|
Post by General Veers on Feb 28, 2009 20:47:20 GMT -5
If something is entirely impossible, than it cannot happen and is nonexistent. Physics is the application of mathematics to physical events that can happen in theory and in practice. If something is nonexistent, then it cannot technically be described. If it cannot be described, than there can be no physics prinicples to describe it since nothing else can describe it. Therefore, "Physics of the Impossible" is a nonsensical title.
However, if something that is impossible AS OF NOW can EVENTUALLY become possible, than theoretical physics can be applied.
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Feb 28, 2009 20:55:40 GMT -5
Good point.
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Mar 1, 2009 0:19:17 GMT -5
I think he means things that we consider impossible today...
As for invisibility, someone has already made an object invisible to the x-ray spectrum. Visible light is trickier.
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 1, 2009 9:22:47 GMT -5
The govt. is working on bending visible light using invisibility cloaks.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 1, 2009 10:49:29 GMT -5
Like in harry potter?
|
|
|
Post by Soul Alchemist on Mar 1, 2009 10:56:52 GMT -5
well, judging by the first sentence of this thread, I think it means things that SEEMED impossible, but are now impossible given today's/"tomarrow's" technology.
Like with invisiblity. although this isn't actual invisibility, Scientists are trying to develop a full-body suit with high-speed cameras on the back of it, and the front being a flexible screen that will display the things the cameras pick up. so it would SEEM that the person is invisible, without actually being invisible. of course, in order to make flexible screens, they need to come out with electrical ink first.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 1, 2009 11:03:55 GMT -5
That would be difficult
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 1, 2009 12:11:35 GMT -5
The process you describe SB is fake invisibility, as you say. But it's still possible to truly be, invisible. You can do this by disfiguring the shape and color of a humans organic molecules and atoms to be that of a certain background. Sounds impossible but it is very possible.
|
|
|
Post by Sandmaster on Mar 1, 2009 15:20:30 GMT -5
And carcinogenic. I don't think people are quite ready to screw around with our internal molecular structures yet.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 1, 2009 17:03:44 GMT -5
Will they ever be then?
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 2, 2009 0:01:38 GMT -5
your not screwing with any molecules your just reconfiguring there colors.
|
|
|
Post by SM on Mar 2, 2009 1:05:09 GMT -5
And tell me, how are you planning to reconfigure it without changing the molecular structure?
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Mar 2, 2009 10:37:19 GMT -5
using food coloring!
At any rate, the people didn't make it as a cloak... more of a suit of armor...
an invisibility-in-x-ray-spectrum suit of armor...
not as catchy as an "invisibility cloak"
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 2, 2009 10:39:39 GMT -5
Or, we could inject people to make their eyes work differently.
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 2, 2009 15:18:53 GMT -5
That's crazy TDM. You can reconfigure its color without changing its molecular structure by changing its emissions of color on the color spectrum or the light spectrum. If I change an apples molecules to purple an apple becomes purple. It's still in its beginning stages. But I believe this technology will be a vauable spy tech in the future.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 2, 2009 15:33:10 GMT -5
I know its crazy, like me.
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 2, 2009 16:01:21 GMT -5
Mmk... That's debatable but anyways. Yay I have I think 8 cubes/stars now. Woo!!!
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 2, 2009 16:11:58 GMT -5
I haz more
|
|
|
Post by spaghetticat on Mar 2, 2009 16:13:10 GMT -5
Yea but I'm doing pretty good considering i only joined a month ago.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Master on Mar 2, 2009 16:14:59 GMT -5
Me 2. Three weeks ago in fact.
|
|