Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpunkyLoveMuff
As for going back in time, I think that idea comes from the theory that time dilates for the object (in this case you), making two different time streams, that will never catch up. [u](seeing as light, by definition, can never go faster than the speed of light)[u] But you would still be in the "current time" wherever you stopped ther journey I think...

---

Light CAN go faster/or slower... and that is also EXACTLY what that experiment they did (and thus this thread in a sense) is about.

They showed that a light particle entering a specially prepared chamber would actually leave that chamber before it even entered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Svip
Hm.  A mini universe?  How can you have a mini universe?  Is that like a mini bar?  Can I pick things out of it?  But I do realise it would have been so much cheaper in the usual universe.

---

who's talking about mini universes? That was only a 'brainfart' from someone who didn't quite understood what this is about.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Svip
However, the scientists should focus more on travelling that fast, instead of making small objects do it.

---

???? Maybe it is better to first understand how something is done, before you can make something or even experiment further.

It's like saying: maybe the Wright brothers should have build a supersonic plane going Mach 8 and twice the size of a 747-400 first, before building their airplane.

quote:

---

Originally posted by illuzn
Actually, the universe is mostly made up of empty space. Thus unless the size of the craft you were using was around the size of a galaxy or something absurd like that you would never really hit anything.

---

tell that to the satelite builders and astronauts who constantly need to repear satelites because stuff flies into it constantly......

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
tell that to the satelite builders and astronauts who constantly need to repear satelites because stuff flies into it constantly......

---

Not to say that you're incorrect (as I dont know too much on the particles-in-space topic), but a that is due to the satellites colliding with particles in the outer atmosphere of the Earth as opposed to particles in 'empty space'. Check out Orbital Decay

quote:

---

Originally posted by Volv

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
tell that to the satelite builders and astronauts who constantly need to repear satelites because stuff flies into it constantly......

---

Not to say that you're incorrect (as I dont know too much on the particles-in-space topic), but a that is due to the satellites colliding with particles in the outer atmosphere of the Earth as opposed to particles in 'empty space'. Check out Orbital Decay

---

Although it is very true that their is much debris in the outer atmosphere of Earth and that this is a very critical area to be in, there is also a lot of stuff (meteoroids, dust and other particles, ice, etc) floating in space and which could collide with (futur) space ships (which includes high orbit satellites, space shuttle, space station, but also unmanned explorer crafts to other planets, etc).

eg: although the Hubble telescope has had its share of damage from debris, it also has hundreds of small craters in it from meteoroids, some big enough for concearn and some even damaged the equipment.

Space is far from empty (look at the thousands of craters on space objects, eg: moon, but also planets and other objects). The thing they say is that because of the nature of the universe and the vastness, you could consider it mostly empty. But that doesn't mean the chance of a collisions is as good as null. Because you could easly turn it around too. Because the vastness of the universe, you have a unlimited amount of stuff you could collide into (especially when considering space travel to distance planets).

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
Space is far from empty. The thing they say is that because of the nature of the universe and the vastness, you could consider it mostly empty. But that doesn't mean the chance of a collisions is as good as null. Because you could easly turn it around too. Because the vastness of the universe, you have a unlimited amount of stuff you could collide into (especially when considering space travel to distance planets).

---

This is why you need warp holes
No problems of colliding bodies

During ancient time few million years ago, there are connection
star to activate a light enable us to travel between planet to planet.

Now is all gone, human can never achieve light speed as matter or
object will explode to pieces or burn out if an object travel at certain high speed in the universe.

Good imagination only create fiction, as logical sense only apply to
logic perception.