Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Scientists break c?

darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 9:02:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If the difference is only 60 nanoseconds less than the speed of light, is it possible that it could have just been a measurement error?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 9:41:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 8:34:40 AM, Lasagna wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

This would go down as the scientific discovery of the century, thus far, I would think.

It is actually not that surprising. When Einstein created his formulas, he did not have the means to test such high velocities. The object of science is to create a theory which expains what you currently see AND is able to predict other things (typically new things, or other things that can be seen, but weren't factored it when making the formula).

Much like Newton, Einstein was dang close. But we will eventually see that some of the things that Einstein couldn't have forseen based on the limited technology of his time are slightly off, and someone will build upon it, and make it better.

Whether this is a case of that or not, I don't know. I'll wait for the independent confirmations.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 9:45:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 9:02:56 AM, darkkermit wrote:
If the difference is only 60 nanoseconds less than the speed of light, is it possible that it could have just been a measurement error?

They have thoroughly explored that possibility, but I suppose it won't be resolved until this experiment is duplicated. As far as the precision of their instruments, if 60 nanoseconds was anywhere near the margin of error, there really wouldn't be any reason to publicize this.
Rob
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:13:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
...actually not that surprising

Yeah OreEle is more enamoured by the Bills 2-0 record than scientists propelling massive particles past the speed of light.

I can't wait to hear what the implications of this could be. Considering we're working with neutrinos, I doubt this provides much hope for large objects moving that fast. I would say the biggest hurdle isn't speed, but power. We can do almost anything with tiny particles, but providing the energy to propel a space-ship carrying humans is another thing entirely. For instance, at an acceleration equal to the force of 1 G, it would take a continuous thrust for nearly 12 months to reach c.
Rob
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:18:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 10:16:30 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Doesn't breaking c mean time travel is possible?

No. That's 1960's star trek talk.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:22:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
While you theoretically, could have an event (lets say a criminal mastermind attempt to destroy the earth), and you could travel to Pluto (faster than the speed of light), pull out your telescope, point it towards earth and you would see events that happened before you left the earth (and could see who the mastermind was, as well as watch yourself boink that hot chick, take down some notes, and make sure to do better next time).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:23:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
What is theoretically possible, is that you can reverse age going faster than the speed of light, however that is merely a calculation based on special relativity time dilation, and I'd verture a guess that it is not accurate on the other side of the light speed barrier.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 1:07:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM, headphonegut wrote:
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2

That's true, but maybe E=mc^2 is just a specific version of a more general formula.

For instance momentum p = mv only applies at low speeds not approaching the speed of light. The actual formula accounting for all speeds is http://upload.wikimedia.org...

When v is much much smaller than c which is what it usually is, the v/c term is 0, the value under the square root is 1, and p = mv.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 1:08:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 1:07:07 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM, headphonegut wrote:
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2

That's true, but maybe E=mc^2 is just a specific version of a more general formula.

For instance momentum p = mv only applies at low speeds not approaching the speed of light. The actual formula accounting for all speeds is http://upload.wikimedia.org...

When v is much much smaller than c which is what it usually is, the v/c term is 0, the value under the square root is 1, and p = mv.

For centuries, scientists always thought p = mv. Now we know that it is a specific version of a more general case.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 1:26:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Weren't there lasers whose photons broke c but information didn't a few years back?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 2:21:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Hawking seems to suggest that breaking c = time travel. If you travel at 1.5c to mars, you'll be looking at yourself before you leave. Think about this. You could then travel back to Earth at normal speeds and interrupt yourself before you left.
Rob
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 2:24:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Where did I read that it is impossible for anything to move faster than light?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 3:04:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 10:23:38 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
What is theoretically possible, is that you can reverse age going faster than the speed of light, however that is merely a calculation based on special relativity time dilation, and I'd verture a guess that it is not accurate on the other side of the light speed barrier.

