Don't believe everything you read in the papers. . .



  • I think the picture speaks for itself:

     



  • Wow! 18 times.. so they have invented the warp drive.. it just malfunctioned during the test.

    And wouldn't a more appropriate subject be "Don't believe everything you see on the news" ? :-)



  • So how many times the speed of light did you need to travel to go back in time to 2003 and finally find this picture?



  • CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."



  • And is it just me, or does that guy on the right look a bit like Ben Stein?



  • Sure! But it's still a WTF, you know =)



  • @flaquito said:

    And is it just me, or does that guy on the right look a bit like Ben Stein?

    "Win Ben Stein's Warp Drive!"
     



  • @flaquito said:

    And is it just me, or does that guy on the right look a bit like Ben Stein?

     

    It's just you. 



  • @Pap said:

    So how many times the speed of light did you need to travel to go back in time to 2003 and finally find this picture?


    Oh, chill out.

     

    And to the other poster, yes, the caption should probably say "news" instead of "papers".  You get what you pay for.  :)



  • @flaquito said:

    And is it just me, or does that guy on the right look a bit like Ben Stein?

     

    If you mean he looks nothing like Ben Stein, then yes. 



  • @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

     

    Light....sound....meh....what's the difference??

     

    That's a BIG oops.

     

     



  • @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    Mr. Obvious to the rescue!

     it's still funny, though.



  • The two guys in the picture are twins, right?



  • <FONT face=tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif>It says "NEARLY", and 0.001 is "NEARLY" 18 for some folks I know...

    Anyway, this reminds me of one crazy debate I had with my friends on a very long day, back when we were kids, so maybe it really is possible... It could be that the shuttle tragedy occurred because running at insanely impossible high speeds (18 times the speed of light?) might cause the shuttle to actually circle around the world and collide with its rear end...



    </FONT>



  • @marvin_rabbit said:

    The two guys in the picture are twins, right?

    You're a lot closer than the Ben Stein guy. But no. 



  • @xrT said:

    <FONT face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> It could be that the shuttle tragedy occurred because running at insanely impossible high speeds (18 times the speed of light?) might cause the shuttle to actually circle around the world and collide with its rear end...</FONT>


    That actually made me laugh out loud. LOL!



  • @sycro said:

    @marvin_rabbit said:

    The two guys in the picture are twins, right?

    You're a lot closer than the Ben Stein guy. But no. 

    If a relativity joke passes over your head at the speed of light, but there is nobody home to hear it... does it make a 'whoosh' noise? 



  • @xrT said:

    <font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif">It says "NEARLY", and 0.001 is "NEARLY" 18 for some folks I know...

    Anyway, this reminds me of one crazy debate I had with my friends on a very long day, back when we were kids, so maybe it really is possible... It could be that the shuttle tragedy occurred because running at insanely impossible high speeds (18 times the speed of light?) might cause the shuttle to actually circle around the world and collide with its rear end...

    </font>

    So, who won the debate?

    It would actually be getting shorter as it approached the speed of light, so I guess it would be getting farther from it's own rear end. 



  • @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    What is the speed of sound in outer space?



  • @newfweiler said:

    @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    What is the speed of sound in outer space?

     

    They weren't in outer space when it happened....



  • @sycro said:

    @newfweiler said:

    @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    What is the speed of sound in outer space?

     

    They weren't in outer space when it happened....

     

    But according to http://bpesoft.com/s/wleizero/xhac/?h=100000, it's 939.92 mph.



  • @newfweiler said:

    @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    What is the speed of sound in outer space?


    Assuming the interplanetary medium is an ideal diatomic hydrogen gas, and neglecting relativistic effects, the speed of sound in outer space is approximately 581,000,000 meters per second.  Hence, to within a reasonable margin of error, the statements "traveling 18 times the speed of sound" and "traveling 18 times the speed of light" are equivalent.


  • @sycro said:

    @sycro said:
    @newfweiler said:

    @dmitriy said:

    CNN must have meant "18 times speed of sound."

    What is the speed of sound in outer space?

     

    They weren't in outer space when it happened....

     

    But according to http://bpesoft.com/s/wleizero/xhac/?h=100000, it's 939.92 mph.

    Even if they meant "the speed of sound", it's an odd thing to say.  It's like "Jesus was the only man who was ever exactly six feet tall."  Six of his own feet?  Six times the size of King Herod's foot, if that was the standard?  Six times today's standard U.S. foot?

    So do they mean the speed of sound at standard temperature and pressure?  Or the speed of sound at the point where the shuttle was?  And what is the significance that it was at some multiple of the speed of sound (or light or whatever)?  Why not "500 times the speed of traffic on Route 3?"

     

     



  • @Carnildo said:

    Assuming the interplanetary medium is an ideal diatomic hydrogen gas, and neglecting relativistic effects, the speed of sound in outer space is approximately 581,000,000 meters per second.  Hence, to within a reasonable margin of error, the statements "traveling 18 times the speed of sound" and "traveling 18 times the speed of light" are equivalent.

    I hardly ever assume an ideal diatomic hydrogen gas when contemplating interplanetary media, and on those occasions when I do, I wouldn't be caught dead neglecting relativistic effects.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.