»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Faster Than Light
| The Alley |
|
Faster Than Light |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. “Dr Sergio Bertolucci said it was vital not to "fool around" given the staggering implications of the result.” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15471118 What are some of the staggering implications? . |
||
| © Copyright 2011 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Uncas Member
since 2010-07-30
Posts 408 |
quote: There aren't any. Unless you're a physicist, in which case everything you thought you knew just got turned on its head. I read about this when it was breaking news, my first reaction was wow! Then I thought about how it'd effect day to day life and I changed my mind to - so what. Eventually I looked a little closer at the details of the experiment and the findings and now I'm more than a little sceptical that it'll actually turn out to be anything other than a miscalculation. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I remember, in the movie K-Pax, Kevin Spacey was a visitor from a very distant planet. When asked how he could reach Earth since nothing could travel faster than light, Spacey remarked that it was easy to travel faster than light. When the scientists said Einstein proved that light travel was the fastest travel possible, Spacey made some comment on how Einstein knew there was something faster and he went into some details on why Einstein thought so. I don't remember what it was but it was impressive. Sure, it's only a movie, but travel faster than light could open up one heck of a lot of new possibilities. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
More and more effort is required to move a smaller and smaller weight as it gets closer and closer to lightspeed. As speed approaches C, the amount of effort required to get to lightspeed approaches infinity. That's if my understanding of Einstein is correct. The way I've heard it expressed by some folks — and I wish I could give references here, but my memory is shoddy and I'm not any good at math — there may be some sort of loophole involved. That is, one may not be able to get to lightspeed because of the difficulty on the approach. That doesn't necessarily mean that one can't go faster than lightspeed if one can find a way of getting there without passing C first. That sounds a bit odd to me. Of course that would depend on how much of the theory depends on something like linear acceleration, which is how I tend to think about speed, and how much may depend on geometry. I'm told that a lot of relativity has to do with geometry in some fashion, and that in the Einsteinian universe space is not to be considered a dimension involving only length, breadth and height but also time as a geometric consideration, and that mass distorts space in predictable ways. I can imagine speed between two points, but when you toss in distortions of mass and time, my brain simply goes on strike. It would be nice, however, if we were able to access speeds greater than light and survive the process. It would make star travel at least a possibility, and that would be something marvelous indeed. |
||
|
Uncas Member
since 2010-07-30
Posts 408 |
quote: What Spacey said Mike, was that Einstein proved that you couldn't accelerate to the speed of light but that there was no reason why an entity already travelling at light speed couldn't accelerate past it. Which is basically what Bob said: one may not be able to get to lightspeed because of the difficulty on the approach. That doesn't necessarily mean that one can't go faster than lightspeed if one can find a way of getting there without passing C first. Bob, I think your brain going on strike is fairly common when you start to look at the concept of travelling 'faster than light'. That's largely because 'faster than light' is a nebulous definition - it can either mean a speed faster than the maximum velocity of light (299792458 m / s) or simply getting from point A to point B faster than light can get there. It's a subtle difference and separating the two can certainly cause a serious brain strike. I wonder though, have you read about the experiment they conducted? It's worth looking at because one thing it does prove is that brain strikes are more common than you think and aren't restricted to non-scientific folk like us.  |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Thanks for bringing that back up, Uncas. I thought it was an excellent movie, by the way. We don't need light travel to cause brains to go on strike. The Alley does that very well.  |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
How fast does light travel through something such as a solid and opaque rock? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Here in the Alley, Ess? |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
