Like removing a magnet, instantly? (i dunno).

I would guess that too, but no field can change faster than the speed of light =O

well turning off a flashlight also seems instant, but this distance is so very huge.

Light doesnt warp space time. And i dont think you have particles/waves of gravity. ^^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton

In physics, the graviton is a hypothetical elementary particle

Gods on wikipedia, I don't believe in him either.

I could have given a link to a paper in Science if I wanted. And the fact you don't believe in something that is on wikipedia doesn't rule out the possibility of its existence either.

you could have given a link that wasnt wikipedia, but it wouldnt change the fact that its a hypothetical concept

Nor the fact that your reply is irrelevant?!

i disagree ;o

where can i look for a clan?
reactions here http://www.thesgl.com/viewthread.php?tid=111489 werent wat i was lookin 4

LOL awesome

try the enemy down forums next. kek

yer already did
the recruited stuff 1 lookin for low 'h2h im in chan but nobody b4 or sice pub
got it in favs tho

Wow, i wish that post i made was a joke. Then i wouldnt look so silly after you crushed my 'gravitons are pagan magic' retort.

academic notability on wikipedia

It was only a joke :-(

ever heard of that thing called the "event horizon"?

Yes. (What's your point?:D)

was a kick ass movie! thats his point braveheart

oh nothing, except that it means that the effect from any event will travel with the speed of light. So, basically the theory is that what happens on or with the sun at this moment is actually the future, which is about 8 minutes away from us.

That is derived from the theory of relativity, and that again collides with the "speed of gravity" mentioned below. But that speed isn't really proven.

wrong. the information will take 8mins to be percieved by us, not the event itself. since we don't have any instruments to measure gravity changes (since we got no clue what it is in the first place) we can only rely on sensors that percieve information trough photons, hence the delay.

Please tell me, have you been reading this entire post or just bits and pieces. It is NOT established that the "speed of gravity" exceeds the speed of light. It is just another theory.

And there is also a theory, which is more widely accepted, that the future is a local term which is basically also limited to the speed of light.
Ever heard the story of the astronaut who travels with almost the speed of light until he comes back to earth only to find out the he aged much slower than everyone else?

It is just another theory.

like.. evolution

Yes and also a theory like Creationism. And you can only believe in either evolution or creatinism, though I think we both agree on which one is of those two is correct.

But tell me which one will you chose out of this pair:

A) "Theory of relativity" even if it's old it's widely accepted and proven many times.
B) "Theory of a "speed of gravity" 20 billion times fast than light, 4 years old, not very widely accepted, not conclusively proven as a basic assumption may be wrong

Sheesh you two need to learn what a hypothesis is and what a scientific theory is. Evolution is a scientific theory backed up by mountains of evidence. Creationism is a concept by Christians backed up by no evidence, it can not be tested and it proposes no real hypotheses. In fact you should be smacked for even calling creationism a theory. It's pseudoscience at it's finest and nothing more.

Yes, you are right. And I should have made the sarcasm more obvious. Apologies.

finally someone who pointed that one out..

A) until some *serious scientists* that are not frowned upon by the majority of the professional community believe it does not hold for gravity.

what i gathered from my online searches yielded results for the credibility of those "controversial" theories equivalent of those for creationism, hence the ironic analogy.. speaking out my ass again, but that's what seems to be out there on the net at least from my scope of view.

You should also be smacked for that comment.

isn't the theory of relativity as certain as the theory of evolution?

if some guy were to say that some unknown specific mutation and following evolution must have been caused by god and made it accelerate the process 1million times over a short period.. wouldn't it be as nonsensical? after all you know all the other pieces fit, so you know there is just a small problem there to solve, and if most agree that it is soluble within the current theory that is what should be expected, and "controversy" especially outside the community would seem laughable. it's like those mystics who discover that there is something called quantum physics which is mysterious and strange, thus everything else can be attributed the traits *mysterious and strange* ..

Just stop already ffs.

just answer this: do you think it's not an established fact like beck thinks or that this controversy stems from crackpots, like yeltsin thinks?

I just don't care. It just annoys when people throw the word theory around in a scientific meaning when they have no idea what it means.

I was just going to reply fool, because i do know what theory means, but i turned it around to ask of your opinion ontopic - but if you have no opinion and still can't see my post in context i guess we can just leave it at that ;)

Whatever. Talking to you makes my brain hurt.

yeah, it's easy in a world where you can claim without reason and shout with no content, wouldn't want to painfully peek through the unfiltered cracks of that comforting shell.

