You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
#11. Posted:
Frenchyy
  • TTG Undisputed
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 18, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,739
Reputation Power: 235
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 18, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,739
Reputation Power: 235
Thats Cool, Some Guy on our base told me and a few friends that Scientists are starting to make a lighting gun to blow up IED's
#12. Posted:
-Autumn-
  • Rising Star
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 18, 201212Year Member
Posts: 734
Reputation Power: 31
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 18, 201212Year Member
Posts: 734
Reputation Power: 31
Sapient wrote Thats Cool, Some Guy on our base told me and a few friends that Scientists are starting to make a lighting gun to blow up IED's


Wonder what its going to need to power it then? If its radiation, i hope you guys where protective suits.
#13. Posted:
PBJ
  • TTG Addict
Status: Offline
Joined: May 07, 201113Year Member
Posts: 2,214
Reputation Power: 94
Status: Offline
Joined: May 07, 201113Year Member
Posts: 2,214
Reputation Power: 94
Cave wrote Hasn't this been known for a while now? Or am I wrong?..
i think you're wrong, this is the first i have heard about it
#14. Posted:
TTG_Flair
  • TTG Senior
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 01, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,662
Reputation Power: 64
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 01, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,662
Reputation Power: 64
i just did a test on this looks like i didnt get this question wrong....
#15. Posted:
Ry-Nasty
  • TTG Senior
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 28, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,842
Reputation Power: 108
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 28, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,842
Reputation Power: 108
If this is true... man would this be great.
#16. Posted:
British-Army
  • TTG Senior
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,137
Reputation Power: 56
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,137
Reputation Power: 56
1. This happend quite a while ago 2. They found out that some of the wiring was wrong which effected the time what was captured 3. They now think that they're wrong, So it looks like e = mc squared will still be with us for a while.

~RJS_MODs
#17. Posted:
British-Army
  • TTG Senior
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,137
Reputation Power: 56
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 18, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,137
Reputation Power: 56
PBJ wrote
Cave wrote Hasn't this been known for a while now? Or am I wrong?..
i think you're wrong, this is the first i have heard about it


I "think" Cave is correct, I've known about this for a long time now, But I do look in to physics a lot.
#18. Posted:
-Charmed-
  • Challenger
Status: Offline
Joined: May 22, 201113Year Member
Posts: 188
Reputation Power: 8
Status: Offline
Joined: May 22, 201113Year Member
Posts: 188
Reputation Power: 8
bro if this is true just say the world changed
#19. Posted:
Kombi
  • Resident Elite
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 08, 201113Year Member
Posts: 291
Reputation Power: 10
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 08, 201113Year Member
Posts: 291
Reputation Power: 10
What happened after that? And what happens when the break that speed?
#20. Posted:
BoxxyPlus
  • Prospect
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 14, 201113Year Member
Posts: 662
Reputation Power: 25
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 14, 201113Year Member
Posts: 662
Reputation Power: 25
Actually this has been proven wrong. If the particles your talking about are nutrinos (spelling is probably wrong) then they actually can't go faster then the speed of light. One one the leads on the project falsified his results.
Jump to:
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.