mimefan599

It's actually a wave particle duality if you are talking about how a photon acts like a wave or a particle in certain contextes. Or if you are talking about the OP then I will shut up.

If you wanna go that way it is actually [math] E^2 = m^2c^4 + p^2c^4 [/math].

What are you saying is moving faster than light, curios? If you had a very rigid rob and you tugged on it, then the atoms would be tugged an inch. This doesn't defy any known facts because as the atoms are being tugged, all the way down the line the atoms will move with it, but the atoms are only moving as fast as you tugged on the rod, not faster than light, so the transmitted data was carried by a huge amount of atoms. Nothing out of the ordinary.

Thats true.

I already saw the whole nova thing based on the book "The Elegant Universe," would it still be worthwhile to read the book also?

Yeah: Light is pure energy and energies nature is squared relative to mass. The full equation is E=mc2 + pc2, p being kinetic energy. E=mc2 only works for matter at rest, so really the force it takes to turn inertial matter into motion really has little to do with how much energy a mass contains.

hm, cool

Relativity tells us that it would travel away from you at the speed of light, but because you are going faster than light, no science can help you.

Man, this isn't very scientific but if you are going to post something, wipe off your grammar. Sometimes it is very hard to interperet what you are trying to say, nwaogu. Plus I think your science is quite off.

I suppose i was looking at light in a more particle fashion than a wave fashion or a quanta packet fashion.

You don't get it, im saying exactly at the point in time whne the light bulb is turned on, with no passage of time in between these two events, is the bulb flung away. THe photons wouldn't have time to be independant because the exact moment that the photons are emmited the light source is travelling at the speed of the photons, i.e. light.

Distance has no direction, or at least speed doesn't. The direction has nothing to do with how fast you go therefore it would not change the direction of time in which you travel. Absolute distance cannot go backwards. In our present knowledge of the universe, we couldnt determine an answer, because we still don't know the true nature of time, nor exactly how we travel through it, or if it is just something we made up. Either way, einstien helped get us to understand a little more about the nature of time, but there is still plenty of knowledge we have you to attain, so you should hold that thought for another 40 to 50 years or so. Perhaps when you travel back in time, you are not on the same timeline at all, I know im going into kind of shaky ground, but the grandfather paradox could be solved if we simply traveled back to a different timeline than our own and killed a version of our grandfather. Just an idea formed from our limited knowledge.

Could we use it as an energy source?

But does the electron change its direction, reacting from the nuetron's collision?

Ah, that makes sense.

What if the neutron hits the electrons surrounding the atom, wouldn't it deflect off and change it's path?

I see what ur saying. all of the very extremely basic things were created at the same time, only depending on how you percieve time. Time could have a definite begining and a definite end or it could not.

Thats pretty interesting

There is a gene that was discovered recently that is nicknamed the "god" gene because those who posses it seem to have an inclination towards believing in god. I don't know if it is because it makes you succeptible to certain beliefs or it makes you believe more in the unseen (a dominant archetype perhaps), but regardless the gene affects things so i think there is no question as to how genes affect biases and inclinations, though nurturing has much to do with it.

of course it matters. women and men act way different when it comes to things like this.

Research something called surrealism on wikipedia then research it everywhere.

Wait, are you a guy or a chick?

Basically, I started this thread because i read in go ask alice that the girl had wondered if Carroll (alice in wonderland author) was on drugs, and I wanted to be a little clearer or clarify as to the roots of creativity. Being an ex pot head, I know many people think that drugs promote creativity. I also know this is false. I beleive that surreal things and thinkning and art create a doorway to the unconscios, not drugs, and anyone who thinks so is a fool.

So the things provided when the mind is free of constraints like survival instinct, sex drive (but not always), need for food, would be a direct testament to the creativity of the human mind. One could live there if one wanted, or thier registering mind could, but that is not the point. And come on Tree, who doesnt want to live in wonderland for a bit, that is why drug levels are so high, they want to explore thier own brain, every dead head like mself knows that. Do you ever get that feeling, when you see something very different, but real enough to realte to, that creates a new world almost, and you just want to explore? That is why, that feeling alone. Sunspot, I like you.

In a nutshell, one can supercede restraints neccesary for the sustaining of life, something that can be put off until a little later, in order to expand one mind to the senses being unplugged and replugged in different ways causing sensations that could make one enjoy life more and make that person look at normal things things with more importance.