Lol no... time dilation doesn't mean you reverse age - it just means that time passes at different rates at high velocities.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 3:15:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 2:21:41 PM, Lasagna wrote:
Hawking seems to suggest that breaking c = time travel. If you travel at 1.5c to mars, you'll be looking at yourself before you leave. Think about this. You could then travel back to Earth at normal speeds and interrupt yourself before you left.

Not really, as you approach closer to Earth, the past you would disappear. The present you wouldn't be able to see the past you disappearing because the past you is travelling faster than the speed of light. Only when light catches up will you be able to see the past you.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 3:58:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 3:15:38 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 9/23/2011 2:21:41 PM, Lasagna wrote:
Hawking seems to suggest that breaking c = time travel. If you travel at 1.5c to mars, you'll be looking at yourself before you leave. Think about this. You could then travel back to Earth at normal speeds and interrupt yourself before you left.

Not really, as you approach closer to Earth, the past you would disappear. The present you wouldn't be able to see the past you disappearing because the past you is travelling faster than the speed of light. Only when light catches up will you be able to see the past you.

The "past me" isn't the only thing here - there's an entire planet. Would the whole past planet disappear? I'd simply arrive before I left.
Rob
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 7:40:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 10:18:56 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:16:30 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Doesn't breaking c mean time travel is possible?

No. That's 1960's star trek talk.

Read the article. It does possibly mean this.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 8:01:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 7:40:18 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:18:56 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:16:30 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Doesn't breaking c mean time travel is possible?

No. That's 1960's star trek talk.

Read the article. It does possibly mean this.

"Much science-fiction literature is based on the idea that, if the light-speed barrier can be overcome, time travel might theoretically become possible. "
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:17:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM, headphonegut wrote:
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2

This.

I sometimes feel like God, or whoever, cheated, by creating this limit. This barrier totally puts a spanner in our works.

We could travel the entire universe in our lifetime, but we can never come back home in time.

The day I learned this, I felt a vast sadness.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2011 10:31:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
One day the scientific community will understand that the speed of light is nothing but the vibration that represents the edge of your particular reality construct. It is in that sense, a side effect. A side effect of the rate at which you are aware of creating your reality.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2011 10:23:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 8:01:35 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/23/2011 7:40:18 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:18:56 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:16:30 AM, Kinesis wrote:
Doesn't breaking c mean time travel is possible?

No. That's 1960's star trek talk.

Read the article. It does possibly mean this.

"Much science-fiction literature is based on the idea that, if the light-speed barrier can be overcome, time travel might theoretically become possible. "

Ore Ele I couldn't disagree with you more. Star Trek and the science fiction world is based entirely on the very opposite of what you just said. Take Star Wars, Star Trek, or pretty much every single futuristic sci-fi show where it's capable for people to travel outside the solar system. What happens to time when they travel? NOTHING. They travel around to different planets like they are so many cities. Time always remains in perfect harmony as they go about their business and if time travel occurs it's only because there is some special device used that has nothing to do with the fact that they are breaking c on a daily basis.

Hawking's complaint is that this is entirely implausible. If the Starship Enterprise leaves Earth, and heads at warp speed to Mars, which is about four light-minutes away, they will look back at Earth and be looking at themselves before they left. Sci-fi NEVER takes this into account and completely ignores it because it turns out that the actual state of affairs isn't as conducive to an entertaining plot-line as what really would happen, because there's no way to wage interstellar wars with the Borg or the Rebel Alliance if every time you jump to warp speed you end up going back in time.

Now, as you're sitting on Mars, you might attempt to head back to Earth. If you do at warp speed, you're going to go back in time 4 minutes once again, and when you get there you can wait out the four minutes, watch yourself arrive, and then wait another four minutes and see yourself off in the first place.
Rob
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2011 2:58:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 10:17:38 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM, headphonegut wrote:
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2

This.

I sometimes feel like God, or whoever, cheated, by creating this limit. This barrier totally puts a spanner in our works.

