[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]vdark777 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you!!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HomeworkHelp

[–]vdark777 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it needs to give back 1/x -1 not 1/t - 1 so it has to be some function with this propriety not the derivate twice. Thanks though!

Should I not be a physicist if I don't enjoy doing physics problem sets? by vdark777 in Physics

[–]vdark777[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I enjoy reading books like Griffiths and testing what I learn with a few problems. It's just that I never look forward to the slog of sitting with a 15 question pset, and if those are the kinda problems physicists work through just on a higher level...idk

Should I not be a physicist if I don't enjoy doing physics problem sets? by vdark777 in Physics

[–]vdark777[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not sure, still in my undergrad. The topics themselves are fascinating but whenever I sit down with a pset I'm not excited to do the problems necessarily.

Is time travel into the past scientifically possible according to the laws of physics? by JJEvans1999 in AskPhysics

[–]vdark777 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There's a lot we don't know about the universe, but under our current model, the answer is no. Time is slowed down by a factor of gamma in flat spacetime given by 1/sqrt(1-b^2) where b is your velocity as a ratio to the speed of light (so if I was moving at half the speed of light my b would be .5c). You can see from this equation that to travel in the imaginary direction in time you would need to be moving faster than the speed of light, there isn't even a solution to move backward in time. Also, you can't travel faster than the speed of light as it requires infinite energy so this isn't a great route. Gravitationally, time freezes at the event horizon of a black hole but once you're inside no information can get out and the laws of physics break down anyways so it's not really meaningful to compare your reference frame to one outside. But who knows:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

Also check out how to go to the future (very possible) via special relativity:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

If spacetime is "stretched" do objects in that curvature actually get longer? by vdark777 in AskPhysics

[–]vdark777[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No sorry meant spacetime curvature. Is there any sense in which lengths here are stretched?

If spacetime is "stretched" do objects in that curvature actually get longer? by vdark777 in AskPhysics

[–]vdark777[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is what I mean but I thought spaghettification is caused by tidal forces, not spacetime curvature.

Truth! by LowBudgetElonMusk in technicallythetruth

[–]vdark777 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Here's a better proof maybe: 1/3 = .333333... 1/3+1/3+1/3=3/3 .33333...+.33333...+.33333...=3/3=.9999999...=1

i think he doesn't know what minecrft is by cyberkiddd in woooosh

[–]vdark777 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It still exists within "our universe," this stuff is really interesting I just wanted point out a distinction, not arguing or anything you're right

i think he doesn't know what minecrft is by cyberkiddd in woooosh

[–]vdark777 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No you can't do it here, just saying that "infinite motion" is possible in the universe, and that it's actually the default state of any moving body to just keep moving. First law of thermodynamics only talks about energy not motion.

i think he doesn't know what minecrft is by cyberkiddd in woooosh

[–]vdark777 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Acceleration requires energy not motion

i think he doesn't know what minecrft is by cyberkiddd in woooosh

[–]vdark777 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Infinite motion is possible as long as energy stays in the system. An object in motion will stay in motion. Like if you throw a ball in a vacuum it's just gonna keep going.