Ah, yes, I see how you got a minimum there - multiplying the classical parabola by the relativistic mass got you a minimum somewhere beyond the singularity. I can imagine how some poor soul digging down the wrong tunnel could get itself stuck there :-) Luckily E is just mc^2 and tachyons can accelerate and lose energy for as long as they like. By the way, you might not have to tunnel to get to the other side - why not create particles that go faster than light the same way you create the ones that go exactly at c? Yair. On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:44:24AM +1200, Russell McMahon wrote: > > It's funny for me to make my debut on this list so far off topic, > > but > > since it's been more than a year since I last blinked my LED and I > > kept > > lurking here mainly for the OT discussions, perhaps it's actually > > appropriate, especially as my current occupation is studying > > particle physics. > > I feel relieved (and amazed) that I seem to have got so relatively > little wrong :-) . (Not little, just relatively little. Or was that > realtivitly little). > > >> It is easy to plot classical energy of a particle (or starship or > >> ...) > > > What formula do you use for this plot? I don't think any I know has > > these minima (or else I haven't bothered to trace their behaviour > > after > > v=c... :-)). > > > It's not meant to be useful or even meaningful :-) > But, it's fun. > Energy from classical velocity and mass. > Mass from rest mass and velocity using special theory. > Plot energy against velocity. > Voila!. > > Takes almost no time to do - try it, you'll like it. > You'll also probably explain why it's meaningless in any useful frame > of reference ;-) -but that would ruin a good story. > > > > Russell McMahon > > -- > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist