Davide Writes: (The email is posted as such. SO, sorry for the telegraphic language and poor spelling and grammar)
“Hello there i have one more question,a crazy one:) according to Einstein we need a enormous amount of energy to push matter at a speed of light,now for me the real problem there is that an atoms at a speed of light will break a part right?so even if we will find a way to push it,we will still failed.I was wander are we looking to the right way?is it photon, so the world of small with no mass only work? now here my crazy question,lets speculate a bit,we have two red dwarf pretty close to earth Barnard’s Star” only “5.9 ly and Wolf 359 7.7ly a baby step compere the universe,if we can send a same kind of mission the we have done with Stardust Nasa’s comet sample and collect a piece the size of a soccer ball back to earth,we could work on it outside earth atmosphere in the space base.Since we can’t go in the first place at a speed of light let’s says that the all deal will last 150 year to go and back,(assuming that we use a new energy to go bit faster)in the mean time the space base will be pretty developed and maybe we even found a new power to push to the speed of light(i remind you that we are speculate)we could put our hands on the sample using electromagnetism so that we avoid any risks and then send it at a seed of light.What i try to say is that a single atom is weak but billions of it together is a different story,here an example, lets imagine to make a spherical shape out of Lego(the toy) and send it in to space at a great speed,it will break pretty soon,now we make another one but we glue the piece together,it will last bit longer,again another with glue and a put net around it will last even longer so instead of a Lego we use our sample,the glue in the inside is the immense mass that will have (piece of red dwarf) net outside the immense gravitational pull ,now do you think that it will be enough to keep it together at a speed of light?regardless the energy that we need to push it? after all even in the past we believed that going faster than a speed of sound a plane will brake a part or something bad could happen,instead only a big BUM wen we reach it and nothing more,so maybe if we can go faster than light nothing will happen,or maybe we find a new way to travel,we can even give a name for fun “a speed of matter” what do you think about it?i know it sound like sci fi but hey physics it self is blowing mind science right? Thank you kindly for your time:)”
I don’t like to respond now.
Responses from visitors invited
A body travels 100m in first 2 seconds and 104 in the next 4 second.how far will it gimove in the next four second if the acceleration is uniform?
A body travels 100m in first 2 seconds and 104 in the next 4 second.how far will it move in the next four seconds if the acceleration is uniform?
- HOW IS CARDIAC ARREST RELATED WITH PHSICS?
- WHAT IS THE PRINCIPLE OF SPHYGMOMANOMETER?
Why the blood pressure in humans is greater at the feet than at the brain.
From my very basic “understanding” of particle physics and our search for hidden particles something keeps nagging at me; is it possible that quantity/quality of particles/boson are tied to time? In other words can the absolute age of any particular piece of matter such as when that particle was actually formed after the big bang determine the strengths of force/bond? IE: “Matter” that we have in our area of the universe is “younger” than matter in the area/time of the center of the big bang. And could the ultimate “aging” of matter account for the matter/anti matter disparity?
I have no answer now. Viewers may respond
A light body and a heavy body have the same momentum which of the two bodies will have greater kinetic energy ?
Sumanta Das requested to explain the answer to this question.
As we know,
The momentum of a body, P = mv whee m is the mass and v is the velocity
and Kinetic Energy of a body, E = (1/2) mv2
Since the velocity term comes twice in E, the lighter body will have greater KE
P = mv
P2 = m2v2
p2/2m = (1/2) mv2 = E
which shows that E is inversely proportion to mass for bodies with same momentum.