hmmmmm... solid points on both sides... I'd call it a draw!
Printable View
hmmmmm... solid points on both sides... I'd call it a draw!
I'm drunk and bored, so I'm gonna split hairs.
You can stand on your head! Or, you could tie a plastic bag around your head filled with sandand stand up. Or, you could be standing, but have your head FIGURATIVELY in sand. As in, you've still got your head stuck in the ground and not aware. Etc.Quote:
Originally posted by bradybaker+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bradybaker)</div>Yes they can. It all depends on the relative speed of the obswerver. It's all relativity. Like... if a cannojball is fired out of the cannon at 100km per hour, is that cannonball moving at 100km per hour, or is it stationary, and the world is just moving around it?Quote:
a) Planets don't travel at the speed of light.[/b]
<!--QuoteBegin-bradybaker
B) Can you stand with your head in sand?
Uhhh... like... if the mountain was upside-down... ummm... uhhhh...Quote:
c) Find a part of a mountain to climb other than the side and I'll be impressed.[/b]
Okay, FINE. You got me with that last one.
But I like coldplay. :P
I found that funny.Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg
What's the deal?
I really like Coldplay. *Clocks/Speed of Sound/Talk... *These are great songs people...great songs.
:P
Wrong. Nothing can travel at the speed of light. Even relative to anything else. Nothing can travel the speed of light excepting light. Its weird. But it just never happens.Quote:
Originally posted by The Blue Meanie
Yes they can. It all depends on the relative speed of the obswerver. It's all relativity. Like... if a cannojball is fired out of the cannon at 100km per hour, is that cannonball moving at 100km per hour, or is it stationary, and the world is just moving around it?
Yeah? Excellent! Glad I brought some humour your way. (No idea what you find so amusing though.)Quote:
Originally posted by ffx-dreamz
I found that funny.
Are you sure about that? It seems to me that if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.Quote:
Wrong. Nothing can travel at the speed of light. Even relative to anything else. Nothing can travel the speed of light excepting light. Its weird. But it just never happens.[/b]
woah :shock:Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg
if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.
THAT COULD SO WORK
Easy. Climb through it, via the mines of moria.Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(icedawg)</div>But coldplay claims that the planet is actually travelling at the speed of light. They mention nothing about perspective in the song.Quote:
Are you sure about that? *It seems to me that if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.[/b]
And even if a planet was moving at the speed of light it would disintegrate under it's own weight and from collisions with other objects, becoming a big cosmic cloud.
Therefore, the lyrics should either say:
Look up, I look up at night
Planets are moving at the speed of light according to the relative speed of the observer
Or
Look up, I look up at night
Large cosmic clouds that were previously planets before attaining a high velocity are moving at the speed of light
Hmm, I dunno what I was trying to prove then... I like coldplay.
<!--QuoteBegin-bradybaker
c) Find a part of a mountain to climb other than the side and I'll be impressed.
What if the planet was made up of a gaint glowing ball of light? That's what I thought.
Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(icedawg)</div>i'm not entirely sure, but i think .jared. is right about this. it's the weirdest part of relativity, and it has to do with the curvature of space-time as you approach the speed of light, i think.Quote:
Are you sure about that? *It seems to me that if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.[/b]
Quote:
Originally posted by dudesuperior@
<!--QuoteBegin-bradybaker
Quote:
c) Find a part of a mountain to climb other than the side and I'll be impressed.
Easy. Climb through it, via the mines of moria.
Although my occaisional Coldplay listening habits makes me fear for my masculinity sometimes, I really like Talk, Speed of Sound, and The Hardest Part.
Don't tell anyone...
More or less, yeah. Music is at its best when it can be appreciated perceptually and intellectually.Quote:
Originally posted by Gorky
Wow....do you do this with every band you hear of?
Coldplay has part of the equation, but are still certainly lacking a large portion.
As for all the crazy scenarios in which Martin's lyrics could make sense, thanks for the effort, but they just reinforce the fact that they're incredibly vague and awkward.
huh. Personally, I'm not a fan of theories that impose limitations; I like to think just about anything is possible (this is a dreams forum, after all).Quote:
Originally posted by dudesuperior+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dudesuperior)</div>Right...I know it's off topic, but I was discussing traveling at the speed of light in general.Quote:
But coldplay claims that the planet is actually travelling at the speed of light. They mention nothing about perspective in the song. [/b]
<!--QuoteBegin-kage23
i'm not entirely sure, but i think .jared. is right about this. it's the weirdest part of relativity, and it has to do with the curvature of space-time as you approach the speed of light, i think.
I have to admit, i was really disappointed by x&y.Quote:
Originally posted by bradybaker
Parachutes was a great album, I'll give them that.
Rush of Blood....also not bad. A step in the safe direction.
