I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  


friendsmore friends | add your site

Funny Junk

Extreme Humor

Gorilla Mask

Funny Games

Viva La Games

Crazy Games

FreeGame Heaven

123 Games


Hot Games

Free Samples

Insane Pictures

Hoy Boys

Comic World

Back to Listing

E = MC2 Explained

Hits: 17313 | Rating: (2.4) | Category: Science | Added by: buddy
Page: 1 2 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
Female, 18-29, Southern US
 43 Posts
Thursday, November 17, 2005 7:05:22 PM
I had a physics teacher that actually did experiments that are now books that are in the library of Congress.....so I already knew a lot of this and could keep up...and yes, I kept an "A" in physics.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Monday, October 24, 2005 5:00:33 PM
Jimbo - The "Twin Paradox" is what I think you're referring to, but that's unrelated to time travel. If you have two twins and one flies around at relativistic speeds for a while he will indeed be younger than the one that stays at earth. The "Twin Paradox" name turns out to be a misnomer, as it is not actually a paradox, and has actually been confirmed in scientific experiment (they flew atomic clocks around in airplanes, I believe).

Male, 18-29, Europe
 193 Posts
Sunday, October 23, 2005 7:28:07 AM
medic1971: you're right. That's the idea behind the time travellers paradox. I'm not sure if you would be able to see yourself take off, but if you had a friend the same age as you, you took off, did a lap of the moon and came back, you'd be younger than your friend when you got back.

Technically speaking, if you were to live at the top of a mountain, you'd also grow older slower than your friend at the bottom of the mountain. By a tiny tiny tiny amount. :D

Male, 18-29, Western US
 49 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 11:35:59 PM
Medic1971: I have pondered the same idea. Theoretically, if travel at speeds above the speed of light were possible you could travel a distance - turn around and view history. However, by returning at speeds faster than light you would not be able to arrive before the light emitting event occurred. In your example you would spend 10 minutes travelling away from the event at 10 X the speed of light and 5 minutes returning at 20 X the speed of light. So by the time you made it back to the event, 15 minutes would have elapsed. With the speed of light at 299,792,458 meters/sec, the light emitted from the event would have already travelled 269,813,212,200 meters from the event that emitted the light.

Male, 13-17, Western US
 218 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 6:02:35 PM
hey everyone, read Neil deGrasse Tyson's thing and listen to how he says "all" omg it's so funny.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 2:53:06 PM
Fusion bombs are difficult to create because fusion only occurs at intense heat and pressures. The center of the sun, for example, is hot and dense enough to force hydrogen into nuclear fusion. Fusion bombs actually require that a fission bomb be built around the hydrogren fuel to explode with enough heat and energy to cause the hydrogen to fuse.

Back to fission bombs: the other hard part about making a fission bomb is creating or isolating enough of the particular isotopes of uranium and plutonium required. Most naturally occuring uranium is the wrong isotope, and plutonium is the wrong isotope and very rare anyways.

I am aware I misspelled "nuclei." I suxx0r.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 2:43:02 PM
tim1977: Fission bombs are difficult to create because nuclear fission only occurs in a sustained chain reaction if the mass of fissile material is big enough. Nucleii that undergo fission require that they be bombarded with neutrons, at which point they may split into smaller nucleii and a bunch of neutrons, which may or may not cause other nearby nucleii to also undergo fission. Too small a mass of, say, plutonium, and not enough neutrons get created to cause enough other plutonium to undergo fission to sustain the reaction. The main problems in creating a fission bomb are 1) bringing two or more small (subcritical) masses together to form a big enough (supercritical) mass fast enough so that it can release most of its energy in its most compact shape, and 2) keeping the critical mass together long enough so that as much energy as possible is released. (if a little energy is released and the plutonium breaks into two smaller pieces immediately, the reaction will stop).

