Help Yo, science guys.

[old.Tohtori]

If something moved 20 times faster in time, would the thing colliding with something in "normal time" cause a 20 times stronger kinetic force? Also would it be any more harmful for the object travelling 20 times faster, or would the kinetic energy be directed at the object that it collided with?

It's after all effectively traveling 20 times faster.

Also in reverse, if something moves 20 times slower in time, would it become stronger or more hard to destroy?

Per example, a wall that is "living" slower then time, would it become harder to break?

 

[chipper]

your question doesnt make sense what do you mean time?

we only percieve time as a linear event to us it only travels in 1 direction and as far as we know has no measurable velocity therefore your question is invalid

 

[old.Tohtori]

Christ sake...let's say faster then? Like..err...if a person moves 20 times faster and punches a person.

Or someone lives 20 times slower.

 

[taB]

Are you planning on punching yourself to extend your life expectancy?

 

[chipper]

say that then you ask a scientific question use the correct terminology

of course it would if a car hits you at 1mph whats likely to happen probably a little nudge barely noticeable if a car hits you at 100mph then your going for a flying lesson

the faster something goes the more mass it gains, in effect a car weighing 1 ton at 0mph is going to have a mass of around 100 tons at 100mph (this is an extremely dumbed down answer)

as for the slower well frankly 0 is the base speed anything below that is going to be in reverse so basically you arent going to connect with said object

there are smarter people on here who can give all the figures n stuff if thats what you want im lazy and cant be assed switching my brain on before work

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well the base of this isn't factual science as moving faster or slower, like superman, isn't possible as far as i know. Just looking for some scientific input on how it would be.

Only thing i said si "science guys" 'cause science guys could most likely answer it.

 

[inactionman]

Toht, prob best for you to look at some applied mathematics and work it out for yourself. Depends how good your maths skills are though. Here's a good free online course.

Also remember that applied maths is only an approximation (although a very good one in ordinairy circumstances), it does not work at relativistic speeds (approaching the speed of light), when the fun of special relativity kicks in, or when things are very small (atoms, photons or sub atomic particles), where you have to use quantum theory. Also it generally ignores things like friction and air resistance, as they are hard to model without difficult calculus (total intergration/differentiation) or computers.

Also remember that time isn't constant, it can depend on your speed (more special relativity when you are approaching the speed of light).

 

[Cyradix]

To put it in a simple way : yes, the faster object would "win" (depending on mass, mass gained by velocity and density/material of the object(s) of course)
Just look a car accidents. The car moving at high speed will rip through the car standing still....

 

[old.Tohtori]

inactionman, yeah, it's hard to explain what kind of data i'm looking for and as such should do the final work myself. Just looking for input. Don't worry, it's not like i'm calibrating russian nukes here

Cyradix, thanks, just what i was looking for regarding the effects.

That would kind of explain how supreman could hit something really fast and not mush up his hand, if he didn't have that copout indestructibility

 

[Tom]

The impact would be no different than if the object concerned was moving through time at a normal rate. In fact if anything it would be slightly less damaging - moving faster through time would, according to the theory of relativity, mean that the object was moving slower through space.

 

[old.Tohtori]

The impact would be no different than if the object concerned was moving through time at a normal rate. In fact if anything it would be slightly less damaging - moving faster through time would, according to the theory of relativity, mean that the object was moving slower through space.

Thanks.

Any idea on the other side? The wall example.

Let's call it a bunny.

If i hit a bunny that is, relative to this world, moving slower through "time".

To the bunny everything moves really fast, but if something was to collide with it, what would the effects(generally) be?

 

[Tom]

No different.

 

[inactionman]

Time differential makes no difference, speed is just the distance traveled per unit time, so it's easier to use one frame of reference and deal with it as being a faster speed.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yeah, it works wonders when talking about something that lives through time faster then other things, but if one were to speculate the flipside of that, something that lives faster, aka, everything else moves faster, one day for others is two for you, how physics would effect that

 

[inactionman]

Eh? Are you talking about the subjective passing of time or some kind of bubble where time actually passes more quickly? The former is possible, the later, highly unlikely.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Eh? Are you talking about the subjective passing of time or some kind of bubble where time actually passes more quickly? The former is possible, the later, highly unlikely.

Let's not think about possible

The rabbit sees everything moving faster,because everything moves at "normal speed".

Everything related to the bunnies physiology etc is regular. So the bunny is in normal speed, but the bunny itself is slower speed then rest of world.

So you can touch it etc, much like a faster moving object could be touched.

 

[Bahumat]

If a duck aligns his spine correctly, he can flip a tank.