Man you've become boring and annoying since you started that philosophy shit. STFU

I ain't the one flaming randomly misunderstanding others and not having the balls to admit it

I don't think anyone can understand the bs that comes out of you.

maybe you should try to understand before you shout about
-if not, ask.
-if you don't care, stfu.
-and if you think you understood, but it becomes apparent you didn't, then let me help you understand me, or just admit and /care away

Maybe you should just stop acting like punee jr.

deep

do what booger says else i'll be forced to sit on you, and that you don't want!

luckily i have spiky hair!

Nah, I'm just saying that only crackpots are sure of their "theories" when they are the only ones coming up with them. Gravity is still a very dark subject and experiments showing a "propagation speed" of c*10^8 or something are just irrelevant when the the unknowns concerning the subject are definitions of "prorogation", "speed", space and time themselves. There are *numerous* really *solid* experimental results dating from decades back to now that show how 'c' is not a constant, etc. This has not put anyone (non-crackpot) off of the general relativity for very similar reasons. Lets also not forget that "sudden" breakthroughs in science are just PR stunts by the suddened media. Einstein, Newton, Bohr, Pelerman; none of them came up with things out of nowhere based on luck, they all simply added their own peace to the collectively pre-assembled puzzle. I can only see people working on fundamental theories in math/physics providing any movement forward. People who measure the "speed of gravity" are probably starting out and want to get ahead in the "community" or are just the Tesla-make-huge-freaky-lightning-coming-out-of-the-ass types, not even mentioning the wildy theorizing. Of source everyone is different on a case by case basis.

:oo great.

now i'm even more confused. :P

but when you say c is not a constant, is that like, it has changed over time, or that it is different in different circumstances?

ps Tesla was kinda cool ;)

Well, time is a circumstance, so yes to both =)
I guess my point was that what we don't know is more fundamental then the definition of space/time itself and thats why results like that are not very relevant. It's like arguing about the length of a mile in antiquity based on the fact that somehow a ship comes back where it came from after traveling around the globe, which we don't know is flat.

That's not entirely true, it might have taken 20 years or more for someone else to come up with Einstein's theories, it was a major piece of insight.

do you think it's not an established fact like beck thinks

Uh, which one, cause if you are talking about either relativity or evolution I'm pretty sure I didn't write that, or at least didn't mean to.
However, even though they are established theories it doesn't mean they have to be 100% accurate.

i c

it's junior high relativity. as for gravity there is no consesus in science comunity about it's speed. perhaps it does have a finite speed but then perhaps once you've been caught in the gravity field you'd feel the effects of the gravity body dissapearing instantly. something like a tractor beam hehe

Oh, really there is no concensus about the speed of gravity? Do me a favor and read my post again, didn't I say exactly the same thing...?

So, if what I wrote is from "Junior High Relativity" is that bad or good? Cause the first implications of Einstein's theory are actually quite easy to understand. Or do you want to say you dropped out before Junior High?

If your understanding of physics is as coherent as your logic, you might just graduate to Lego 6+ soon.

It will actually take me two more semesters to graduate as an engineer, but since I did build my first robots with Lego I'll take that as a compliment.

hey there jamerio

well yeah it did take me until the beginning of this year :)

What can I say, I'm a lazy cunt :D

well yeah it did take me until the beginning of this year :)

What can I say, I'm a lazy cunt :D

but not lazy enough to post two times!

when i was a kid i built a huuuuuge pirateship out of legos. it pwned. so i know how you feel.

well my robot was a box, as well, so hardly any difference. Except that i like cool robots and you prefer people with a lack of hygiene ;P

a lack of hygiene?

is that the damn swine flu over there? wtf is going on?

robots are cool? fucking hell...

you've never been sailing, have you?

i reckon it would be instant because I see a magnetic field like a rope connected to all the masses/planets, if magnetic fields dominate space they are always there everywhere around body masses, hence not fired, like light.

no form of energy (attractive force being one) can travel faster than the speed of light is what i heard

It would be instant IMO.

I don't like the fact that scientists say this and that when they can't even figure out a cure for the common cold on their own planet.

One thing time should tell you that when people look back on themselves they get a lot smarter and beliefs change.
Andif theories or work is build on an untrue belief then it means everything that stems from that is wrong.

Afterall, "very smart" people once swore the earth was flat.

http://www.thefinaltheory.com/images/Final_Th...pter_1.PDF

I dont have an opinion on it yet, but it sounds pretty cool.

What do you mean "I don't like the fact that scientists say this". Say what? And why would it be instant, everything we know at the moment points away from it being instant?

Jamerio knows everything mate.

Yawn I never said that. It just seems that way becasue the most taxing part of your days revole around deciding on what episode of Lost to watch.
Yes I scoff at lazy people with no ambition or drive. Big deal. No one cares what they think ayway.

8 months on the dole eh?

Yes while I was waiting for a visa application in America?
An before that I did 7 years at one of the worlds best gamedevs.

Who the fk are you, some non skilled 26 yr old long time forever unemployed loser probably still bumming money/rent off his parents who spends his day playing computa games and trying to stir trouble to take him away from his Icelandic Nightmare.

You're so biased and bitter it's hilarious. Still Karma put you where you are for a reason so just deal with it.
Mve on you sad c**t or come back when you gain something interesting to say.

What no speech about how you are like Martin Luther King or JFK?

Stop trying to assassinate him with your bullets of logic and common sense.

yeah because all the people here who aren't vain self obsessed deluded cunts with there own head lodged up their arse strut around constantly boasting what they've done and where they've been in life are still jobless and living at home.

You're a total fucking snob and think you're above everyone, you also seem to know everything about anything. You're a mega shit version of kdawg, sonic and punee all rolled into one. I dread to think you apply the same mentality in real life.

now Jamerio me with one of your posts and how me and my silly little troll friends come out and target you because we have nothing better to do, and well the usual predictable stuff you say.

nigga stole my line

what gamedev?

rare, he made some maps for goldeneye and worked on perfect dark then quit because their "ethic" changed or something.

He also earned six figures at 19 but then obviously he went a bit down hill since then to the dole for 8 months out of "choice"

wasnt goldeneye like the lowest budget game ever?

Prolly why jamerio worked on it, slightly more than dole to make maps etc.

He was only a tester on goldeneye. Making millions for his work!

six figures in dollars or african money?

Pound Sterling.

Of course, this is just his story.

Evolution explains why '"common" cold cant be cured that easily, or you dont believe in that either?

"I don't like the fact that scientists say this and that when they can't even figure out a cure for the common cold on their own planet."

classic jamerioism, that ones gold.

Didn't you know the same theroetical physicists involved in researching this topic were just doing it to skive off their real job of curing the common cold and making all the Lemsip in the world of no value?

yes, that one was painful.

because its so funny

It would be instant IMO.

I don't like the fact that scientists say this and that when they can't even figure out a cure for the common cold on their own planet

"IMO"? Think anyone gives a shit about your opinion on scientific matters? And what is the point of your second quote? You don't like the fact that scientist say this and that? In relation to what exactly? What are you on about, moron?

ROFL!!!!!

1. scientists arent sure whether gravity is an instant effect or has a pulsating effect.
2. scientists can figure out the cures for the common cold but the virus mutates every year rendering the remedy useless.
3. true =)

3 is mostly a myth.The Earth being the center of the universe on the other hand...

Why does Jamerio have 5 stars? Hes quite the misinformed motherfucker

because even clowns need appreciation

'Afterall, "very smart" people once swore the earth was flat.'

ppl have known about the world being round for well over 2000 years. twas only some theologians that claimed the world being flat in the middle ages

yeah but the greeks didnt have a mircowave and ready meals. they were so noob for their time, lolz!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes#The_A...reality.3F

All that Daily Mail reading is rubbing off on you.

immediately. we would just continue in a straight line, the moon would still revolve around us, and we'd all freeze to death before we hit the asteroid belt =)

so the asteroid belt will keep its current position even tho the sun doesn't exist?

lol whoops

seeing as the sun would never disappear completely, the only option would be that it collapses, however, this would still have alot of mass, and therefore continue exerting its influence on our orbit

and eventually forming a black hole when it gets to the 0th dimension.

not all stars become black holes, only the bigger ones.

it doesnt matter because of gravitational collapse

hypothetically

8mins imo

It would be basically instant or extremely close to instant as the "Speed Of Gravity" is much greater than the speed of light, at least 20billion times greater, but still not quite infinite.

A long and technical paper on the "Speed Of Gravity"
http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp

But, Speed of Dark > *

Read also:

"Aberration argument
It is often held, e.g. by Tom Van Flandern, that the speed of gravity must be at least 20 billion times that of light. This argument draws an analogy to the aberration of light, which causes the Sun to appear in a position slightly displaced from its actual position. Introducing a speed of light time delay into Newtonian gravitation would result in unstable planetary orbits.

But in general relativity, gravitomagnetism effects cancel out the effects of aberration. The weak stationary field limit of general relativity reproduces Newtonian gravity with instantanous action at a distance, despite the fact that the full theory gives a speed of gravity of c.

No current observations are inconsistent with general relativity."

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

don't worry about that, we'll never get to see it happen.

Don't be so sure, Humans!

Muhahahahaha!

According to general relativity gravity works at the speed of light, since it is the best theory we have at the moment I will need to go with that.

(Makes you wonder, why hasn't this shit been tested?)

Some people tried, but their results aren't really accepted.
They did get something like 0,8 - 1,2 times light speed.

lol, yeah I saw that. Strange, I didn't think it would be that hard, since everything is affected by it, I guess we just don't have instruments sensitive enough.

or any suns disappearing for no reason?

the sun dissapearing is an example for making the logical problem a bit easier to comprehend.

What if you were traveling at a speed say v = lim -> c away from an object
would the gravital force on you be the same as if you were stationary compared to the object?

Hell that even gets me confused and I figured out the respawntime of the mega in war§ow 8-)

Can you answer that question if you replace gravity with light?
then what is the relevance?

Ehm, that question is just a more logical one than "what if the sun dissapeared". And also one that we can try, allthough we prolly won't reach that speed we can reach one higher than 0 =)

why would i replace gravity with light? im not sure what you are asking me here :P

what's your point here? grav force weakens with distance. unless you have enough thrust to break the body's grav field, you'd be orbiting it at the speed of light.

no i meant also that gravital force seamed to be that for an object of the same mass but at a distance other than the current position of the space craft.

You know that it may be the instrument's fault? The more sensitive it is the less accurate results it gives (when dealing with something as elementary as particles).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg_principle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodingers_cat

Yes, that could be a reason.
And the more you think about it it becomes really hard to find a way to really measure it.
Hence that other result where they didn't even give an interval but said. It's somewhere between 20 billion times faster than light and infinite. Not really convincing either, and as it seems their entire physical approach may be flawed as well...

Yeah, apparently their's and others experiments have been inconclusive, and it's also very difficult or impossible to observe etc.

Also according to that wikipaedia article which has this, imo, crazy sentence:

"The weak stationary field limit of general relativity reproduces Newtonian gravity with instantanous action at a distance, despite the fact that the full theory gives a speed of gravity of c."

Instantaneous action at a distance, but doesn't exceed the speed of light?
So the effect would still be immediate!?

You are misreading it, it means that it reproduces newtonian gravity(which has instantanous speed), even though relativity's speed of gravity is the same as light.

Yeah, I guess I did..

that article is kinda shit

??? i thought the speed of gravity was the speed of light? what is all this controversy? am i ill informed!? :(((

no, just people embarrassing themselves

Hmm.. I guess that would make more sense.. In fact, it makes so much sense that I'm not even going to bother to check it ;D

hmm dunno really


my guess is we would all die very quickly regardless ;D

the question is not if, but when? and why?

well most meteors that could wipe out are planet we only know about after they have past to tbh we're gonna be dead before we know it :)

i'd know it, i have fast reactiontime

like


strafe strafe

gold armour

stake


spawn mh

RAPE

?"

strafe? don't lets be silly

you can consider global warming as a security maintenance in case of a sudden disappearance of the sun :>

all hail G.W. he is saving the earth :P

didnt know jamerios initials are G.W.

Games Williams mate. He just always spells it wrong as James.

guess that's one of the most fundamental and interesting topics in physics :) I'm convinced it's not instant, the question is rather is it bigger than c or not, and by how much? In case it's really bigger than c it brings up alot of trouble as the current limit for information transport would be breached.. then again you got quantum stuff that might break this anyway.. \:(/ lots of stuff that needs research and damn good theoretical physicists :)

I guess the effect could be instantaneous if the 'gravity particles' have no mass (so the speed of light wouldn't limit them).

I think he is referring to the theory that information is limited to the speed of light as well. And "the sun has gone" is definately information.

yup :>

no mass = no information

don't u think?

I don't know that much about the field, sorry.

The best I can say is that since energy and mass are related something with an energy but no mass could have information... Just a guess, though!

Particles with mass travel slower than the speed of light. Particles with no mass travel at the speed of light... such as light.

Yeah my bad.

How about negative mass then? There's no proof that they exist but there's been talk about tachions which could travel faster than light.

That stuff gets very complicated, not something you can discuss on a messageboard :)

Unless it's a Star Trek board. Tachions...

lol

"then again you got quantum stuff that might break this anyway.. "

Doesn't entanglement provide no way of passing information? You know what the result on the other end will be once you've checked your particle but you've not transmitted any information from A to B.

it would be in my ass.

to the left or the right of the giant dildo?

dont get confused, my arse aint like yours - no dildo up there.

how do you explain what they found at your place then? :p

wondered where that went, fucking pigs.

dont worry if any aliens try and steal our sun we can just release our biologically advanced super space monkeys to destroy them before they get far
if for some reason they take it then the world will conjoin all of the suns newspapers to make 1 giant sun with a candle inside accompanied by a machine converting the effects of global warming to make a new sun

Well you made more sense than Jamerio.

haha :)

bet it took you 30 mins to think of that

sure did

I'd hit it

Actually I've seen on Tv in about 1 billion years a bigger galaxy as ours will go threw the milky way. It doesnt mean all the planets will collide since there's a lot of vaccum inside but the remaining planets and stars will get reorganised in other systems because of the gravity changes and we may get in another solar system and have a different sun.
Our sun will die in 5 billion years so there are many chances it dies when the earth is very far.

