Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which would make CERN part of the conglomerate that made the Internet would it not? TCP/IP isn't much use without the HTTP protocol and some markup language for text formatting.
No, it would not. I have been using the Internet since 1979. The WWW protocol was not invented until 1991.
Before 1980, you could only access the Internet through major universities. In my particular case, I used PlatoNet to connect to the Internet via the University of Minnesota. They acted as the ISP does today. Archy, Veronica, and Gopher services were available, and allowed users to perform searches much like Google does today. During the 1980s companies like CompuServe, America On-Line, and Prodigy, offered users Internet access.
True, that was Einstein's solution to getting around the problem of destroying information. He simply invented "white holes," which have never been observed. That was the biggest problem with GR, it contradicts the law of conservation with regard to singularities.
If there was no singularity, as Hawking suggests, then there is no need for "white holes" or other dimensions. All information that passes the event horizon would eventually be released through Hawking radiation. According to QM, all matter that passes the event horizon hits a "firewall" and is reduced to a quark-gluon plasma. Maybe a more appropriate name for "black holes" would be "quark stars."
but some are assuming that all black holes have singularity at their core, and that may not be true. solar mass black holes do have a singularity at their core by the very nature of their creation. however we still have yet to determine how a super massive black hole is created. are they tunnels to other dimensions? or are they just solar mass black holes that have combined in galactic collisions? or are they stars that were once extremely massive in size that collapsed in on themselves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
Traveling faster than the speed of light is quite impossible, nothing with mass can travel faster than light. However, there may be other means to travel vast distances in a short periods of time, such as warping space/time itself. Space/time is the only thing capable of moving faster than the speed of light.
thats one theory for traveling faster than light. create a sustained warp bubble around your ship,, and you compress space in front of you, and expand it behind you, and you ride that like a surfboard on a wave. its also possible that we can travel faster than light without the warp drive trick, but until we actually create a machine to make the effort we will never know. and yes i know the mathematical formula suggests its impossible, but then again it was impossible to travel faster than sound and put a man on the moon as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Because the money you waste staring at Black Holes could be used to develop a propulsion system that could send a probe to a Black Hole in your life-time, so that you could study it more efficiently.
a lot of breakthroughs are going to be needed for that to ever happen, but in fact we already have an engine that can do it in the early testing stages.
Quote:
Yeah, well, maybe behind Door #3 to Dimension #11 is an alternative to the combustion engine.
hey now, dont be taking my internal combustion engines away from me, unless the alternative is truly better, and sounds mean.
Quote:
Orbiting a Pulsar? Yeah, like that's really teeming with life.
life can be found in many areas on extreme conditions. granted i doubt that life of any kind is aon a planet that orbits a pulsar, or a magnetar.
Quote:
Well, then stop looking for planets in galaxies and star clusters that are 12.7 Million Light Years away. There's 1,000+ G and K Class Stars within 50 Light-Years of Earth....what's so wrong with looking there?
No, it would not. I have been using the Internet since 1979. The WWW protocol was not invented until 1991.
Before 1980, you could only access the Internet through major universities. In my particular case, I used PlatoNet to connect to the Internet via the University of Minnesota. They acted as the ISP does today. Archy, Veronica, and Gopher services were available, and allowed users to perform searches much like Google does today. During the 1980s companies like CompuServe, America On-Line, and Prodigy, offered users Internet access.
There is no WWW protocol, if you're going to split hairs, at least be consistent and split them all. There is the hypertext transfer protocol (http) which dates from 1991 (and many others like SMTP, SNMP, POP3, etc. etc.). While Compuserve AOL Prodigy and others existed, they fell by the wayside because their specific protocols were less effective. So you can say CERN killed CompuServe, I think that's an achievement to be proud of. The "internet" we know today is a direct result of Tim-Berners Lee work at CERN that's the fact.
I mentioned Janet, because an "Internet" existed prior to the HTTP protocol. However I didn't originally state that CERN did create the internet, that was someone else. I said that when someone stated CERN was responsible for some internet technologies, then it had produced something of tangible value.
but some are assuming that all black holes have singularity at their core, and that may not be true. solar mass black holes do have a singularity at their core by the very nature of their creation. however we still have yet to determine how a super massive black hole is created. are they tunnels to other dimensions? or are they just solar mass black holes that have combined in galactic collisions? or are they stars that were once extremely massive in size that collapsed in on themselves?
According to GR, all black holes have singularities. Once a particle is consumed by the singularity, according to GR, it is gone forever. That violates the law of conservation of energy, so Einstein came up with white holes, that have singularities but release energy rather than consume energy. Nobody has ever observed a "white hole."
If there is no singularity, then all the information a black hole consumes is still inside its "apparent horizon", just not in the form that it went in. Since black holes slowly evaporate over time due to Hawking radiation, that information will eventually be released, and there is no violation of the conservation of energy.
Essentially a "black hole" is just a really massive dead star composed of quark-gluon soup that is more dense than a neutron star. So dense that no information can escape from it, not even light, except in the form of Hawking radiation.
Two colliding neutrons stars could form a black hole, or two colliding stellar black holes may make even larger black holes until you end up with super massive black holes. None of them would have singularities, they would all be composed of extremely dense, hot, quark-gluon plasma. The more massive the black hole, the longer it takes to evaporate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
thats one theory for traveling faster than light. create a sustained warp bubble around your ship,, and you compress space in front of you, and expand it behind you, and you ride that like a surfboard on a wave. its also possible that we can travel faster than light without the warp drive trick, but until we actually create a machine to make the effort we will never know. and yes i know the mathematical formula suggests its impossible, but then again it was impossible to travel faster than sound and put a man on the moon as well.
Traveling faster than the speed of sound was never impossible, nor was putting a man on the moon. However, in order to move anything with mass at the speed of light would require an infinite amount of energy.
There may be other ways to move cosmological distances in a short period of time, but traveling through normal space is not one of them.
Which would make CERN part of the conglomerate that made the Internet would it not? TCP/IP isn't much use without the HTTP protocol and some markup language for text formatting.
No, it would not. I have been using the Internet since 1979. The WWW protocol was not invented until 1991.
Before 1980, you could only access the Internet through major universities. In my particular case, I used PlatoNet to connect to the Internet via the University of Minnesota. They acted as the ISP does today. Archy, Veronica, and Gopher services were available, and allowed users to perform searches much like Google does today. During the 1980s companies like CompuServe, America On-Line, and Prodigy, offered users Internet access.
However I didn't originally state that CERN did create the internet, that was someone else.
Actually you did state that "CERN part of the conglomerate that made the Internet." Or are you going to pull another Obama and blame that on Bush as well?
Actually you did state that "CERN part of the conglomerate that made the Internet." Or are you going to pull another Obama and blame that on Bush as well?
As for Professor Stephen Hawking, for a man who developed what the Americans call Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS or Motor Neurone Disease) age 21, and who was initially given 2 years to live, being alive 50 years later is an achievement in it's self and this determination is not just shown in Hawking's ability to live through adversity and thrive but also in much of his work, and I am sure he would be the first to look at alternative theories to his own and to continue to look at new theories as scientific research progresses.
Traveling faster than the speed of sound was never impossible, nor was putting a man on the moon. However, in order to move anything with mass at the speed of light would require an infinite amount of energy.
There may be other ways to move cosmological distances in a short period of time, but traveling through normal space is not one of them.
really? until 1948 many physicists thought that the sound barrier was an actual barrier that couldnt be crossed by anything larger than a bullet. they were wrong. and until 1969 landing a man on the moon and retuning him to the earth was also considered impossible, at least with the technology of the day, until we actually did it. so since we havent done it yet, yes it is currently impossible to get something going faster than light, but that doesnt mean that at some point in the future that it wont happen. perhaps einstein was wrong with his equation. in the end we wont really know until we can get something past the speed of light, even if it is a sub atomic particle at first. once that happens, then we can formulate a more accurate equation based on actual fact instead of conjecture.
Aren't we always hearing complaints from the religious about how scientists are know it alls?
The fundamental basis of science is to seek the truth. Would you rather he, and the rest of the scientific community, suppress the truth in order to remain as seemingly omniscient? No dice.
The best moments of science are not the "eureka!" It's the "wait that can't be right" that leads to the bigger advancements. Every time science corrects itself it's a victory for human understanding.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