Female, 30-39, Southern US
 14458 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 12:31:29 PM

Male, 30-39, Southern US
 202 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 8:02:58 AM
Here is something that is bothering me.... Let's just say you could get into a rocket ship and take off from earth and travel at say 10 times the speed of light. Then after about 10 minutes you could stop, look back, and watch yourself take off.
Now here is the part that troubles me. What if you took off in a rocket and traveled at 10 times the speed of light, then turned around and came back to earth at 20 times the speed of light. Would you not get back before you left?
Maybe that's why the speed of light is a the universal speed limit....

Male, 13-17, Europe
 688 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 5:15:33 AM
to tim1977
All matter,lets say plutonium,
contains energy.
E=MC2 shows how much.
E=MC2 Energy=the speed of light squared (multaplyed by its self).
in an atomic bomb this energy is relised in the form of movment,heat,light and radiation.
happy now?

Male, 18-29, Western US
 49 Posts
Saturday, October 22, 2005 12:46:07 AM
To the people who actually understand the concept of E=MC2. Why is it so difficult to apply in terms of creating an atomic bomb? What holds a brilliant mind from being able to apply this.

Male, 13-17, Southern US
 877 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 11:58:14 PM
but what if you did manage to move at light speed?
you wouldn't be able to see anything would you? no, you wouldn't

Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1086 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 11:54:11 PM
i havent looked at this from what i know, its the MAXIMUM measure of energy that can be given out by something, i dont know how you can get that energy, but get something going lightspeed as mentioned above? and SJW is right in order to propel something lightspeed, you must move it with some that can travel lightspeed or faster, that has mass... which cant be done, sorry

Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 1886 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 11:43:57 PM
Very interesting.

My question is, if one were to travel at the true speed of light, and time were to supposedly stop, then it should be impossible for actual light to reach the speed of light. I mean, if time stopped, you could move an infinite amount of distance in zero time, thus achieving an infinite speed. In fact, moving ANY distance whatsoever while time is stopped would equal infinite speed (divide one mile by zero time, the only explanation of the result would be that it simply transported there instantly, meaning infinite speed.)

But, light isn't instantaneous. If it were, we could see stars disappear the second they die, and not thousands of years after their deaths.

I think one of the people said that flashing a light from a train moving 100 MPH wouldn't increase the speed of the rays of light because the speed of light mutates the variables for speed (distance and time).

My head hurts... lol... Physics is a very interesting topic.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 11:02:40 PM
IWillRm(m)brYou: if you think "isn't" is the correct spelling of "is not," you are an idiot.

I'm sorry; I meant: "...you're an idiot."

Male, 13-17, Southern US
 877 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 10:36:25 PM
everyone's trying to smart
it is a simple concept though
so here's a hard one:
time does not exist, it is merely an illusion created by our minds because of their inability to perceive all instances of being at once

Female, 13-17, Eastern US
 58 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 9:27:07 PM
And you don't know how to spell isn't...

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 7:24:25 PM
"Alot" is not a word.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 125 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 7:23:46 PM
Alot of dumb people in the forums.

Female, 13-17, Eastern US
 1462 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 6:20:48 PM
My heaaaaaaaad....owwwwwww. I'm too dumb
And Tedweird, before you call anyone a dumbass spell "you're" right. And Buddy isn't a dumbass, if it weren't for him, I would have no i-am-bored.com and then I would die.

Male, 18-29, Europe
 585 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 5:48:04 PM
I knew all this from when I studied physics in secondary school (high school for you Americans), it made me see things in a different light and after I left the army I started wearing pseudo-intellect glasses even though it was completely un-necessary. It made me look smart... Well the moral of this story is that if you were pseudo-intellect glasses during a tae kwon do sparring you will probably end up in hospital. Truly tragic...

Male, 13-17, Midwest US
 372 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 5:24:12 PM
i get it but i got it before this so...doesnt really matter(haha thats a crappy pun)

Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 309 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 5:17:12 PM
it made sense before. Buddy, ur a dumbass.

Male, 18-29, Western US
 45 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 2:35:13 PM
Whatup09: You have no idea what you're talking about. At all.

Male, 13-17, Europe
 1065 Posts
Friday, October 21, 2005 2:08:12 PM
ok then...

Page: 1 2 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account

Back to Listing ^top

Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |