Caveman 2 Cosmos

[Thunderbrd]

Why are executives (the guys that expand corporations) in the military unit category? They should be counted as civilians, even better would be missionaries so that they they can be more easily filtered out in the city view.

I'm curious how they are being 'categorized' this way or where they are coming up as that. They are civilians by unitcombat and people by specialunit and they aren't getting any XP from any military instructors, so what filter is catching them as military?

 

[Yudishtira]

0.5c + 0.5c is not 1c.
1km/s + 1km/s is 2 km/s.... unless you are precise enough.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula

When you have to start arguing 1 + 1 doesn't equal 2 in order to hold on to your dogma, I think we're just about done here.

What about c + 1 > c, as in one of my examples? Are you going to dispute that? What about the infinite speed of every electromagnetic particle in its own reference frame?

 

[raxo2222]

When you have to start arguing 1 + 1 doesn't equal 2 in order to hold on to your dogma, I think we're just about done here.

What about c + 1 > c, as in one of my examples? Are you going to dispute that? What about the infinite speed of every electromagnetic particle in its own reference frame?

So you believe, that special relativity is hoax/scam?
GPS must take special and general relativity under account.
Photons doesn't have rest reference frame.
Photons travel at speed of c in any reference frame.

Nuclear reactions give so much energy only because of this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence
This is how sun lasted for over 4 billion years.

Also read about crisis of 19th century physics - it seemed to be complete but there were few quirks. This is how we got modern physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_physics#20th_century:_birth_of_modern_physics

So adding velocities in special relativity is some mathematics not some simple addition (simple addition is mostly correct if you are talking about speeds less than 10% C).
1 + C would be 1 + C in Newtonian physics.
Special relativity predicts everything Newtonian physics would predict at low speeds.

 

[Thunderbrd]

An answer to this can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone - the one-way example given there might not be that impressive (you can find a frame of reference where the superluminal movement leads to the arrival happening before the departure). But the two-way example shows a case where sending information into the past becomes possible if two people have access to such a device that can send information with superluminal speed. And that is true as long as the signalling speed is superluminal - that is why this is the speed of causality. Causes must happen before their effects.

I think you missed my point.

First, let me make sure that I'm assuming your term correctly, that superluminal means faster than the speed of light. And that by this YOU believe that the speed of light = the speed of causality and thus assuming that if we are talking about exceeding the speed of light then we must also be talking about exceeding the speed of causality.

What I'm saying is that the speed of light cannot possibly BE the speed of causality and it is proven by the fact that we can measure any delay at all between the emitting and receiving of light.

If I can shoot a laser at the moon at time A and have it return from bouncing off a mirror there to arrive at my receiving panel at time B and time A and B are not the same exact moment, then I have proven, conclusively, that the speed of light is NOT the speed of causality itself. Only if there could be no measurable difference in time between the generation of the light and it landing on the receiving panel would it be travelling at the speed of causality.

It would then be further shown not to be when I can find something that travels from Point A to Point B in less measurable time, even if we haven't found anything that can move that fast yet.

I'm not talking about something moving backwards in time, just something moving faster than light.

 

[raxo2222]

Whatever has happened to US and Australian education system

What I'm saying is that the speed of light cannot possibly BE the speed of causality and it is proven by the fact that we can measure any delay at all between the emitting and receiving of light.

Photons and gravity travel at speed of causality because they are massless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

Massless things can't travel at other speeds.

Causality speed is finite - we can find its speed by doing various experiments.
For example proton and neutron separately have different mass compared to being together as deuterium - isotope of hydrogen.
Also its some ratio of physical constants - its in link above.

 

[Joij21]

Unlike some people on this thread who think its impossible, I believe FTL can be done but only by bending space time i.e. warp drive. Now with that being said because we don't yet have the technology and because the energy costs would require an economy far more robust than we have now in order to support the vast energy generation requirement to make it feasible, my best guess is it will be available around 3,173 A.D. . For the next millennia though we won't use seed ships and instead remain in our own solar system colonizing the planets here because of the sheer cost of such seed ships and the fact that closed economy/multigenerational ships would be too impractical with no economic return to Earth because of the distances. Only after the warp drive would we begin colonizing Alpha Centauri and beyond due to the fact that resources would also be able to be brought back to Earth for commercial exploitation.

 

[Yudishtira]

So you believe, that special relativity is hoax/scam?
GPS must take special and general relativity under account.

What I'm saying is a direct corollary of relativity. The scam is the head-in-the-sand antics and the cover-up by those who aren't comfortable with the facts.

Photons doesn't have rest reference frame.
Photons travel at speed of c in any reference frame.

Are you saying photons aren't allowed a frame of reference because of the uncomfortable consequences? What court was this ruled in?

If I shine a photon behind me while travelling at any significant fraction of c (any speed at all really), after a year it will be more than a light-year away. In my reference frame.

Does this mean you're going to take mine away too?

 

[Yudishtira]

Whatever has happened to US and Australian education system

Some of us resisted the mind control, cult programming, spells and hypnosis. Others lapped them up, proud of the superiority they thought it gave them.

Photons and gravity travel at speed of causality because they are massless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

Massless things can't travel at other speeds.

But light does travel at other speeds eg. in water. Does causality have to slow down for it?

 

[raxo2222]

What I'm saying is a direct corollary of relativity. The scam is the head-in-the-sand antics and the cover-up by those who aren't comfortable with the facts.



Are you saying photons aren't allowed a frame of reference because of the uncomfortable consequences? What court was this ruled in?

If I shine a photon behind me while travelling at any significant fraction of c (any speed at all really), after a year it will be more than a light-year away. In my reference frame.

Does this mean you're going to take mine away too?

So you aren't comfortable by fact, that Newton theory is merely approximate model.
Sorry, universe is much more complicated, than you want to believe.
Go back to 19th century, Luddite

New theories are built on top of old theories - new theory must predict what old theory predicts and must explain things, that old theory couldn't explain.
Fun fact: General relativity and quantum mechanics are fundamentally incompatible with each other despite working very well.

If travelled to/from sun at relativistic speeds, then it would appear bluer/redder as photons gain/lose energy.
In your reference frame they will spend less time travelling too.

Some of us resisted the mind control, cult programming, spells and hypnosis. Others lapped them up, proud of the superiority they thought it gave them.


But light does travel at other speeds eg. in water. Does causality have to slow down for it?

Ah yes, Industrial Revolution and disastrous consequences on humanity.
You should create anarchoprimitivist commune with other people on here.
Anarcho because "government bad" primitivists because "technology/science bad"
Cult programming and mind control perfectly describes conspiracy theorists.
Also spells and hypnosis aren't real - its just some manipulation.

Light always travels at c, it seems to be slowed because photons are kept being absorbed and re-emitted in random direction when travelling trough some medium.

 

[Thunderbrd]

But light does travel at other speeds eg. in water. Does causality have to slow down for it?

Good point.

So... from all the reading links provided, it seems to me that the big excuse that nothing can travel faster than light is that nothing has been observed to do so, therefore, we assume that causality itself is travelling at a speed and thus that speed is wrapped up in the definition of space itself. That if you move far enough away, you've moved in time as well because literally, anything you see out there in the universe is what's happening at this very time in relativity to your own frame of observation and the speed of light is defining the speed of time's passage per distance.

I'm not sure I buy it, no matter how verifiable the experiments may seem to be. If light takes time to travel, then it's not the speed of causality imo. The speed of causality is instant. There is a current moment taking place universally everywhere. Time is a 4th dimension that is not the same as space and is instead an entirely different axis to spacial distance.

I may be wrong. Probably am, but it doesn't seem so full of self contradictions that way.

Sure, massless energy seems to have a constant rate of speed, ok, cool, now we know what the rate of speed of a massless energy is. Neat. I see no reason it cannot be exceeded without breaking causality where something can travel c without being automatically capable of moving backwards in time. It just reaches its destination before light does. That's really not that complicated.

Light always travels at c, it seems to be slowed because photons are kept being absorbed and re-emitted in random direction when travelling trough some medium.

