RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,319
Posts: 5,352,534
Members: 24,616
Currently online: 635
Newest member: groucho900

TrekToday headlines

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Thread Tools
Old February 6 2014, 03:22 AM   #16
Rear Admiral
Nebusj's Avatar
View Nebusj's Twitter Profile
Re: Neutronium, warp-speed projectiles, and black holes.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Anyway, the point is that as far as collisions between solid objects at high velocities, your measured energy will trend upwards towards infinity as you approach lightspeed; that is not, however, KINETIC energy, and won't be transferred as such.
Yeah, it is the kinetic energy. I mean, look at the word. I don't know what you're going on about with Doppler shifts but, sheesh, that isn't even wrong.
Nebusj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 6 2014, 11:51 PM   #17
Re: Neutronium, warp-speed projectiles, and black holes.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Not that you know or care what I'm talking about...
Until you can provide the equations to back up your statements, you'll find that not a lot of people will understand (or care about) what you're saying. Physics is a mathematical science. Theories and proofs are not made through anecdote or analogy.

I've provided the equations that support my argument (and that of special relativity...). So, go ahead. I'm listening. You start with the one that shows the following:

Crazy Eddie wrote:
... an object moving at high relativistic velocities does not gain energy or momentum abnormally.

Last edited by WarpFactorZ; February 7 2014 at 03:19 AM.
WarpFactorZ is online now   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.