You cannot go faster than the speed of light. Ever. Ever. Ever. Ever. Scientifically proven.

Not if you have SCIENCE.

I would post the episode of through the wormhole here, but I can't find the video on youtube (without paying $1.99). I believe it something like, instead of moving through space you would instead move space so that you would travel faster than light would (like an object on a table cloth). I might have explained it wrong, because it has been a long time since I watched it,but I think it was like that.

People are yet to make the E=mc^2 equation make any sense to me, I just watched a video on it, it states that an object floating in space has no kinetic energy, then if you fly away in a spaceship, you'll see the object moving away, so somehow it gains kinetic energy. I don't.. is the entire E=mc^2 theory based on perception?

Glitch wrote:People are yet to make the E=mc^2 equation make any sense to me, I just watched a video on it, it states that an object floating in space has no kinetic energy, then if you fly away in a spaceship, you'll see the object moving away, so somehow it gains kinetic energy. I don't.. is the entire E=mc^2 theory based on perception?

Well, I guess that perception is just a factor, but it's not mainly based on that.

Of my understanding, the E=mc^2 theory it's based on movement and loss/gain of energy, that means that you gained energy because of movement, but, you lost energy as well, and where did that energy go/came from?

I don't quite understand it.

Glitch wrote:People are yet to make the E=mc^2 equation make any sense to me, I just watched a video on it, it states that an object floating in space has no kinetic energy, then if you fly away in a spaceship, you'll see the object moving away, so somehow it gains kinetic energy. I don't.. is the entire E=mc^2 theory based on perception?

Energy = Mass x (Speed of Light x Itself) (Don't ask me why c stands for speed of light). You multiply c by itself first because it's an exponent (Yeah, boring order of operations stuff, blah blah blah). Then you multiply that by m, and you get E. Mass is measured by kilograms.

Say you have an object that weighs 2 kg. If you want to calculate its potential energy (Measured in Joules (J)), you would take the speed of light and multiply it by itself. The speed of light is 300,000 m/s, so it would be 9^10 (90,000,000,000) m/s. Then you multiply that by 2 and get 180,000,000,000 J, so an object weighing 2 kilograms has 180 GJ (Gigajoules) of potential energy.

The more potential energy something has, the harder it is for any force (Besides inertia) to change what it's doing, and the easier it is for inertia to make it stay in place. The same goes for kinetic energy, except inertia keeps it going.

ChristianHG wrote:Of my understanding, the E=mc^2 theory it's based on movement and loss/gain of energy, that means that you gained energy because of movement, but, you lost energy as well, and where did that energy go/came from?

1.

ChristianHG wrote:theory

It's not a theory, it's a scientific equation.

2.

ChristianHG wrote:gained energy because of movement, but, you lost energy as well, and where did that energy go/came from?

Nowhere. Nothing ever gains or loses energy. You don't gain energy when you move, your potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. When you stop, your kinetic energy is converted back into potential energy. It's something called (Very creatively, I might add) "conservation of energy."

So how is the speed of light linked to energy? Is the object was light, that would make some sense, but this seems to be about ordinary objects.
And what is this thing about gaining infinite mass when you near the speed of light? Conservation of mass is a thing, are all light waves really super dense death projectiles here to crush us under their extreme weight?

Glitch wrote:So how is the speed of light linked to energy? Is the object was light, that would make some sense, but this seems to be about ordinary objects.
And what is this thing about gaining infinite mass when you near the speed of light? Conservation of mass is a thing, are all light waves really super dense death projectiles here to crush us under their extreme weight?

I don't know. Someone must have been like "Hey, let's calculate energy using the speed of light," and somehow, that seemed to work. And I don't know what the hell all that infinite mass stuff is about. And no, light is just radiation, so it has very little mass, if any.

Might I entertain you gents with some SCIIIIEEEENNNNCCCEEEE?!?!

[youtube]-kVsxVBz1Mg[/youtube]
The person who did this is called Roy Kelly. You should ALL Subscribe to him.

LukeDude759 wrote: Energy = Mass x (Speed of Light x Itself) (Don't ask me why c stands for speed of light). You multiply c by itself first because it's an exponent (Yeah, boring order of operations stuff, blah blah blah). Then you multiply that by m, and you get E. Mass is measured by kilograms.
Say you have an object that weighs 2 kg. If you want to calculate its potential energy (Measured in Joules (J)), you would take the speed of light and multiply it by itself. The speed of light is 300,000 m/s, so it would be 9^10 (90,000,000,000) m/s. Then you multiply that by 2 and get 180,000,000,000 J, so an object weighing 2 kilograms has 180 GJ (Gigajoules) of potential energy.
The more potential energy something has, the harder it is for any force (Besides inertia) to change what it's doing, and the easier it is for inertia to make it stay in place. The same goes for kinetic energy, except inertia keeps it going.

c stands for constant.
The speed of light is 300,000,000 m/s not 300,000 m/s.

I could have sworn it was meters. I must have heard kilometers, then.

This thread is leaking out of the heavens. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)