We could travel the entire universe in our lifetime, but we can never come back home in time.

The day I learned this, I felt a vast sadness.

Don't feel so sad.... You have many lifetimes to experience the wonders of the universe. Earth is just one location after all. Experience living on earth for all that it is. That's one of the reasons you chose to incarnate on this planet in the first place.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2011 4:54:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/23/2011 10:31:08 PM, Tiel wrote:
One day the scientific community will understand that the speed of light is nothing but the vibration that represents the edge of your particular reality construct. It is in that sense, a side effect. A side effect of the rate at which you are aware of creating your reality.

People should realise that our own reality is created by combining the vibrations of thought with the inner sense that guides our spiritual telos. We see reality though a fuzzy lens of thought that find its edge at the speed of light, though most people can't understand that concepts like that are only projections of our own ego.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2011 4:58:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/24/2011 4:54:59 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:31:08 PM, Tiel wrote:
One day the scientific community will understand that the speed of light is nothing but the vibration that represents the edge of your particular reality construct. It is in that sense, a side effect. A side effect of the rate at which you are aware of creating your reality.

People should realise that our own reality is created by combining the vibrations of thought with the inner sense that guides our spiritual telos. We see reality though a fuzzy lens of thought that find its edge at the speed of light, though most people can't understand that concepts like that are only projections of our own ego.

Exactly, once one inverts the mind-brain duality the notion of self-actualization becomes a reality as humans have reached their peak evolutionary form via the harnessing of spiritual ions.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 1:41:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/24/2011 4:58:47 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 9/24/2011 4:54:59 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:31:08 PM, Tiel wrote:
One day the scientific community will understand that the speed of light is nothing but the vibration that represents the edge of your particular reality construct. It is in that sense, a side effect. A side effect of the rate at which you are aware of creating your reality.

People should realise that our own reality is created by combining the vibrations of thought with the inner sense that guides our spiritual telos. We see reality though a fuzzy lens of thought that find its edge at the speed of light, though most people can't understand that concepts like that are only projections of our own ego.

Exactly, once one inverts the mind-brain duality the notion of self-actualization becomes a reality as humans have reached their peak evolutionary form via the harnessing of spiritual ions.

What?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 1:42:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/24/2011 2:58:20 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:17:38 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 9/23/2011 12:56:13 PM, headphonegut wrote:
If peoplz read Einsteins theory he says you can't accelerate he said nothing about going faster than celeritas and most objects don't travel faster than C because they get heavier as they go faster E=MC^2

This.

I sometimes feel like God, or whoever, cheated, by creating this limit. This barrier totally puts a spanner in our works.

We could travel the entire universe in our lifetime, but we can never come back home in time.

The day I learned this, I felt a vast sadness.

Don't feel so sad.... You have many lifetimes to experience the wonders of the universe. Earth is just one location after all. Experience living on earth for all that it is. That's one of the reasons you chose to incarnate on this planet in the first place.

No matter how many lifetimes I have, in no lifetime can I travel the universe and come back home in time. It's a very sad thing.

Once you leave, you leave.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2011 1:48:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/25/2011 1:41:43 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 9/24/2011 4:58:47 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 9/24/2011 4:54:59 PM, Kinesis wrote:
At 9/23/2011 10:31:08 PM, Tiel wrote:
One day the scientific community will understand that the speed of light is nothing but the vibration that represents the edge of your particular reality construct. It is in that sense, a side effect. A side effect of the rate at which you are aware of creating your reality.

People should realise that our own reality is created by combining the vibrations of thought with the inner sense that guides our spiritual telos. We see reality though a fuzzy lens of thought that find its edge at the speed of light, though most people can't understand that concepts like that are only projections of our own ego.

Exactly, once one inverts the mind-brain duality the notion of self-actualization becomes a reality as humans have reached their peak evolutionary form via the harnessing of spiritual ions.

What?

DDO Theoretical Physics club right here.

Get on our level.