Well certainly they have to jazz it up to make people watch the show, They definitely make mistakes as I'm sure any science lab would. I have seen a few shows where they went back and admitted to mistakes and re did the experiment.
I'm not trying to say that they have the definitive answer...
well they follow the scientific method, I suppose you would have to watch the episode to see if you agree that they covered all the bases with their experiment
On discovery channel the myth busters answered this question. Using rain coming straight down they found the faster you went the more wet you became. Even if travelling faster meant spending less time in the rain. You must also consider that when travelling at a speed you are receiving rain...
"Lethbridge student solves Universe"
in todays local paper.
A young lad has postulated that D=distance
D=E/pi
The theory on how it explains gravity is that if distance is altered by E then a beam of light travelling around say the sun would encounter a greater distance on one side of...
only way to go back without paradoxes
No matter where you are in the universe due to relativity compared to energy you are always in the middle. That being said, If you could teleport halfway to the edge of the galaxy, since you'd still be in the middle the universe would only be half as old...
and if infinite times zero equals one then
dimension=d(t)
with each variable representing a zero or infinite
and dimension representing our universe
to exit our universe out of a black hole and exit that universe out of a consecutive black hole dimension must be 2 or greater. where a value...
in the equation d=(c-v)t If velocity was light then time is infinite.
zero times infinite being one. distance would equal one.
That distance would be our universe, or our singularity.
And since only mass travelling at light speed can make distance zero and time infiinite
dt=1 the one...
E=mc2 did you know the c in that equation is
d=(c-v)t
t=c/v+d
v=(d+c)t
c=(dt)-v
*Note velocity is directional. light could also be c=(dt)+v depending if your looking at direction of travel or opposite your direction.
If you make velocity light speed. Then distance is zero and time...
first off, I'd like to point out once again, that the equation is already proven correct. Second of all if c-v=0 then D=0(t) Just looking at the equation tells you that something travelling light speed doesn't exist in time. And it's distance can only be found if you measure it. Once you...
No, look at the equation.
D=(c-v)t
Obviously, if v=c then D=t
You put the infinite's and zero's in there for yourself, because there is no way to solve the equation. The only way to solve the equation is to measure it, to give it a distance. Only then does it interact with time.
Ok c...
Guys if D=(c-v)t
Then c can represent massless and v represent a mass.
If v is equal to c, then D=t
Therefor time only exists as a distance. Without connecting with a distance nothing can be measured. Because without time, there can be no other equations.
If you travelled at light speed...
But the speed of light is a velocity in itself, also no matter who measures it, it is the same speed relative to themselves.
Therefor c can also equal dt
c=Dt
c=D/t+v
We know light behaves as a particle and a wave depending how we look at it, well there now you have it in mathmatics...
Man no wonder I was confused about a t.o.e
I always thought c=Dt,
Wait a minute, light is a constant, it will always be the same speed and return the same time for the same distance. Therefor either of those equations can be used to measure light.
The second equation is a new equation for...
Ok
Alright, well yes russ waters, Multiplying E and T gives me a distance in two ways, I'm still struglling with this as much as you are to understand me though. In any case, Energy travels a certain speed. And given a time that gives a distance. The other way Energyx time gives a distance...
k, an easy question does planck distance equal planck energy X time ?
And I've studied physics in some degree, but only in my own time. And I don't know enough formulas to figure things out. But I understand both in language. Also when I look at the question of the theory of everything...
Wow, that was a lot of reading, I had like 7 more quotes but my browser timed out. I like that star trek guys comments it really brought a new perspective into it. I agreed with most of them. As for the quarrel about a given value for zero, I think we will forever be getting closer, but never...
So when these vectors are near collinear (coexisting?) their magnitude (energy?) turns to near zero. Could this be akin to the ether we look for?
When the vectors coincide they create a space this near empty space has a certain time frame. If you increase the magnitude in the equation...
I don't understand the math too well could you further explain it in english?
I find it interesting that you say approximate unity. To me that says some guy with a real affinity for turning patterns into a math formula came up with something that can almost explain it in all situations. "Like...
no they don't. Zero is a term we made to describe nothing, if you are counting apples you have zero apples.
No where in that shows that B exists and is an element of A.
If you are saying that b is absolutely nothing and a is what you are saying is nothing, both are equal to zero so it...
i still don't see why all the hub bub on this subject nothing is nothing, nothing isn't dark matter, dark matter is dark matter. nothing is nothing, nothing is absence of something, nothing doesn't even exist. nothing is zero and anything else is non zero.
more on black holes, The larger they are the longer they take to lose their energy through Hawking radiation. This is because, a black hole actually does have a relative time to you. The less energy it has the faster time goes relative to us. I've given enough examples with the equation, you...
okay. Hawking Radiation comes out of a black hole in fluxes that despite peoples best efforts, they can't pin the math down correctly to explain it in all circumstances.
What my theory suggests, is that a black hole, is an entire universe like our own. The energy waxing and waning comes...
No I'm not telling you new facts, just why they are.
We already know light Time and distance are related. Watch,
Light travels one light year per year. Right there shows you.
Man I had written a lot here and it deleted it, i don't feel likewriting it again.
So i'll skip to important...