Conversation
Notices
-
So there might be a particle that can move faster than light? What's it made out of, Rainbow Dash?
Friday, 23-Sep-11 08:14:44 UTC from TTYtter-
@ceruleanspark Is it tachyons?
-
@starlightbolt whatever the hay a "Tachyonic Neutrino" is. I don't really...get quantum physics.
-
@ceruleanspark Neither do quantum physicists.
-
@scribus "If you are wondering about theories that allow tachyonic [faster than light] neutrinos the least wacky one I can find is that neutrinos can take 'shortcuts off the brane through large extra dimensions.'" Oh god how did I get here I am not good with computer.
-
@ceruleanspark They exist in imaginary time, so they do not use the same time reference that we do. Thus they can move faster than light... which I do not agree with the theory of the speed of light being a limit on velocity myself. Some theories say they even move backwards in time so it appears they are moving faster than the speed of light
-
@ceruleanspark What's a brane? !derp
-
@starlightbolt I looked up "Imaginary Time" and now I'm more confused that I was before. Imaginary time is a form of time that runs perpendicular to regular time? The X to Time's Y on a cartesian grid? Or is it the Z?
-
@scribus I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING ANYMORE. UP IS DOWN, TIME IS LEFT. BLACK IS UP
-
@ceruleanspark It's the Y axis... I'm a control engineer so I am used to things being in the imaginary plane a lot. You can pretty much think of this in the Laplase domain, but I don't think that is gonna help you very much either XD
-
@ceruleanspark Another theory is that they have imaginary mass, and so the square of their mass is a negative number. So their slowest speed is the speed of light and as they lose energy they actually speed up. I don't know why I am so interested in dumb things like particle physics that don't affect me XD
-
@starlightbolt It's some kind of... dimensional conversion formula?
-
@ceruleanspark It's something that you can use instead of time. If you have a function based on time domain, that is too complex, you can convert it to the Laplase domain, which is pretty much imaginary time, then solve it... I'm not sure why imaginary time is easier to use it just is XD
-
@starlightbolt You lost me at "Something" So is imaginary time actually imaginary, or does it have defined rules based on some constants?
-
@ceruleanspark Time . . . perpendicular . . . Well, then, we're up to a time square, next stop - Time Cube!
-
@scribus Time Cube is my favourite thing on the internet.
-
@ceruleanspark I keep waiting for the people behind the "Cube" film series to produce it.
-
@ceruleanspark it means √(-1) which is i... so the imaginary part squared is in the negative plane... if that helps at all... this is an extremely hard concept to explain I am realizing XD
-
@scribus Wasn't that what Cube 2: Hypercube was about? A tesseract?
-
@ceruleanspark It was alternate dimensiony, at least... It's been a while, it could have had time-elements and yes, it did, why did I forget that? 6_9 !derp
-
@scribus You'd probably enjoy Primer, if you haven't seen it.
-
@ceruleanspark I don't think so, but it sounds familiar...
-
@scribus It's a really good, if mind-buggeringly confusing movie.
-
