Another physics discussion

[Warp Spider]

In fact, even if you could move your leg at velocity greater than that of light, you still would cast some shadow, though it would become increasingly distorted as your leg approached the speed of light and quite bizarre indeed were you to exceed it. At relativistic leg velocities the shadow also would not be as dark, which might make it unnoticeable.

 

Like it matters, though, swinging a 25 pound leg at anywhere near the speed of light would create a shockwave in the air so intense it would rupture the internal organs of you, your target, and anyone standing nearby even if you missed. It would also likely shatter all the windows and if you were to hit you would likely send the remains of your target out of orbit.

 

Suffice it to say, if anyone can kick anywhere near fast enough that it doesn't cast a shadow, I would be interested to learn under your instructor.

 

EDIT: On second thought, your target would not break orbit because they would be vapourized due to the extreme heat generated by the friction of travelling at over 25 thousand miles per second. (assuming a fairly large target) The highly ionized plasma that would be left of the target may disperse before leaving the atmosphere, but I couldn't really say for sure.

[JerryLove]

Yes, there is a technique called a "shadowless kick", yes there was a saying about a guy "his kick was so fast, it did not leave a shadow", and yes, it is just a saying intended to express that he had a really fast kick, no amount of speed actually prevents a shadow.

[KwicKixJ1]

LOL i haven't stopped laughing this whole post. you guys are great.

 

lol... so fast it didn't cast a shadow. ahahahahaha.

 

sorry.

 

go watch iron monkey. part one. great movie.

 

and picturing that one guy's discription of what would happen... with like an entire room catching fire cuz of the insane speed. lol. that's almost as funny as pulling out a guitar, a fair lady, a crane, etc. for a tai chi lesson.

 

i'm glad you people on this message board have a good sense of humor.

[paolung]

[Bdaze]

Like it matters, though, swinging a 25 pound leg at anywhere near the speed of light would create a shockwave in the air so intense it would rupture the internal organs of you, your target, and anyone standing nearby even if you missed. It would also likely shatter all the windows and if you were to hit you would likely send the remains of your target out of orbit

 

haha, not to mention cause an anomally in space time which would likely end everything in the universe.

[Warp Spider]

Well, the notion that time is related to the speed of light is still highly theoretical, and a rather unsupported claim if you ask me. Certainately you would percieve the world as if you had travelled back in time, but would you really have, or would it just be an illusion created by you "outrunning" the light from things that happened in the past?

 

I guess that's a more philosophical question than anything, but personally I think the whole gravity/velocity affecting time thing is a bit far-fetched.

[JerryLove]

Well, the notion that time is related to the speed of light is still highly theoretical, and a rather unsupported claim if you ask me.

And it's a theory because it makes predictions, the predictions have been tested for, and the tests have proven to bear out the predicted results. http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/EinsteinTest.html

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=test+relativity

I guess that's a more philosophical question than anything, but personally I think the whole gravity/velocity affecting time thing is a bit far-fetched.

Definately... but it also appears to be true.

[Warp Spider]

Not to burst your bubble, but those tests only prove that light is affected by gravity, not time itself. Also, even if you did do an experiment that showed that you could "go back in time," it wouldn't necessarily mean that you were actually in the past, as mentioned before, just that you'd fooled yourself into thinking you were in the past.

 

Like a wave machine. The wave splashes over you once. Although you can run back and beat the wave and then get splashed by it again, it's not like you've gone back in time to the original splashing.

[paolung]

what about the tests with clocks placed at the top of skyscrapers and the clocks placed deep underground that show a slight (very slight) difference in time, thereby confirming that gravity in fact does affect time?

[JerryLove]

Not to burst your bubble, but those tests only prove that light is affected by gravity, not time itself.

Actually, it shows that mass curves time-space; which is an underlying point of general relativity. Since inertial mass and speed are connected, and mass and time-space are connected; so speed and time-space are connected.

 

"The stretching of time by relativity has been felt and measured by other orbiting clocks -- GPS, for example -- but PARCS will measure the effect with errors one hundred times smaller than its predecessors did." - NASA - http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/08apr_atomicclock.htm

 

"During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once eastward and once westward, to test Einstein's theory of relativity with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flyng clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 4023 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 27521 nanoseconds during the westward trip ... Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 5910 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 2737 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks" - http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html

 

Google gives me 6,680 hits in regards to "test relativity atomic clock"; how many emperical tests would you like?