Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 5660

The implications are huge. Once we reach the speed of light time stops. Once we exceed the speed of light we travel backwards in time. Reminds me of the verse that says God is light. And God knows the beginning from the ending. How? He has already been there.

cameron222, Rapture Ready 19 Comments [12/1/2003 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
Julian

How very apt that someone with infinite stupidity cannot comprehend infinite mass! (or blue shift)

7/10/2006 6:51:30 AM

Crosis

God is a tachyon?

7/11/2006 3:30:43 AM

CousinTed

God damn it, the last episode of Star Trek The Next Generation was not about the speed of light! It was about a giant time/space anomaly!

7/11/2006 3:58:30 AM

Napoleon the Clown

Once we reach the speed of light time stops. Once we exceed the speed of light we travel backwards in time.

While time dilation has been proven, exactly what happens when you reach/exceed c. is entirely theoretical at this point.

There appears to be a chance for this one, if it decides to look beyond religion.

7/11/2006 4:15:35 AM

Julian

OK, once again people. Anything with ANY mass - even an electron - cannot reach the speed of light because it would require infinite energy to do so.

Following that, anything with any mass cannot exceed the speed of light.

Imaginary particles in theoretical physics that hypothetically go faster than the speed of light have no mass.

Furthermore - we can clearly see approaching the speed of light is NOT linear. Just because time appears to stop as you reach c, it does not mean it will go backwards if it was possible to surpass it. That would be like saying if you went below -273.15K things would start to heat up or that singularities have -ve mass.

7/11/2006 7:27:00 AM

Napoleon the Clown

Anything with ANY mass - even an electron - cannot reach the speed of light because it would require infinite energy to do so.

Ehhh, not exactly. Photons do have a miniscule amount of mass. If they didn't have mass they'd be unaffected by black holes. I think a better way to phrase it would be any component of matter as we know it cannot achieve c. because it would require an infinite amount of energy to get it there.

7/11/2006 7:47:14 AM

Julian

Light is affected by large graviational objects because those objects warp space time, black holes affect space time to such an extent that the light cannot reemerge.

Also.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/light_mass.html
Sometimes people ask \"If light has no mass how can it be deflected by the gravity of a star?\" One answer is that any particles such as photons of light, move along geodesics in general relativity and the path they follow is independent of their mass. The deflection of star-light by the sun was first measured by Arthur Eddington in 1919. The result was consistent with the predictions of general relativity and inconsistent with the Newtonian theory. Another answer is that the light has energy and momentum which couples to gravity. The energy-momentum 4-vector of a particle, rather than its mass, is the gravitational analogue of electric charge. The corresponding analogue of electric current is the energy-momentum stress tensor which appears in the gravitational field equations of general relativity. A massless particle can have energy E and momentum p because mass is related to these by the equation m2 = E2/c4 - p2/c2 which is zero for a photon because E = pc for massless radiation. The energy and momentum of light also generates curvature of space-time so according to theory it can attract objects gravitationally. This effect is far too weak to have been measured. The gravitational effect of photons does not have any cosmological effects either (except perhaps in the first instant after the big bang). There are far too few with too little energy to make up any noticeable proportion of dark matter.

7/11/2006 7:58:59 AM



Traveling at the speed of light requires an infinite amount of energy. Which is impossible to provide, obviously.

Though if we could somehow channel your stupidity we'd just about have it covered.

2/20/2008 7:33:37 PM

apYrs

and they consider the ToE unproven and fictional

2/20/2008 8:36:09 PM

cyborgtroy

"LET THERE BE MYSELF"

3/22/2008 2:18:21 AM

brendand

If you're going to use science, quit following the bible. you cant use both.

3/16/2011 7:50:21 AM

Anon-e-moose

"The implications are huge. Once we reach the speed of light time stops. Once we exceed the speed of light we travel backwards in time. Reminds me of the verse that says God is light. And God knows the beginning from the ending. How? He has already been there."

cameron222, I don't think you realise the lethal implications of what you're saying here, beliefs-wise. Why?

In "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier", when Kirk & co - including Spock's half-brother Sybok - had reached Galactic Centre (via the 'Great Barrier' protecting the fabled 'Sha-Ka-Ree', the base-world of Creation) meet God, he asks to be brought aboard the USS Enterprise. Whereupon Captain Kirk (basis of all awesomeness in the universe) asks him:

'What does God need with a starship?'

Thus the nub of my gist: If your 'God' is as 'omipotent' as he claims, then why can't he travel back in time to prevent Original Sin from happening in the first place: Adam & Eve, Eden, the 'Tree of Knowledge', the Talking Snake, and all that jazz, hmmmmmmm?!

Either he won't - or can't. (certainly in that film's scenario, if God is omnipresent, he wouldn't need a starship - which can travel at many times the speed of light - in the first place, ergo he was logically bested by Kirk. QED. Hell, Kirk & co. were able to travel back in time in the previous film, to correct the mistakes of humanity in the past - in an inferior Klingon Bird of Prey, no less!)

And if he can't, then he's not omnipotent. Thus he's not God. Therefore he's a contradiction to himself, ergo he doesn't exist. QED.

"God is light"

Light, eh? Which travels at 186,282 miles per second. And no more (after all, it's impossible for even a photon - with zero mass - which is what light in the visible band of the Electromagnetic Spectrum consists of, to exceed that speed). One word: Tachyons:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

One more: Ions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/04/nasa-trumps-star-trek-ion-drive-live.html

The research in alternative propulsion systems (to replace solid/liquid fuelled rockets) is ongoing. I.e., Lasers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_propulsion

Pulse-laser propulsion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=LAdj6vpYppA

PROTIP: The science fiction of the past is the science fact of today. Quantum Computers already exist ('E.D.I.' in the film "Stealth" not looking so unlikely now, hmmmmmmm?!).

I love the smell of annihilated arguments in the morning. Smells like... victory.

3/16/2011 9:40:24 AM

Justanotheratheist

So has Michael J.Fox.

3/17/2011 1:45:17 AM

Quantum Mechanic

Fail physics much?

3/31/2011 4:14:19 AM

Canadiest

Anon nailed it with the Kirk Star Trek quote (fundies hate Rodenberry)
Star Trek always stayed in our galaxy too (or am I wrong?) because warp seven (is that 7 times the speed of light, I think it is in federation terms) only keeps you in the neighborhood. Even in the newer series they were a month or two away from Earth at most times


3/31/2011 1:27:35 PM



if i know my trek, warp speeds increase exponentially. warp 7 would be c^7.

5/9/2012 7:37:35 PM

Quantum Mechanic

Fail physics much?

9/19/2012 12:11:41 AM



Crosis: "God is a tachyon?"

You are onto something here! Tachyons have imaginary mass and god is imaginary! it all holds up!

10/18/2012 5:18:45 AM

Kuno

[…] Once we exceed the speed of light we travel backwards in time.[…]

Those Superman comics from the silver age are not science text books, dammit!

10/18/2012 5:42:01 AM
1