GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Who understands Einstein's theory? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=601546)

woj 04-24-2006 03:14 PM
50..........

GigoloMason 04-24-2006 03:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerco

Einstein's Theory of Relativity to be Tested

07.15.03

Albert EinsteinNASA is preparing to put Albert Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to the test. The Gravity Probe B (GP-B) spacecraft will use four ultra-precise gyroscopes to determine whether space and time are distorted by the presence of massive objects.

Albert Einstein conceived the Theory of General Relativity.

In order to carry out the mission, GP-B will measure two factors - how space and time are warped by the presence of the Earth, and how the Earth's rotation drags space-time around with it.

At Stanford University, ideas for Gravity Probe B began to take shape in 1960. A physics-engineering team was formed, led since 1962 by Francis Everitt, now GP-B principal investigator. So began a long process of design, analysis, and exploratory research funded by NASA and supported technically by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. The GP-B spacecraft was designed, integrated and tested by Lockheed Martin.

Computer-designed artist rendering of the Gravity Probe B space vehicleThe GP-B spacecraft arrived at Vandenberg Air Force Base July 10 from the Lockheed Martin Space Systems Facility in Sunnyvale, Calif. Launch is set for late 2003 aboard a Boeing Delta II launch vehicle.

Computer-designed artist rendering of the Gravity Probe B space vehicle

Low- and high-resolution JPEG image files of Gravity Probe B can be found at:
http://einstein.stanford.edu/gen_int...map_image.html

For more information on the Gravity Probe B mission, see:
http://einstein.stanford.edu/ and http://www.gravityprobeb.com/
Wrong theory of relativity :winkwink:

woj 04-24-2006 03:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by choppa
:1orglaugh

Drake 04-24-2006 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GigoloMason
1) As your velocity approaches the speed of light you move through time more slowly from the point of view of an observer.
The part I don't get is how does one know this? How does one come to accept the statement as a given or truth. Was it first conceived from a mathematical proof or equation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GigoloMason
2) As your velocity approaches the speed of light you shrink in the direction of the vector from the point of view of an observer.
It's been years since I took Grade 12 Algebra & Geometry and when I did, I got a C+ grade in it, lol. Mind you, I was a slacker. I have no recollection of what a vector is and how to apply it here:(

If a vector is a straight line, I agree you shrink as you pass an observer. This happens when a car passes you and it gets smaller the further away it gets from you. I have no clue if that's how to interpret the statement. hehe:(

Quote:
Originally Posted by GigoloMason
3) As your velocity approaches the speed of light your mass increases.
Ok I'll accept that. I still just don't grasp how that relates to time.

Doctor Dre 04-24-2006 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyn1
Theory of relativity where (in laymans terms) is if you travel at the speed of light, time stays still.

According to Einstein (and he was famous for coming up with theories like this that no one could disprove) is if you travelled from earth to some other planet at the speed of light, even if it took 10 years, you would be no older.

This has confused the 'illogical set' no-end for years, but if you looked at it logically, it is bullshit. Time can be measured from the time you are born. If you all of a sudden jump on a spacecraft, travel to another planet that took 2 years, you are still older in relationship to when you were born.

Einstein also worked on the nuclear bomb that was dropped on Japan. He was only a bit player in the team. I remember reading about Einstein being asked if it was feasible in approx. 1938. He said it was impossible and couldn't happen. He was sadly lacking in this regard. I'm from german heritage, but have no time for his theories.

Lyn from Oz
Actually it's not exactly the speed of light... it's more that the fastest you travel, the slower time goes. They tried to mesure it with nuclear clocks on TGV (fast speed trains) and it seem that his theory was right...

VicD 04-24-2006 03:59 PM
Wrong forum :)

GoodChris 04-24-2006 05:10 PM
How can you be at all conclusive on his theory.

First of all, the speed of light is a calculation of distance and time. The only thing that this theory can rely on is OUR interpretation/perspective of distance and time. IMHO to even remotely assume that this theory of relativaty could be true is a lack of thinking outside of the box. There are so many more variables that are not being considered in his theory. This theory was developed based on the concept that we live in 3 Dimensions.

He may have presented a better way of looking at things based on the existing knowledge at the time, but i think there are far too many holes to be able to consider his theory as accurate and true.

chaze 04-24-2006 05:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QualityMpegs
I thought your age changed relative to everyone else's like if you traveled the speed of light for 10 years, it won't be that you didn't age at all. You will have aged 10 years, but everyone back at earth might have aged 50 years.

Am I wrong about this?

No-one knows for sure but I think age is relative to size, health, and your environment.

Flys live 24 hours but go through the physical maturities of living 40 human years. And there is a general size to living ratio for species.

So far as explaining how time stops when you go the speed of light?

This is based on quantum physics. Simple put there is no spoon only what we think is there that works like a spoon. maybe at the speed of light life moves faster then thought so we can't realize what's happening enough to age.

just rambling :1orglaugh

I think the most amazing thing Einstien realized is that size is infinite in all directions. Maybe connecting the smallest level to the end of the galaxy in some sort of reversed palerity world. We spend so much time on space but galaxies can live evolve and go extint all in the mold of a peice bread left in the sink.

runaway 04-24-2006 05:39 PM
very interesting topics!!

