Staredit Network

here are some facts/theories that you may find interesting. do not be shy not to know something if i find anything interesting i'll post it here, if people will read/discuss.

FACT: according to the theory of relativity, there is no speed faster than the speed of light, if 2 photons fly towards eachother their sum speed is still the speed of light

FACT: the speed of light changes with time, allthow these changes are very small

FACT: the universe is expanding, so all gravetically not/weakly connected particles moove away from each other. the closer this particle is to the "end of the universe" the higher the particle's speed is (even galaxies can be understood as particles here, becawse a galaxy is a "stable" thing)

FACT: due to the expansion of the universe, some particles gain speed HIGHER than the speed of light, so we cannot see them with any method from earth. there is a border (wich is getting closer & closer to earth) behind wich we cannot "See" anything.

FACT: in the theory of relativity (wich is understood as correct today) there are no particles/waves that can moove faster that the speed of light. but what about the expanding universe? the best example is: take a laser, aim it at the moon, turn it ON & start mooving it very fast, becawse of the huge distance, the "red dot" on the moon will moove faster than the speed of light. but every seperate photon in the beam will moove with the speed of light. this red dot is not a body/wave. the speed limit is set to things that "moove information" (sorry, i didn't find a better way to explain this)

FACT: time & space are one. Einstein added the 4th dimension - time-space to the former 3. gravitation is "bending" time-space, wich means that in a powerful gravitation field time will moove with other speed.

FACT: mass makes gravitation.

FACT: photons of light moove from the center of the star to it's surface for a fiew years.

THEORY: after the big bang equal amounts of matter & antimatter were created. they annihilated, but not fully, the world that we know today consists of matter, that just did not meet antimatter, & the antimatter in somewhere in the far universe, waiting to annihilate with matter.

THEORY: after the big bang a bit more matter was created than antimatter, so after annihilation, what's left of the winnig matter formed our universe.

THEORY: to make a black hole out of the Earth, you gotto "squeeze" it to the size of a pack of cigarettes (aprox.)

FACT: a particle was created (in a laboratory) that turns into an anti-particle & back about 2,8 billion times a second

NOTE: if you do not belive in something here, don't say like "JAMMED U NOOB, I KNOW THE WORLD IS FLAT, DON'T TALK SH*T", instead, go towww.vokrugsveta.ru & flame there, it is the main source of information.

i cant read the language on that site u gave us, so ill rant here

if you are saying that there is a way to travel faster than the speed of light because some force slows everything down, then relative to what is it faster by?

and u said that mass causes gravity is a fact, but im pretty sure it is a theory of the fabric of space...

Speed of light varies with time? Speed is measured IN time, isn't it?
Speed of light DOES vary with the container it is passing through, however.

it's russian, my native language.

where did i say that some force is slowing down everything ? *reads it again* you confused me a bit...

i didn't say there is a way to travel faster than the speed of light. i said that everything is mooving away from everything is the universe (if it's not being held together by gravitayion), becawse it is expanding in all directions. so technically yes, galaxies that are behind the "sight" border moove (relatively to us) faster than the speed of light.

about mass causing gravity it's a fact. look around. everywhere in space a bigger body (like a planet) will have a gravitation field bigger & more powerful compared to the smaller planets or sattelites. black holes (that have such mass that we probably should not try to imagine) have such big force of gravity that it pulls in everything, including waves/light.

ADDITION:


yes, light passes different things with different speed. but i think they measured it with a laser pointed at the moon if i'm not mistaken. the research on that theme begun only lately, so we don't know will speed of light allways rise or go down, or it changes spontaneously/under the effect of factors, unknown to us.

so this "anti-matter" is going to destroy all things if we come in contact with an anti matter galexy?

I would first like to say, that there should not be any "fact" that is not completely conceptual and thought up by humans. If you say any natural occurence is fact, there are often times when those circumstances are false.

