Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 203 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
paul 1
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#50760 - 01/14/14 04:47 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

I pitty people like yourself orac , perhaps one day you will understand that I was trying to help you and others or attempting to help you and others to see through the falsities of modern science as I have.


Careful Paul that was almost a statement of compassion something very rare from the ever so religious Paul smile


Originally Posted By: paul
only because I actually care about real science.


Another lie Paul so soon ... would you like me to back and cut and paste your answer about science you know the war bit or have your forgotten you wrote that bit or have you changed your mind?

Again above you already stated you won't even read science because it is based on mathematics so are you studying science or not?

See you try this posturing garbage and get caught out each and every time ... so lets give you a chance to fix your lie ... would you like to discuss real science Paul, I don't even care how you define "real". You can include goat god if you like it is all fine by me .... I love science discussions laugh

Help me understand real science Paul I am willing to repent and I am reaching out for your assistance, I have seen that QM is all wrong!!!


Edited by Orac (01/14/14 04:50 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
.
#50762 - 01/14/14 05:20 PM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
Another lie Paul so soon ... would you like me to back and cut and paste your answer about science you know the war bit or have your forgotten you wrote that bit or have you changed your mind?


real science and science are different.

in that real science does not adhere to the fantasy math that must exist
in order for certain theories and false claims like those that Einstein presented to remain.

and science adheres to these fantasy theories and the fantasy math in order to protect these fantasy theories , QM carries these fantasies even
further than Einsteins proposals even into the realm of embarrassment.

now you shouldnt think that I think that science as a whole consist of
idiots who adhere to these fantasy beliefs that their produced math has
control of all matter in Creation.

because I dont , I think that the only parts of science that consist of these idiots are the ones who adhere to the Einstein and QM false math and theories and the theories of Evolution and of course the medical industry scientist who no longer strive to find cures for illness and disease but focus on the control of illness and disease through the use of prescription drugs only.

in order to claim that matter in a vacuum cannot travel faster than the speed at which light travels in a vacuum , you must first have resources
that could propel matter to that speed in a vacuum.

to put it in real science terminology so that you can understand it , you
must first have a force that can travel faster than the matter that you are
trying to accelerate to a certain speed in a vacuum.

whatever that force may be , a physical force by an object acting on the
matter , gravitational force , magnetic force , etc...

and that force must be capable of overcoming the inertia of the matter
that it is trying to accelerate.

just claiming that matter cannot travel faster than the speed of sound didnt hold water either once the needed force was found , and the false claims of science that matter cannot travel faster than the speed at which
light travels in a vacuum does not hold water either , when real science is concerned.

you cant have your fantasy shrouded cake and eat your cake , but
real science is eating your cake as we speak and before long you will have
no cake.

yourself and others like you who are followers of the science fantasies cult can continue to adhere to these fantasies if you so choose , but the future
will remember you as quacks without any sense of logic.

charlatans who imposed their will upon the population of the Earth through
fake science.


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50769 - 01/15/14 01:13 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

in order to claim that matter in a vacuum cannot travel faster than the speed at which light travels in a vacuum , you must first have resources
that could propel matter to that speed in a vacuum.


Ummm perhaps you missed the 50 years we have these big machines we build they send matter round and round accelerating matter to almost the speed of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

Quote:
The protons will each have an energy of 7 TeV, giving a total collision energy of 14 TeV. At this energy the protons have a Lorentz factor of about 7,500 and move at about 0.999999991 c, or about 3 metres per second slower than the speed of light (c). It will take less than 90 microseconds for a proton to travel once around the main ring a speed of about 11,000 revolutions per second.


Umm so science got matter to 0.999999991c how much closer would you like them to get?

Oh I know a bunch of protons is not matter under goat god theory is it ... how silly of me.

Originally Posted By: paul
charlatans who imposed their will upon the population of the Earth through fake science.


Imposed???? We don't care what idiot layman believe they can go worship goat gods for all we care ... oh waitsmile

That is the funny thing about science there are very few numbers that actually believe some of the stuff at the cutting edges and it still gets money for the research I wonder why that is smile

See science doesn't impose anything their will on the population we leave that to religion smile

The population of earth funds science freely because they want more weapons, more discoveries, more toys, more money.

That's the bit you struggle with Paul science really doesn't give a rats what you think because we get funding not based on popularity but on results and we don't need your belief smile

That is why your war of science against religion is so funny, it's a fight you can't win and you haven't even realized that. Perhaps you would like to start a movement in the USA to ban science you have a large number of religious people there supposedly. Come on if you really believe your garbage start it. See that Paul is called contempt smile

Ahh the smell of the first flame war of the year, I live for it.


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 01:39 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50771 - 01/15/14 01:40 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
Umm so science got matter to 0.999999991c how much closer would you like them to get?


so science claims that it has gotten matter to a speed that close to the speed at which light travels in a vacuum?

and it still claims that matter cannot travel faster than the speed at which light travels in a vacuum?

Quote:
and move at about 0.999999991 c, or about 3 metres per second slower than the speed of light


the earth is moving as it rotates at 40,075 km per 24 hours.
thats 40,075,000 meters per day.
and 1,669,791.66 meters per hour.
and 27,829.86 meters per minute.
and 463.83 meters per second.

according to your testimony of sciences accomplishments
the proton would be moving (in reference to the earth)
at a speed faster than the speed at which light can travel in a vacuum.

in fact 460 meters per second faster than c.

and if using our sun as the reference point it would be moving
apx 105,000 + 460 meters per second faster than c.

so given that science claims that the proton should become
infinitely massive as it approaches c , just what does science
now claim that infinitely massive really means?

the speed of light ( c ) has been broken many times according to your testimony.

so why does science and yourself adhere to these false claims
that matter cannot travel faster than the speed at which light travels in a vacuum?

I believe I have won this argument , thanks.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50772 - 01/15/14 01:48 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

so why does science and yourself adhere to these false claims
that matter cannot travel faster than the speed at which light travels in a vacuum?

I believe I have won this argument , thanks.


If that was all you were trying to prove all you need is a tube in a vacuum and a light in the tube.

Now the light in the tube is launched at the speed of light by definition and the tube is moving with the earth so it meets the same criteria as the LHC but it's a little more simple. In fact shining a torch forward off a moving car or anything moving would meet your criteria.

There is however a problem lets see if you are smart enough to work it out.

Tell you what I will give you a hint the earth isn't moving in a straight line in your story above or any of the stories, your 463 m/sec is in an arc movement. The LHC would have the exact same problem smile

This by the way is very Newton you sure you don't want to join his theory?


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 01:56 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50774 - 01/15/14 02:00 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
so , I suppose that you were just being deceitful when you
said the following.

Quote:
Science says ANYTHING MADE OF MATTER can not go faster than the speed of light. It is also the speed limit of light without the presence of a media.

Light itself for example can go faster than the speed of light it can actually go at infinite speed as was recently demonstrated it just needs a media to do it


it doesnt really look as if a media is required now does it.

so basically as long as you have a force that is capable
of accelerating matter that matter will
eventually reach and surpass c.





_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50775 - 01/15/14 02:03 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
The matter isn't moving faster than the speed of light you haven't resolved the problem of the arc spiral smile

Let me know if you get stuck working it out the torch example is easier to see the problem because you will end up with the problem does light move in a straight line or does it follow the arc movement.


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 02:07 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50776 - 01/15/14 02:06 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
I dont need to resolve any problem.

if the proton were being accelerated along a straight line
the proton would still reach and exceed c.

for instance a infinitely long and straight
accelerator. ( linear )

and the accelerator is not bound to the earth or its rotation.
it is in space.

and as long as there is a force that is accelerating the proton
it will continue to accelerate further beyond c.





_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50777 - 01/15/14 02:08 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
If that is what you want to believe then fine but you have a big problem light bends with motion then.


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 02:09 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50778 - 01/15/14 02:14 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
if there is no motion then light will not bend because of motion.

besides that emitted light from a light source will travel in a straight line.

unless it is bent by an outside force acting on it.

gravity , magnetic fields , traveling through a medium , etc...

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50779 - 01/15/14 02:14 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: newton]
newton Offline
Megastar

Registered: 09/30/12
Posts: 1209
Quantum ?

We speak here about Galileo !!!

Natural fall down Law

m-----earth-------m >>>>>>>>>> constant motion 30 km/s

mass m left or mass m right will be first n the Eart


HISTORICAL BACKGROUND of the problem
" Galileo postulated his relativity hypothesis: any two observers moving at constant speed and direction with respect to one another will obtain the same results for all mechanical experiments (it is understood that the apparatuses they use for these experiments move with them).
This idea has a very important consequence: velocity is not absolute. This means that velocity can only be measured in reference to some object(s), and that the result of this measurment changes if we decide to measure the velocity with respect to a diferent refernce point(s). Imagine an observer traveling inside a windowless spaceship moving away from the sun at constant velocity. Galileo asserted that there are no mechanical experiments that can be made inside the rocket that will tell the occupants that the rocket is moving .
The question ``are we moving'' has no meaning unless we specify a reference frame (are we moving with respect to that star'' is meaningful). This fact, formulated in the 1600's remains very true today and is one of the cornerstones of Einstein's theories of relativity."





Edited by newton (01/15/14 02:16 AM)

Top
#50780 - 01/15/14 02:30 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
if there is no motion then light will not bend because of motion.

besides that emitted light from a light source will travel in a straight line.

unless it is bent by an outside force acting on it.

gravity , magnetic fields , etc...



The problem is earth is describing an arc spiral so when you watch a laser describe a straight line across a room it is actually arc spiraling because the whole room is arc spiraling in the motion you just calculated yet you see it as a straight line.

You aren't getting the problem so perhaps I just tell you.

This is a standard reference frame issue the speed of the protons is calculated from a reference frame the reference frame is the electromagnetic wave running the LHC doing the acceleration.

Thus the 0.999999991 c already includes the movement of the earth because the speed measurement is based on the changing rate of the EM pulse running around the LHC which includes earths movements.

So I guess if we are being exact some of the 0.999999991 c is bought about by the earth's movement rather than actual acceleration by the LHC.

The key point is the protons when doing 0.999999991 c is not a relative speed it is there speed measured in the conditions they were referenced which was a spinning moving earth that contains the LHC.

You can't then decide to add the earths movement speed to the figure because it already includes it.

Your error was a standard layman error you assumed the 0.999999991 c was an absolute stand alone speed of the protons relative to the earth when we use xxxx.xxx c we are almost always referencing to the speed of light in space and you can't add or subtract things from it smile

That is why I found your whole example funny it is the same for the torch example resolves exactly the same way.

To me you just told a funny joke like a police man booking a stationary motorist for doing 1656 Kilometer/Hour because of the speed of the earth ... point of reference is everything smile

So I give you points for thinking of the possible problem but take points off for not being able to resolve it. You have improved your logic skills lately even resolving some of Newton's trash so I had expected you would work it out but it looks like you have a little way to go yet.

Unfortunately the way we use speed often doesn't talk about the reference point it is assumes you can work that out with logic even within the law. When we talk about 60km/h car speed it assumes you recognize that speed is relative to the earths surface and science often gives speeds in percentage of c which means the reference is to the speed of light in space.

So the memo from the exercise is when someone gives you a speed think careful about what the reference point is because there is no absolute reference point !!!!


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 04:41 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50781 - 01/15/14 06:21 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
ahhh , the cult must be pressuring you to find some excuse.

but that wont work , orac.

when I said in reference to the earth , I meant to a point on the earth just outside the LHC where the measurement is taken.

if an observer was standing on that point during that 1 second that the earth rotates 463 meters yet he is frozen to that point as the earth rotates , ie he sees the earth rotating beneath him then he would see the added 463 mps speed that the proton is traveling at.

you have two points of reference here the observer and the proton.

either point sees the speed as being faster than c.

and the policeman was right in his speeding estimate , the person was speeding if you include the earths rotational speed , its like this is the year 13 billion + or so but we only count 2014 of those years.

what we are discussing here is the speed of matter , if a proton sitting on top of your car it is already traveling at
463 mps if the car is motionless , because the car is traveling at 463 mps due to the earths rotation.

if your car is on the equator and facing east and you drive it east at a speed of 1 mps then the proton sitting on top of your car is traveling at 464 mps because of the added 1 mps speed that your car is traveling at.

needless to say we are only interested in the speed of the proton.

and in this discussion we are only discussing the fact that real science has already caused matter to travel beyond the speed that light travels in a vacuum.

and that science still adheres to the fake theories that claim that its not possible.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50782 - 01/15/14 06:49 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
So go back I count 7 posts and you asked

Originally Posted By: Paul

1) where did I lie?

