10-year old girl discovers, photographs supernova

[ferma2]

---

It's not an engineering issue. It's a mathematical one. If you're familiar with the rule of asymptotes, the issue is very similar, why? Read this:

SPECIAL RELATIVITY: WHY CAN'T YOU GO FASTER THAN LIGHT? — An Essay by W. Daniel Hillis [page 3]

-RODION

OT: I'm still not convinced enough with the issue of "breaking the speed of light" since the link you've provided rod is basing on the current engineering. Don't get me wrong, technology has always surpassed our expectations since the beginning. We can't possible say that there would be no spacecraft that could break the speed of light.

[rodsky]

OT: I'm still not convinced enough the issue of "breaking the speed of light" since the link you've provided rod is basing on the current engineering. Don't get me wrong, technology has always surpassed our expectations since the beginning. We can't possible say that there would be no spacecraft that could break the speed of light.

You are not convinced because you didn't understand it. I sincerely wish I had the training to explain the process to a layman, because it does make complete sense and the fact that yhokz101 was convinced could mean mean that he was able to digest why this principle is unbendable.

Tell me, can you divide by zero? Can you give me a prime number that has a natural number divisor other than 1 and itself? If you can, then I'll believe that one can travel faster than the speed of light.

-RODION

[ferma2]

You are not convinced because you didn't understand it. I sincerely wish I had the training to explain the process to a layman, because it does make complete sense and the fact that yhokz101 was convinced could mean mean that he was able to digest why this principle is unbendable.

Tell me, can you divide by zero? Can you give me a prime number that has a natural number divisor other than 1 and itself? If you can, then I'll believe that one can travel faster than the speed of light.

-RODION

I did understand the points in that link. Please don't compare "dividing by zero" with "breaking the speed of light". You can't possible make "dividing by zero" as a reference to the later since there are a lot of factors to be considered in "breaking the speed of light" like technology, while on the other hand, "dividing by zero" only involves a mathematical principle. You're comparing two different things brother.

I don't know what convinced yhokz101 but i had definitely undertaken the points in your link.

[rodsky]

I did understand the points in that link. Please don't compare "dividing by zero" with "breaking the speed of light". You can't possible make "dividing by zero" as a reference to the later since there are a lot of factors to be considered in "breaking the speed of light" like technology, while on the other hand, "dividing by zero" only involves a mathematical principle. You're comparing two different things brother.

I don't know what convinced yhokz101 but i had definitely undertaken the points in your link.

Nope. It's all in the math.

-RODION

[ferma2]

I sure am up to seeing these beautiful phenomenons close enough for me to not get affected. I love seeing objects colliding.

[rodsky]

I sure am up to seeing these beautiful phenomenons close enough for me to not get affected. I love seeing objects colliding.

No one ever said that going "up close" to them is impossible--you just chose the wrong method (and perhaps the wrong dimension where the mathematics of that dimension are more "restrictive" in a sense) to deal with the problem. It's like you want to cross a river by ONE restrictive solution--to walk on water--when the fact is, you can solve this problem by just riding a boat across the river, or building a bridge across the river, right? But like everyone else, everyone sticks to the "walking on water" problem (I don't know why, maybe the idea sounds so fascinating to them or what). So while you're spending (maybe wasting?) time trying to solve the "faster than light" issue (akin to wasting time trying to figure out a way to walk on water), others may have found a way via wormholes, fiddling with tachyons, or warping space/time.

-RODION

[analog man]

No one ever said that going "up close" to them is impossible--

technology is always advancing. who knows.

you just chose the wrong method (and perhaps the wrong dimension where the mathematics of that dimension are more "restrictive" in a sense) to deal with the problem. It's like you want to cross a river by ONE restrictive solution--to walk on water--when the fact is, you can solve this problem by just riding a boat across the river, or building a bridge across the river, right? But like everyone else, everyone sticks to the "walking on water" problem (I don't know why, maybe the idea sounds so fascinating to them or what).

some choose the hard way and the easy way. Leonardo da Vinci walked on water. Jesus did also.

So while you're spending (maybe wasting?) time trying to solve the "faster than light" issue (akin to wasting time trying to figure out a way to walk on water), others may have found a way via wormholes, fiddling with tachyons, or warping space/time.
-RODION

if I'm thinking, I'm not wasting my time. Even if I'm sleeping, I enjoyed being in my dreams.
But Rodsky, who really knows that someday, we can travel faster than speed of light.
I was always fascinated by Han Solo.
It is very plausible, because nothing is impossible.

an event happened approximately 240 million years ago and has just been seen.. wow!!!

yes, approximately.

http://www.et-st.com/et_surface/user...Discussion.htm
http://www.vestheory.com/Chapter%20XVIII.pdf

when we both consider the behavior of light as matter, wave, particle.
just an additional information.

Physics 32 and 33

[rodsky]

Leonardo da Vinci walked on water.

No, he did not. If you are referring to this image:

It was an idea sketch, and even if he did try it, he wouldn't be technically "walking" on water, but riding two small flotation devices attached to his feet and balancing himself with poles. Skiing on water may have been a more apt term.

Jesus did also.

Not valid for discussion in the science section. Infraction given.

if I'm thinking, I'm not wasting my time. Even if I'm sleeping, I enjoyed being in my dreams.

Fact: Dreaming is NOT thinking--thinking is the product of a conscious mind, not an unconscious one.

But Rodsky, who really knows that someday, we can travel faster than speed of light.

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

I was always fascinated by Han Solo.

Your fascination for Han Solo is a non-factor in the realization of whether faster than light travel is attainable or not.

It is very plausible, because nothing is impossible.

Illogical statement. There are many impossible things, and they shall stay impossible because that's how this universe works.


-RODION

[ferma2]

No one ever said that going "up close" to them is impossible--you just chose the wrong method (and perhaps the wrong dimension where the mathematics of that dimension are more "restrictive" in a sense) to deal with the problem. It's like you want to cross a river by ONE restrictive solution--to walk on water--when the fact is, you can solve this problem by just riding a boat across the river, or building a bridge across the river, right? But like everyone else, everyone sticks to the "walking on water" problem (I don't know why, maybe the idea sounds so fascinating to them or what). So while you're spending (maybe wasting?) time trying to solve the "faster than light" issue (akin to wasting time trying to figure out a way to walk on water), others may have found a way via wormholes, fiddling with tachyons, or warping space/time.

-RODION

point taken but, what I meant when I said ''up close'' was being in a place where the heat or the reaction of the collision will not be life-threatening to me while clearly witnessing the whole beautiful scenario. That was just wishful thinking.

[cromagnon]

Yes, in this space, you are ALLOWED to insert concepts like the warping of space/time, wormholes, tachyon speeds and etc.

maoy gi ingon nga adto mn jud sa lisod naa may sayon ... kay even if you travel 10x the speed of light if its 200million lightyears ... milion lang japon ...

hope madiscover ni nato ang wormholes within our lifetime ... and get the chance to be in different alien world ... (a friendly one)

kana if we can find access in the paralle universe / string theory ,,, etch..