A for effort, F for not getting the question ;)

He is not talking about the sun dieing as in going supernova and the white star or balck hole or what have you. Cause I don't think we would have a lack of gravity then.

He is taling about if the sun and all it's effects disappeared instantaneously.

who cares? and anyways, when you write:

"and all it's effects disappeared instantaneously? "

you're just equivocating the sentence unnecessarily lol

uhm, if noone cared about my reply (cept for you obviously) that would count double for a reply to a reply which noone cared about, if you catch my drift.

I don't think the last sentence was any equivocating either, if you took more than two seconds. You know there are two types of disarrearing. The one where the effects gradually go to zero, read fade away, which his replay was about, and jumping to zero which this entire post is about. ROFLMAO!

he wrote something slightly offtopic..so "who cares if it's not spot, spot on topic"? ..i thought his post was interesting nonetheless

after that i was wondering why you added "and all its effects", because that could also mean all its still pending effects.. but if you still think it makes perfect sense and isn't redundant, that ok with me..

The sun dieing or going supernova would not change its mass. The question is about the sun being removed completely (including its mass).

It thought I said that as well.

Anyway I think you would lose some mass in a supernova just not all of it

Um yea I'm going blind. Didn't read the 'not'.

0.3244533456 nano second

soo.. anyways.. i read this article some years ago.. was there something wrong with that info?

Just that it is not verified.

even if it isn't .. how did this get through?

"But experts say the indirect evidence that gravity propagates at the speed of light was already overwhelming. "It would be revolutionary if gravity were measured not to propagate at the speed of light - we were virtually certain that it must," says Lawrence Krauss of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio."

that's just one source, others claim it has to be ALOT higher (talking potencies rather than factors) else some effects cannot be explained, or some things would have to be instable and so on. as you can see by the error margin mentioned in that source, it could very well be alot slower or alot faster than c..

and my dog could very well be one of the still-unconvinced sources

The people sharing such stuff are not just random nature lovers talking out of their ass as you obviously do here, they're well-respected scientists and put quite some effort in these theories. Contrary to what you may believe they do not derive theories from the smell of their dogs' poo or the colour of a flower, they do think about this stuff with a scientific background. If it was so far off from a possible truth how come they're not being turned down easily by the other physicists?

"random nature lovers talking out of their ass as you obviously do here"
actually, I couldn't possibly be talking out of my ass since I haven't said anything about the 'truth' of the matter. But if you wanted to know, my physicist father and three world renowned scientist I'm acquainted with, not to mention Pelerman whom I'd have personally met had I been interested, would poop on your "sources". Oh wait, I believe the last one did.

"ok."

"OK?"

thats what he said

Are you his lawyer?

no comment

'But if you wanted to know, my physicist father and three world renowned scientist I'm acquainted with, not to mention Pelerman whom I'd have personally met'

You sound like this guy i know ... hes a cock.

Omg, does he sound like a cock all the time or just when somebody tells him he's talking out of his ass? :o

hehehe, they all sound like crackpots from my 5min searchspree, one guy tim flanigngnign whatever was associated with a site that took the "face" on mars as something to consider, lewl. and i don't know shit about physics

wouldn't be surprised if the real scientist cba to post random stuff on the internet or even bother to refute em claims if they be too cracky, no wonder they seem 50-50 w/e on the internet; and these other theories bear all resemblance of crack-conspiracy-smelling shit anyways. hehehehehe (but again i'm speaking out my ass from intuition of which i am fond)

afaik most stuff is published on internet servers where only the physicists have access to and share their knowledge and research project. one of the profs at my uni however told me that there's roughly 10,000 papers/day published (iirc) so it's hard to filter out anything :)

exactly, and those that don't "surrender" to that norm of *publishing*, but instead set up individual sites and lurk around the internet to gain supporters may seem bigger (more trustworthy) than they really are ;)

there is actually a whole dirty business of people turning out shit after shit paper, going to shit conferences getting shit peers to "review" them, etc. My boss actually submitted a 'cgi-gen' (by mit) paper to one of these 'conferences', alas, it was after the generator thing got popular, and they somehow spotted that it was TOO nonsensical =(

it's annoying, i've even seen a few adds on google that links to sites even i with my basic physics can see is full of shit. and still they seem to have bestseller books and good testimonials :[[

9000 of those papers are wikipedia compilations + translations =)

I doubt that ;-)

You seem to do a lot of the same "research" that I do, i.e. mostly on the net and reading up on everything and then weighing them up against each other to find the correct one.