2) when have I been deceitful?


There you have your own answer you have done both lie and attempted a deceitful answer in 7 posts.

You can't even admit you have no idea how the measurement was derived or it's reference you just try to use some twisting of words to escape the trap. Caught you like reeling in a stupid fish, hook line and sinker.

See unlike stupid goat god liars I know exactly how we measure the speed of the LHC first hand, I am not relying on some 10th hand account of words in wikipedia. You claim still that some reference point will see the protons faster than the speed of light but sorry no it doesn't anyone with half a brain can work that out.

So unless you can give me the exact description of how we measure the speed of the protons in the LHC you are making and being DECEITFUL BY DEFINITION.

You have been caught out a number of times in this way.

So does the great goat god in sky sanction or forgive your lies and deceit, does he sanction such behaviour or are you just a very bad goat god lover headed for a bad afterlife smile


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 06:57 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50783 - 01/15/14 06:56 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Im going to guess that the measuring instruments were
not rotating around the LHC with the proton , orac.
and that the speed was taken from a fixed position so that
it could be more accurate.

and after all , your the one that gave the measurement orac.

and all of your religion bashing serves no purpose.

why do you always use your anti religion as a crutch when your faced with logic , I guess thats the way your brain deals with fight or flight.


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50784 - 01/15/14 07:02 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
your the one that gave the measurement orac.

and all of your religion bashing serves no purpose.


True I gave you a speed the same as the police example you need to know what is implied as the reference point.

In both cases it isn't given you need understanding of what you are talking about.

So you had no idea what my speed reference is and you went off on a stupidity exercise and got caught smile

So instead of saying okay I realize I haven't understood the background of what you have told me you made up a pile of bullshit and tried to sell it as the truth.

Now the question is why did you try and sell the pile of bullshit as truth because you have this religion versus science war thing going on. Something you now try and back away from and deny even though you are clearly wrote that exact thing in previous posts.

You wanted an example of something going faster than the speed of light and you set about creating a bullshit argument to make it and when caught doing it you now try and play it all down. I was kind at the start I told you to think about the situation carefully ... SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T DO smile


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 07:05 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50785 - 01/15/14 07:06 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
so are you now saying that the speed that you gave was a false measurement , or was it a true measurement?

I found it on wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

Quote:
At this energy the protons have a Lorentz factor of about 7,500 and move at about 0.999999991 c, or about 3 metres per second slower than the speed of light (c).


you stated that the earths rotational speed was accounted for in the measurements , could you please post a link to that information.



_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50786 - 01/15/14 07:21 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Its a true speed referenced to an electromagnetic wave in space.

So in technical speak it is the speed of the proton including all movements that affect earth but do not affect an electromagnetic wave.

So in your police example it is the 1650 Km/h number, if you want it referenced to earth surface you will need to take off the speed of earth which is actually complicated because of the spiral arc.

Note these are still not an absolute speeds because the universe itself could be moving and the EM waves are in the universe they don't move relative to earth but they would move with the universe.

Everything involving speed requires a reference point.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#50787 - 01/15/14 07:26 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
So in technical speak it is the speed of the proton including all movements that affect earth but do not affect an electromagnetic wave.


where is the link that shows this information.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#50788 - 01/15/14 07:52 AM Re: How motion can glue two mass m - atomic bond ? [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Lubos does a reasonable semi readable version of a calculation

http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/the-world-as-seen-by-lhc-protons.html

He even gives you the rather complicated proton's world line speed versus world line spacetime speed and even consequence of what the proton sees the LHC like which I sort of hinted at.

The true actual precise calculation you do from the field movement in the LHC that the proton is synchronized with but it is well outside the scope of something that is going to found on the internet. If you really want it in layman or at least dumbed down Pete aka PMB may be your man because of his background.

The magnetic controls over the LHC is just amazing it is even affected by the gravity from the moon which causes tides on the tunnel

http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/06/07/is-the-moon-full-just-ask-the-lhc-operators/


Edited by Orac (01/15/14 08:25 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.