Vanilla 1.1.2 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
The speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s
Now take a disk with a circumference of 299,792,458 meters.
Circumference = 2 * Radius * Pi
Radius of this disk is 47,713,452 meters.
A point on the edge of a disk with a radius of 47,713,452 meters that makes one revolution in 1 second will be traveling
at the speed of light. What happens to this disk at that radius or of a radius greater than 48 million meters?
The disk still rotates, but if you were on the point at the radius, you would perceive shifts: mass increases, making everything seem heavier, length decreases, making everything seem shorter, and time slows down thanks to relativity.
So a point on the rim of a 48+ million meter radius disk that makes a revolution in 1 second will or will not be moving faster than 299,792,458 m/s ?
yea if you can get it that fast...
i think if something is that big, the amount of energy required would be too much...
technically you cannot go faster than the speed of light. but i am yet to understand why that is entirely, so i can't definitively tell you yes or no.
no need to try to explain it to me, i understand the basics, just not the why why whys.
if you are trying to accelerate material object (ie edge of that disc) its mass is getting bigger and bigget the closer you get to c and therfore its also getting harder to accelerate more, if you have enough energy by accelerating you will eventually end up with black hole
but aside of that theoreticaly you can go "faster" than c in two cases:
1-you will find a medium in which light speed (not c!) is very low and then make some object move faster than that, iirc this is called czerenkov radiation and was proven for smal practicles (mind you that c constant is defined as "light speed in vacuum")
2-get a strong laser and a good binoculars or small telescope, point them to the moon and move the laser (slowly), you will observe that dot on moons surface is moving faster than light but its not material so again you didnt beat ~300000000mps for material objects
migrena, your #1 up there is not going faster than c, but going faster than light in a medium. c is the speed of light in a vacuum.
*does a hand stand on the disk*
yes, #1 should be classified as moving faster than light, my bad
I suppose centrifugal force would utterly destroy any matter at that speed.
you could use a dyson ring with large mass in its center, but you will need to find a way to increase its mass to balance centrifugal force (ie shoot some matter to its poles as you increase its spinning speed)
ok, how about this
your in your car going 100mph on the highway, you turn on your head lights.
how fast is the light from your headlights going?
It's going at the speed of light in that medium...Since you are already moving you are not applying any additional speed to that light...it is still the same.
migetman, that's like asking this:
You're moving at one inch per hour. You throw a baseball. How fast is the baseball going?
The initial velocity is immaterial to the answer.
hit the nail on the head ;)
ok say you're going half the speed of light and then turn on the headlights. What happens? Everything I've ever read/heard says the light goes the speed of light in the medium, relative to yourself OR any onlooker. I have yet to understand why so far but this is what I understand. If someone can explain, please do.
that is where consensus diverges. There are people who have quite differing opinions on that, take with a pinch of salt everything you learn in school that is physics related from the last 50 years, alot of it is high up for questioning.
If you think about what you are asking, lets imagine two people. one in a vehicle racing along at half the speed of light, the other far off and stationary. if the vehicle emits a pulse of laser light forwards, how can one observer see either 50% or 150% the speed of light, while the other sees 100%. I cannot answer your question. ask me again in 4 years when I have my masters in physics lol.
complicated answer: dig into information about corpuscular nature of light and you will know why
simple answer: why you think that fotons will move at vechicle speed + light speed?
Posted By: bluebandit08ok say you're going half the speed of light and then turn on the headlights. What happens? Everything I've ever read/heard says the light goes the speed of light in the medium, relative to yourself OR any onlooker. I have yet to understand why so far but this is what I understand. If someone can explain, please do.
You cannot "add momentums" when considering photons, because photons have no mass. Photons always travel at c in a vacuum.
they do have mass :p
ixnay on the otonphay assmay
I'm making a point.
we are talking about fotons in their wave or material state?
*wishes he knew enough about physics to participate* 
migrena, u never heard of wave particle duality? every wave has a particle property and visa versa.
that is why light lands in packets called photons.
that is also how solar wind is supposed to work.
"supposed" 
its hard to grasp those vapour of knowlage that i still have from my studies... i asked because i remembered that there was something wrong with fotons being material all the time and maintaining their speed, so they have and at the same time they havent any mass?
migrena
It's an extension of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. If you measure a photon's mass, you change its state.
In order to make any meaningful statements about photons, then, you need to disregard mass.
you need that mass to know how much exacly light will bend in gravitational field (a fact you can confirm during each solar aclipse)
and the fact that a black hole is black.
its not black hole that is black, event horizon is black, and its not really black because it emits some moving particles, ergo it emits heat...
ok we moved totally off-topic 
lol :)
well it's black because light is sucked into it and not emitted, and light is sucked into it because it has mass and is therefore affected by the gravitational field.
I'm not sure that gravity has any effect on light (photons) at all.
Gravity wells distorts the shape of space around them. A photon travels in a straight line. If a black hole or other gravity well causes said "straight line" to curve, then the photon appears to travel in a curve when in fact it continues to travel in a straight line.
No, I'm not making this up!
no you are right, i get your point completely.
hmmm.... but if you think about it the same could be said about any orbiting body, they are simply following a straight line in a parobolic indentation of the space-time fabric caused by a larger mass. we recognise the slope of this fabric by the size of the force the mass experiences.
If you shine a light from the earth, it will travel the path photons take. The earth will travel a different path, due to gravity.
I think that is resultant of the difference in speed.
So... I'll assume from the answers... that the disk will, in a sense, become a spiral, with the inside rotating, but as we approach the edge, it begins to slow down to nothing since it's to massive to move? (Then it begins to move backwards and then I am totally screwed) 
i mentioned this in one of topics here
photons mass was experimentally proven by measuring difference betwen expected and real stars positions during sun eclipse - measured positions of stars observed near sun was different from calculated if fotons wouldnt have mass, stars were observed closer to the sun thus proving that gravity affects photons, and because gravity affects only objects that have mass therfore fotons have mass
i hope my english was good enough to make this clear
Posted By: UdoboyIf you shine a light from the earth, it will travel the path photons take. The earth will travel a different path, due to gravity.
photons will travel different path because they have much smaller mass than earth and therfore they are much less affected by gravity
Posted By: wwbwb9636So... I'll assume from the answers... that the disk will, in a sense, become a spiral, with the inside rotating, but as we approach the edge, it begins to slow down to nothing since it's to massive to move? (Then it begins to move backwards and then I am totally screwed)
" TITLE="
">
if it will be made from rubber then yes 
Posted By: migrenaPosted By: UdoboyIf you shine a light from the earth, it will travel the path photons take. The earth will travel a different path, due to gravity.
photons will travel different path because they have much smaller mass than earth and therfore they are much less affected by gravity
That's what I said!
wow i started somthing with alot of big words...
Posted By: MrFingerstechnically you cannot go faster than the speed of light. but i am yet to understand why that is entirely, so i can't definitively tell you yes or no.
no need to try to explain it to me, i understand the basics, just not the why why whys.
There's no real need to understand why. It's classical theoretical physics, and the most elegant answer was given by the third poster.
PS to "migrena" - a black hole emits a hellava lot more than "some particles"..... Black holes are "messy eaters".
I am a physics student and the only reason I accept something I do not fully understand, such as the above, is because so many more knowledgable people than I do accept it. I just don't digest things I don't understand, simple as. The majority of physics within the last 50 years I view with extreme scepticism. especially quantum physics. yuck. wave-particle duality, ok, but tell me a particle could be anywhere in the universe until you measure it? 
<blockquote><cite>Posted By: Geog</cite>*wishes he knew enough about physics to participate*
</blockquote>
DUMBASS!
Isn't Dumbass the guy who wrote The Three Musketeers and the sequel The Man in the Iron Mask? I hear that there's going to be another sequel Iron Man coming out in May 2007 where Leonardo finally kicks some serious butt with his robot armor.
I think that was Dumas, Taed... 
The Man in the Iron Mask was actually book 5. The second book was alright... the others were boggy in politics to get to the end.
Yeah, it's pretty confusing. While they're subtitled The Three Musketeers: Book 4 and The Man in the Iron Mask: Book 5, the first 3 prequels were never made. It was a typical Dumas move to try to create a franchise that he could just sit back and live off the royalties. Of course, in the 18th century, merchandising rights were less than bubkus, so he didn't even cash in on the back-end, either. And, as you probably know, he later died a pauper. It wasn't until the Classics Illustrated versions of the books came out that the original novels then became popular in the mid-1900's.
That was the most awesome turn of a conversation I have ever seen, Taed. Thank you for that.
I thought that a black hole is black because the light goes so fast you can't see it 
1 to 48 of 48