X&Y, however, was a disgusting display of cowardice on the part of Chris Martin. They'd finally achieved the level of success where any self-respecting musician can and should take some chances. With the world on its knees, he was given a perfect and rare opportunity to challenge the frontiers of popular music.
What does he do? Puts out Rush of Blood pt. 2. Why? He knows it'll sell.
He's certainly secured a wealthy future for his oddly-named children, but at the cost of all artistic merit and respect that he had previously earned.
Not at all what i thought it would be...
The only songs i liked were Talk and Fix you.
What? Those are the only songs you liked? Swallowed in the Sea is amazing.
You are forgetting about relativity. There is a simple equation, like (1- (v1* v2))/(v1 + v2) where v1 and v2 would be .5 for icedawg's example. Each observer should see the other coming at a relative velocity of 75% of the speed of light.Quote:
Originally posted by OpheliaBlue+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(OpheliaBlue)</div>Quote:
<!--QuoteBegin-icedawg
woah :shock:Quote:
if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.
THAT COULD SO WORK[/b]
I'm not a big fan of coldplay either. It all sounds the same.
Bah, they all sound the same...Quote:
Originally posted by Gorky
What? Those are the only songs you liked? Swallowed in the Sea is amazing.
FreshBrains is right... all you coldplay lovers MUST listen to meddle. There's no comparison. It's not a question of taste or opinion either, it's a question of talent, something coldplay is severely lacking in.
And no, you can't travel at the speed of light, even relatively (although that's already been said).
No, that's not how relative velocities work. Consider myself moving at 1 km/h E, and yourself moving at 1km/h W. Using myself as the reference point, you're moving at 2km/h W. Or, the distance between us is widening by 2 km/h...not 1.5 km/h.Quote:
Originally posted by Distant Clone
You are forgetting about relativity. There is a simple equation, like (1- (v1* v2))/(v1 + v2) where v1 and v2 would be .5 for icedawg's example. Each observer should see the other coming at a relative velocity of 75% of the speed of light.
Yeah, except that adding together your speeds as you move apart only works with relatively small velocities. Think about it, if you and another object were moving apart at .75c each, that'd be saying that relatively, one of you could be moving at 1.5C, which obviously doesn't quite work.
Equation time!
Consider V and W to be the speeds of two spaceships as seen by a third observer. Call him 'stationary' even though ya know, velocity is relative and all...
And Consider U to be the velocity of one spaceship in relation to the other.
U = (v + w) / [ 1+ (vw / c^2) ]
Okay, so let's assume that v and w are each .75C
U = (.75C + .75C) / [ 1 + (.5625c ^2 / c^2 ) ]
U = (1.5C) / [1.5625]
U = .96 C
Yeah, you can't use the same equations we use for low velocities and low distances and stuff at speeds that approach the speed of light. Just doesn't work and all, relativity and stuff.
.... Yeah, I took a class on physics once... I'm not a complete nerd, I promise :|
For jared's equation, U = (1C) / [1+ .25c^2 / c^2 ]
U = .8C
And then theres the stuff about mass and length being relative. So as an object approaches the speed of light, it approaches infinite mass and infinite length. And yeah... I don't want to be infinitely massive.
I think my brain just exploded.
I don't think this is true. I'm not going to back this statement up at all right now... but I remember reading (legitimate source...) that it wasn't.Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg
Are you sure about that? It seems to me that if you're traveling at half the speed of light East, and I'm traveling at half the speed of light West, then from my perspective, you're traveling at the speed of light East.
Well, I only have two semesters of introductory physics at the University level, so some of you could very well know better than I. (I did, however, get perfect on my physics II final exam :wink:.) Personally, I still recognize that speeds approaching light are all in theory; as I said earlier I have trouble accepting imposed boundaries.
Okay... so I think that I meant that if anyone is traveling toward a light source at any speed, they will measure the speed of light as C. Something going half the speed of light will measure the same as someone walking towards a flashlight. But that's different, anyways.Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg
Well, I only have two semesters of introductory physics at the University level, so some of you could very well know better than I. (I did, however, get perfect on my physics II final exam :wink:.) Personally, I still recognize that speeds approaching light are all in theory; as I said earlier I have trouble accepting imposed boundaries.
We accelerate particles to near-light speeds on a regular basis.Quote:
Originally posted by icedawg
Personally, I still recognize that speeds approaching light are all in theory; as I said earlier I have trouble accepting imposed boundaries.
The new CERN accelerator will be able to hurl gold nuclei at around 99.99% the speed of light.
Like the electrons that shoot out of those things on TVs! right?Quote:
Originally posted by bradybaker
We accelerate particles to near-light speeds on a regular basis.
The new CERN accelerator will be able to hurl gold nuclei at around 99.99% the speed of light.
I think ice was talking about objects with like... significant mass being moved at a significant percentage of the speed of light... I just base that thought on the fact that I would assume he knows subatomic particles and all move at speeds near the speed of light often.