Some subjects like this one are fairly easy to disconcern, others, are harder. I had a big argument recently with one of my best friends regarding Microwave ovens. He says that microwaved food is harmful, as the mircowaves actually break apart and rearrange water molecules, and when you body absorbs that "infected" water, it breaks down your molecular structure (i.e. cancer) He "quoted" lots of studies that were done with plants, and all the plants that were fed with microwaved water died.

When he first told me this I was shocked, because if it was true I was practically fucked (I eat a large amount of things made in the mircowave) but at the same time I was not completely convinced, so I checked online.

Here comes conflicting studies, conspiracy theories, word of mouth etc. etc. I could find no two sources that actually agreed with anything. I struggled with it for days and came up with an answer of sorts. Mine was that microwaves do not affect the water (no radiation is left behind) and that meals cooked in the microwave is more healthy because it only affects water in food, not the actual food and retains most vitamins. My friend still disagrees with me though.

Of course, this subject is a lot more black and white. If anyone says gravity doesn't travel at the speed of light, they should make us a new physics model, heh. Until then they should shut the fuck up.

Ummm, sorry for the long reply, I just wanted to say "hey! I do that too!"

<3

But the internet really is a breeding ground for shit theories and conspiracies - I think i'm gonna be more alert from now on; people seem to be readily buying into it and enforce it. (just like my mom told me, to which i would always easily reply that I could sort out the good stuff - now I'd be *claiming* it a bit more uneasy)

I've actually been acquainted with the microwave "anecdotal evidence" since my father always has been, and still is a skeptic towards microwaves.. When they came on the market he had a feeling it could affect and change the structure of the molecules in a harmful way, so he'd rather unconclusive aviod it until it was "proven" to be safe.. For him i guess it was one of those cases (later) where he had a hard time changing his own opinion after the circumstances had changed and new facts became available. He's generally skeptical to all things that might be slightly harmful though.. But i guess it's a common error to not, at least honestly, reevaluate ones own convictions/beliefs on current circumstances and evidence.

More scary, did you know that microwaves were banned in Russia until quite recently, due to the dangers it could have on you.

*sigh* the internet, well back in the old days, you knew one crackpot theories and you stuck with it, now we get loads of crackpot theories. I've had a discussion with some guy who says that gravity was less thousands of years ago, and thats how the pyramids were built. I mean wtf!? The guys isn't stupid either, I just dunno how you can believe in something which makes no sense at all.

always makes me reflect and try to figure out what my errors are, to no avail.. the thing is that many of the people postulating these arnt really stupid, or it does not seem to correlate that obviously.. almost to the point where one thinks that maybe higher intelligence can quickly lead to finding arbitrary patterns where there is none, and exploiting the bias of finding info and facts that connect and amplify their original seed of belief, which i really think is whats happening. but there is probably even more to it as there is so much to account for, lists of cognitive biases is really useful tho - ive regularly started checking it now and then to remember what they all are ;)

do you have a feeling that this thread's controversy is limited to outside the scientific community as well?

Pretty much, scientists would use whatever information they have available at the time. The only people who would be thinking differently would be people who are researching new theories or trying to conduct experiments.

8 mins? bs, ain't seen that fucker in weeks

Length of Day 7h 50m
Tomorrow will be 4m 54s shorter.

lol finland

whatever, rainboy

So do you have to pay rent on those igloo's?

igloo is the inuktitut word for a house of any kind

Gravitation isn't instantaneous, it's a "wave" so we would lose gravitation and spear off into space only about 7/8 mins later. By us, i mean pleanet earth, of course.

afaik that is still up to discussion, some researchers claim it was alot faster.

I think many Scientologists would be convinces with that sort of language.

I thought scientologists only concern are black clothes and fuckin Katie Holmes ^^

I KNOW MATHS

SO DU AJ!

I NO UR A CLOSET HOMO LOL :)

uh?

Randomness. =O

i agree with that statement

there's an interesting equivocalness usually involved when using the word controversial, usually the strongest two that stand out in are smt like "controversial publically/politically/ w/e" OR "controversial WITHIN the community of people who actually know what they are talking about" - funny how these get mixed up all the time, even in "serious" media xD

I guess Mars and Mercury would come ask Earth if we wanted to hang out, Neptune is kinda cool so he could also join if he wanted. Jupiter and Saturn are such fatasses so they would be all by themselves, maybe Uranus would join them, who knows what kinda stuff those planets are up to. Pluto and Venus are totaly gay homosexuals, so the Earth, Mercury and Mars would be like "See u later". Maybe they would hang out with Uranus...

Alaska can come too!

Hehe.. one of the best flash vids ever :9

AAAAAAA ZE MOTHERLAND!

AAAAAAA ZE MOTHERLAND!

