4-dimensioners and acceleration to light speed

Discussion of theories involving time as a dimension, time travel, relativity, branes, and so on, usually applying to the "real" universe which we live in.

Postby swirl gyro » Sun Jul 18, 2004 8:02 am

Oh, PS, I think it may be possible to reach light speed with a quantum jump. Could someone tell me why not?
swirl gyro
Dionian
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:10 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Postby Euclid » Sun Jul 18, 2004 3:23 pm

swirl gyro wrote:I see what you're saying. But the height doesn't get multiplied because it "doesn't exist". so m=dlw. height is just out of bounds for that particular universe. If you had to add the infinite possibilites to the calculations for the finite actualities, nothing could exist, it all reverts to zero.


Say what?
User avatar
Euclid
Dionian
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:32 am
Location: Beaumont Texas (USA)

Postby elpenmaster » Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:08 am

no, the hight would be zero. you cant just throw out a number because it is zero! (this was discussed before i believe!) length times width times hight for bionian equals x times y times 0, so it equals 0 :evil:
elpenmaster
Trionian
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:29 am
Location: Southern California

Postby jinydu » Mon Jul 19, 2004 9:17 am

swirl gyro wrote:Oh, PS, I think it may be possible to reach light speed with a quantum jump. Could someone tell me why not?


I guess because it would open up many problems, like the Grandfather's Paradox. Also, even if you could get past light speed due to quantum uncertainty, you would probably drop right back below.
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby RQ » Thu Jul 22, 2004 3:04 am

Jinydu, I thought you said quantum jumps can't cheat you past the speed of light, because if a light ray entered it, it would still be faster than you...

Swirl gyro, if you're talking about a parallel 2D or 3D universe, then the height=0 would be negligible, otherwise, Huh?
RQ
Tetronian
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:07 pm
Location: Studio City, California

Postby swirl gyro » Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:22 pm

elpenmaster wrote:but if the 2-d object by definition had no height, only length and width, then it would have zero mass. mass=density x height x length x width
because volume=height x length x width, and if it had zero height, it would turn the whole equation into zero, so mass=0
since the 2-d object then has 0 mass, couldnt it be accelerated to the speed of light?


RQ wrote:Swirl gyro, if you're talking about a parallel 2D or 3D universe, then the height=0 would be negligible, otherwise, Huh?


the elpenmaster quote is what I'm talking about. i'm talking about any universe... you do not count the dimensions that do not compose it, or else the whole equation reverts to zero and there is no universe. comprende?
I sense, therefore I am.
swirl gyro
Dionian
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:10 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Postby swirl gyro » Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:26 pm

oh, oops...
elpenmaster was talking about a 2d thing embedded in 3d. Nevermind, I'm a dork, ignore me.
I sense, therefore I am.
swirl gyro
Dionian
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 12:10 pm
Location: Pasadena, Ca

Postby Rkyeun » Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:57 pm

density is NOT mass / (height * length * width).
density is mass / volume.
In 3D, the formula for volume is (height * length * width).
In 2D, the formula is (length * width).
In 4D, the formula is (height * length * width * extrusion).
In ND, the formula is (1D * 2D * 3D * ... * ND).

I'm going to assume 4D is made of particles as well. 4D protons and such. No, that's still not infinite energy. Though there are infinite 3D layers in the 4D fuel source, it sure as heck isn't made of 3D protons, their fields don't seem to reach into extra dimensions, or else we'd be 4D now as they formed 4D nucleus and such. So a 4D proton in our 4D fuel has a charge of +1. However we see only a sliver of it. Assuming it's not made of smaller particles, we'd have 1/Infinite energy in that particle for our use, assuming it can interact with us at all... which it doesn't seem to do, or we'd be AWARE of objects moving about in contact with our 3D world as they moved all out little magnets... or perhaps that's due to the 1/Infinite charge that can interact with out world, doing exactly nothing. And even if we could move to get extra slices, there are still a finite number of particles in the fuel, and we'd have to hunt them down.

I'd go as far as to say us and our universe is completely invisible to them. opaqueness is defined in terms of thickness, and since we are 0 thick in extrusion, we are perfectly clear to 4D light ... and all other 4D forces.
And they're invisible to us, because the energy in their parts is so dispersed through viewing an infinitessimal slice that it doesn't have the strength to affect us at all.

There could be any number of dimensions of any dimension depth, at any angle, intersecting all over and at every point... and none of it would be strong enough to have any effect unless they had the same number of dimensions and were turned the same way.

In summary, to the one who posited that 4D fuel was infinite energy? You build the pump, and I'll supply the fuel.
Rkyeun
Dionian
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:24 pm

Postby elpenmaster » Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:01 am

the point was that the reason we cannot accelerate something into light speed is because it would take infinite energy. however, to us, a 2d person would have no volume, and consequently no mass, and it would not take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate them to light speed, because they have (in our perspective) no mass
elpenmaster
Trionian
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:29 am
Location: Southern California

Postby houserichichi » Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:10 am

You don't have to accelerate a massless (assuming rest mass, of course) anything to the speed of light, for that is the speed they naturally travel at. No acceleration needed.
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby jinydu » Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:07 am

Remember that in Special Relativity, the momentum of a particle with nonzero mass is given by m * gamma * v, where m is the rest mass, gamma is the Lorentz factor (a number that = 1 when the mass is at rest and approaches infinity as the object approaches the speed of light) and v is the speed.

For this alleged massless particle with a speed less than the speed of light, m would be 0, gamma would be a finite number and v would also be a finite quantity. Therefore, the momentum of such a particle would be 0, a very odd particle to say the least!

Thus, if Fred really did have 0 3D mass, it would be impossible to keep him pinned to a stationary wall. To keep Fred from flying away, Bob would need some kind of field (what kind of field to use would depend on what kind of matter Fred was made of) around his house that would force Fred to move in a closed loop.
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby wendy » Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:31 am

One runs into dangerous ground when one assumes the laws of physics applies when it clearly does not.

We on one hand assume that we can have fred on the wall, and then on the other hand we assume that he must fly away.

One must also understand that zero-mass does not imply a great velocity. This was never in relativity. What relativity says is that *photons* travel fast (regardless of their weight), but it does not imply that *massless objects* must travel fast.

W
The dream you dream alone is only a dream
the dream we dream together is reality.

\ ( \(\LaTeX\ \) \ ) [no spaces] at https://greasyfork.org/en/users/188714-wendy-krieger
User avatar
wendy
Pentonian
 
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Postby jinydu » Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:28 pm

wendy wrote:One runs into dangerous ground when one assumes the laws of physics applies when it clearly does not.

We on one hand assume that we can have fred on the wall, and then on the other hand we assume that he must fly away.

One must also understand that zero-mass does not imply a great velocity. This was never in relativity. What relativity says is that *photons* travel fast (regardless of their weight), but it does not imply that *massless objects* must travel fast.

W


Sure its in Special Relativity. If you don't believe me:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... om.html#c1

http://physics.mtsu.edu/~phys2020/Lectu ... entum.html

http://www.mta.ca/faculty/Courses/Physi ... entum.html

As I said in my previous post. A massless particle travelling at less than the speed of light would have 0 momentum, a very odd state of affairs, to say the least.
jinydu
Tetronian
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 5:31 am

Postby houserichichi » Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:23 pm

Please excuse, but I was under the impression that since spacetime is locally described by the Lorentz group then all massless particles MUST travel at the speed of light (since c is the invariant speed) - or have I missed something?
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Postby Rkyeun » Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:11 pm

Massless particles only travel at the speed of light when they exist.
Fred does not exist.
Rkyeun
Dionian
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 7:24 pm

Postby houserichichi » Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:17 pm

Actually even virtual photons travel at the speed of light, if I'm not mistaken. :wink:
houserichichi
Tetronian
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Canada

Previous

Return to Non-Spatial Dimensions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests