morgsboi

You need to watch a program called: loose change. Heres a link on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3MN9382eGY It's really good and contains tonnes of evidence. Sorry but your not the first to discover.

This bit: A singularity is thought to be the end of time and space. learn to read.....

I suppose that's possible. Although my theory is, there is no "end" to the universe. It is a constant. I think the big bang was just an ink spill on the paper which spread, and possibly wasn't the only big bang. Either that or the universe is expanding with light at a constant speed since the first light source in the universe. So which ever photon is furthest away from the big bang, that is how far the universe has expanded. They are just my theories (out of my head) of an "edge".

[/quote The path of light (and everything else like planets, comets, etc.) is "bent" in a gravitational field because of the warping of space and the warping of time due to the presence of mass/energy (the source of gravity.) This warping of space and time is called spacetime curvature. Okay, thankyou

Ah, I understand. Do you know the proper name for the curves? For research purposes. Thank you

Time travel is possible. Mass slows down time which is still time-travel. Or the 4th dimension folding back on itself is also (although not proved or well studied).

So if nothing is faster than light, then why would physics allow a force that pulls stronger than light can travel?

Any ideas yet? And also I know it's not really science, its more of a time traveling movie thing, but it still could be used if time travel were possible.

You say time stops, I don't quite understand how time itself stops. Otherwise the black hole wouldn't be doing anything within the event horizon. But how can even the most extreme gravity affect something that has no mass? And according to Professor Stephen Hawking, even a black hole is not truly black so it must emit something.

Hi, I'm looking for a website that shows my strongest points of physics so I can pursue them further. I'm 14 and a bit of an all-rounder. And I'm above GCSE level.

Only matter is affected by gravity. And if light is made up of matter, why won't it destroy anything it goes through? Would this answer be correct: Black holes warp space-time so much that any particle that crosses the event horizon finds that simply moving forward in time also moves it toward the singularity at the center of the black hole. The only way anything could escape the black hole would be if it could travel faster than light. You can view an event horizon as being defined to be the boundary between an escape velocity that is lower than c and an escape velocity that has to be greater than c. Another question that I can't answer is: Would light bounce between the event horizon and the mass? Because Professor Stephen Hawking says that not even a black hole is truly black. So even in the slightest, light should reflect off the black hole but only to get sucked in again as it can't escape the event horizon.

So, its still slowing down time by 17647806.03643145. It's noticeable as communications travel faster than [math]A[/math] via electricity and radio waves ect. You clearly don't have any way of "thinking outside the box", so I don't understand why your on the theoretical physicist forum.

I know what refraction is, but even so it slows down light. If there is no light you cant see. The time that it takes for the light to reach you (and your brain to process it), is the amount of time that you will be looking back at. The present is impossible to observe.

Okay, so it is quite simple. Light goes at the speed of 299,792,458 m / s. Now it is possible to slow down light....... a lot! Researchers at the Rowland Institute for Science slowed light to 16.98752 m / s (38 miles per hour) in 1999, and researchers at UC Berkeley slowed the speed of light traveling through a semiconductor to 9.7 km/s (34900 kilometers per hour or 21700 miles per hour) in 2004. So we will call 16.98752 m / s, [math]A[/math] which is a variable depending on the amount the light is slowed down. REF: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Slow_light REF: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Slow_light Now if this light ([math]A[/math]) was in a very large room, with 2 people on either side of it with telescopes a few miles away, then if one of them put their hand up then it would take a long time for the other guy to even notice it, changing the whole light cone. So light has been slowed down by an amazing 17647806.03643145 times, which theoretically, should mean that everything we see is either 17647806.03643145 times slower or we have 17647806.03643145 times the amount of delay that we would normally have on our light cone. [math]X[/math] is the time it takes for you to see what is happening in the present at a distance. So the equation should be [math]X = D / A[/math]

Only for somewhere to start.

Okay, so this is just a theory, very rough and doesn't have much evidence to back it up due to very limited resources. Now this is based on the ability to go back in time. So if you were to go back in time (unplanned), then would you be able to get out of a constant time loop, where you are traveling along from A to B. So say you are going through normal time and then something happened to divert you away from the normal flow from A to B which ended up with you going back in time. After that would you be able to change the past by going A to B by jumping over the event that caused you to go back in time and carry on to B or would it just not be possible as you are now destined to go from A to C to A to C and so on. If the A to C was what happened, then what would happen to the other you who would keep passing through, doing the event without knowing what would happen, causing the other you to keep going round from A to C, causing the time loop to just fill with you's from the past. This would either prove parallel universes which are not accessible by traveling in the first, second or third dimension, it would simply be a paradox or you would just disappear from the the future. Please do ask questions as bits of it can be confusing and I will answer any questions as best I can, and will leave a diagram below. Also I'm 14, and I realize that is very "out there" and I don't have evidence to back it up as I haven't come across any, and would appreciate if anyone else knows anything to do with it to contribute. Diagram: The black is the line of normal events in time. The blue is is the alternative route that happens to take you back in time. The red is that journey back in time to point A. The green is the jump for after you have gone through the "blue" that takes you away from the alternative route and brings you too the normal flow of events, after the alternative route.

Ah, thankyou. I really think I can do well at this with some good time and studying. Yeah, but I am very limited with resources that I can use other than the internet, but I think college and university will be a big help too.

Well it's not an actual equation. It just shows the question I wanted answering and now it is. And if anyone wants to add some additional information then they can.

Yes, I'm just trying to learn Is that encouragement or sarcasm? Anyway, we have got very far from the point. The point was, I was wondering if the [math]Speed[/math] is faster than [math]C[/math], would the [math]Speed[/math] take the place of [math]C[/math] or would the basic laws of physics not allow it?

I have done lots of studying and have a good understanding, also I'm a very quick learner. What do you expect me to do? Light magnesium with a bunsen burner? I'm much more advanced than a lot of people my age.

Yes, but as I also said, I put it on here to get information to learn about it. I am only 14 so I haven't exactly been able to get a PHD with years of studying. But I am hoping too.

Yes, it was "out of the air" and I put it on here to get help with it.

Okay, thanks. So what is V? Yes, the right hand version is a lot better.

As I said, I was thinking about if something went faster than the speed of light then what would happen to Einstein's theory, so I developed a simple and quick tweak. I've explained it a couple of posts below and also I am only 14 and I come on here to learn more about my thoughts and theories that I have so I'm not a big expert in science but I am hoping to be.

Yes, I know it's not confirmed but if light speed was broken (doesn't matter what experiment) then would this work? And I don't understand how it could be justified as it's in it's simplest form. Actually I've noticed a flaw, sorry. The equation should be if S=>C then E=M(C+(S-C)^2 which I will change in the forum. And as a word equation it would simply be: If the speed is greater than the speed of light then Energy is equal to the speed of light plus the sum of the speed minus the speed of light. Make sense??