You sound like somebody else I know ... he's a retard.

hahaha personal vendetta! =]]

nah, i'm just saying

im gona make u eat my shit then shit out my shit then make u eat your shit which is made up out of my shit that i made u eat....

you play CS or WoW?

sorry..was bored :(

np m8, golden esr rule #1: never apologize

pull a Jameiro instead

lol

if it disappeared then i'd be thinking "rofl..."

and I'm sure many random RA3/CPMA players would be too.

do i see a rage pattern here

if it disappeared all the animals would know instantly and start running out in space!

I bet i wouldnt notice, I would just keep sitting in my basement playing Entropia...


probe, probe, probe, claim, extract, repeat

It takes the same amount of time. this phenomena was under discusion in the swedish science illustrated some time ago. The hypotesis was tried when data calculated with the "infinite-rule" failed for launched spacecrafts reaching the outer parts of our solar system. Somehow gravity, as explained in the magazine "just didn't catch up". From what I recall they applied the "c-speed gravity" or what ever they called it and things summed up.

seems kinda logical don't you think that something 150 millions km away just dissapears and gravity dissapears even though nothing can travel faster than light. Strange still =)

If gravity wasn't an instant effect then I don't really understand how pulsars work. If the effect of gravity takes time to propagate then there would be an angular effect between the two bodies and they would change speed significantly.

Also the other obvious thing is that light is affected by gravity but gravity is not affected by itself so it's almost meaningless to compare one to the other. Gravity cannot be affected by itself because we can feel the gravitational effect of a black hole whereas light from the black hole cannot escape.

Also I see the obvious causality problem with the effect of gravity travelling faster than light, meaning you could use gravitational effects to send messages into the past. There must be an explanation, I guess I need to study the subject a lot more before coming to any conclusions.

That was the stupidest thing I've read in a long time.
Light has no mass.
Mass curves space however, causing light to "bend".

He knows light has no mass; read #116. What exactly is stupid about his post?

Gravity is a force that two objects apply on eachother, which is proportional to the mass of both objects. And since light has no mass, it isn't affected by gravity. But that wasn't what he meant I came to realize after his second post.

I do know a little about Physics thanks! Four years of studying to get two masters degrees. My point is that the original question of this thread poses a big paradox to me.

If the effects of Gravity travel faster than light, then it breaks causality. I could send morse code through gravitational effects by moving a mass up and down on one side of a box. On the other side of the box I have sensitive equipment to measure the gravitational change of the mass. Therefore I am sending information (via gravity morse code) faster than the speed of light. This should be impossible, otherwise it breaks causality, so how can Gravity's effect travel faster than the speed of light across the box?

My other point was that claiming Gravity must travel at the speed of light was meaningless because light is affected by gravity. Yes you can use space-time geometry as one way of describing the effects of General Relativity, but that's somewhat irrelevant. I used the example of a black hole to show that laws affecting light do not necessarily work on Gravity. Yes it might seem obvious already, but the point of the example was to show this obviousness since there are so many claims that Gravity must travel at the speed of light.

This is an interesting topic for me, and I've studied a lot of Physics. I'm not sure why that makes me stupid...

Ok cool

Smart thing with the morse coded =)

What wouldn't add up is that gravity can't affect light unless it was faster than light, and at the same time stuff can't move faster than light.

"My other point was that claiming Gravity must travel at the speed of light was meaningless because light is affected by gravity. Yes you can use space-time geometry as one way of describing the effects of General Relativity, but that's somewhat irrelevant."

Hmm, why is that irrelevant? Doesn't that way of looking at it make sense of the apparent paradox? mm ok now my head is spinning :p

It's a way of picturing the effect of gravity but it doesn't help you work out the speed of gravity?

not me nope i just get more and more confused ;) but I thought you had a feeling that gravity was not = c I can see how it is hard to show, but doesn't the theory say that it should be at c? (which would mean the ones claiming c is not gspeed has the burden of proof)

If gravity travelled at c then pulsars would show this up very clearly. They don't!

;)

oh yeah and while I'm on it, great journal, I even plussed it and I rarely plus =)

Hey dood, I'm going to Prague for a holiday in February , whats cool to do there? (The "unofficial" non-tourist cool stuff - I will be with someone who speaks the language)

omg lots of comments on nothing =P

Time spent scanning useless posts is less beneficial than time spent gaming online I'd say.. Be gone and get your life going already

The CPL is dead.

in all fairness, it wasn't when he made that post...

Well that's why I wrote that.

It's his initials

Well I doubt he goes by the initials all the time, more likely he just used them (if they, after all, are like that) to troll ESR off.

He used them, then CPL asked him not too when he played in the CPL and he used CPLains if I remember correctly (Look at the edits). When CPL died I guess he changed it back.

thus now, I can bug him about it.

