Nowhere. It's YOU that time-travelled forwards into the future...

Ah Crap! I just lost 8 days! I want my 8 days back!

go 7-11 buy lor. 8 days every week....

You went near light speed so the time passage for you is slower and you didn't realise it's already 8 days for the rest of the world.

going near the speed of light also means his mass increased exponentially. That means, CP got REALLLLLYYYY FAT~~!!

urm, theoretically speaking, it should be the other way round - he should have lost mass at 1/[sqrt(rate he gained speed)]...lols

E=mc2. To move at the speed of light, mass has to increase to increase energy, since c is constant. When energy is used, mass is obtained.

but he actually went INTO e speed force, which is irregardless of mass, as atoms are energised. So which Flash gave up his force 4 u?

When you apply E= mc² to a moving object, the c becomes your speed, not the value for the speed of light, becos the E for energy HAS

to remain constant. That is why rocks burn up and lose mass when they pass through the atmosphere and gain speed.

and btw, irregardless is incorrect. You prolly meant regardless

thank you for your correction, but i definitely meant irregardless. A double negative, similar in style to "not unlike" or "aint got no".

and e=mc2 is used for relative motion while meteors usually use newtonian mechanics, tho the use of mass-equivalance dictates that heat

actually has mass, so when the rock burns, the matter converted to heat has similar mass.

the c in e=mc2 is usually speed of light in vacuum, but i suppose it can be changed in accordance to situations like nuclear physics.

I have not heard of the argument that a person going near light speed will lose mass. After all, in a translated Japanese sci-fi I read, an

assault on a particular planet was done accelerating small asteroids to NEAR light speed to smash defense drones.

Argument was that as it approaches light speed it will 'gain mass' and become unstoppable.

yes that's the premise of why Einstein said time-travel was near impossible, as great energy to travel results in greater mass, thus cycle.

very confusing, this mass and matter thing.

Hmm touché on one thing tho: i made the mistake of applying einstein's equation within the context of newtonian physics, when that eqtn

is based on quantum physics. Hearing abt the mass increment with acceleration for e=mc² for the first time tho...guess i gotta revise! lol

Maybe we did get the 'mass increment' part wrong. I have always interpreted it as the energy needed to continually accelerate towards light

speed tends towards infinity the closer it approaches light speed.

Nevermind if you think I am an idiot and that I don't really know what I am talking about. After all had I been a genius, I would be in my

current situation anyway. Hahahhaa.

aiyah say for fun nia ... mass increase = CP get fat, more funny ma

in any case, meteorites "losing mass" when falling thru the earth's atmosphere is a result of FRICTION and the atmosphere burning off mass

the burning already means ENERGY is expended, hence more energy to accelerate the meteorites

anyway no need to argue la... CP get fat is funnier