/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12526826

65KiB, 590x393, particle accelerator.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Particles accelerators can reach 99,99% of speed of light

Owner Thu 31 Dec 01:09:47 2020 No.12526826 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12526923 >>12528003 >>12528212 >>12528740 >>12529895 >>12531948

a particle can reach 99,99% of speed of light in a particle accelerator

why can't it surpass this speed even when there is a force forcing the particle to accelerate?

there must be an opposing force to it

what's the nature of this opposing force?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 01:36:35 No.12526923 Report

Quoted By: >>12528730

>>12526826
because the quantum foam/planck field/ 11th dimensions gravity is interacting with it which is was all bosons and fermions are theorized to generated from.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 06:26:43 No.12528003 Report

Quoted By: >>12528306 >>12528730

>>12526826
there is no opposing force, it's just that F=ma doesn't hold close to the speed of light
the relativistic form of the equation, which does hold at relativistic speeds is
$<br />f^\mu = \frac{dp^\mu}{d\tau}<br />$
where $f^\mu$ is the four-force exerted on the particle by, for example an electric field, and $p^\mu$ the particle's four-momentum.
This equation makes F=ma hold at speeds small compared to the speed of light, but close to the speed of light adding energy to a particle simply makes it asymptotically approach c and increases its mass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 07:53:25 No.12528212 Report

Quoted By: >>12528621

>>12526826
we're not allowed to

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 08:51:36 No.12528306 Report

Quoted By: >>12528489

>>12528003
tl;dr is: learn special relativity kids

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 10:50:25 No.12528489 Report

Quoted By: >>12531320

>>12528306
"Special relativity for kids"
Sounds the perfect present for christmas to any child.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 12:01:26 No.12528621 Report

Quoted By:

>>12528212
this but unironically

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 12:42:58 No.12528730 Report

Quoted By: >>12529770 >>12529927

>>12526923
quantum foam was proven not to exist decades ago.

>>12528003
>increases its mass.
Nope. Fermilab proved that mass doesn't increase with acceleration.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 12:47:27 No.12528740 Report

Quoted By: >>12531336

>>12526826
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezU-zfjm7ew

This video will explain the entire concept in both an in-depth and superficially intuitive way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 19:29:32 No.12529770 Report

Quoted By:

>>12528730
The distinction is that mass increases with speed rather than acceleration.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 20:11:29 No.12529895 Report

Quoted By: >>12530985

>>12526826
C (the universal constant, what is popularity referred to as the speed of light) is really just moving one Planck length (the smallest possible unit of distance) over one Planck time (the smallest possible unit of time). So the best way to think of C is that it's the fastest possible speed anything can travel through both time and space.

Really though any object with mass (no matter how small) can ever actually travel at C because any mass, no matter how small, requires a non-zero acceleration to move through space time. Basically, you would need literally infinite energy to accelerate anything with mass to C. A particle accelerator can get a particle to 99.999~% of C but every additional bit of energy it applies to a mass will only add another factor of .9 or whatever to it.

In mathematical terms basically, any object whose mass is non zero requires an infinite amount of energy to reach C velocity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Dec 2020 20:27:03 No.12529927 Report

Quoted By:

>>12528730
>quantum foam was proven not to exist decades ago.
that's not true. generators pull electricity from the quantum foam. you should know better then what they tell you or what you read based on lab results.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 01 Jan 2021 02:02:53 No.12530985 Report

Quoted By: >>12531607

>>12529895
>C (the universal constant, what is popularity referred to as the speed of light) is really just moving one Planck length (the smallest possible unit of distance) over one Planck time (the smallest possible unit of time). So the best way to think of C is that it's the fastest possible speed anything can travel through both time and space.
Are the definitions of both Planck length and Planck time not derived from C? And the definitions of both Planck length and Planck time not from one another? I never understood this. What came first to form the definitions of these? I assume some experimentation with C, but what specifically?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Nonsymmetric velocity time dilat (...).gif, 122KiB, 256x256

Anonymous Fri 01 Jan 2021 04:56:07 No.12531320 Report

Quoted By:

>>12528489
It's how Santa makes it to every house in one night

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 01 Jan 2021 05:04:52 No.12531336 Report

Quoted By:

>>12528740
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fIh7hbhpxzI

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 01 Jan 2021 07:34:19 No.12531607 Report

Quoted By:

>>12530985
Definition of C broken down like you said. We define the values for a Planck Length and a Planck time based on C because that's a value we can actually measure, whereas the Planck length and Planck time are far too small to be visibly measured. The hard part was figuring out that light was traveling at C and not some arbitrary number, which is what relativity and special relativity deal with basically.

But yes, by measuring and understanding C, we can assign a value to planck length and time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 01 Jan 2021 10:50:37 No.12531948 Report

Quoted By:

>>12526826

They aren't massless. It's impossible for something with mass to hit C.

Light, being massless, can attain C.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches