A possibility; Nukes in space

[Urwumpe]

Light has actually been slowed down to 38 mph (61 kph) through a very dense medium.

Even already less in a Bose-Einstein condensate. The last I heard was pedestrian speed.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/15-11/st_alphageek

 

[jedidia]

I'm pretty sure that's not what he was referring to, but radiation does slow down in material.

I know that, and I actually oftentimes wondered what it means for relativity... Special relativity works all nice with a ton of spherical cows. Then again, general relativity is so far above my head that there's no chance in hell I'll ever learn all the stuff needed to understand it :lol:

Anyways, the radiation won't be "slowed down" in a sense that it will loose momentum by plowing through the atmosphere. If he didn't mean that, I apologize, can't think of much other interpretations, though.

Also, am I the only one that noticed that the tune of Jews in Space was recycled for Men in Tights?

Nope. There's also a similiar tune somewhere in Monthy Pythons "meaning of live", if I remember correctly.

Or Ralph Siegel, who has a patented chord progression

He PATENTED a chord progression?? now that should be forbidden. If Bach, Beethoven and Mozart would have patented specific chord progressions, we couldn't make much music anymore today. In any case noone could use B-A-C-H (german notation).

Even already less in a Bose-Einstein condensate. The last I heard was pedestrian speed.

Coooool! Now, let's find that hyperspace medium where speed travels FASTER than in a vacuum! :lol:

 

[Urwumpe]

He PATENTED a chord progression?? now that should be forbidden. If Bach, Beethoven and Mozart would have patented specific chord progressions, we couldn't make much music anymore today. In any case noone could use B-A-C-H (german notation).

You can still use most power chord progressions, only a few of them are owned by Wagner. :lol:

 

[Fizyk]

I'm pretty sure that's not what he was referring to, but radiation does slow down in material. That makes the basis for lenses. In water, the speed of light is only about 0.75 c.

The speed of visible light is about 0.75c. For gamma and X rays it's probably a lot closer to c. The speed of electromagnetic waves usually depends quite a bit on wavelength, you know

Then again, there is also neutron radiation, which will probably indeed have a lot smaller range in the atmosphere than in the vaccuum.

 

[Urwumpe]

The speed of visible light is about 0.75c. For gamma and X rays it's probably a lot closer to c. The speed of electromagnetic waves usually depends quite a bit on wavelength, you know

:facepalm:

Oh !

 

[tblaxland]

:facepalm:

Oh !

Chromatic dispersion is a real problem in spread spectrum fibre optic communications. The frequency dependence of the refractive index in most materials means that different frequencies have different phase and group velocities. The wave velocities tend to infinity as frequency increases, IIRC, but I don't recall what effect that has on the velocity of individual photons.

 

[Urwumpe]

Chromatic dispersion is a real problem in spread spectrum fibre optic communications. The frequency dependence of the refractive index in most materials means that different frequencies have different phase and group velocities. The wave velocities tend to infinity as frequency increases, IIRC, but I don't recall what effect that has on the velocity of individual photons.

Simple - none.

Group velocity is the speed at which a group of photons travel through a medium, taking individual random paths. Each photon still travels at c but doesn't take the direct route.

What annoys me is that the medium is completely left away again. Despite it being really the important factor, before the wavelength has any effect.

 

[Fizyk]

What annoys me is that the medium is completely left away again. Despite it being really the important factor, before the wavelength has any effect.

What I wrote applies only to electromagnetic waves travelling through a medium, of course, in vaccuum it's always c. Maybe I should have written this explicitly. Oh well.

Also tblaxland wrote exactly what I meant, except he phrased it differently.

The frequency dependence of the refractive index in most materials means that different frequencies have different phase and group velocities.

I wrote about dependence on wavelength, but it's the same thing as dependence on frequency.

 

[OrbiterSpore]

I WANT ENGLISH!

(...)If he didn't mean that, I apologize, can't think of much other Interpretations, though(...)

:goodposting:

fftopic: :
i need to apologize, the translator of EN-US>PT-BR from history channel that is the culprit:facepalm:... i need to keep watching TV on English or i'll keep shaming myself because of someone that translates incorrectly!

Back on topic:

Thanks! my questions about nuke effects have been answered!(Who needs Yahoo! answers now?:lol

 

[Keatah]

You are aware that the inverse square law also applies to nuclear weapons?

Also, why does always have the same to pop up here. Nukes,kill, battle, fight.

I know that's rhetorical..But, for one thing, death and destruction and blowing stuff up in warfare is a part of human nature. Brings out the "MAN" in man; could be today, could be 2000 years ago. Could be next week. But there will always be maiming and killing and artificially & externally induced suffering in the name of power and control. Conquest and conflict will *ALWAYS* be a part of humanity. But that is for another thread.

Now, doesn't a nuke shockwave behave differently in space as opposed to in an atmosphere? Certainly there would be no wind or displaced atmosphere to push stuff around.

And, regarding light, somebody said or was doing experiments with phased array antennas to try and see if waves could be made to reinforce each other and therefore, somehow, speed up their propagation. A second side experiment was/is to see how much power and be packed into the tip of a wavefront.

Well then! That's all beyond me, but I think that in order to faster than c we need to build interfaces and technologies to access different aspects of spacetime. All this theory is great and stuff, but if we can't play with it with physical objects.. then.. ? ?

Which now reminds me of a nightmare dream I had the other day, again! It was the one where I overclocked my cpu so fast it started running code from the future, here, now. And thereby ripped a hole in the space-time continuum. The only way to stop it was 2 print the results on a dot-matrix printer from the 1970's. Somehow slowing it down and shrinking the rift! This went on, back and forth , all night long in a crazed delirium.

 

[Urwumpe]

Brings out the "MAN" in man; could be today, could be 2000 years ago.

Not really. While showing the world how strong you are is part of male nature, showing your own weakness by the use of bigger clubs is not one of it.

Of course men are programmed to show women how good they are as sexual partners. But luckily, the options for that have grown by cultural advances.

Now, doesn't a nuke shockwave behave differently in space as opposed to in an atmosphere? Certainly there would be no wind or displaced atmosphere to push stuff around.

Of course, but first of all, the energy will be limited by the inverse square law. Atmospheric lensing can cause damage many thousand km away from strong nukes, but this is then limited to few places that are militarily impossible to be predicted in advance. And thus useless for military strategy.

The further you explode a nuclear bomb away from its target, the more damage potential you loose. Exploding a nuclear bomb at low altitude increases the damage range by the Mach stem effect, but doesn't increase the damage exactly AT the target. Which is why modern nuclear bombs can be deployed in many different ways, including penetrating bunkers.