KennyC

Or can it?

The attached links bring up porn pop-ups!

True, in that view.

I think yes it could be. It could also just be that we don't have tools/capabilities of measuring/determining anything faster/smaller - victims of our own reality.

Ah but can you determine the time or #1 and #2 and the level of irritation of #3? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged But do you subscribe to the multiverse concept where each decision/change splits to another future and all possible futures exist? Or are you saying that no future exists til it happens?

Fascinating discussion. I'm currently reading Lee Smolin's "The Trouble with Physics..." and have just gotten to the part where he suggests some similar ideas about the "problems" with Time as a dimension. Apparently there are mathematical systems where the time dimensions more or less disappears into the "background." At one point (Ch 15: Physics After String Theory - page 239 of my epub version of the book): "....There is a deeper problem, perhaps going back to the origin of physics. Around the beginning of the seventeenth century, Descartes and Galileo both made a most wonderful discovery: You could draw a graph, with one axis being space and the other being time. A motion through space then becomes a curve on the graph (see Fig. 17). In this way, time is represented as if it were another dimension of space. Motion is frozen, and a whole history of constant motion and change is presented to us as something static and unchanging. If I had to guess (and guessing is what I do for a living), this is the scene of the crime."

Thanks. I was going to say that....

Someone knowledgeable will be along shortly. I think Electrons, Protons etc have actual size, not sure that is true of quarks though.

That's my understanding as well. It is immediately traveling at C. Interesting huh? Another sort of related question, what determines the direction it moves when it is "born?"

I'm a nervous wreck at the mention....

I'd think a tremor might make it pretty hard to shoot planes down as well...

C is the derivative of C^2 - it's a transform of ""coordinates" between the energy framework and the mass framework. ^^^^^^This may be Bogus^^^^^^^

Well, that was fun....

Welcome!

Hey I'm Kenny and I'm a scienceaholic. I've been fascinated with science from when I was a kid some half-a-century ago. I am an aborted physics major from long ago and have studied much psychology. My degree is in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and I work as a computer software engineer and do some writing on the side. I'm looking to brush-up, catch-up (no not ketchup!) on physics and science for myself knowledge and article/essay writing.

Thanks! KAC

From what POV? That was my point. To the traveler all should look and feel normal, right? KAC

Good thought, but what if something else was changing to compensate. (kind of like shrinkage and mass change at relativistic speeds that are invisible in the observers frame of reference). That's exactly the equations/results that would have to change to allow for it, it seems. KAC

Any references? Links? KAC

Oh, I understand that. That thing that I keep wondering though is what we might discover if we reworked all those equations holding something else constant, like space or time... I certainly don't have (or have lost) the mathematics necessary to do it. KAC

But to the traveler, there is no "smashing" things traveling with them should appear to be the same. KAC

No, because sound requires a medium to travel in... KAC

I know it's blasphemy, but what are the reasons (other than Einsteins assumption) that lightspeed must be constant. It's always bugged me that this one quantity is "nailed down" and it screws up everything else...time, space, mass... What if it were not constant but actually did vary. Couldn't we look at something else being the "universal constant" and see what would happen with all the equations? I'm sure there is more to it than I know, but someone please tell my why lightspeed has to be a constant. KAC