Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #545769 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-15 18:05 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-15 21:49 -0800 |
| Articles | 4 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Lets Say When an Electron is up to 99.999999999 of light Its going at c "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 18:05 -0800
Re: Lets Say When an Electron is up to 99.999999999 of light Its going at c Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-16 14:00 +1100
Re: Lets Say When an Electron is up to 99.999999999 of light Its going at c "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 10:47 -0800
Re: Lets Say When an Electron is up to 99.999999999 of light Its going at c "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 21:49 -0800
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-15 18:05 -0800 |
| Subject | Lets Say When an Electron is up to 99.999999999 of light Its going at c |
| Message-ID | <a54eddf9-8ec5-4bde-9c9b-b32b13865810@googlegroups.com> |
Reason it does not get from A to B as fast as light it took a bigger curve??? I like this thinking for it fits. TreBert
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-16 14:00 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dftq25Fnu8hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #545769 |
On 16/01/2016 1:05 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > Reason it does not get from A to B as fast as light it took a bigger > curve??? I like this thinking for it fits. TreBert > The reason it takes longer is that it's not going as fast. Why would some bizarre alternative explanation be required? Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-16 10:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1ff5f515-44e4-44f7-a7b4-298ed611ef0e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #545773 |
On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 7:00:28 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 16/01/2016 1:05 PM, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > > Reason it does not get from A to B as fast as light it took a bigger > > curve??? I like this thinking for it fits. TreBert > > > > The reason it takes longer is that it's not going as fast. Why would > some bizarre alternative explanation be required? > > Sylvia. Best to think in more than one direction.TreBert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-15 21:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <44ed113c-fb90-4257-814f-ceca9e955def@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #545769 |
On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 6:06:01 PM UTC-8, reber g=emc^2 wrote: > Reason it does not get from A to B as fast as light ...is because it's not traveling as fast. Besides, you can only say it's traveling at a fraction of c WRT some reference frame, not WRT light because no matter how fast it's traveling WRT say Earth's reference frame, it's always standing still compared to light *in its own reference frame*. This is why, when reading a science fiction book with the premise that faster-than-light travel can only be initiated when a would-be starship is traveling at some fraction of c, you should throw the book at the nearest wall. Mark L. Fergerson
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web