this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
71 points (96.1% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26858 readers
1702 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I watched a video about the development of the line, that ridiculous building project in the dessert. I see glacier basically melting in front of my eyes but never felt as doomed as watching this shit developing for some reason. Just the sheer amount of manpower, diesel and money wated on the viggest pile of shit i have ever seen while the planet around them is dying.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

Is that fucking garbage still going ahead!??

Sheeeeit

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago (6 children)

If you’re on a truck traveling at 60mph, and throw a ball forward at 60mph, that ball is moving at 120mph.

But if you replace the ball with a flashlight, then the light isn’t moving at the speed of light plus 60mph. Instead, it slows down so as not to exceed the speed of light.

It’s like if you threw that ball at 60mph and it went flying forward, but at 10mph, no matter how hard you throw.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Uhh, relativity, fun. This gets a lot more mind boggling, imagine 3 people, A and B are in a train and C is an observer outside. From C point of view, B will pass him first, then A. This train is going at 50% the speed of light and it's very long, A and B are 1 second light apart, i.e the distance that light takes 1 second to travel.

If A shines a flashlight B will see it 1 second later. However from C point of view since the light was shone the train moved forward 0.5 light seconds. So the light has to travel 1.5 light seconds distance, and it does so in exactly 1.5 seconds. So the observers disagree on the distance the light travel, but also disagree on the time it took, but they agree on the speed of light.

This makes things weird, because both A and B say that 1 second passed, but C says that 1.5 seconds passed. This means that people moving faster experience time slower. Which means that if you take two twins, put one on a fast moving ship, e.g. 80% speed of light, by the time he comes back only a few minutes would have passed for him, but years would pass for the other.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

The back of my brain is fizzing.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Twitter users

Why? Just leave.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago

Same with people who complain qbout facebook and use facebook.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

The astounding incompetence and corruption woven into Australian politics and law enforcement.

Statement from FriendlyJordies

Coronation (re-upload) (the video referred to in the above)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Not really a recent thing, but the idea that supposedly if you travel faster than light, then you begin going back in time. But that doesn't make sense to me. I guess the math has to work out somehow, but it seems to me that if light has a speed, then - ignoring the logistical issues related to having the power to travel ftl - travelling faster than light would simply be that, faster than light. Or to put it another way, if it takes 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach earth, then an object travelling 2c should take 4 minutes to travel the same distance, not negative 4 minutes or however that'd work out.

The only conclusion I can come to regarding how that works out logically, is that relativity sets the time light travels to "0" regardless of time taken, because that's the only way I could see a negative value making logical sense. However it seems like that'd have its own issues, plus it implies that light instantly reaches its destination. Yet we know light has a speed and takes time to get places. It just... doesn't make any logical sense. Yet I guess the math must work out otherwise scientists would have blown so many holes in relativity that it wouldn't be used anymore.

inb4 "but causality..."

The speed of causality is inferred from the speed of light and the speed at which fields propagate in a vacuum. Causality, or the idea that cause must be observable before effect, is a human concept. Observing effect before cause doesn't break causality, it only appears to do so because we're seemingly limited to the speed of light. The reason why causality is said to have a speed (the speed of light in a vacuum) is because, with the exception of quantum tunneling, we've never observed anything that moves faster than light, so it's a seemingly safe assumption to say that cause and effect play out at a speed no greater than light in a vacuum. Or to put it another way, the speed of light dictates causality, not the other way around. If something is found to be faster than light (like particles tunneling through objects), then causality must shift with it.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Let me see if I can try to explain this.

First off, light isn't just the fastest thing we know of, it is physically impossible to go faster than light according to the laws of physics as we understand it. This is because the speed of light is actually tied to the way spacetime works.

Imagine you are standing and you throw a ball. The ball travels at whatever speed you throw it, let's say 5 mph.

Now, let's put you on a train traveling at 20 mph and do the same thing. If you throw the same direction the train is traveling, your 5 mph adds to the train's 20 and the ball goes at 25 mph according to someone standing next to the track. Throw it the other way and they see it travel at 15 mph. To you, in either case, it appears to move at 5 mph.

Light doesn't do this. We've measured it, and in a vacuum light always appears to travel at the same speed (we call it c for short). If you hold a flashlight, your friend next to you can measure the speed of light and will find it to be c. If we put you back on that train and stand your friend next to the track, you will see the light moving at c, but so will your friend. Not c +/- 20 mph, but c. Even if we put you on a rocket traveling at some significant portion of light speed, say 0.5 c, both you and your friend would still observe the light from your flashlight to be traveling at c.

This is what Einstein figured out, and this is what we mean by Relativity. From this, we also know that objects moving faster experience an increase in mass (you have to get moving pretty close to c to really notice), and as you approach c that mass trends to infinity. That's why anything with mass cannot achieve the speed of light, it would be infinitely massive, and thus require infinite energy to accelerate to that speed. Thus, only things with no mass (such as light) can move that fast.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

When Zefram Cochrane is born you'll eat your words!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What if you think of it this way. If the Sun exploded right now, we wouldn’t know for 8 minutes, but if you were to leave at the same time, at twice the speed of light and traveled for 8 minutes, you would be 24 minutes away from the explosion now.

So if you travel away from the earth and view it through a telescope, you would see back in time as you flew away, since the light traveling from earth wouldn’t be traveling as fast.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (7 children)

That's not why relativity causes time dilation -- it's not the Doppler effect of light. If it were, then the direction of travel, not merely the speed, would be a factor.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The speed of light is the speed of information, including gravity, electromagnetism, and some other things I am not thinking of off the top of my head. For example, if the sun disappeared right now, the lack of gravitational pull would reach Earth at the same time as it blinked out from Earth's perspective.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

You’re going back in time but you’re not going to be in the same place.

Think of a person walking on a road, you can drive past them and arrive somewhere before them.

You can’t do that while staying stationary. So you couldn’t say go back in time and see prehistoric Earth. It’s relative to when and where you are.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (6 children)

That if there are infinite universes out there in the multiverse then there are infinite amount of universes exactly like this one. Which means we’re stuck living this exact life across infinite universe and we’ll never be able to escape it. So that’s kind of depressing but mind blowing I guess

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

That's not right at all by my thinking.

Infinite multiverse means infinite exact same universe as ours, yes. But it also means there are also infinite different universes. But you can use comparisons to see that there would likely be more universes that are different than ours because of small permutations in history causing larger effects in the future. So I like to think there are both many exact universes, and many very different universes.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

Yep, if there's an infinite number of parallel universes then there's an infinite number where nothing is different. Maybe the only difference between the universes was the position of a mote of dust on an uninhabited planet in a galaxy on the other side of the universe.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

Perhaps. But infinite universes is still just a theory. So why let such a astronomical 'what if,' get you down?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What an enormous public heath issue iodine deficiency was in Switzerland and how completely everyone forgot about it after it was fixed by the introduction of iodized salt in the 1920s: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v45/n23/jonah-goodman/a-national-evil

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

i would speculate that [mild?] hypo vs hyper may have different advantages/disadvantages at various stages of life.
but idk. #dyr #factcheck

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The actor who played the main guy in The 4400 is married to William Shatner's daughter.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

To boldly go... where few men have gone before.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›