Comments by "Dr Gamma D" (@DrDeuteron) on "Kyle Hill" channel.

  1. if I had a nickel for every time I used the chaos hand move to get some strange.....
    1
  2. no, because you're moving through Lorentz contracted space...until you stop and realize you didn't age over a very looooong trip.
    1
  3. simultaneity is relative, so you can't just say "they accelerate at the same speed" without specifying a reference in which to match velocities and times.
    1
  4. the fireball is a lot hotter than surface of the sun, more like 20x hotter than lightning (which is already much brighter than the sun)...but it's quickly hidden behind the opaque shockwave....which is heating air to >100,000K, so it's really bright, too.
    1
  5. The string is a physical manifestation of the local (inertial) length coordinate. Since the ships remain with constant separation in Earth's frame, they must spread out in their local rest frame, breaking the string. Since the string breaking is relativistically invariant (it can't break in one frame and not in another), it brings home the fact that Lorentz contraction is real physics, and not a matter of "perspective", as some like to incorrectly argue.
    1
  6. That the two ships travel at the same speed at the same time (for Earth) is neither "appearance" nor is it a "hypothesis", it is a "stipulation". So any analysis you do where it is not stone-cold-fact is garbage.
    1
  7. There are no inertial frames at "c", so the question "how does a photon experience time" is not askable, and any apparent insight gained from considering it is based on a fallacy, and is probably misleading.
    1
  8. And his technical accuracy.
    1
  9. 🚨 with emergency stop buttons under them every 20 feet or so is standard in accelerators. So is double door 🚪 key 🔑 interlock during operations, preceded by a closed search of all spaces by search experts …which can take hours per arc in large place like DESY or CERN
    1
  10. I suppose some people don’t like to be told what to think. I wonder if AI will ever have that problem
    1
  11. Ppl misuse the telephone and the mail. Even books (maybe more so) Never had a Nigerian prince send me a telegraph, though
    1
  12. or, the plane of simultaneity from the rear ship sees the front ship in the future (relative to Earth's plane of simultaneity), thus the front ship is moving faster.
    1
  13. Light doesn't have a rest frame. Such questions cannot be answered, so we don't ask them.
    1
  14. if the nose and tail have same acceleration w.r.t to the launch pad: then, yes.
    1
  15. infinite tensile strength violates special relativity. See: Born Rigidity.
    1
  16. the PEP is the whole point of degenerate matter.
    1
  17.  @logicplague  I checked from another account and I believe I was censored for using the word (which I can write here, duh: D generate) which in quantum mechanics means all low energy states (with multiplicity > 1) are filled... that is, you achieve the maximal spatial packing consistent with the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Since the minimum size of a state goes as 1/m, the ration of the size of a white dwarf to a neutron star is roughly (mass neutron) / (mass electron)....around 2,000. Very cool.
    1
  18. It can join fusion power and high Tc superconductors in the museum of hype, while quantum computing waits in the wings
    1
  19.  @ingerasulffs so close
    1
  20. AI is stupid af. draws weird picture tho.
    1
  21. It falls apart b/c relativistic mass is not a thing (anymore). No matter how fast the string moves, it's still just string at rest in its rest frame.
    1
  22. that is a major pitfall of learning relativity. Lorentz contraction is not a result of visual perspective. It's because a space slice of spacetime at equal time in the moving frame is contracted w.r.t. to the non-moving frame. Since the distance btw the ships is constant in the initial rest frame, they pull apart in the moving frame. The paradox is resolved when you remember the slice of contracted space is not simultaneous in Earth frame.
    1
  23. cut, but just a sliver off the back. Light is faster than the ladder, always.
    1
  24.  @spacemanspiff2137  When confused, I just do the Lorentz transformations. Step 1 is define "Events" in one coordinate system. Put the ladder entering the barn, at the entrance, at (t=0,x=0) in the barn frame and (t'=0, x'=0) in the ladder frame. Define other events. Transform them with the (linear) equations and ponder. All will be revealed. Think about Minkowski diagrams. Eventually, some degree of intuition is developed.... I first studied this in 1985, so it takes a while.
    1
  25. check on the Helium Flash: it takes a lot of energy to convert degenerate matter into normal matter, and then there is gravity's binding energy (about 20% of the baryonic mass).
    1
  26. The difference between the speed of light an a particle beam is m2/2E2, os LEPs electrons were faster than LHCs protons, but lower energy. Ofc fermilabs neutrino beams are the fastest fermions in the world.
    1
  27. no that';s right. we can go back to newspapers and radio. let AI burn the fossil fuels arguing with itself.
    1
  28. Suppose you've reached 99% c going Galactic North and coast for a bit. Now you are ready for the final push.The speed of light in every direction is still 299,792,458 m/s....so in which direction should you go to try to break it?
    1
  29. No. Transverse dimension aren't weird.
    1
  30. relativity is not about "perspective" in the traditional sense. In the non-traditional sense (a coordinate diffeomorphism)?....that's a different....perspective.
    1
  31. but they don't. The stipulation that they accelerate equally in Earth-frame means they're on two separate trajectories.
    1
  32. The claim that 2 ships act as 1 is false.
    1
  33. You can't say "the whole thing moves at the same speed" without specifying a frame of reference. If the acceleration is constant in the Earth's frame, then the speeds are always the same. That means the speeds are different in either ships' rest frame, because the times in the 2 ships are different (by (v2-v1)*(x2-x1)/c^2, for small |v2-v1| ).
    1
  34. you cant think of anything more au currant?
    1
  35. solar or sidereal revolutions. btw: the correct answer is 1: 3 rotations and 1 revolution. Nice work college board of woke dopes.
    1
  36. we all want Kyle's follicle brilliance, but alas....
    1
  37. If they were a single entity (in their restframe), they would notice nothing. But: Earth would see the two ships accelerating differently (violating the set-up in the paradox). The rear ship would be 'faster' than the front ship, and that speed difference would account for the Lorentz contraction of the string.
    1
  38.  @johnbennett1465  The problem with your analysis is when you say "all 4 marks are accelerated at the same rate"...or v1(t1) = v2(t2) = v3(t3) = v4(t4) = v with t1=t2=t3=t4. If that holds in the Earth frame, then in the ship frame t1' > t2' > t3' > t4', so that position 4 reaches "v" before 3 (and so on). The relativity of simultaneity is the root of all SR paradoxes.
    1
  39.  @johnbennett1465  But they are not accelerating at the same rate in their own rest frame. In fact, in your example, there is no frame in-which they are all accelerating at the same rate. In the Earth's frame (1+2)/2 accelerates at the same rate as (3+4)/2 (the COM of the ships remain equally spaced for earth), but (2-1) and (4-3) are Lorentz contracted by gamma. For the ships' frames, (2-1) and (4-3) are fixed (the rest length of the ship), with the COM's separating: (3+4)/2 - (1+2)/2 expands by gamma. There is no compensation for speed-of-light delays, as that is totally unnecessary and of no use in thought experiment.
    1
  40. please use American to pronounce ferreners' names.
    1
  41. Just say, "I don't get it" and try to learn. This self-esteem-movement inspired "there is no right answer" may work in gender studies, but it is an epic fail in physics.
    1
  42.  @TristynRusselo  we have the tech, it is proven.
    1
  43. Of course it will be verbose, as it ingests more verbose writing than terse, because reasons. Strunk and white is very short.
    1
  44. Simultaneity is reference frame dependent, so if they have the same (non-trivial) profile in Earth's frame, their profiles differ in all frame moving w.r.t. to Earth. Thus: your 3rd sentence asserts a contradiction, and all conclusions from it are wrong.
    1
  45.  @N3onDr1v3  said observer in 3rd paragraph would see ships moving apart. There are problems with his minkowski diagram. (1) He labels the time axis "y"...awkward (2) While he describes the resolution of the paradox qualitatively by showing the tilted line-of-simultaneity intersecting the worldlines further apart, he skips the fact that the tic marks are dilated by sqrt((1+v^)/(1-v^2)), which mitigates the effect...but doesn't cancel it out.
    1
  46. Moving a spot across the moon at >c is meaningless, because nothing is moving. It's not much different from: I am thinking about Mars. Now Venus. See: the place I was thinking about moved faster than the speed-of-light.
    1
  47. No. the nose and tail a single ship do not move at the same simultaneous speed in the initial rest frame, which violates the condition of the paradox, hence all conclusion based on that proposition are inconsistent.
    1
  48. "same time" according to who's clock? (Earth's...but do the front and rear ships' clocks differ from Earth's in exactly the same way?).
    1
  49. But the conditions are different. The problem stipulates that each rocket follows identical v(t) profiles in Earth's reference frame: so they must, by definition do that. No such constraint applies to the nose and tail of an individual rocket. Moreover, that a rocket undergoes length contraction implies it can not meet that constraint.
    1
  50. exactly one spaceship separation.
    1