| Author |
Message |
Greysky
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 5:38 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
"~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1107549908.493580.37890@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | I just read that article and decided to find more information on google
and found this group... I am 14 years old (yes, I do understand quantum
physics, relativity, and some of the uncertainty principle; I'm
obsessed with science). After reading the article "How Time Travel Will
Work" a few days ago, I was thinking and figured that the only thing
that would ever be able to travel beyond the speed of light without
being destroyed is light itself. Then today I read about that
experiment, and it supports what I thought. I do think it is possible
for light to travel faster than its own speed, and if this didn't occur
in the cesium-filled container it could occur in space, if wormholes
exist. There also is a logical explanation for why the light appeared
to exit the container before it entered. I found it searching Google.
If you think about it enough, you realize there cannot be a set speed
that nothing can travel beyond
For a lot of reasons, light can not go faster than itself in a vacuum. To go |
faster than light, it is necessary to resort to using alternate techniques.
To try to wrap your mind around the conceptual difficulty this poses, check
out my website:
www.allocations.cc
You do need to understand some quantum physics, and know what probabilities
are, but if you are as good as you say you are, this should be easy stuff.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
~~SciGirl~~
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:08 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
The last time I used symbolic calculus (ie, took an integral the
classic way) was maybe 6 years ago, to calculate the power dissipation
of a switching fet, and I pretty much knew the answer anyhow.
Nowadays, one tends to do numerical simulation instead of closed-form
solutions. And there's software that *will* do symbolic calculus
better than 99% of the math professors on the planet.
Symbolic integration never made much sense to me anyhow. Apparently
you stand back, hope for inspiration, and guess a solution. Some
people have a real talent for this, some don't.
Anybody who plans a career in a science should understand the concepts
of calculus, limits, differential equations, and system dynamics, but
few probably need to do the symbolic equations themselves. I do a lot
of numerical simulation using the concepts of calculus plus a lot of
simple number crunching.
My kid is taking calculus at Cornell. Seems to me they're teaching a
lot of the mechanics but not enough of the meaning.
John
If your kid is in high school or college, that's fine. BUT I AM 14 and
CANNOT COMPREHEND COMPLICATED MATH LIKE CALCULUS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
~~SciGirl~~
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:14 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
"I don't really know that many 14 year olds, so maybe the question is
best left for you to answer. Do you know anyone else who's 14 who
understands quantum physics at your level of comprehension?"
I have a friend who is 13, will be taking trig and calculus next year,
and is capable of understanding it but just doesn't care enough about
science to do so. She helps me with math, I help her memorize the
periodic table. She's got it to zirconium now, I think.
Also, no, I actually do not think I'm smart at all. It's not like I
just read it and get it. As I said, it took me three months to get
relativity. I had a report card full of C's in 6th grade and worked
hard to pull it up from there. If any one of my mentally normal
classmates loved science as much as I do and really wanted to learn
this stuff, and put the effort in that I did, I'd be willing to bet
they could, too.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
~~SciGirl~~
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:18 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
Ok, I admit I stink at quoting stuff here.
I volunteered my age so that you guys wouldn't answer my questions with
a bunch of calculus that I wouldn't understand.
I am so sick of coming up with calculus equations whenever I search for
anything that I decided to make it clear right off that I don't
understand it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
~~SciGirl~~
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:31 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
Ok, I give up. No matter what I do, it doesn't seem there could be
anything I could do to prove I am really 14 years old. Everyone here is
too persistent to believe anything I'd say.
It's like a repeat of seventh grade. My seventh-grade science teacher
thought I was obnoxious.
Also, it's a little annoying to me that I know this stuff now, because
I'm in suspense on the edge of my seat waiting for someone to make a
breakthrough and answer all these questions like what the link is
between light as a particle and light as a wave. I can't figure it out
myself; I don't know enough. I can't build any sort of experiment or
prove anything with calculations. So, I'm frustrated. I almost wish I
didn't understand it.
Give anyone my age the Cartoon Guide to Physics, then refer them to
howstuffworks.com, and they'll know everything I know (not much) if
they care enough to learn it. It's explained in such simple terms that
they will.
Ok, I have decided off my own accord to dump google groups. I'll
discuss things with people I actually know who can see me and know I am
a 14 year old with an average IQ (shown from tests, I know they're not
that reliable but still, they have to mean a little something).
Twenty years or so into the future, I hope to be forecasting your
weather.
Bye everyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich Grise
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:40 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:14:30 -0800, ~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
| Quote: | "I don't really know that many 14 year olds, so maybe the question is
best left for you to answer. Do you know anyone else who's 14 who
understands quantum physics at your level of comprehension?"