 

[Chilly]

e = mv^2

energy = mass * velocity squared

twice speed = four times energy

momentum = mass * velocity

twice velocity = twice momentum

figure the rest out youtself with your bullshit "moving 20 faster through time" nonsensical shit.

 

[old.Tohtori]

figure the rest out youtself with your bullshit "moving 20 faster through time" nonsensical shit.

Yeah, "apologies" for asking for opinions and or views....

 

[Tom]

e = mv^2

energy = mass * velocity squared

twice speed = four times energy

momentum = mass * velocity

twice velocity = twice momentum

figure the rest out youtself with your bullshit "moving 20 faster through time" nonsensical shit.

You are assuming the original example is moving faster through space. This is not the case - it is moving faster through time. An object moving faster through time has less velocity in space.

 

[Chilly]

You are assuming the original example is moving faster through space. This is not the case - it is moving faster through time. An object moving faster through time has less velocity in space.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm quoting some mechanical laws of this universe within normal environments. I dont want to get involved in the rest of the debate as it appears to be totally meaningless.

 

[SawTooTH]

The question is not clear. Are you talking about time travel as in Doctor Who?
Are you just talking about a speeding object hitting another object using standard Newtonian physics as Chilly is suggesting?

Are these objects travelling through time and moving through space? Or is it an occupying a space and catching up to another object that will occupy the same space at a future date?

See what I mean?

 

[old.user4556]

e = mv^2

energy = mass * velocity squared

twice speed = four times energy

momentum = mass * velocity

twice velocity = twice momentum

figure the rest out youtself with your bullshit "moving 20 faster through time" nonsensical shit.

No replacement for God tbh.

 

[Scouse]

Yeah, it works wonders when talking about something that lives through time faster then other things, but if one were to speculate the flipside of that, something that lives faster, aka, everything else moves faster, one day for others is two for you, how physics would effect that

Y'see toht. As much as you're trying with yer energy, it's dull to discuss something that's obviously shit

 

[old.Tohtori]

Y'see toht. As much as you're trying with yer energy, it's dull to discuss something that's obviously shit

I was just asking for advice, has nothing to do with other thread.

 

[old.Tohtori]

In any case, the moving faster/living faster is clear enough, speed is just so great that the force is quite extreme too.

I was just curious on what the flipside of it would be, and how that would react.

In a "supernatural" world so to speak, marvel universe whatnot.

Guess it can't be applied to basic laws of physics really.

 

[Zenith.UK]

Actually it can.
The phenomenon of subjective time passing more slowly the faster you go is discussed in physics, it has also been quantified and is predictable.

Time dilation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tom]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm quoting some mechanical laws of this universe within normal environments. I dont want to get involved in the rest of the debate as it appears to be totally meaningless.

You're quoting laws that don't apply to the question. Something travelling more slowly through time is not a normal situation. Unless you're talking about Trem.

 

[Sar]

The impact would be no different than if the object concerned was moving through time at a normal rate. In fact if anything it would be slightly less damaging - moving faster through time would, according to the theory of relativity, mean that the object was moving slower through space.

Hmm.

Actually the faster you travel in space the faster you travel in time - hence why time dilation meant the Final Five cylons lived for the 2000 years it took them "externally" to reach the colonies, while it seemed to them that only 10 years had passed.


Anyhoo...

I think Toht's sense of what speed time is lived at is confused with the individual's perception of time passing.

Example: Take Tilda Swinton's character in the video for Orbital's masterpiece: The Box:

YouTube - Orbital - The Box

Her perception of time is much slower than everyone else's, so everything around her appears to be moving much faster. This, technically is wrong.

Gravity is the key here.

Gravitational pull dictates how fast or slow time passes, because as we all should know thanks to the crazy patent officer, the greater a gravitational pull by an object, then the slower time will pass on its surface.

IE If I landed on the surface of a neutron star, which is superdense and has a bloody massively powerful gravitational pull as a result, then time for me will pass as normal in my eyes, but if I look up then I'll see the stars born and wink out of existence fairly quickly as time "up & out there" will appear to have sped up hugely, much like the experience of the character in the Box video. To an external observer I would appear to have stopped moving completely, because of the gravitational differential affecting the effect of time on space.



Ultimately I think Toht is thinking of a superhero like the Flash, who does everything super fast. However the problem there is that The Flash should still perceive everything around him as normal, so his hands moving super-fast would still be a blur even to him.

Of course it gets flubbed by "increased metabolism" or some such bullshit, but that's an out for the writers really.

 

[chipper]

maybe you should change header to yo science fiction guys cos you are asking for an answer that requires the laws of physics to be ignored.