Elton John - Don't let the sun go down on me

actually it would take 8 minutes also, the effects of gravity would travel at approximately the speed of light, so as the last ray of light the earth, second after the earth will not just start floating into space

We don't understand gravity. We just use it. Under the assumption "gravitons" (lol) can't travel faster than the speed of light the same as any other particle (which is a big assumption) Tellus would be slingshot out into empty space after 8 minutes. The Moon would accompany us, as usual, but we would be completely without all light except starlight. If some individuals posessed willpower and talent, a bunch of generation ships would be built before the greenhouse effect would give in to the cold of space, and a few of us could survive.

But knowing humanity, first we'd probably fight a few wars over who gets to go, since we've lost our survival instinct and instead cherish the killer instict.

Sometimes I fucking cringe at the topics you guys discuss.

Yeah it was supposed to be just a little braintease but it spurned into a bigass debate =)

Don't EVER do that again !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

... white socks would be black

So I would have to wear white socks with black pants and shoes because they were in fact black? Or would the pants and shoes turn white as well? Jamerio would be SO confused!

I'm sure someone's made the comment already, sif I'm going to read the thread for it.

If the sun disappeared completely...
most gamers wouldn't notice.

that the best you've got?

space already expands faster than the speed of light.
gravity is the warping of space.
why can't space collapse faster than the speed of light?

no information can travel faster than c (or at c)?
it's not traveling -- space is changing.

"space already expands faster than the speed of light"

how do we know that? physics start to equal theology somewhere around there =)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_universe

the universe is 13.7 (with an uncertainty of two billion [with an uncertainty of one billion]) billion years old (don't steal that -- it's a title of a chapter in my book!!!!).

however, we might have observed light from much, much further distances:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_of_the_universe

this is not proven, but the fact that space is expanding is fact.
facts are facts.

so none of you physicists are going to rebut my post?
well, I'll make a short addendum, too, so I don't have to check back to find whether someone's argued what would otherwise bring up this point:

if you subscribe to string theory, which would require gravity as a force, then you also need to take into account that space can tear, and possibly mend itself, so that space previously occupied by our star would effectively shorten, causing information travel to seem greater than c.

this also applies under the standard model.

omg would be so cool! god im sick of gravity.. bus rides too for that matter.

We would still have gravity :P

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448134/

also 8mins

when the gravity catches up with the light, will it make a sound?

Quite possibly. If the sun just went POP, GONE, the gravitational wave would ripple through the Earth causing at the very least Earthquakes, with the accompanying sound, death and destruction...

where do you get this idea?

you claim to know the nature of gravity? yeah right.
I'll just say: HUMBUG.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

what happens when the sound barrier is broken?

a shockwave is created, accompanied by a sound wave with a very high intensity and pressure.

could reaching the speed of light (something that's impossible for anything with mass) create a shockwave accompanied by intense light?

finally, just for a clarification: it is IMPOSSIBLE to catch up to a beam of light.

well yeah I think the whole question is kind of stupid (and was meant as a joke anyway), and someone else can probably verify this. But one thing to bear in mind is that relativity says the speed of light is always constant, so if you were shining a beam of light out from you while moving it would always speed away from you at the speed of light no matter how fast you were going. Therefore you could never "catch up" to it like you do with the sound waves (compressing them into a sonic boom).
And yeah, you going at the speed of light is pretty impossible, in fact I think you'd relativistically turn into a black hole on the way because of length contraction and mass increase.

bump

cunt

Yes?

I like how you respond to being called a cunt...

I would expect it to be about when the light ends.

I wonder how long it would take before we all were dead after that.

it would take quite a while to die actually, artificial heating will surely keep some of us alive for quite some time, running out of food would be the real problem.

I don't think there has been a movie with this happening. There should be :P

I suspect nuclear reactors would be buildt, right?

the sun will die in a blast and it will end life on earth also.

zombie apocalypse please

since the speed of light is defined by magnetic permitivity and dielectricity, both electric and magnetic fields cannot change faster

we would all be swedes

best answer

If the Sun disappeared completely... would gamers notice?

Someone has been seeing Dany Boyle's: Sunshine

:)

We would all stick it where the sun don't shine.

doesn't matter. we'd die soon.

just like anything else, when something is instantly removed its effects are instantly canceled as well.

but as far as how fast these effects would be felt or noticed at a certain distance? one would assume..at least as far as current knowledge allows..known mathematical equations will give you the tentative answer...till our knowledge expands and those answers are completed.

but since we as humans will probably not know everything before our galaxy fully collides with another (which is happening as we speak) and is destroyed... there is no way of knowing the real answer.

I really have no idea, but after reading some of the comments on this thread I am very much inclined to finding out.