed of light would kill you.

cc prettytasha ,cc live science

prettytasha:
it might be possible tho if we achieve a means of travelling at the speed of light ,

I think that the most feasible means is TT will be moving faster than the speed of light, because space and time plots a 3d graph with space being relative to time , so if velocity is increased and space is kept constant the plot will have a cave-in and if maintained over a period of time the space-time barrier will be ruptured