Speed of light

Page 8 of 9 [ 130 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,522
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

19 Mar 2015, 7:33 pm

Fnord wrote:

Adamantium wrote:

Fnord wrote:

The OP's question has been answered, whether or not he likes - or even understands - the answers he was given. There's really nothing left to state or explain, so maybe this thread would be better off locked against future posts.

You don't think we should have another 5 pages of discussion about the speed of light being dictated by the clock speed of the processor running the universe simulation that we live in (and the efficiency of the routine handling collision detection)?

Well, I am using a tablet, and I find that scrolling through all of this false science somewhat tedious. It would be nice to have a serious discussion on modern scientific topics without poseurs pretending to be the only experts on whatever topic is under discussion, while the rest of us give them more attention than we would give a pimple, but I guess we have to be more tolerant of pretentious arrogance these days, and try to educate the ignorant masses despite their best efforts to elicit an emotional response.

Carry on. :salut:

I did not pose as an expert. Stop lying. Why would an expert ask a question? My only complaint was that the vast majority of people ( such as fnord) did not understand the question.

_________________
YES! This is me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gtdlR4rUcY
I went up over 50 feet!
I love debate!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtckVng_1a0
My debate style is calm and deadly!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-230v_ecAcM

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Mar 2015, 7:34 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

eric76 wrote:

wittgenstein wrote:

I explicitly said that I was not saying that I was an Einstein. I said that using analogies is perfectly legitimate and used Einstein as an example. Stop lying! PS anyone can go back to the paradox thread and see that I am right.
Now I will say something that might be considered trollish but it is true.
Anyone (you eric) that thinks that EVERY scientific organization in the world is lying about AGW ( anthropohenic global warming) has lost all credibility. ( I am using your words," lost all credibility )

You do remember, don't you, that I'm in favor of Global Warming? I sincerely want Global Warming. What I'm scared of is the next glacial period in our current ice age.

You argued against the fact that there is global warming. And then yes,you switched directions when you lost that and claimed that global warming is a good thing. A position even crazier than denying that global warming is true.

More likely, I pointed out that the "Global Warming" is rather disappointing.

As far as crazy ... yeah, sure.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,522
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

19 Mar 2015, 7:36 pm

Its interesting that no one has posted one of my posts that was trollish. I simply ask a question, so time dilation causes the highest possible velocity to be 186,282 mps and everyone goes ballisitic.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,877
Location: Stendec

19 Mar 2015, 7:40 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Adamantium wrote:

Fnord wrote:

I did not pose as an expert. Stop lying. Why would an expert ask a question? My only complaint was that the vast majority of people ( such as fnord) did not understand the question.

Who said you were posing as an expert? Besides, we all understand your question - it is you who can't seem to understand the answers.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,522
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

19 Mar 2015, 8:03 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Speculations are fine, as long as they are not presented as facts.

If you want to know the 'Why' of things, then stop speculating and study Science.

Just keep in mind that the Lorentz equations were developed about 14 billion years after the speed of light was set in the Big Bang. Thus, your question is a non sequitur, because the speed of light was not established to satisfy the Lorentz Equations; instead, the Lorentz equations were developed and refined only to (1) explain how the speed of light is observed to be independent of the reference frame, and to (2) understand the symmetries of the laws of electromagnetism.

Your question is like asking why humans were bred to have the exact number of feet as there are shoes in a shoebox - a ridiculous concept, as it presumes that humans were created for the shoe industry, instead of the other way around.

:roll:

Obviously, that post proves that fnord did not understand the question.

wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,522
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

19 Mar 2015, 8:08 pm

I never even suggested that we caused the speed of light to be what it is.

eric76
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

19 Mar 2015, 8:35 pm

naturalplastic wrote:

obviously the effects of relativity stop you from going over a certain speed.

More precisely, they stop you from ever reaching that certain speed.

Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

19 Mar 2015, 8:49 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

you're not just asking questions, you're completely ignoring the answers given. why should people label you anything else given this fact?

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,135
Location: temperate zone

19 Mar 2015, 10:28 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

No one is going ballistic but you yourself. Stop projecting yourself onto us.

You keep asking "why is the speed of light the speed of light?" so its up to you to demonstrate how that is not nonsensical trolling. Not for us to show that it is.

Anyway:

The answer is yes-for the second time i am telling you what you already know-the obvious- that time dilation dictates that that number has to be the upper speed limit of the universe.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,135
Location: temperate zone

19 Mar 2015, 11:33 pm

wittgenstein wrote:

naturalplastic wrote:

wittgenstein wrote:

No need to get emotional. I am not trolling. So you are saying that time dilation causes the highest velocity to be the speed it is.

How am I "being emotional"?
I was just pointing out the obvious. That you are trolling. Now you are lying too!

Anyway- I will take the bait anyway-yes- obviously the effects of relativity stop you from going over a certain speed. Thats what I am saying.

Why at THAT speed at not at some other speed- in other words: "why is the top speed limit of the universe at the speed observed and not at some other speed?" is obviously a question that no one can answer at this point.

Post a quote from me that was trolling.
It seemed to me that you were saying that time dilation causes the ultimate velocity to be the speed it is. How is that trolling?

Asking "how is it trolling?" shows that you are either playing ignorant (out of malice), or that you really are extremely ignorant. I will just assume the later, and assume that you honestly, and innocently dont know enough to know why it tooks like you're trolling.

The answer to your question is "Yes. I am saying that the relativistic effects of approaching the speed of light are what stops you from reaching the speed of light". In other words "Yes. The top speed of the Universe IS the top speed of the Universe. Duh."

Next question.

Page 8 of 9 [ 130 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Jump to:

Speed of light Post Reply New Topic

Speed of light