Astrophysics: the relativity of time

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 41

Astrophysics: the relativity of time




by Capt_Maloche » 16/12/14, 18:58

1360 wrote:
Arnaud M wrote:If we scratch it we find ...



1360
is one of my old blue card codes
I see there an omen that cannot be due to chance : Cheesy:



Now I take all the info to analyze it before I reject it

Besides, we know today that there are millions of earth-like planets capable of hosting life, so why not an advanced civilization somewhere, but remains to be demonstrated.

Topic divided since Company-and-philosophy / end-of-world-for-2012 astronomy-and-assumptions-t10482.html
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^

Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 71672
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 7517




by Christophe » 16/12/14, 19:29

Capt_Maloche wrote:Besides, we know today that there are millions of earth-like planets capable of hosting life, so why not an advanced civilization somewhere, but remains to be demonstrated.


No doubt but the problem of the Universe is time ... more than distance ...

I've been thinking about it a lot since I saw I

I think that a civilization like Star Wars will NEVER exist because if the problem of distances is perhaps solvable that of relative time is not!

On earth, in the heliocentric reference frame, we go more at night than during the day so time flies faster on the night side than the day side ... (obviously negligible but physically true)

Same thing at the seasonal level in a benchmark "centered on the galactia" compared to the revolution of the earth around the Sun which moves at 217 km / s (but I do not know the direction of movement of the sun ...)

And ditto on an N + 1 scale for the galaxy which itself is moving!

So in the end someone knows how many km / s the earth is moving relative to a really fixed point in the Universe?
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum - Support the forum doing Useful shopping
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11169
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1901




by Ahmed » 16/12/14, 19:57

What can "fixed point in the universe" mean?
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 41




by Capt_Maloche » 16/12/14, 23:47

Christophe wrote:No doubt but the problem of the Universe is time ... more than distance ...

I've been thinking about it a lot since I saw I



I haven't seen this movie, I must have 3 hours to lose I think :-)

For the time, it is true if one moves at relative speed of the earth for example
at 87% of the speed of light, time on Earth passes twice as fast, it's reasonable.
99% is a factor of 7
99.99% is a factor of 22.4

Source (to be verified) http://rmitte.free.fr/science/sci4.htm

Just for fun
With a vessel that would have a propellant capable of pushing 1G (9.81 m / s²) how long (perceived) to reach the speed of light?

Answer with this little utility http://www.calculateur.com/acceleration.html
about 1 year
300 m / s / 000 = 000sec or 9.81 days

So it’s towards travel via Wormhole to turn

Image
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 71672
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 7517




by Christophe » 17/12/14, 00:16

Ahmed wrote:What can "fixed point in the universe" mean?


Quite right: since the "bottom" of the universe is itself in motion!
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum - Support the forum doing Useful shopping

User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 41




by Capt_Maloche » 17/12/14, 09:44

Arnaud M wrote:.
To summarize, a giant planet (planet Nibiru or planet X) has entered the solar system for 10 years, and is getting closer and closer to our orbit .... We are talking about 3 billion deaths worldwide .

To understand all the ins and outs of this case, I gave you a little summary here:
http://arnaud.meunier.chez.aliceadsl.fr/fr/divers/nathum/hist.html

Even if for the moment it doesn't speak too much to you, the next few days should enlighten you ...


I LOVE IT!
I invite you to have a beer by reading this blog Image

There’s a lot of nice scripts for good SF movies

I didn't know qi, it's funny :D and unverifiable

I think
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 11169
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 1901




by Ahmed » 17/12/14, 12:19

What exactly can the concept of universe mean?
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 24889
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 4225




by Obamot » 17/12/14, 13:43

I really like...! : Cheesy: On another side ...

... this is the very expression of all the vanity of the human species that expresses itself.

Like when man makes the cinema to tell himself - with his limitations on the scale of his modest life expectancy which hangs by a thread - what he should do to "save the planet»... As if it belonged to him! Even more funny is the very arrogant notion of "Space conquest"...!

As when the man declares to have "discovered" a new living species (him? What a pioneer!) Didn't it exist before he even appropriated the discovery!?! Very curious way, devoid of any humility, to see the question ... Idem in the "discovery"Of"new virus"(Not before it was just a biological entity which does not require a host, it is just that when the virus has" discovered man "that it could not do without it ...! Another hypothesis: so the virus would have discovered us before we even discovered it: what a disappointment!) Image

So, is it really man who discovers things in his environment or the opposite: the environment - what we call "nature" of which we would not be part, since we would be above it: did not man make "God" in his own image? (Some claim it would be the opposite ... what cynicism after having been so far from gaïa, to believe that despite all our "sins" there would be a "benevolent hand" that would "sometimes protect us from ourselves") - "nature "Who discovers with terror ... man (and who perhaps would even develop strategies for him to get rid of him as any living being would seek to get rid of an intruder who would go against the" general laws of a system "...: living things and their intrinsic balance ...)

As for saving the planet ... How long have we been here? Less than 6'000 years tells us the bible (written by .... men), and the first hominidae? According to our chromosomes (but we know so little ...) 6 million years ago tells us "science" and which corresponds to the little red line below on the far right:

Image
Source: http://www.hominides.com

And after that we would have the vanity to say wanting to "save the planet", to conquer other worlds and / or "time spaces" or what do I still know?

We? Little coprolite pie in the making, "save the planet"? Hahaha! But nooooooooonnn, she doesn't need us "the planet», She is doing very well without us! It was there long before and will be there long after we have all been exterminated by the contempt that we have for things and for ourselves and which is immeasurably more gigantic than the little respect we show for the few things that we know...! (Barely 4% of the material in total) ... So imagine that we could move from one world to another "because we would have the need if we want to escape our destiny", but why paaaaaas! Why paaaas !!! Aren't we pathetic ??!

So wormholes are still in our fantasies, but it's in our genes! And our "theoretical and anthropotechnical" way of seeing the world ... Image

... surely that the Egyptians had discovered things forgotten because of the respect they had for things they did not know - and that we hardly have at the rhythm of permissiveness with which we strive to destroy what has took billions of years to form - we are nothing but super predator coupled with the arrogance of phantasmatic super conquistador of space built in our image? - Egypt, which had studied these questions long before us, allowed it to understand the true imitates between life expectancy and our mortality: therefore to know a little about what we are and especially what that we are not: faced with the wormhole, even with all our technology, faced with the scale that such challenges represent, would it not mean that we would not be much more advanced than them at the final and on the time scale (?) .... to meditate.



See you in reality, when the man will soon leave "to settle permanently on Mars"! It's going to be cotton, but will bring it a little better to the pure and hard evaluation of its real capacities!

Capt_Maloche wrote:
Christophe wrote:No doubt but the problem of the Universe is time ... more than distance ...

I've been thinking about it a lot since I saw I



I haven't seen this movie, I must have 3 hours to lose I think :-)

For the time, it is true if one moves at relative speed of the earth for example
at 87% of the speed of light, time on Earth passes twice as fast, it's reasonable.
99% is a factor of 7
99.99% is a factor of 22.4

Source (to be verified) http://rmitte.free.fr/science/sci4.htm

Just for fun
With a vessel that would have a propellant capable of pushing 1G (9.81 m / s²) how long (perceived) to reach the speed of light?

Answer with this little utility http://www.calculateur.com/acceleration.html
about 1 year
300 m / s / 000 = 000sec or 9.81 days

So it’s towards travel via Wormhole to turn

Image


Long live the belief in science which is in the process of replacing that which we had in "god"! : Mrgreen: : Cheesy: 8)
Long live man and ruchti graben (!) which brings us back to the autism intrinsic to our species! Image

And since they remind us of the faults of humanity: "long live the terrorists»Threatening to blow himself up then eliminated / executed with machine-gun fire in a democratic state with parliamentary justice - without trial and without anyone judging the disproportion of the facts given the threat and the expeditious methods used - in the mood hushed up the swanky chocolates of the Judeo-Christian aristocracy in the middle of the business district ... of our kind, which can only be a real masterpiece of evolutionary theory (I am no more neither creationist nor for Daesh or the National Guard ...! No, we will need even more " muscular "than that to understand our drifts ...?)

Roughly speaking, in the current situation, we are not much better!
0 x
User avatar
Gaston
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1910
Registration: 04/10/10, 11:37
x 86




by Gaston » 17/12/14, 14:24

Capt_Maloche wrote:Just for fun
With a vessel that would have a propellant capable of pushing 1G (9.81 m / s²) how long (perceived) to reach the speed of light?

Answer with this little utility http://www.calculateur.com/acceleration.html
about 1 year
300 m / s / 000 = 000sec or 9.81 days
Result which obviously does not take into account the relativistic effects that will manifest themselves after a few months of acceleration.

The formula which gives the speed of an object subjected to a constant force F is:

V = gt / rac (1 + g²t² / c²) with g = F / m

In the above case, after 353 days the speed will be "only" 212 132 031,7 m / s

To reach 99% of the speed of light, it will take 214615410 seconds or 408 years ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 71672
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 7517




by Christophe » 17/12/14, 14:56

Very interesting Gaston!
Last edited by Christophe the 18 / 12 / 14, 12: 36, 1 edited once.
0 x
Do a image search or an text search - Netiquette of forum - Support the forum doing Useful shopping


Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 15 guests