The Large Hadron Collider

[CaleyD]

The last couple of answers are exactly what I was getting at in regards to the "magical" properties of light. Understanding it properly will involve whole new principles of Physics...things we can barely imagine the existence of, let alone comprehend.....and although perhaps not related to time travel, or even our understanding of the workings of light and why it behaves so strangely, it's that kind of leap in thinking/understanding that the LHC could potentially unlock.

We sit and look through science history books and we learn of people who made huge discoveries in the past. They may seem small to us because the outcomes are now common to us and in many cases are used in every day society....PC processors work using particle physics for example, and we never give the science behind them a second thought. I'm sure when the science behind these discoveries was made that they generated similar discussions to those we are having now and in 50 years or more (or less) people will view the findings of the LHC (if their are any) in the same way we view the science behind many things today.

Over the years people say things to you and at the time you think they are barking mad, but later on you come to realise that perhaps they weren't as mad as you thought (or you've now become as mad as them). One of those people from my past was a primary school teacher (Mrs Davidson, Dalneigh). Two or three things she said have stuck with me over the years and although they seem philosophical you do start to wonder if their if there's anything scientific in them. In particular I remember her making a comment about "The older you get, the faster time passes". A comment brushed off by a 12 year old Don Johnstone all those years ago as being the words of a barmy teacher, and, on the surface a stupid idea.....but what if time is really only what we perceive it to be and a "second" in your world is more or less in my world. There's no doubting that I perceive that time passes faster 20 years on from when I was told it would...but why? Is their a scientific reason behind my, and everyone else's, perception of time?

[Guest Spectre]

There's no doubting that I perceive that time passes faster 20 years on from when I was told it would...but why? Is their a scientific reason behind my, and everyone else's, perception of time?

I think I read somewhere a while back that the perception of time is related to your metabolism, so as you get older and your metabolism slows down time goes quicker.

Similarly, a mouse's heartbeat is much faster than a human's, so they 'seem' to live longer. (Not sure how the mouse's opinion was ascertained in this!)

PS The speed formula (thanks Wikipedia) is (u+v)/(1+uv/c^2). So the two spaceships will travel at 96% the speed of light relative to each other.

[whoops formula corrected]

Edited September 12, 2008 by Spectre

[CaleyD]

That "96%" figure seems to crop up a lot in terms of trying to accelerate anything "solid", and if you read some of the stuff out there on the LHC you will see that this is also the maximum speed they will be able to fire particles at.

Despite them having a formula to explain it, I still don't think they know exactly "why" it happens this way....it's one of those "it just does" scenarios which scientists can (and have) spend a lifetime trying to understand it or come up with new, more accurate ways of "measuring and recording" it.

[Scarlet Pimple]

What would you say if I surmised that your life span is related to a specific number of heartbeats with everybody having their own figure. Prolonging life therefore depends on, amonst other things, slowing down the heart by exercising regularly. ?

[Guest Spectre]

So if you don't drink, don't smoke, don't eat chocolate and do exercise regularly it slows down your heartbeat meaning you live longer?

If not, it will certainly seem like it...

(The old ones are always the best)

[Yngwie]

That "96%" figure seems to crop up a lot in terms of trying to accelerate anything "solid", and if you read some of the stuff out there on the LHC you will see that this is also the maximum speed they will be able to fire particles at.

If that maximum speed isn't referred to as Hadron's Wall then these boffins have no sense of humour.

[Guest couchpotato]

If that maximum speed isn't referred to as Hadron's Wall then these boffins have no sense of humour.

certainly nae void of humour roond here :thumb04:

[CaleyD]

Nice One

[Charles Bannerman]

That "96%" figure seems to crop up a lot in terms of trying to accelerate anything "solid", and if you read some of the stuff out there on the LHC you will see that this is also the maximum speed they will be able to fire particles at.

That's possibly because one of the Einstein equations from one or other of his Theories of Relativity specifies that as the velocity of a particle increases, so does its mass.

The equation is m(v) = m(0)/square root(1-(v-squared /c-squared)) where m(v) and m(0) are the masses at velocity v and at rest, c is the speed of light and v is the velocity the thing is going at.

This function hardly moves when v is a low value (so under normal circumstances we just don't notice the effect) and only increases appreciably when the speed of light is approached. At 96% of the speed of light, the mass of the particle ihould be almost 4 times its rest mass and, in terms of Newton's 2nd law, requiring that much more of a force to accelerate it any further. By this stage, also, the function is increasing quite quickly so I could guess that 0.96c might be just about the limit.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Charles Bannerman

[Caley Mad In Berks]

CB I'm sure you forgot to 'take away the number you first thought of' in that equation. Still, not bad! Your old physics teacher would be proud of you. In my day it was an old dear we called "Parrot face". Can't even remember her proper name now.

[Charles Bannerman]

Miss M.I.M. Taylor. She had retired by the time I got there, but was still well remembered by staff. She was tiny and used to keep a box in her lab to stand on so she could belt bigger people. She was also extremely fierce.

I had Maude for Physics up to O Grade and then for Higher and SYS a couple of guys you wouldn't remember (Andrew Halkett and Jim Wilson) who were recent arrivals and didn't stay that long.

Edited September 15, 2008 by Charles Bannerman

[Scarlet Pimple]

Spectre

-- eh?

A fitter heart revs up your metabolism which does not necessarily diminish with age.This reduces your weight and allows you to eat as much black chocolate as you like which gives you anti-oxidants but if you want to drink like a fish I hope you have a better than average constitution, especially if you smoke. Smile.

I know a 110 year-old man who smoked all his life and liked a dram too. He had a strong constitution and no doubt had his heart-beat allocation set high.

So, if we are talking about the number of heartbeats being set at a specific figure for you when you choose your body prior to re-incarnating, doesn't this mean that that this is the point at you will die despite your bad habits ?

But you are probably too young to worry about it ? Although if you are a spectre you naturally will be in touch with the spirit world and know the answers anyway--so are you just a tease ? Smile (2)

[PullMyFinger]

[CaleyD]

I've heard rumours that a talent sapping black hole has appeared beneath TCS and is the reason we can't do chit at home.

[Guest Spectre]

No, it's not a black hole (which prevents light from escaping), it's a mute hole that sucks all the cheering and support from ther home stands.

[CaleyD]

They've turned off the LHC until next year