186,000 MPS no longer the speed limit?

**Potemkine** · 10-28-09, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by _BuRn_

Originally Posted by GM Mr. White

Maybe I should confuse by telling you that photons are particles.

Wave-particles.

Also, better way to think of the 'speed of light' is not as visible light, but rather as the speed of 'energy'. The constant "c" is the maximum speed of energy through what we call a 'vacuum'. It is important to note that what we consider a 'vacuum' is not empty, as with current theories of dark matter and string relation there is always a medium for the energy to travel through. So really, "c" represents the theoretical max speed of energy through a currently unquantifiable medium.

Just for clarification.

Now lets talk about instant communications and causality problems about time travel, because that is when this discussion gets really interesting.

Indeed! Space is frequently described as the cross sectional area of space-time. Gravity as we know, warps space time. Black holes warp this space time so much that it almost breaks. Under multiverse theory, these black holes are connected at the other end by white holes which spit out matter and this is how more "universes" are created. To get to another universe then, you must go into a black hole. Only problem is though, when traveling in these black holes, theoretically, time slows down. As a result, even if you survived, you technically would never make it. Same with communication technologies as we know it. So even if we got to another universe, we couldnt communicate with each other! Blows your mind right?

**DJ Ms. White** · 10-28-09, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by _BuRn_

Originally Posted by GM Mr. White

Maybe I should confuse by telling you that photons are particles.

Wave-particles.

Also, better way to think of the 'speed of light' is not as visible light, but rather as the speed of 'energy'. The constant "c" is the maximum speed of energy through what we call a 'vacuum'. It is important to note that what we consider a 'vacuum' is not empty, as with current theories of dark matter and string relation there is always a medium for the energy to travel through. So really, "c" represents the theoretical max speed of energy through a currently unquantifiable medium.

Just for clarification.

Now lets talk about instant communications and causality problems about time travel, because that is when this discussion gets really interesting.

Speed of energy seems incorrect; more so, the maximum speed of anything in existence in a pure vacuum. Yes, if something exists it has energy. In fact, I would go so far as to say it must have energy, but this energy is not what moves. It is more a quantifiable value that in large part helps determine the qualities of the existence to which it is assigned. I should clarify that I am not implying that energy is a quantum number.

**Alundil** · 10-28-09, 12:01 PM

I, personally, am fascinated by these topics and have been reading about them for a long time.

On another note:
Look, there are trolls here:

Originally Posted by hawgballs

I think it is an affront to god. And a sin. And those scientists are going to H-E-double hockey sticks, for trying to be the almighty.............

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Hehe, I'm still trying to figure out how god managed to bury all those dinosaur bones.

Sigh - even in topics that have nothing to do with their particular brand of fodder and horseshit - there they are. So typical

**_BuRn_** · 10-28-09, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by GM Mr. White

Speed of energy seems incorrect; more so, the maximum speed of anything in existence in a pure vacuum. Yes, if something exists it has energy. In fact, I would go so far as to say it must have energy, but this energy is not what moves. It is more a quantifiable value that in large part helps determine the qualities of the existence to which it is assigned. I should clarify that I am not implying that energy is a quantum number.

Dude,

E = mc^2

**~~hawgballs~~** · 10-28-09, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Alundil

I, personally, am fascinated by these topics and have been reading about them for a long time.

On another note:
Look, there are trolls here:

Originally Posted by hawgballs

I think it is an affront to god. And a sin. And those scientists are going to H-E-double hockey sticks, for trying to be the almighty.............

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Hehe, I'm still trying to figure out how god managed to bury all those dinosaur bones.

Sigh - even in topics that have nothing to do with their particular brand of fodder and horseshit - there they are. So typical

Oh quit your fucking crying lady. What I posted was said in jest, and meant to be funny.

**FragRaptor** · 10-28-09, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by _BuRn_

Originally Posted by GM Mr. White

Speed of energy seems incorrect; more so, the maximum speed of anything in existence in a pure vacuum. Yes, if something exists it has energy. In fact, I would go so far as to say it must have energy, but this energy is not what moves. It is more a quantifiable value that in large part helps determine the qualities of the existence to which it is assigned. I should clarify that I am not implying that energy is a quantum number.

Dude,

E = mc^2

E = mc2 Thats right I win, failures.

**_BuRn_** · 10-28-09, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by FragRaptor

E = mc2 Thats right I win, failures.

:9

**Alundil** · 10-28-09, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Alundil

I, personally, am fascinated by these topics and have been reading about them for a long time.

On another note:
Look, there are trolls here:

Originally Posted by hawgballs

I think it is an affront to god. And a sin. And those scientists are going to H-E-double hockey sticks, for trying to be the almighty.............

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Hehe, I'm still trying to figure out how god managed to bury all those dinosaur bones.

Sigh - even in topics that have nothing to do with their particular brand of fodder and horseshit - there they are. So typical

Oh quit your fucking crying lady. What I posted was said in jest, and meant to be funny.

LOL - now who's panties are in a bunch again? Hawg, it might have been funny and I might have even laughed (though in this particular case I did not). But seriously that is (generally speaking) the angle of most of your posts. So, excuse me for not knowing that this one post, that looks like all the rest of the 3,000 was the joke. Perhaps if you brought something other than ridicule and shit slinging to the discussion more often people might be able to tell the difference (and possibly take you and your thoughts more seriously).

I say this because I think that you're intelligent, and very capable of having educated discussions. Dare I say debates. However, it seems (and this might simply be observer error) that most of the posts that I see from you, have degenerated into the virtual equivalent of "he said, she said, stop touching me, you stop touching me" bullshit that a parent would expect from the kids in the back seat of the car. And what I mean by that is this.....the tone and content of a large majority of your posts make you seem the "bully" and an oaf. I do not know if you are a bully (and honestly do not care) but I do know that you are not an oaf, based purely on the vocabulary you use. But, you tend to inflame things for no apparent reason. Time and time again. I'll grant you that there are many people that help that inflammation, but there is no need for the dumb as fuck shit slinging. (Not that I think the comment above was shit slinging). I guess, I just get tired of seeing posts and good discussion derailed by bullshit. Of which that comment appeared to be more of the same.