Although they do pass their momentum on, the particle is either absorbed or reflected, otherwise you would have photons that travel less than the speed of light. At a quantum level, everything becomes weird probability. Of course, as I said, there are multiple theories and all are slightly different.
Posts by SirusKing
-
-
Theories are just explainations.
Oh, And greg, in science, you forget that nothing is "fact" or 100% proven. Although you are right, gravity right now is vastly unexplored.This might be where a bit of confusion is happening, since there are several theories for all of this.
-
Even then, in relativity, Gravity does not actually alter the direction of light at all but changes the space around it. According to the photon, it is still travelling in a straight line. I don't quite understand this part but the speed limit for light is set by time dilation, as the speed of light happens to be where time stops relative to the object at speed. Although it isn't "instantaneous", it is still counted as infinite because of this time dilation.
-
But they don't, I already said that. Energy is not equal to mass, only rest mass.
-
As I said before, no, they do not have mass. Energy is not equivalent to MASS (relativistic) on its own, but it is to rest mass.
-
What I SAID is that the Photons have the Mass of the Energy which is moving the Photon. Not that the Photons have Mass.
But it doesn't, since it takes no energy at all to move something with no mass to the speed of light (or any speed). When a photon hits something, it has a probability to either get absorbed (transferring its energy) or just bounce off.
-
Its parodying work so it is fine, just don't claim them as your own images and refer to them as IC2's.
-
Photons can't have mass because they wouldn't travel at the speed of light, to which, as fair as we know, it is experimental fact that they do.
M = mc²/(√1-(v/c)²)
where M = mass at velocity
As v approaches c, (v/c)² approaches 1, and so (1 - (v/c)²) approaches zero.
This in turn means M approaches infinity.
E=mc² only applies to still objects, whereas E²=(mc²)²+(pc)² Applies to moving objects, and if it is moving at the speed of light it must have 0 mass.
E²=(0c²)²+(pc)²
E²=0+(pc)²
E=pc
The momentum of a photon is p = (ℎf)/c where ℎ = plancks constant and f = frequency
so E=c((ℎf)/c)
so the energy of a photon is E=ℎf -
How would I measure mass in seconds?
It can probably be done, since light is a constant of both speed, time and distance. -
If you are running 1.6.4, you need this:
http://ic2api.player.to:8080/job/IC2_experimental/397/There are, however, some bugs currently.
-
I assume you are running 1.4.5, then? I strongly recommend updating, though. Most mods have updated to at least 1.6
-
Which version of IC2 and which link are you clicking? It should be the bottom download link on the version page.
-
Hm, are you sure you calculated it right? I got ~0.5GF/W for Tianhe as well.33,000,000,000,000,000FLOP/s / 17,600,000W = 1,875,000,000 FLOP/s/W = 1.875 GFLOP/s/W
Is this sound?
-
Quantum computers are hypothesized to be good at tiny fraction of some tasks. For daily computations they are awfully sucky.
Now let's compare them in terms of (FLOP/s)/W
The Taihne-2 runs at 1.875 gigaFLOP/s per watt (in total running at ~17.6 MW), and using 20 gigaFLOP/s (estimate phone processing power) at roughly 40 watts (average phone power usage), runs at 0.5 gigaFLOP/s per watt, so the Taihne-2 is more efficient.
Quantum computers are more for security, passing data between other computers, than for actually calculating. That is up to a more powerful closed system computer.
-
Actually, I meant my Smartphone! It could have sent 2 missions to the moon at once, if you would replace Android with something with something more efficent.Hardly a super computer for todays standards (especially since the moon missions needed very small amounts of calculation). I obviously wasn't talking about things like the cray-1, but more like Taihne-2 (at least 1 petaFLOP/s):
this bad boy can do around 33 petaFLOP/s, or 33 quadrillion floating point operations (33,000,000,000,000,000 FLOP/s)
Your phone can probably do maybe 20 billion FLOP/s (20,000,000,000 FLOP/s)
Big difference, eh? -
We already have that. Hmm I'm going to use tin instead of copper to transfer electricity, wait, why is the tin vaporizing and the copper no- OMFG I JUST DISCOVERED POWER LIMITS.We have that but it has very little effect, ie, you still don't know WHY it does it and you still don't apply the knowledge of how it works to other things.
For example, because people associate metals with conductive material, they wouldn't guess that the most conductive material there is isn't a metal
-
What about a quantum computer, such as Google's D-Wave?
Quantum computers are great but they aren't for processing power. Things like the Titan or the Tianhe-2 are still more powerful.
-
Define "incredible power". I'm quite certain that Note 3 has more power than early supercomputers while using nearly no power at all. Not to mention having WAY more processing power than even desktop processors from less than decade ago.Modern super computers, I meant. Try shrinking the Titan into your fist >.>
Which, by the way sinaj, is much better at calculating than your brain is, and even then, your brain certainly isn't "micro". -
I just happen to not have m Micro-processor production kit here, and what would yet another nano-supercomputer be anyway?Nano super computer? What? Super Computers are still several rooms full of Towers, you know.
-
I can't be bothered to do yet MORE texturing, but I recommend GIMP and here are my templates:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hks2yp1q1a0njdm/L2W0AeQc8dIf you use them, or any of the new textures, please give credit where due.