Drunken Sam 04-24-2006 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by woj
50..........
woj's bot travelled forward in time

GigoloMason 04-24-2006 05:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike33
The part I don't get is how does one know this? How does one come to accept the statement as a given or truth. Was it first conceived from a mathematical proof or equation?
It's been proven with partical accelerators where they accelerate a radioactive particle and measure the halflife decay of the material to gauge how much 'time' has passed. They have also done experiments with atomic clocks in high speed aircraft where the ones in the planes tick 'slower' than the ones on the ground.



Quote:
It's been years since I took Grade 12 Algebra & Geometry and when I did, I got a C+ grade in it, lol. Mind you, I was a slacker. I have no recollection of what a vector is and how to apply it here:(
= = = = = = => turns into
= =>
You shrink, but only relative to the direction that you're going. Note that the width remains the same, only the length changes (attempting to do this with a 2d model so work with me ;) )

Quote:
If a vector is a straight line, I agree you shrink as you pass an observer. This happens when a car passes you and it gets smaller the further away it gets from you.
No that's just a matter of distance, what I'm talking about is an object actually getting smaller (again only from the point of view of an observer) depending on the speed at which it's traveling. If you could hypothetically take a picture of a car moving near the speed of light as it passed you even ten feet away it would be about as wide as a pin viewed from the side.
(ie you're looking this way at the road the car was traveling on -> || )

Quote:
Ok I'll accept that. I still just don't grasp how that relates to time.
It doesn't other than the fact that according to this theory both are variables which are dependant on our velocity and therefore relative to other moving bodies.

GigoloMason 04-24-2006 05:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodChris
How can you be at all conclusive on his theory.
No one is being conclusive, he asked for the theory according to Al and this is the theory according to Al. It has since been updated.

Quote:
First of all, the speed of light is a calculation of distance and time. The only thing that this theory can rely on is OUR interpretation/perspective of distance and time.
Actually one of the suppositions that this theory puts forth is that the speed of light is a constant, and therefore can be used as a benchmark against our relative prespectives.

Drake 04-24-2006 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GigoloMason
It's been proven with partical accelerators where they accelerate a radioactive particle and measure the halflife decay of the material to gauge how much 'time' has passed. They have also done experiments with atomic clocks in high speed aircraft where the ones in the planes tick 'slower' than the ones on the ground.
That's so cool. It's really weird because I don't fully understand how this happens and makes me second guess how everything I take for granted in the world actually works, lol.

I should have paid more attention in physics and calculus. Maybe if I re-grounded myself in the principles of light and matter I could wrap my head around this. For now, it reads like Greek to me, but the proof is undeniable.

E Guru 04-24-2006 06:52 PM
I saw some thing on the discovery channel. They were talking about how they synced watches together before astronauts went into space. When they came back, the watches were just a few minutes different. I think it worked with digital and analog watches.

Nyght 04-24-2006 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike33
That's so cool. It's really weird because I don't fully understand how this happens and makes me second guess how everything I take for granted in the world actually works, lol.

I should have paid more attention in physics and calculus. Maybe if I re-grounded myself in the principles of light and matter I could wrap my head around this. For now, it reads like Greek to me, but the proof is undeniable.
If you have two atomic clocks, one at sea level and one at "altitude" say in Colo., the one at altitude runs slower than the one at sea level. Since time runs slower for the clock at altitude because it is traveling faster, ppl that live at altitude thus live slightly longer reletive to ppl at sea level.

reynold 04-24-2006 07:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyn1
Theory of relativity where (in laymans terms) is if you travel at the speed of light, time stays still.

http://www.cartelia.net/fotos/c/clockstoppers2.jpg

nofx 04-24-2006 07:57 PM
this is the thread of the year so far

;]

Wiggles 04-24-2006 08:25 PM
i spent hours discussing this with one of my friends once, not a simple concept :)

Mr Cheeks 04-25-2006 01:07 AM
Theory of Relativity:

Time seems to go relatively slow, when you spend it with drunk relatives, on holidays... :)

snooper 04-25-2006 03:12 AM
right over my head

dragon9 04-25-2006 07:48 AM
Time is relative to where you are. For example mars takes longer to cirlcle
around the sun. So if you lived on Mars you live longer,but you will not know the differece. Another example would be while you are driving and look at how much time has passed and how long did it seem to you.

jimthefiend 04-25-2006 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon9
Time is relative to where you are. For example mars takes longer to cirlcle
around the sun. So if you lived on Mars you live longer,but you will not know the differece.

LMAO

Time is NOT relative to where you are. :1orglaugh


The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. This definition refers to a caesium atom at rest at a temperature of 0 K.

Screaming 04-25-2006 07:57 AM
what if c.a.t really spelled dog?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:15 AM.
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123