Anyway, to address the "facts"

I believe you mean to say that not many "things" can travel faster then the speed of light in a vacuum, given that there are little or no influences from other forces. (Light itself, or electromagnetic waves rather, have been theorized to travel faster then this calculated speed, c, but it has never been recorded)

If two beams of light are traveling at one another, their relation to one another is more then the speed of light, but the information expressed between the two is still only at the rate of the speed of light. Think about this, stand outside one night and look at the moon. Now start spinning in circles. The moon zooms around at an incredible rate around you. Knowing how far away it is, it must have been going quite a bit faster than the speed of light to be circling around that fast. But you know from logic, that it was only you spinning, the moon wasn't changing speed at all, it was only your perspective. Which is the basis of everything Einstein fought for.

Even if the particles at the other end of the universe travel faster then the speed of light, the information sent from them would still reach us. The only way we would not be able to see an object would be if it came at us at a speed faster then the speed of light.

Theoretically, pieces matter and antimatter are constantly created and destroyed at the sub particle level, and since they do not leave any traces of residual matter left, we can assume that there were equal amounts of matter and antimatter created. Although this is only a theory.

Although a lot of what you said has merit of some amount, it seems like it came from someone who did not fully understand particle physics (I'm not saying that I do either, or anyone for that matter )


And about mass being gravity, gravity is only the interaction between things with mass.

a fact is a prooven statement. if you think that the theory of relativity is correct, it should be called a fact cuz all this was calculated with the help of it.

the information sent from the particles that are in far universe will not reach us, cuz the speed at wich those galaxies are mooving away from us is faster than the speed of light, that's why light from them can't get to us. why do you think it will reach us ?

about what you said, that we would not be able to see an object if it mooves at us with the speed of light. i doubt it. light will fall on him from all over & reflect. & what wil lhappen then i dunno. maybe those photons will be "pushed in the back" by him, or maybe not.

how are waves traveling faster than the speed of light rantent ? maybe we will hear some new facts.

i know that the stuff with 2 photons flying at eachother sounds parodoxal but it's what they said. the theory of relativity says it all...

allmost all this information was taken from a respected magazine. they interview people who know things about physics.

ADDITION:
& about mass creating gravity it's prooven. i'll repeat: a black hole has a huge mass & it has huge gravity. an apple in space has small mass & small gravity. gravitation is not allways "interaction" between objects. you can have a gravitation field without any objects near.

well, from a practical point of view, if something is travelling in one directing extremely fast, and it gives off something with travels like forever but slowly, the slow stuff will still eventualy reach you unless you're going as fast as that away from the first object. so as far as i can tell, its not that the galaxies would have to be moving from us that fast, its that we would have to be moving from them that fast.


the thing about us not seeing an object is it is moving at us at speed of light is true because it would arrive here at the same moment as we first see it.

i didn't get you. you are saying that there is difference between the two statements:
1.we are mooving away from other galaxies with speed X
2.other galaxied are mooving away from us with speed X

or what ? ...

acualy ignore what i said i was being stupid

as far as i know, there are no anti-matter galaxies. but if matter & anti-matter touch, it causes annihilation. so it all depends on how much matter & anti-matter came in contact.

So things calculated from theories are facts?

if somebody prooves the theory of relativity wrong, than we will have to re-think everything from the beginning. but i think that's not gonna happen soon.

they have been wrong on a lot of things before. like the flat world and geocentric universe

Accourding to that logic, and the nature of Particle Physics and Quantum Mechanics non of your supposed proven facts are true.



The theory of relativity points to two seperate theories, general relaticity and special relativity.

Accourding to special relativity: "The laws of physics are the same in any inertial frame of reference. This means that the laws of physics observed by a hypothetical observer traveling with a relativistic particle must be the same as those observed by an observer who is stationary in the laboratory. The speed of light in a vacuum is constant (specifically, 299,792,458 meters per second)."

Accourding to general relativity: All observers are equivalent.

---

Therefore your first statement is DEFINANTLY not a fact.



No, the length of time changes with speed, as does mass. The faster you move the slower time flows. If it were possible to travel at the speed of light you were attain infinate mass and time would stop. For instance, traveling near the speed of light for 10 years you could stop and return to Earth to see that 70 years had passed on Earth.

---

Therefore this fact doesn't make sense.



