Quantum Ideas

Post Reply New Topic

No, thats just it... turning an object into energy at one point and reassemble it at a second point... energy in itself is... errrrr....

somwhere between the 0th and 1st dimention... which cannot be used into make mass or have as sutch...

as somthing with mass must have at least 3 dimentions...

Crap... I was gonna run the numbers to show why glider18's idea doesn't work, but, *shockingly enough* the special relativity energy formula leads to all kinds of messed up in a rotating system...

Here is something to think about on the speed of light thing.

Today, we find that nearly every astronomer, scientist, great thinker, of the past was wrong in certain areas of their research---even though they were convinced of their research. Do you think that two hundred years from now, scientists in the future will look at our present day astronomers, scientists, great thinkers, and not find errors in their research? We can rest assured that new findings in the future will find many errors in today's research that many of us regard as fact.

There was a time, in the early development of the automobile, that the thought of travel at one mile per minute seemed impossible. Many thought the human body would be traumatized by such a speed. But we quickly achieved it.

Then, there was the speed of sound. Many thought it would not be achieved. Many thought a human being would be literally torn apart at such a speed. But we did it.

Now, the next obstacle is the speed of light. Can we surpass it? I believe it is possible.

Let me share this thought. We know what would theoretically happen if the speed of light were surpassed by some object---the object could not be perceived---it would not be visible. In fact, as long as it traveled this enormous speed, it would never be visible to us---because it would be literally reaching the future from our vantage point. (Like with the sound barrier being broken there is a loud boom, I am not sure about some tremendous flash of light if the light barrier were broken) But...let us just go along with this for a minute. There could be microscopic/sub-atomic objects/particles traveling faster than the speed of light all around us. How could we ever perceive them? I don't think we could. But they could be out there. I believe the only reason why the scientists say the speed of light cannot be broken is because nothing can be perceived as existing at that speed. So therefore it is rendered as impossible. But, if these faster than light particles were among us, we would never know it---so they could theoretically exist in my opinion.

And if the greatest minds in the world today continue to say the surpassing of the speed of light is impossible, there is something they cannot argue. Just as 185,999 miles per second exists in this sentence as a valid measurement of speed, so does 186,001 miles per second. They are only numbers and measurements---and they both exist---one is one mile per second short of the speed of light, the other, one mile per second faster than the speed of light---they both exist.

There are fundamental reasons for the light barrier that are qualitatively different from other supposed speed caps you've cited. One is that the amount of energy to accelerate an object with positive rest mass to c is infinite (there are other arguments, for example that super luminal transmissions lead readily to nonsensical causality paradoxes). The argument from ignorance is pretty much just giving yourself carte blanche to believe anything at all, which just defeats the purpose of thinking.

No in a state of energy its only speed = c....

My belief is that the light barrier will be broken---there is such a thing as 186,001 miles per second. It is only a measurement. Measurements can be broken. The problem with science is that once a scientist establishes a law, they disregard anything else that conflicts it. Scientists established the so-called theory that the speed of light cannot be broken---and how can scientists be so arrogant today to think the present laws are correct when so many have been faulted in the past?

I would have been called crazy in the past to suggest the earth was round. I would have been persecuted at one time for suggesting the earth was not the center of the universe. Those were firmly established laws---and you did not dare speak against them.

The laws of today will be found to be faulted too. We will never understand the strangeness of this universe---it is not meant to be understood. How dare we place a speed limit on it.

One thing to remember is that measurements are human abstractions about the world. And so it's possible for us to imagine things that don't actually correspond to physical world. (What is "an object with a mass of negative 5 kilograms"?) That is, the way our abstractions work isn't necessarily how the universe works. Also, humans don't put laws on the universe -- it's common misperception that science works that way. It's rather that everything we've observed about a phenomenon leads to a compelling case that that phenomenon is a physical "law." IOW, it's a law of universe as set forth by g-d (or whomever one likes), as best we can tell.

Also, when a theory clicks into place with other theories that also have a lot of compelling evidence, it reinforces how 'compelling' that theory is, and the idea that we're actually understanding something deep about the structure of the universe. There's no reason to think the universe has deep structure like that, but to me that's the amazing part -- that it actually seems like it does, and moreso the more we figure out.

There was no good reason to think think there was a "sound barrier" -- those arguments were "hand waving" vagaries. It's like someone saying "the stock market will never go above 10,000." Someone can say it, but there's no compelling reasons to really think it's true. Or, I could predict that in future it will be realized that the Earth really is flat -- but it's very hard to see how any evidence could be compelling enough to overcome the case that it's round. Errors will certainly be found and corrections made, but they don't seem equally likely for every 'law' we've figured out.

True, measurements are abstractions humans try to place on things in the universe.

I have often thought about this in regard to time. Time would then appear to only be a measurement of noticing the revolution of the earth, and the movement of our planet around the sun. Of course, each planet has its own day and year according to these so-called time measurements. But time? That does seem abstract. Can you see it? No, but we can sense a progression of events. But it seems that time would then be something that could be non-existent in that it is only a measurement of movement---and something invented by human beings to manage life and measure these movements.

Just for everyone's information in this forum, I am more educated on the topic of astronomy and science than it may seem in regards to the so-called limit of reaching the speed of light and surpassing it. I enjoy bringing out theoretical arguments to challenge thinking. If I had to bet money on whether or not we will break the light barrier---I would not bet heavily. But I can say, I cannot rule out the possibility that the light barrier can be broken some day---that is my personal belief.

Yes... Have people ever took a spectromiter and used it to clock 186,000 mi/s?

and in reality light dosent even travel at the speed of light...

t travels apx... uhhhh about 179,000-181,000 mi/s... so what truly is the speed of light.... no one can truly tell...

There is indeed

It is called Čerenkov radiation. Look it up on Google. The thing about the speed of light is that it has a different value in different mediums. The one typically quoted is in vacuum. However, it is slower in other mediums such as water. When beta particles are emitted in nuclear reactors they are emitted faster than the speed of light (in water) and this gives rise to Čerenkov radiation. A sort of "sonic boom" of light. The reason why the water around nuclear reactors glows blue.

That would probably be an incredibly blinding light indeed. I want to thank those of you who have engaged in this discussion so far---it's been most interesting---just perfect for Aspie minds.

I have taken university coursework in astronomy, but our focus was more on star evolution and the study of eclipses. I have gone ahead and researched into the light barrier thing. I cannot rule out the possibility of breaking this barrier, but it definitely seems to make more sense in accepting that the speed of light cannot be broken.

Right now I would say I am 95% convinced the speed of light cannot be broken, and 5% sure there is a possibility that it can be broken.

I would like to add something else here on this discussion that I started on the speed of light. It is hard to find a discussion forum anywhere else on the internet when something like this is argued---you don't have members telling others to go to #%$*, etc. People are usually rude and obnoxious with each other in most internet forums. I mean we see that even on the comments on youtube. I am most thankful that in the wrongplanet people tend to behave better (however I have seen some that are quite bad). But what I am saying is that I thank each one of you for discussing this so far in a respectful polite manner with me and others. Now, let's debate on .

Heh... Exactly why i made it... The realm of physics have always interested me... Sooooo... i thought it would do so to others as well...

Though there could be ways around it, of course -- one of my favorites is this one by Miguel Alcubierre (he worked out an idea using relativity that you could 'surf' a patch of space-time on a wave (er... for lack of a better analogy)): "The Alcubierre Warp Drive"


QFT

Ive also seen a drive that rides on gravitational waves to... creating a masive gravitational disruption to create a wave... "Surfing" through space...

Actually, interestingly enough, the speed of light is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second, because the meter was actually redefined in the early 80s in terms of how far light moves in a second. That way, any precise measurement never changes the figure for c, but just refines the precision with which we know the meter.

I started discussing the speed of light with one of my gifted classes and asked them to do some research on it. I had mentioned the idea of using a giant clock like machine with an incredibly long arm---like I originally suggested at the beginning of this thread. But TallyMan states that there would be more energy required to turn it than in the whole universe. I assume then that what he says is correct on this for he seems knowledgable on this topic. The arm would have to be incredibly long. But it is still fun to think about it. Does anyone know the formula for determining the speed the arm would be moving along various points of its length? Even though I had majored in math for a time---I seem to have forgotten this stuff.

I see now that there are more ideas for traveling these speeds. I am not familiar with those, but I will be anxious to look into them.

I think the goal of anyone wanting to travel these speeds is working with the concept of time travel. Of course for that, it is not necessary to travel the speed of light, but at speeds near it. To be honest, with the uncertainty of the future, I am not sure I would even want to advance into the future---who knows what we would find.