Yeah so this doesn't always make sense here - I mean if you are travelling at .5 c in a direction then you shine a light backwards, how does it then travel at 1.5 c to make up for the momentum you have moving the other direction? (This may be what Yudi was trying to say in other words.)

Or is it that to an observer to the side of the person moving and shining the light backwards, both the light that's approaching from the original point to the person moving and the light moving backwards are moving at a speed relative to the speed of the origin of the light sources themselves? Thus it takes a light from the Earth to reach that person moving twice the normal speed of light and it takes the light returning to Earth from that person moving twice the normal speed of light for the distance as opposed to exactly the same distance in light years as the person is/was when the racing lights were sent? But if the person were fixed in space (unmoving) and the Earth was fixed in space, the light would take the normal rate of time to reach both Earth and the traveller?


Yeah, looks like the part I have a hard time swallowing as real would be this stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

Seems like an incredibly unnecessary convulsion of thought as a whole. That space itself manipulates time doesn't seem to be necessary to explain anything unless you're trying to somehow explain that the speed of light = the speed of causality, rather than all causality is instantaneous.

I say all this knowing I'm probably wrong here because the examples and thought experiments are often baffling in the way they are expressed - there are symbols for mathematical meanings in use on these pages I have no idea what they mean and I don't have the patience at the moment to reread over and over until it starts to make any sense in many other attempted examples.

 

[raxo2222]

Good point.


Yeah so this doesn't always make sense here - I mean if you are travelling at .5 c in a direction then you shine a light backwards, how does it then travel at 1.5 c to make up for the momentum you have moving the other direction? (This may be what Yudi was trying to say in other words.)

First one is bad point - its speed in vacuum.
In medium it effectively travels slower as it is constantly scattered, absorbed and re-emitted.

Velocities aren't simply added in relativity, c + c is c. 0.9c + 0.9c is something closer to c.
There was link about velocity addition in relativity above.

If special relativity is such eldritch abomination for you two, then you don't want to see science that is behind semiconductors.
Or one behind black holes.
String theory is level above that.

 

[Thunderbrd]

its speed in vacuum.

Have you considered that perhaps a vacuum as we think we're observing it, isn't actually a vacuum at all but rather a sea of raw unformed potential that cannot even be called energy or mass unless it becomes somehow twisted into a knot of existence? A sea of potential that may well be able to provide light with some resistance and thus why c seems to be so constant because it's just a constant degree of resistance? Could this BE what we call dark energy/matter that's causing this?

In medium it effectively travels slower as it is constantly scattered, absorbed and re-emitted.

Thus proving that it IS a thing that is in motion, not just an instantaneous movement from point a to b.

Velocities aren't simply added in relativity, c + c is c. 0.9c + 0.9c is something closer to c.

And this doesn't strike you as false on the self-contradictory illogical face of it?

 

[raxo2222]

Have you considered that perhaps a vacuum as we think we're observing it, isn't actually a vacuum at all but rather a sea of raw unformed potential that cannot even be called energy or mass unless it becomes somehow twisted into a knot of existence? A sea of potential that may well be able to provide light with some resistance and thus why c seems to be so constant because it's just a constant degree of resistance? Could this BE what we call dark energy/matter that's causing this?

Thus proving that it IS a thing that is in motion, not just an instantaneous movement from point a to b.

And this doesn't strike you as false on the self-contradictory illogical face of it?

Quantum fluctuations? Even our atmosphere barely slows down light effectively.
We would see things, as effective change of speed of light causes refraction.
Stars are twinkling because of our atmosphere.

In our reference frame it is thing in motion - always at c, when not busy with interactions.
There is NO absolute reference frame in relativity.
Also universal clock doesn't exist in relativity.

