Originally posted by JimL
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The have found another Goldilocks world!
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostEven at a speed of 300 miles per minute, or 18,000 MPH, it would take over 3 million years to get there, so, other than scientific curiosity, I don't see the point.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe point of introducing the article is over the years they are discovering of exoplanets in a similar zone as the earth, and over time we will have a range of earth like planets that could possibly exist.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostI have little doubt that within the 14 billion lightyear expanse of this universe there are many goldylocks planets out there, there just don't seem to be any close enough to be anything more than a curiosity to earthlings.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Sorry. Had to correct the thread title. It's "Goldilocks" not "Goldy Locks."
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostEvery party has its ...
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostBut anything travelling at light speed would be torn to shreads.
1.367 years at 1g.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostTraveling, shreds, and you're confusing light speed with falling into a black hole. Accounting for relativistic effects, anything traveling at c/√2 would take as many years to arrive as there are light years to travel.
1.367 years at 1g.Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.
Comment
-
Originally posted by QuantaFille View PostI think he's referring to the fact that anything with any mass at all would explode if it hit a speck of dust at that speed. No black hole necessary.
It's 0.683 years to c/√2 at 1 g.
And no, tearing and blasting are fundamentally different. A collision at those speeds is effectively a nuclear blast. No tearing involved. The extraordinary tidal forces from near approach to a black hole would rip an object apart. No blasting involved.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostTraveling, shreds, and you're confusing light speed with falling into a black hole. Accounting for relativistic effects, anything traveling at c/√2 would take as many years to arrive as there are light years to travel.
1.367 years at 1g.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostFirst, thanks for overlooking the arithmetic error.
It's 0.683 years to c/√2 at 1 g.
And no, tearing and blasting are fundamentally different. A collision at those speeds is effectively a nuclear blast. No tearing involved. The extraordinary tidal forces from near approach to a black hole would rip an object apart. No blasting involved.Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostBut anything traveling at the speed of light would experience singularity like conditions, no?
Originally posted by QuantaFille View PostI wasn't taking him quite so literally. Basically the gist of it is, it doesn't matter whether you can ever attain such speeds, as you will end up in little tiny bits before you get close to light speed.
Or, instead of toasting your bread using a slice as wide as your living area, you could gather those protons from a much larger area with a magnetic scoop and redirect them, turning them into fuel.
And by the way, how would something traveling at that speed maintain radio communication with a receiver/transmitter at its point of origin, anyway?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 02:47 PM
|
3 responses
31 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
05-07-2024, 08:07 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 12:33 PM
|
5 responses
52 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
05-14-2024, 11:35 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
14 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-26-2024, 10:10 PM
|
5 responses
26 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-28-2024, 08:10 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-25-2024, 08:37 PM
|
2 responses
14 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-25-2024, 10:21 PM
|
Comment