Apart from the spelling errors, this is true. Unless of course the galaxy/object in question isn't moving away from the center of the universe. The only time an object speeds up gonig towards the edge of the universe is if it's been travelling that way sicne created in the big bang.

---

Earth iS teh FLATzor!



This simply isn't true, it is theorized to ahve happen imediantly after the universe formed, but hasn't been proven (Therefore isn't a fact.) however, some particles, such as tachyons, are theorized to be moving faster than the speed of light.

---

Tachyons speed up as they run out of energy! They're incredibly odd!



See "Syphon pwns you, v1." for the continuing disprove of this "fact"." This is mearly about human interpretation, not true quantum mechanics.



Just no, everythnig about this statement is completely wrong.

---

Funfact: Einstein never invented a dimension.



Gravitation is the interaction between massive objects with relatively non-massive objects. Everything emits gravity, even those non-massive objects. Such as you or me.

---

My head has a moon.



Stars eject helium, and photons travel at the speed of light.

---

Damn, that's a big star. Said the man as he looked on at Tommy Lee, and I, as I imagined the star that has yearly photons.



Are you thinking of a positron? If so, then no.

---

JAMMED U NOOB, I KNOW THE WORLD IS FLAT, DON'T TALK SH*T

Quantum Mechanics. Done.

It actually takes a single photon about 50 million years or so to reach the surface of the sun, because as a photon, after being ejected from the core, hits another particle, which absorbs it, displacing an electron (which flies of with some of the photon's energy, while the rest is expended as heat and light, keeping the centre of the star hot), and the electron will fly into orbit around another atom, forcing another photon to seperate from the atom, which will hit another atom, etc. until the energy reaches the sun's surface as light.

Syphon, for example, you have a formula: E=mc^2. all calculations connected with it are using this formula. today, we think it's correct & think of it as a fact, but maybe someone will proove it wrong & all the calculations will be wrong then. by your logics nothing can be counted as a fact, becawse maybe in 9999 years it will be prooven wrong.

about the speed of light, they used a laser pointed at the moon to calculate that. Yes, time changes with speed, as does mass. allthow i don't know about this, but my idea is the following: mass increases with speed, so it increases gravity & gravity chnages how time flows.

"See "Syphon pwns you, v1." for the continuing disprove of this "fact"." This is mearly about human interpretation, not true quantum mechanics"

it's sad taht i can't translate that article in the magazeen about this question...

"Just no, everythnig about this statement is completely wrong." if you don't belive, go to the site i gave you in the first post & find it there. where did you get that it's wrong ? or you just think so ?

"Are you thinking of a positron? If so, then no." why no ? hm, i thought it's a big discovery. didn't they whow it on TV (even) ? i don't remember what was the particle. & why "no" ?

& about the photons mooving from the center of a star, Minority replied to you, Syphon.

the fact about the laboratory particle changing to anti then back is really neat.

mass = gravity. without this law, black holes and galaxies cannot exist.

You know, if one gram of anti-matter annihalated one gram of normal matter, the resulting energy discharge would be around 18 billion billion (18,000,000,000,000,000,000 or 18x10[sup]18[/sup]) joules.

Ouch.

some really awsome information

i imagine military praying to antimatter as to God...

What you're describing sound like the atoms are being fissed apart to colide with each other. And photons aren't afcted by electrons, seeing as how an electron is 1/2000th the size of a photon. When in reality the Sun is fusing atoms, them being pulled back to the core is the only thing that could hold a photon back, and that would'nt last long. The sun isn't massive enough for it's gravity to affect light. If it took 50,000,000 years for a photon to leave the sun it would be red, and much darker.



Exactly, NOTHING can be taken as a fact until proven completely. How can you prove e=mc^2? You should would need alot of energy that we don't have to spare. And if you could prove it people would have long ago developed means for doing it easier and easier, eventually allowing us to matter back to energy. If e=mc^2 was a provable fact we could've easily eliminated pollution problems.



Point out some sorces for this, will you. Because it's something I've never heard about all this quantum hooha, and I read about it alot.



A joule isn't that much, write it in say, megatons of force. Doesn't seem as large then.