Speed of Light= Younger

[lianne777]

umm einstein prove it.
I really duknow why?
check the link below:
http://www.time.com/time/reports/v21/science/time.html

[FreePlay]

lianne:
plz2not talk science
kthx

[lianne777]

lianne:
plz2not talk science
kthx

ok, but you dissapointed me
but atleast your not the same as "Hiratai".

[-skelevision-]

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, I didn't read through, but going faster than the speed of light requires an infinite amount of force and therefore cannot be achieved. You can slow down aging to the point where you live millions of years, if you're travelling fast enough, but you cannot grow younger because it is impossible for matter to travel faster than light.

[slicer4ever]

first off lets point out these are only theories so it is not proven fact that nothing can travel faster than light secondly light is still matter otherwise how can you get an effect if you have nothing so it's evident that it's possible for matter to move at the speed of light and last i knew light can change in speed i.e. if i remember correctly does not a solar flare's(or something the sun does) "light" move faster than normal light by nearly 50 thousand mph (using mph as an frame of reference)

and lastly infinite is not a number period get over it i can add a 1 to any number you give me no matter how big it is so stop giving the crap o it requires infinite amount of power no it requires much, a lot, a ****load but not infinite also don't say a number divided by 0 is infinite you can't get a number so obviously it isn't infinite if you can't get a number and it hasn't been proven.

[Jakeman235]

one of the problems of traveling faster than the speed of light is that the speed of electrons is slightly less that the speed of light there for if you were moving faster than the speed of light it is very possible and probable that you would mess up you molecular structure and basically you would die. So it is widely accepted that the speed of light is the "speed limit on the Universe" therefore making time stop for is also accepted as impossible although most agree that traveling at close to the speed of light you can slow your growth rate and "accelerate through time"

[FreePlay]

It's fun to pull stuff out of your arse, isn't it?

Electrons move at precisely the speed of light. Stopping time is not accepted as "impossible." Moving faster than the speed of light is impossible, not dangerous.

stop giving the crap o it requires infinite amount of power no it requires much, a lot, a ****load but not infinite

Shut your ignorant mouth.

# Matter becomes more massive as it accelerates, and at the speed of light, an object would have infinite mass.
# To accelerate an object of non-zero rest mass to c would require infinite time with any finite acceleration, or infinite acceleration for a finite amount of time.
# Either way, such acceleration requires infinite energy. Going beyond the speed of light in a homogeneous space would hence require more than infinite energy, which is not a sensible notion.

[Skyline34]

Requires more than infinite energy? that doesn't even make sense

[Siouxsie]

And that's why it's impossible.

[Jakeman235]

Scientists can create anti-matter which when combined with when combined with non anti-matter immense amounts of energy is created, though i do believe that we will not be able to move at the speed of light to say that its impossible
and would require an unobtainable amount of energy is just closed minded. I believe that earlier in this forum someone also said that " we once believed that the world was flat," and "the Geocentric theory was thought crazy." So i say "NEVER SAY NEVER." Its just ignorant.

[Chathurga]

It was actually not widely believed that the world was flat. The Greeks, for example, knew it was round.
And it is impossible, despite your best "anything is possible" paraphrases.

[FreePlay]

to say that its impossible
and would require an unobtainable amount of energy is just closed minded.

No, it's not. It's just called "believing Einstein's theory of relativity."

As matter increases velocity, the amount of energy required to accelerate it increases, and its mass increases.

Once you reach just under the speed of light, you would need an infinite amount of energy to actually accelerate to the speed of light.

If you think otherwise... well, you're ignoring the science.

[Archaemic]

Actually, the concept of relativistic mass is an outdated concept. It still shows up in many text books, but does not align with the current understanding of special relativity.

But he's right about everything else in that post.

[Jakeman235]

Don't believe everything that a Scientist says because we know now that E=Mc2 is incorrect. I know this is irreverent but it just goes to show that things do change.

[Archaemic]

???
I think you're misinformed. If you're going to make outrageous claims, you should provide a source, or no one's going to believe you.

[slicer4ever]

i'm ganna stick with it's possible to travel at the speed of light and more even though he don't understand how to obtain it at our current understanding of science

[Archaemic]

Are you trying to say that you think it's possible to travel faster than the speed of light? I can't tell; your post is so poorly worded. If so, you need to take a course in special relativity. That will probably crush your "opinion" on fact.

If one could go faster than light, causality would be violated. It's scientifically PROVEN. It's not just some theory, like, say, ether, which was later disproven by experiment. It's impossible for anything to travel faster than the speed of light. Tachyons don't exist.

[Siouxsie]

But Tachyonic Fields do!

[Jakeman235]

E=Mc2 really isnt correct because it is impossible to create an equation because the variables change so often that this is not exactly correct but it is the closest we will get it still serves its purpose but it is NOT EXACT

[|-Anubis-|]

what does that mean?

The speed of light is constant.

Mass is constant.

thus energy will be constant.

Or are you trying to talk about the uncertainty principle?

[Jakeman235]

http://www.articlealley.com/article_18371_45.html

Here is a link to a site that talks about it.

[|-Anubis-|]

It doesn't really talk about.

it just mentions "some scientists".

No mention of a source, document, or anything else about their test results.


I have to buy the book.
Anyone else have a better link?

[Jakeman235]

E=Mc2 really isnt correct because it is impossible to create an equation because the variables change so often that this is not exactly correct but it is the closest we will get it still serves its purpose but it is NOT EXACT

Sorry about this pay no attention my friend tried to explain it to me a while back, his basis was correct right but his info not so much please use the afore posted link.
-= Double Post =-
http://ezinearticles.com/comment.php...awed&id=107511
This may be better.

[FreePlay]

Just stop talking.