And it only looks self-contradictory, our brains (intuition) want to scream ooga booga and hunt animals - we didn't change much in last 200 000 years or so.
Intuition is useless thing when it comes to modern physics. Instead of seeing bad spirits you see conspiracy or nonsense in chaos.
Adding velocities in relativity is complicated thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula#Special_relativity

This one makes special relativity feel like home, and it has way more applications in real life (material sciences).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics

If you don't understand something, it doesn't mean its bullcrap.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Quantum fluctuations? Even our atmosphere barely slows down light effectively.
We would see things, as effective change of speed of light causes refraction.
Stars are twinkling because of our atmosphere.

You would see that if it refracted the light, wavered the light, or in any way redirected it, but if this pool of 'void' - call it the ether - simply offers a constant pressure of resistance from all angles, then it would be why light could require a measure of time to arrive rather than having to get into some explanation of time and space being conjoined.

There is NO absolute reference frame in relativity.
Also universal clock doesn't exist in relativity.

I'm gathering that and it's also why I feel inclined to discount the theory. It doesn't feel right nor seems logical. I'm not going to call it conspiracy, just going to say I think the entire theory is just a model and perhaps it is... gasp... wrong.

Adding velocities in relativity is complicated thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula#Special_relativity

I can only imagine.

 

[raxo2222]

I'm gathering that and it's also why I feel inclined to discount the theory. It doesn't feel right nor seems logical. I'm not going to call it conspiracy, just going to say I think the entire theory is just a model and perhaps it is... gasp... wrong.

It isn't wrong, it just means, that you don't understand it.

Last man, who understood entire knowledge base of his time was in Renaissance - Leonardo Da Vinci was genius though.

Intelligent people know, that they don't know:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

 

[Joij21]

You would see that if it refracted the light, wavered the light, or in any way redirected it, but if this pool of 'void' - call it the ether - simply offers a constant pressure of resistance from all angles, then it would be why light could require a measure of time to arrive rather than having to get into some explanation of time and space being conjoined.

Well time actually goes faster the farther you are away from the Earth due to gravitational time dilation. If we acknowledge that gravity can bend space then how could bending of space affect time? Unless they are one and the same of course!

This is undoubtedly proof that has been tested time and time again proving they are indeed conjoined. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation

 

[Thunderbrd]

If we acknowledge that gravity can bend space then how could bending of space affect time?

Still working on acknowledging that too but that's nother discussion

It isn't wrong, it just means, that you don't understand it.

I'm not stating it is, just stating that it doesn't seem to be logical.

 

[raxo2222]

I'm not stating it is, just stating that it doesn't seem to be logical.

You would have to study mathematics behind it.
All modern physics seems to be like that - mathematics and experiments check out with high precision and accuracy.
We are used to Newtonian world - low velocities, relatively large sizes and masses.

If you are bored you can read wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics
I'm sure you will find branches of mathematics, that will seem illogical.

Any new physics will be even more crazy.

 

[margolloxx]

The answer to all of this is that we don't know. It has always been. Anytime some people claimed to have found the one truth it has gone horribly wrong either for them or the people around them. Is Earth flat? Are we the center of the universe? Do animals have feelings? What is the meaning of life (i have an idea but i might be wrong!)?
If we are lucky then we are now closer to the truth than ever, if not we might have taken a wrong turn at some point and have to go back. Thats the baseline of science. Never dismiss a theory entirely, no matter how ludicrous it seems.

Also remember that designing future stuff will be science fiction no matter what. Don't be scared to go off the rails!

 

[raxo2222]

Also remember that designing future stuff will be science fiction no matter what. Don't be scared to go off the rails!

Since we have time travelling techs in later games, we could blame stable time loops for anything too weird
There is even one tech, that claims to be gift from time travellers.

Beginning of future should be very hard science fiction, so transition would be smooth.
That is you would be 10 - 20 techs into future and you would wonder if those are actual predictions.
Frost Beams tech in Transhuman era is one of softer SF techs.

Information era was reworked so first column is 1990 - 1995 AD techs, second is 1995 - 2000 AD techs and so on.
Column with Commercial Spaceflight is 2020 - 2025 AD.

Our modern physics would be treated like crackpot theories in 18th/19th century.
Also if those current crackpot theories were real, then their mathematics would be way more complex than mathematics you can usually find in physics.