What is anti-light-speed?
-
ensger wrote:
What is above 0 and and slowly enough
1E-99?;P Paul
Paul van der Walt wrote:
1E-99?
not slow enough! ;P long double : exp:15 mant:64 Quadruple: exp: 15 mat: 112 _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
No - it doesn't work like that :) Heisenberg's principle (in part) means dx.dp >= h_bar/2, where dx is uncertainty in position and dp is uncertainty in momentum. If we assume a unit mass then we have dx.dv >=h_bar/2. => dv >= h_bar/(2.dx) (h_bar = planck's constant / pi) So the bigger your uncertainty in exactly where you are, the less your uncertainty about your velocity. So you can say the velocity of an object is as close to 0 as you want. You just have no idea where you left it. cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
So you can say the velocity of an object is as close to 0 as you want. You just have no idea where you left it.
So you are saying that the slowest speed is the pair of binoculars I lost at Taos at the age of 5? _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
No - it doesn't work like that :) Heisenberg's principle (in part) means dx.dp >= h_bar/2, where dx is uncertainty in position and dp is uncertainty in momentum. If we assume a unit mass then we have dx.dv >=h_bar/2. => dv >= h_bar/(2.dx) (h_bar = planck's constant / pi) So the bigger your uncertainty in exactly where you are, the less your uncertainty about your velocity. So you can say the velocity of an object is as close to 0 as you want. You just have no idea where you left it. cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
No - it doesn't work like that :) Heisenberg's principle (in part) means dx.dp >= h_bar/2, where dx is uncertainty in position and dp is uncertainty in momentum. If we assume a unit mass then we have dx.dv >=h_bar/2. => dv >= h_bar/(2.dx) (h_bar = planck's constant / pi)
Now your just showing off with all that algebra and big words. And to think you started off in Canberra making mud pies from memory. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
No - it doesn't work like that :) Heisenberg's principle (in part) means dx.dp >= h_bar/2, where dx is uncertainty in position and dp is uncertainty in momentum. If we assume a unit mass then we have dx.dv >=h_bar/2. => dv >= h_bar/(2.dx) (h_bar = planck's constant / pi)
Now your just showing off with all that algebra and big words. And to think you started off in Canberra making mud pies from memory. Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash 24/04/2004
modelling mud pies, thank you very much. Poorly, too. cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
As we know, light speed is the fastest speed we know. But I have a question. What is the most slowly speed we know?
ensger wrote:
What is the most slowly speed we know?
The speed at which the American government makes decisions.
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
-
ensger wrote:
What is the most slowly speed we know?
The speed at which the American government makes decisions.
"You have an arrow in your butt!" - Fiona:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog[^]CPhog. The act of using CPhog (Firefox)[^] alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog (Firefox)[^] and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
-
Hi Chris, Since speed is distance over time, shouldn't the lowest speed be the Planck length over the Planck time? Ivor S. Sargoytchev Dundas Software -- modified at 16:27 Saturday 24th June, 2006
-
As we know, light speed is the fastest speed we know. But I have a question. What is the most slowly speed we know?
ensger wrote:
As we know, light speed is the fastest speed we know. But I have a question. What is the most slowly speed we know?
I think it's the speed at which my ex-wife trundles back and forth to the kitchen for more food. I call it "Desiree speed".
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Speed or velocity? (Lowest velocity is -c. Lowest speed is 0) cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-- modified at 13:14 Saturday 24th June, 2006
Have you seen the article about light traveling backwards? http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=2544[^] Here is the professor's Nonlinear Optics Group Page[^]. -- Marcus Kwok
-
Speed or velocity? (Lowest velocity is -c. Lowest speed is 0) cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-- modified at 13:14 Saturday 24th June, 2006
If I have two directional light sources A and B and I aim them diametrically opposed in a pure vacuum, and I observe in the direction of travel of the beam A, do photons of stream A travel at c or at 2c relative to photons of stream B? If I place the camera point C collinear but not between A and B, so that both streams are, for a short period, in a single observational frame of reference, are the photons constrained to travel at c/2 or does the fact that none of the photons from one of the beams will ever reach the observer provide them with a sort of quantum get-out-of-gaol-free-card, incidentally also releasing the other beam from the constraint? If we treat photons as field perturbation wavefronts in a fluid with a viscosity such that the wave travels at c, this certainly accounts for the constant velocity aspect, but it totally fails to explain the directionality. Imagining vacuum as a sea of contangent bubbles of potential kinda like valence shells, maybe photons don't travel but are absorbed and a new photon of the same energy emitted at the other side of each bubble.
PeterW -------------------- If you can spell and use correct grammar for your compiler, what makes you think I will tolerate less?