Click to see G-Rated Pics and Movies Only
« Previous Stairs Fail | Quick-setting Fail Next »
» 203 Failures in Communication
-
Recent Comments
Ballsauce on You don’t say? crusty on Kawasaki Fail VelmaDinkley on Park Attire Fail Ballsauce on You don’t say? Ballsauce on You don’t say? whocares on You don’t say? karl 11 on Hair Fail Ballsauce on You don’t say? Ballsauce on You don’t say? Dang on You don’t say? 
Cheezburger Network Blog
The sad thing is that they have no clue why this a FAIL.
teleportation rocks!
I cast… BLINK!!!!
WOW FTW
Mage Win
LUDICROUS SPEED GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
they’ve gone plaid.
dang sucka…
das fast
This is great! I think almost the best one….
This is definitely my favorite!
Wish this were true. Then they could go back in time and the event wouldn’t have happened. (18x speed of light)
Uhhh… accelerating to the speed of light would create a black hole of infinite mass = universe destruction… not time travel
both would happen
Wrong. The black hole would essentially be you (infinite mass) therefore no travel
Er, the universe would not be destroyed by the creation of a black hole.
it would of this magnitude. Imagine infinite mass. That’d be a MASSIVE black hole, right?
Infinite density, not infinite mass. Infinite mass would be more mass than theree is in the universe (a statistical, and logical impossibility)
If you went as fast or faster than the speed of light, you’d be invisible. Just adding that in for a little fun fact lol. (Light would not be able to reach you and reflect off you, thus you’d be invisible)
Fail on you for caring about the physics of CNN.
wow that is a fail of a comment, not true
You fail, it is true.
but you wouldn’t be able to see either
then that would be stupid to travel the speed of light
(if it were possible) then you would only move for like a second until
you crash into something….
why are we talking about this anyways? CNN is normally wrong
regardless…
Its not that you wouldn’t be able to see, or that you’d be invisible… When you’re moving at near the speed of light, light still comes at you from any direction AT the speed of light. The problem is just a complete impossibility. It is not possible for anything to attain the speed of light in the spacetime it is in. You would have to have infinite mass to be moving at the speed of light as long as your rest mass is nonzero. But the rest mass is what affects everything not travelling with you, so you wouldn’t gain a huge gravitational field and turn into a hypermassive black hole, it’s just the manner of saying that infinite mass = infinite inertia = no acceleration.
Also, as you approached the speed of light, you’d gain mass, so you’d need more energy to accellerate… which would cause you to gain mass, so you’d need more energy.
Basically for an object with mass, you need infinite energy to achieve lightspeed.
No, the poster before you is right; no infinite mass black holes. You DO NOT gain mass. It is a ‘way of interpreting it’ but it is more like having more resistance to acceleration rather than having more mass. Poster before you was explaining that, when you for no reason say “Also…. blah blah blah (translation:I’m an idiot).”
Reading comprehension FAIL.
Me: Life FAIL. I’m a third year physics student. WTF am I doing at 5:30 in the morning correcting failblog posters physics?
Thank you! Its about time someone desided to tell them about it.
The thing many people dont realize is that the speed of light is relative. They cannot travel 18 times the speed of light because objects traveling slower than the speed of light will never be albe to go faster than the speed of light, and objects moving faster than the speed of light will never be able to travel slower than the speed of light.
But if they were to travel close to the speed of light, from our point of view absolutely nothing would happen. Once they aproached the speed of light they would apear to us as completely frozen in time. They wouldnt crash untill trillions of years into the future.
This is due to the fact that when an object aproaches the speed of light, light itself must always be able to pass them at the full speed of light in any which direction. This is relativity, if you look at the equation
(Detlta t)’ = (Delta t)/(1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
v cannot ever = c
but as v aproaches c the change in time gets closer and closer to infinity. This meaning that time would go by faster and faster as they aproached the speed of light. So what seems to them to be 1 minute off falling to the ground, is millions of years to us. Meaning millions of years would go by on earth before they actually crashed into the ground.
From our point of view. They would sit there in that spot forever. This is because we cannot watch them for million years to see them move.
So, no black holes, no going back in time, no destruction of the universe, just 7 people forever stuck in the sky. (for a million years or so.)
Cheers!
Dude, seriously, you’re doing an overthought, unorthodox overachievement fail.
on topic fail. haha
well actually it would just be delayed, so what you were doing however the amount of speed your travailing. It’d be like travailing at the speed of sound… but with light
over-thinking fail
true that… after all, the universe wasn’t destroyed upon the creation of brittney spears…
It wouldn’t cause a Black Hole either.
Yes it would: Infinite mass?
DENCITY
not mass
Spelling fail: Density
mass doesn’t change no matter where you are or at what velocity you are traveling. maybe we should go back to 7th grade science and refresh our memory
Actually the requirements for creation of a black hole require an object whose mass to density ratio is within the swarzchild limit. Anything that is such would become a black hole.
On the topic of faster than light travel, mass most definitely changes with velocity. Why don’t we take some elementary physics to refresh our memory. Einstein’s famous equation E=MC^2 shows that in order to move the speed of light, one must have infinite energy, and, by the same rule, infinite mass. therefore, to be going 18x the speed of light, the Columbia would have gained Infinity x 18 mass and, instead of turning into a black hole, would have ripped out of the space time continuum. And, also, time travel and black holes are very closely related.
Correct, well done. Time travel is theoretically possible, however, it would destroy the universe
So much wrong about what you said.
First, FORWARD time travel is possible and proven.
What you are referring to is BACKWARD time travel, which was up until recently theoretically impossible.. Until the madness of string theory.
oooooookaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy …………………. stephen hawking………..
e=mc^2 has NOTHING to do with your point. By that equation, it would seem like moving any mass at the speed of light requires an energy of E.
STFU. Stop drowning the world in your ignorance.
E = gamma mc^2 is important one here. As v -> c, gamma -> infinity (gamma = 1 / (1-v^2/c^2) , E -> infinity. Mass does not go to infinity.
As for the infinite mass thing, it is due to the people misunderstanding gamma*m and treating gamma as the “mass multiplier” when it is more of an inertia increaser ie an energy requirement increaser.
End of story.
gamma = 1 / sqrt (1 – v^2 / c^2), sorry about mistake.
hahahahaha
another physics fail:
mass DOES change depending on the velocity you’re traveling.
Okay, extreme physics Fail. Mass. Never. Changes. Not even at different velocities.
neither of you have traveled in that speed so you all FAIL, lol. No one can tell what is gonna happen
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Extra o fail
Look into relativity please. Not all of it because I’m sure it would be much too confusing for you. Just the main ideas:
Mass changes with velocity
Energy = Mass
Time changes with velocity
Time changes with gravitational strength
Gravity is a warp in spacetime, not a force
Length changes with velocity
Once you understand those, you may return to being an idiot.
xD
please see my other posts. E = mass. Mass does not change. Gamma changes. Gamma appears in formulas that have nothing to do with mass (Lorentz’ transformations) therefore it is not a “mass multiplier” just an effect. Mass does not change, do /not get more gravity due to speed.
E=mass was supposed to be in quotes, belittling your intelligence.
arg is for Arogant, apparently
No it doesn’t. Gamma changes.
Actually no that’s not possible. It’s impossible to do it because even traveling at the speed of light requires an infinite amount of energy which is impossible since infinity is only a concept (anything divided by 0 is undefined). If you were to do so (fastest I have heard is the LMC only shoots things at 99.9999% the speed of light). If it were possible to even do that then yes that would be a possibillity.
It’s impossible assuming you have mass. So yeah, basic science WIN! (and one of the first)
space-time dilation fail would only cause a black hole
Science win!
er, forgive me if I’m wrong, but my understanding was that both special and general relativistic physics forbids any massive (ie mass > 0) object from accelerating to the speed of light in the first place.
the mass of the accelerating body would rapidly approach infinity, thereby requiring infinite energy for further acceleration… I don’t think any current theories would predict the creation of a massive black hole
and anyway, black holes are all over the place in the universe.
yawn, I’m going to bed
independent thought fail.
infinite mass localized in space = singularity = space-time warp = black hole
i can has wikipedia?
No, it doesn’t work that way. An object only forms a black hole if it has a high density in its rest frame. Its density from other frames is not relevant.
Except that with infinite Mass, the gravity would be so great it would basically become a black hole, only without the actual black hole itself being there
the massive object (space shuttle), were it to somehow become dense enough to act as a black hole, say, by traveling at 18x C, would be moving so quickly that the effects of its gravity would likely go ‘unnoticed’ by any matter it passes (this is not to say it would have no effect, but it would not be able to suck things in as an active black hole does, and would not likely ‘drag’ anything with it as it sped through the universe).
and remember, rest is only relative.
‘Meee,’ you’ve FAILED einstein and hawking, sorry.
lol why are people like you who are supposedly really smart, and know everything about this topic, on a website like this? Thats a fail.
recent studies actually show that there are no physical laws preventing > speed of light travel
wtf? Ever heard about Einstein? Theory of relativity? That clearly states that only particles without mass can travel at the speed of light. If an object has mass, following Einstein’s laws, the energy to reach the speed of light would be infinite. The energy you put into a system when it’s nearly at the speed of light is sometimes refered to as mass, because that makes calculations easy. That doesn’t mean it’s actually mass, just a great amount of potential energy. Therefore, even if you would attempt to let the spaceshuttle travel at the speed of light, it wouldn’t create a blackhole or something, and certainly no timetraveling. And please never say ‘recent studies’, ‘cos the studies you refer to clearly fail at physics…
sigh.
burden of absolute proof fail!
Wanna prove that 1=2??
E=MC(C)
KE=1/2MV(V)
Assuming you are at the speed of light, V=C
Assuming 100% Efficient, KE=E
MC(C) = 1/2MC(C)
Cancel it down and you get 1=1/2
or 2=1
E=Mc^2 only applies to objects that aren’t moving
KE 1/2 Mv^2 only applies to objects moving at slow speeds.
Theres no reason an objects Kinetic energy should equal its
rest energy
moving at C is the OPPOSITE of 100% efficient.
plus, at C, KE is infinite, meaning you can’t solve these equations with integers.
you can’t make all these assumptions together, stupid math trick…
…oh, and stating that V=C IS ‘Assuming you are at the speed of light’
[redundancyFAIL]
mathFAIL.
Science meets math fail
Its not a fail, it just means that we have senses of humor. And can actually type in complete sentences like we’re not in kindergarden.
Correct, but assuming something with mass DID achieve the speed of light, it would have such a high mass (infinite) that it would promptly implode.
err… “probably implode?” it WOULD implode and… I think I already explained this but I’ll say it again…
As you approach the speed of light, your mass/density increases drastically. If you actually reached the speed of light, your density would be so great that you would implode(much similar to a dying star) and become an extremely large black-hole-type object, consume the whole universe, and cause a second big bang.
Either that or you’d just turn into energy in the most horrific and firey experience in your life.
promptly != probably
hello? star trek?
Star Trek = fiction. Fail. Dosen’t apply to REAL LIFE physics.
there wouldn’t be time travel or black holes, only mass turning into energy. Anyway, infinity is a myth, any calculations invlolving infinity are incorrect.
No way! a craft’s mass is proportional to it’s speed as you approach the light speed “barrier” it’s mass will increase at an exponentially increasing rate to infinity towards the speed of light, so to move an infinite mass you need infinite horsepower…
UNIVERSE FAIL
Black holes are not caused by FTL objects because they don’t exist!
who said the craft was moving. if you move space around the craft then there would not be a problem, or lets just fold space i’ll give a demonstration, got a piece of paper.
Event Horizon Win
lol u fail. the speed of light has nothing to do with black holes
OMGPHYSICSF***INGFAIL for you!!!
black holes are DEFINED based on the speed of light. they even GET THEIR NAME from it: ‘black’, meaning no light can escape its gravity, meaning the speed of light is not sufficient to escape, meaning DIRECTLY RELATED.
incorrect. a black hole is caused by gravity imploding on its self. the speed of light would just create a delay of image. you wouldnt travel through time, but to an eye that uses light to see, it would apear that way. so your both wrong.
since no ones ever gone the speed of light how do you know exactly what will happen?
Hum… Sorry mister, maybe you should go back in time to learn many things…
Actually, If you had 2 clocks, if one was stationary, and you had the other in a vehicle that could travel at or near the speed of light, the stationary clock would seem to “Tick” slower, while the opposite would be true if you were able to see the moving clock while stationary. Therefore, you would have traveled forward in time.
Temporal Dilation.
Form Wikipedia, on time travel via time dilation:
Time dilation is permitted by Albert Einstein’s special and general theories of relativity. These theories state that, relative to a given observer, time passes more slowly for bodies moving quickly relative to that observer, or bodies that are deeper within a gravity well.[42] For example, a clock which is moving relative to the observer will be measured to run slow in that observer’s rest frame; as a clock approaches the speed of light it will almost slow to a stop, although it can never quite reach light speed so it will never completely stop. For two clocks moving inertially (not accelerating) relative to one another, this effect is reciprocal, with each clock measuring the other to be ticking slower. However, the symmetry is broken if one clock accelerates, as in the twin paradox where one twin stays on Earth while the other travels into space, turns around (which involves acceleration), and returns—in this case both agree the traveling twin has aged less. General relativity states that time dilation effects also occur if one clock is deeper in a gravity well than the other, with the clock deeper in the well ticking more slowly; this effect must be taken into account when calibrating the clocks on the satellites of the Global Positioning System, and it could lead to significant differences in rates of aging for observers at different distances from a black hole.
It has been calculated that, under general relativity, a person could travel forward in time at a rate four times that of distant observers by residing inside a spherical shell with a diameter of 5 meters and the mass of Jupiter.[15] For such a person, every one second of their “personal” time would correspond to four seconds for distant observers. Of course, squeezing the mass of a large planet into such a structure is not expected to be within our technological capabilities in the near future.
Time dilation also is in effect near Black holes, but slightly different.
The clock that is near the event horizon would seem to “tick” slower for all observers.
no one really knows what would happen if the person would time travel or create a black hole
Quantum physics fail.
YOU CANT TRAVEL FASTER THAN TIME!!!!
never ever ever.
i get anoyed where people say “i went the speed of light and got there before i set off”
sorry to correctificate you…
This is a Great one. my favourite that ive seen
actually they would be in the future,
no one could go back in time
(in the shuttle’s frame of reference, the time is slower comparing to the time in our frame of reference)
try tp plug v = 18c into lorentz transformation. FAIL. 1 – sqrt(-#) = complex time FUN
Autofail!
Nice catch!
A few years back we had a very bad barge fire in Tampa Bay. The young reporter earnestly pointed out that the flames were leaping over 200 miles into the air! That’s one HECK of an intense fire!
what, thats just sad.
does no one else think that this is ’shopped? the word LIGHT looks different than the rest of the text.
Does NOT!
it’s just the contrast from his jacket
no it’s distortion from the black hole they caused from going that fast
BWAHAHA!!!
no black holes. Read my other posts, ARG
OMFG it was a joke. CTFD arg
I think it’s legit. I remember first seeing a different screen cap of this within a day or so of the accident.
Simple fail, or massive technology leak fail?
in any case, America fails
doz
I’m American and totally agree. America fails epicly.
Awesome fail…even if it is a photoshop fail…kudos to the fail-thor.
i think it is supposed to be speed of sound not light
Gosh! We, in our limited brains, did not quite figure that one out. Thank you, Anonymous, for your excellent sleuthing skills.
Oh my god!!
HE’S A GENIUS!!!
No shit sherlock.
Wow, no wonder the shuttle blew apart. Sad really.
Derek (#4) very funny! They could have time traveled just like Superman. The only problem is they would have needed to go in the opposite direction to spin the earth backwards.
This isn’t a Photo shop. I remember seeing that graphic on CNN that day.
sorry, but if yu went 18 times the speed of light, your density would essentially become infinate and one of two things would happen:
1: You would implode and create a massive-black-hole-type object that would be so dense that it’s gravity would be stronger than the dark matter causing the universe to expand and the universe would be confined to a single point, and the universe would then essentially start over with another Big Bang.
2: You would simply turn into energy.
Sadly, if you travelled the speed of light, traveling through time would be the least of your problems, not to mention impossible!
cool theories!
how do you KNOWZ this?!
hahaha this is ridiculous
NO. GDI. NO. Don’t make assumptions; do the math. Your view is not supported. See intro to relativity and stop drowning the world in your ignorance.
skeptic (#8) Naa, it’s true, I’ve seen it myself that day.
This isn’t photoshopped. It appeared on CNN when the Columbia broke apart during re-entry.
I remember how the Bad Astonomy Bulletin Board was all abuzz about it the day it happened: “No wonder the shuttle blew apart! They had a warp core breach!”
It only looks shopped because the word LIGHT is on the man’s suit.
Wow. Someone skipped out on introductory physics.
NASA
GRARGH – fail on post attempt!!!
NASA ftw – 18x Speed of Light….rofl
HAHAHAHAHA!! Imagine if it was. I don’t even know what would happen. Time travel apparently, but who knows. Maybe just a huge increase in mass, or a black hole or something.
Actually it would have infinite mass and infinite energy… so there would be no more universe let alone earth
No. Doesn’t work that way.
At this point, just gonna say NO.
i wonder…
if going 18X the speed of light, wouldn’t you be hidden from actual sight?
if anything going that fast was used as an intercontinental missile of sort, would it be detected by radar?
twould be odd to see something father away than it actually is…
and suppose. you have a video of it, and you see an explosion. then, you see it hit.
or could you even video it?
is anything going the speed of light even visible?
if going faster than light, could it in fact ESCAPE THE “INFINITE” GRAVITATIONAL PULL OF A BLACK HOLE???
or, maybe become a black hole due to an insane amount of G-Force put on the mass, which compresses to a point of infinite density?
Stop FAILING right now please.
As some other guyz ( i hope) shoud have stated, you cannot reach the speed of light by the simple fact that the closer you get to it, the bigger fraction of energy you put on your system goes into mass increase instead of speed. So when speed –> c (speed of light, and the arrow is a limit for those who failed at maths…), the energy that goes into mass increase –> 100%.
and, Blackholes DO NOT have infinite gravitationnal force you DUMBASS. The escape speed is higher than speed of light (so unreachable in theory) but it is a finite value.
And last of all, neither doppler or relativist effects can result in seing something before it actually is there… so thats total bullshit too.
so before posting BULLSHIT on a website, please go back to school and learn damn idiot.
The internet isnt allowed to have incorrect information! If it did we’d be no better then the animals!
Before you go getting all beefy about his or her physics, you’d better check your own grammar – idiot!
Didn’t the Grammar Idiot replace the Office Assistant in MS Word?
So if a guy who spoke english as a second language but had a PHD in Physics told you something about physics you’d say: Learn ENGLISH noob, WTF, moron.
Grammar fail
- No… if you were 1s away at the speed of light, travelling at 18 multiples of c… you would be seen there and then 2s later, 18x the distance.
- radar works by sound waves… it would detect it, but far too late to do anything
- ever seen a star? it isn’t there anymore!
- wouldn’t work like that… because of the deceleration of it hitting and causing the explosion, you would see it hit at the same time as the explosion
- a black hole doesn’t have an infite gravitational well… the gravitational pull of the one at the centre of our galaxy is “only” about 10^7/10^8 times that of our sun.
…etc
Radar is electromagnetic radiation (same as light and x-rays), not sound. FAIL.
to answer your question about anything going the speed of light, light goes the speed of light and yes it is visible, i think, hold on……. yup i can still see my screen
Going that fast…well, going really fast; since 18x is impossible… you would be invisible to the radar
going at that speed you would be out of sight withing miliseconds. The light goes 300 000 km a second and times 8 2 400 000km a second the object wouldn’t been in the line of sight for even 1ms
If our current physics theories are true (and we have no reason to believe they aren’t), it’s not possible to travel faster than the speed of light. Traveling a significant portion of the speed of light (usually referred to using the constant c in physics, which is actually the speed of light in a vacuum, it changes in different mediums) would have some rather interesting effects. To start with, once you reached a significant fraction of c (say 90%) you would tend to have a sort of photonic shockwave leading you. To an outside observer the object would appear as a brief flash as it went past, but probably wouldn’t be visible until just before it had passed (think lightning bolt, but looking from the ground to the sky directly underneath it). There is also some speculation about what effect it would have on the mass of the object, with some speculating a rather drastic increase the closer one gets to c. As for radar, you might get lucky and pick up a brief blip, but odds are the object would enter and leave the radar area before the blip, if any, even registered so it wouldn’t really be much point.
Escaping black holes? Not in one piece. There’s pretty good evidence that black holes “evaporate” over time by spewing the odd bit of radiation, and some pulsars are believed to be rapidly spinning black holes that toss neutrons (and other things) out of their poles, but all these emissions are on the particle level, anything as big as an atom isn’t coming back.
It’s also important to point out that anything going that fast would more or less rip itself, or the earth apart if it was in the atmosphere (at the very least it would quickly leave earths gravitational field and probably take a nice chunk of the atmosphere with it, if not pieces of land mass).
all we know is that we can’t travel AT the speed of light. in theory we can go faster by accelerating instantly with some sort of quantum leap.
“information” can´t be transferred faster than the speed of light
Although that’s what my Dad told me when I was a little kid, we’re now finding that that’s not provable. What is known is that, if information is transferred faster than the speed of light, then causality falls apart, as you can have effects happening before their causes.
If THAT is possible, it means that everything that we know about the universe is pretty much just a localized special case, rather than actually universal. . . but the math works out that such a thing might be the case.
I think what you’re touching on there is entanglement, the whole idea that two particles can be linked together in such a way that a measurement of some property will agree between the two even though by the time of measurement they are spatially separate. I don’t quite grok the uncertainty principle and why this property is assumed to be unknown until the point of measurement, but that is taken for granted by numerous physicists, so until I can wrap my own brain around the math, I will take their word for it. So a property is unknown in both particles until it is measured in one, then the other instantly takes on a corresponding property, so something is conveyed faster than light. The reason no information is carried is that you have no effect on which quantum state the measured particle is going to settle into, you have no way of making it go one way or the other, and therefore you have no way of affecting which way the remote particle is going to go either, thus causality is not violated.
Sorry to the english majors if I mixed up affect and effect, if it offends you, you can bite me.
Enough of this nerdiness, I need a beer.
oooooookay… well now i know where to go when i need help with my physics coursework
With the exception of bad news which follows its own rules
Wow, they broke warp 2!
correction, warp 3.4
0_o How much is Warp 9?
18C is approx. warp 2.38, according to the conversion formula used AFTER star trek: TOS.
18 speed of light – super!
FAIL
Seriously,
Rest In Peace Crew of Space Shuttle Columbia.
Agreed
well, that’s obviously why they failed………18 times the speed of light will disintegrate a shuttle
lol shopped….that’s supposed to say “sound” ……
tards
Could be the news’ mistake, not a PS.
[...] to see lots of pictures of human stupidity and ironic juxtapositions, especially stuff like this, this, this, this, or even [...]
LOL
DD
Xenu was there
HAIL XENU!
please do not say XENU, you are irritating my body thetans. I am seeing a 3D movie with a chariot also
We can’t travel at the speed of light, except Chuck Norris.
LUDICROUS SPEED!
WIN!
no we are going PLAID
Warp 18, Engage!
Wow, I didn’t know that NASA had developed warp drive.
I get it… Chuck Norris was on the board and farted near the engine…
i knew everyone would talk about the speed-of-light-impossibility thing. I just wonder how many people who were editing the text at the bottom saw this and had no problem with it. Its just the dumb peeps at CNN
this is a NASA funding fail they lack funding and the dumb congress asks them to do more than they can with the funding FROM CONGRESS so its a congress fail CURSE THEM
Thats faster than the Millenium Falcon!
Airplane (the movie)
FTW!
That would be impressive.
I wish I could travel at nearly 18 times the speed of light…sigh…
No you don’t… and here’s why *deep breath in*
Due to my previous science knowledge, it is my impression that as you approach the speed of light, your mass/density increases drastically. If you actually reached the speed of light, your density would be so great that you would implode(much similar to a dying star) and become an extremely large black-hole-type object, consume the whole universe, and cause a second big bang.
Either that or you’d just turn into energy in the most horrific and firey experience in your life.
Hence why you DO NOT want to travel 18x the speed of light.
Ok, I’ve read this statement several times now, and I can’t hold it back anymore.
If we were, theoretically, to travel at said speed of light and theoretically implode similarly to a dying star, why is it said it would consume the entire universe and create a ’second’ big bang, as it were? That’s assuming there was a first one. If that’s the case, how come all the stars that are imploding, similarly to the way we theoretically would, don’t suck up the entire universe and cause a big bang?
How many people here actually believe there was a first big bang, despite several ’spacial’ objects (meaning objects in outer space, not objects that occupy space, if you catch my meaning, lol) are spinning and traveling in the wrong direction?
Not to mention that everything here about black holes, time travel, and the speed of light in general is theoretical to begin with, because we can’t do it. None of this is or can be proven physically, only on paper, which, as we all know, isn’t how things always work. For instance, I’ve seen many dimensions proved on paper, but only 4 work in our existence (length, width, height, and time). 3 if you exclude time as a dimension.
I’m not scientist, or quantum theorist, obviously, but I’ve had my interest in Einstein, Hawking, et al, and some of these theories here just don’t make any sense in my head. Course, a lot of their theories don’t really comprehend either, lol. And try to use simple terms as much as possible.
NO. GDI NO. In your state, nothing would have changed. NO INFINITE MASS OR DENSITY. If by your observations (observations taken by you, the person going nearly the speed of light) nothing has changed, how could you implode? Just because you are going fast doesn’t mean you can apparently be normal (your own reference frame) while someone else ’sees’ you become a black hole (in their reference frame).
Logic fail.
Gamma is not a “mass multiplier,” it is in formulas that do not involve mass (Lorentz’ Transformations). GDI NO BLACKHOLES. NOT HOW IT WORKS. TY.
If going that fast you’ve got a problem because it wouldn’t take much time before you crash in something xD
actually, in in space going the speed of light isn’t as fast as you think. for example, the nearest star is several LIGHT YEARS away. even at the speed of light, it would still be too slow to explore anything beyond our solar system
Didn’t think of Colony Ships, did ya?
Holy shit that’s fast. IMO, best one here.
I guess we can all agree on one thing:
O_o.
Ensign Crusher, Warp 18, Engage.
Hmm, how could a black hole even possibly form going 18x the speed of light? Even gravity has its own speed, so even if an object could have infinite density the “warp” in the fabric of space time would have little to no time to form (assuming you are constantly moving).
Eh… this is all beside the point considering (as far as we know) the speed of light is the speed limit of all things in the universe.
Shit… warp speed accident
Please don’t forget that relativity is, of course, relative — namely relative to the frame of reference. For a ship going (near) the speed of light, nothing changes to those inside. They perceive the objects in the original frame as accelerating, gaining mass, length shrinking, etcetera.
Black holes are formed when a mass is compressed to the point where light cannot escape the gravity well within a finite time. Relativity is all about gravity, acceleration, mass, and time, so relativity definitely is involved! Quantum effects take place at the S-radius as particles come into the gravitational field from outside. Black holes are indirectly observed through the radiation which results. They by definition cannot be seen directly. They are not formed by masses going the speed of light as masses cannot go the speed of light. The gravity of a black hole is the same as the gravity of the mass it started with — it is just denser.
Entanglement is a quantum phenomenon. The comment that information can’t exceed the speed of light is correct. A quantum event at X might result in an instantaneous change at Y, but we can’t know about it until the information from that event at Y travels back to us — at the speed of light, max.
How’s that for an egg-head comment?
*claps*
cnn as usual lying to its public
why are you all debating so much about the physics behind something clearly photoshopped… look, ther’es even pixels scattered around where the word “sound” was replaced with “light”.
INTERPRETATION FAIL
no this is actually the real CNN broadcast (i saw it myself that day…)
Time travel may be physically possible, but not through FTL speeds. at that speed, according to Einstein, your mass (potential energy) would become infinite. and since infinite is nonexistent, you would find yourself in a case where physics cannot explain. therefor FTL travel (and time travel in that method) is impossible to achieve in this Universe.
i agree except for your conclusion. i would say, since YOUR MASS NEVER CHANGES, it is impossible to have infinite mass, therefor making FTL travel impossible
LOL 18x speed of light xD riiight
If it was traveling that fast and crashed it would literally disappear they would have know it ever existed it would become nothing but dust…..wtf
even if it were possible to move fast enough for any of your science to matter… you’d crash into a planet, asteroid, star, or some other body in space… you’d go from 0, to god knows how fast, to bug on a windshield in under a second
We as humans cannot even reach 18 times the speed of sound yet, much less 18 times the speed of light!
uhm its proven that once you surpass the speed of light by any mesurment of speed at all you will then enter the fifth demension. we are in the 4th dimension (length width height timedepth) and the 5th would ad speed depth.
Wow, this isn’t a troll, is it.
See.
I can travel faster than the speed of light. And to prove it, I’m going to type my next comment at 18 times the speed of light and post it before this one.
Actually. You all Fail. Einsteins Theory clearly does not state that an INFINITE amount of energy i needed. It states that 9.0 × 10^16 joules per kilogram are needed to travel at light speed.
Which can be more properly expressed as 1 Gram traveling at the speed of light having 21.5 kilotons of TNT-equivalent energy.
It says nothing of infinity, True these are ridiculus amounts of energy, but not infinite. and strictly speaking an item that does not have Mass, does not have energy. Ergo Light has Mass. since it gives heat and light
And there is no proof of anything moving fast to create a blackhole. or even make the universe end. in fact anything that ever made a black hole was standing relativly still.
Oh and MASS never change. WEIGHT will be diffrent on Earth an on the Moon. but MASS will be the same as long as DENSITY is equal.
Not true on your Energy comment. You arfe referring to E = mc^2, which is the mass energy equvalence. You should be referring to E = (gamma) mv^2, which DOES show it requiring an infinite amount of energy (gamma = 1 / sqrt ( 1 – v^2 / c^2) , which one can see goes to 1 / 0 as v -> c. This would make the whole equation go to infinity.
I like chocolate milk!!!
Hahaha they most likely meant the “Speed of Flight” xD
Would still take 2.64 months to travel to the nearest star
This is why I love the internet, I was more amused reading the comments than I was observing the original picture!
To all those people out there who know more physics than me (i.e., all of you): I believe I read somewhere that whilst you cannot attain the speed of light by accelerating to it, it is possible to create something that already has FTL momentum, therefore bypassing the infinite energy requirement?
Going at the speed of light would cause the light particles in the atmosphere to slowly transform into carbon atoms. So that means you could become a cloud of carbon and probably mutate cause carbon is radioactive.
LOL!!! 18 Times speed of FAIL
I love Muffins!
TAKE THAT EINSTEIN!
Never have so many nerds been so sure they were so right, and yet so many so wrong.