I have a friend who is 13, will be taking trig and calculus next year,
and is capable of understanding it but just doesn't care enough about
science to do so. She helps me with math, I help her memorize the
periodic table. She's got it to zirconium now, I think.
Also, no, I actually do not think I'm smart at all. It's not like I
just read it and get it. As I said, it took me three months to get
relativity. I had a report card full of C's in 6th grade and worked
hard to pull it up from there. If any one of my mentally normal
classmates loved science as much as I do and really wanted to learn
this stuff, and put the effort in that I did, I'd be willing to bet
they could, too.
|
The biggest reason people don't want to believe that you're 14 is that
you're writing coherent English. And you seem to have humility. The entire
group is gaping in awe at such a phenomenon. ;-)
When we were 14, we were lucky if we could pick our nose without putting
our eye out. ;-D
Cheers!
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich Grise
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:46 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:18:59 -0800, ~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
| Quote: | Ok, I admit I stink at quoting stuff here.
I volunteered my age so that you guys wouldn't answer my questions with
a bunch of calculus that I wouldn't understand.
I am so sick of coming up with calculus equations whenever I search for
anything that I decided to make it clear right off that I don't
understand it.
|
Well, you didn't just wake up one morning knowing algebra either, or
English, for that matter. Take little bites - calculus is more-or-less the
next "stage" after algebra. Try to understand what the equations are
trying to model. You can visualize a sine wave, by imagining a dot going
around in a circle, with bar graphs on the X and Y axis. Kind of overlay
polar and rectangular coordinates.
Anyway, that's just one example - calculus is about rates of change of
stuff. Or rates of accululation of stuff.
But I predict you'll catch on surprisingly quickly. :-)
Good Luck!
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Fields
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:49 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On 7 Feb 2005 17:14:30 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | "I don't really know that many 14 year olds, so maybe the question is
best left for you to answer. Do you know anyone else who's 14 who
understands quantum physics at your level of comprehension?"
I have a friend who is 13, will be taking trig and calculus next year,
and is capable of understanding it but just doesn't care enough about
science to do so. She helps me with math, I help her memorize the
periodic table. She's got it to zirconium now, I think.
|
---
40 down, 66 to go! Pretty good.
---
| Quote: | Also, no, I actually do not think I'm smart at all. It's not like I
just read it and get it. As I said, it took me three months to get
relativity. I had a report card full of C's in 6th grade and worked
hard to pull it up from there. If any one of my mentally normal
classmates loved science as much as I do and really wanted to learn
this stuff, and put the effort in that I did, I'd be willing to bet
they could, too.
|
---
But they don't, so who knows? Of course they could be equally
motivated by something other than science and they could be driving as
hard as you are to get where they want to go, but the point is, you're
motivated and you're here, and you're demonstrating that you've _got_
the tools to take you where you want to go. So that looks pretty
smart to me, anyway.
--
John Fields |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Fields
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:49 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On 7 Feb 2005 17:18:59 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Ok, I admit I stink at quoting stuff here.
I volunteered my age so that you guys wouldn't answer my questions with
a bunch of calculus that I wouldn't understand.
I am so sick of coming up with calculus equations whenever I search for
anything that I decided to make it clear right off that I don't
understand it.
|
---
Fair enough.
--
John Fields |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich Grise
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:55 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:47:17 -0800, ~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
| Quote: | Superbowl's on. I don't understand football, so I'm going to stare at
the TV and think about how it works. :)
|
Not much to understand, really. The point is to get the ball across that
line when you're on offense, or stop the other team from getting it across
your line when you're defense. They switch back and forth throughout the
game. :-)
The rest is just gingerbread, much like calculus. ;-)
(big hint - be in the presence of males while watching - how they react
will give you a pretty good insight as to what's "important".)
Cheers!
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich Grise
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:00 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:25:31 -0500, Keith Williams wrote:
| Quote: | In article <420724DA.EDE0D172@earthlink.net>, robertbaer@earthlink.net
says...
~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
" And guess what? The third law of thermodynamics guarantees that all
electronics will get warmer."
The trouble with that is that they aren't even getting into
thermodynamics yet (I can decode the latin roots of that I think -
temperature change?)
Crudely stated, the three laws of thermodynamics are:
1) You cannot win.
2) You cannot break even.
3) You always lose.
3) You cannot get out of the game.
|
Capitalism is based on the belief that you can win,
Socialism is based on the belief that you can break even,
Mysticism is based on the belief that you can get out of the game.
Cheers!
Rich |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Fields
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:03 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On 7 Feb 2005 17:31:51 -0800, "~~SciGirl~~" <palmtree117@juno.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | Ok, I give up. No matter what I do, it doesn't seem there could be
anything I could do to prove I am really 14 years old. Everyone here is
too persistent to believe anything I'd say.
It's like a repeat of seventh grade. My seventh-grade science teacher
thought I was obnoxious.
Also, it's a little annoying to me that I know this stuff now, because
I'm in suspense on the edge of my seat waiting for someone to make a
breakthrough and answer all these questions like what the link is
between light as a particle and light as a wave. I can't figure it out
myself; I don't know enough. I can't build any sort of experiment or
prove anything with calculations. So, I'm frustrated. I almost wish I
didn't understand it.
|
---
You don't, that's why you're frustrated!
---
| Quote: | Give anyone my age the Cartoon Guide to Physics, then refer them to
howstuffworks.com, and they'll know everything I know (not much) if
they care enough to learn it. It's explained in such simple terms that
they will.
Ok, I have decided off my own accord to dump google groups. I'll
discuss things with people I actually know who can see me and know I am
a 14 year old with an average IQ (shown from tests, I know they're not
that reliable but still, they have to mean a little something).
Twenty years or so into the future, I hope to be forecasting your
weather.
|
---
Perhaps, if you stick with it through the frustrations, in twenty
years or so you'll be _controlling it!
---
--
John Fields |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Fields
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:06 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:40:40 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:14:30 -0800, ~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
"I don't really know that many 14 year olds, so maybe the question is
best left for you to answer. Do you know anyone else who's 14 who
understands quantum physics at your level of comprehension?"
I have a friend who is 13, will be taking trig and calculus next year,
and is capable of understanding it but just doesn't care enough about
science to do so. She helps me with math, I help her memorize the
periodic table. She's got it to zirconium now, I think.
Also, no, I actually do not think I'm smart at all. It's not like I
just read it and get it. As I said, it took me three months to get
relativity. I had a report card full of C's in 6th grade and worked
hard to pull it up from there. If any one of my mentally normal
classmates loved science as much as I do and really wanted to learn
this stuff, and put the effort in that I did, I'd be willing to bet
they could, too.
The biggest reason people don't want to believe that you're 14 is that
you're writing coherent English. And you seem to have humility. The entire
group is gaping in awe at such a phenomenon. ;-)
When we were 14, we were lucky if we could pick our nose without putting
our eye out. ;-D
|
---
Well, when _I_ was 14, I had already learned the difference between my
nose and my eyes. ;)
--
John Fields |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Jones
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:21 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
John Fields wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:28:50 +0000, John Woodgate
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:
I read in sci.electronics.design that John Fields <jfields@austininstrum
ents.com> wrote (in <ohdf011lpgmu5vglvgf8cm6mcmver6u30v@4ax.com>) about
'breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com', on Mon, 7
Feb 2005:
Also, ISTR she made a comment about being denied access to something
because of her age/grade in school; something like, "I'm in the eighth
grade so they won't let me..." Her dad needs to find out what's up with
that and fix it.
But fix it only if it's in her interest. Precocity should by no means be
repressed, it should be challenged, but, on the other hand, it should
not be *over*-stimulated. I know of a case where a young lad came to
mental harm that way.
---
Yes, over-fertilizing is as bad (or worse) than not fertilizing at
all, but a large pot is usually better than a small one.
|
Here here! Rich is going to agree with you about the large-pot. ;) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Fields
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:26 am Post subject:
Re: breaking the speed of light article on howstuffworks.com |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 02:00:54 GMT, Rich Grise <richgrise@example.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 09:25:31 -0500, Keith Williams wrote:
In article <420724DA.EDE0D172@earthlink.net>, robertbaer@earthlink.net
says...
~~SciGirl~~ wrote:
" And guess what? The third law of thermodynamics guarantees that all
electronics will get warmer."
The trouble with that is that they aren't even getting into
thermodynamics yet (I can decode the latin roots of that I think -
temperature change?)
Crudely stated, the three laws of thermodynamics are:
1) You cannot win.
2) You cannot break even.
3) You always lose.
3) You cannot get out of the game.
Capitalism is based on the belief that you can win,
Socialism is based on the belief that you can break even,
Mysticism is based on the belief that you can get out of the game.
|
---
Capitalism is based on the belief that you can control the game.
Socialism is based on the belief that everyone should be playing the
game the same way you are.
Mysticism is the belief that there is a game.
--
John Fields |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in