• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

FTL is here!

From the website
It will help restore the logical common sense reasoning in scientific communities
thus allowing the progress of civilization to continue with out legacy of
dark ages!

Einstein new that Doppler in Lorentz give asymmetric shifts so he..

..invented his own version of Doppler theory,
but he overlooked one small detail.
Click to expand...


"Einstien new"?

Typo or tosser, I can't decide, but it seriously puts a dampner on my enthusiasm...
 
Come on they're german, give them a break- they have obviously been using a Microsoft translation device for the website ;)
 
It's a fiendish conspiracy to discredit them by making them look daft!
 
You can buy much cheaper co-ax cable even from maplins! And even if you can push energy down a cable faster than light you still can't use it faster at the other end....:confused:
 
Faster than light? Just get an optical fibre cable with some light going down it and lob it across the room. You have now just marginally increased the speed of light. I don't believe in the 'speed of light' as a constant any more. I've gone off it. If light always moved at the same speed refraction wouldn't work...
 
Refraction? That's interesting: I see what you mean, but I have no idea if you're right or not....I'm sure I knew all this stuff when I was at school.
Definately could do with a physicist of some sort on this thread.
 
Speed of light is constant for any given medium - hence refraction.

The speed of light c as a constant is defined as the speed of light in a vacuum.
 
What happens when you are travelling at near light speed and you switch on your torch? Does the beam seem to creep slowly across the room or do those photons break the light barrier?

Will they be moving at 'light speed' relative to you or to a 'stationary' observer? If the former were true, then to the bod watching, they would now be doing nearly 2c...
 
What happens when you are travelling at near light speed and you switch on your torch? .

The light travels at the same speed for the observer because their frame of reference will slow down ( time dilation ).

To the stationary observer it still moves at the speed of light ( it just appears to the, to be moving away from the moving torch-holder at c - their speed.

It takes a little getting your head around.

thanks

Uncle Bulgaria
 
From Randi's column last week:

This last April 1st, we missed our annual Flying Pig Awards, due to pressures of other work, and a heavy lecture schedule. As usual, there was a full field of likely awardees. For next April's event, our good friend Peter Zimmerman has assured us that he's discovered a big winner:

It is my high privilege to nominate Dr. Randell L. Mills, MD, president and CEO of BlackLight® Power, Inc. for both the Pigasus and IgNobel awards. Dr. Mills has produced the Grand Unified Theory of Classical Quantum Mechanics ("GUT-CQM," also known as "Gut-Con") which, in about 1000 pages, stands all of 20th-century physics on its head, predicting anti-gravity as a consequence of the changing shape (disks, hollow spheres) of the electron and sub-ground-states of the hydrogen atom. Mills is also able, at the drop of a quantum, to postdict almost any result that he reads about in the press including publications such as Scientific American, Science News, and — I think — the National Enquirer.
As support for the award of the Pigasus prize, I cite the fact that [five competent scientists] have now conclusively proven on its own terms that the entire theory is bogus from its very first line. In view of the fact that Mills has raised over $30 MILLION dollars and is now raising $3.5 MILLION more from investors (some investors include your tax-paying electric light and power companies skimming the money from their ratepayers), I believe that no nominee in the history of either award has ever been more worthy of receiving it. Indeed, we have here a nominee for whom the famous Randi/JREF Challenge would be small change!

I must say that this claim by Dr. Mills of a paradigm-shaking revolution in science and the nature of the universe, is of a much higher class than those that I usually receive, merely because of the academic status of the originator. It is merely attired in more formal costume that others than arrive at the JREF office every day. I offer you the following submission as an example of what usually passes before my eyes, spelling and all:


I claim that my Faster Than Light data transmission cable devices propagate signal and or information in digital format with propagation speeds that are no less than 2(two) times faster than the speed of light as measured in vacuum. Below are the proposed definition of what constitute both a positive and negative result. . . . The border line: If my FTL data transmission line should propagate signal with speed that is below 200% of c than that speed should be considered as negative result. If my FTL data transmission line should propagate signal with speed that is equal or higher than 200% of c than that speed should be considered as positive result. Now to "Cut the Red Tape" I propose this: I will send the following Items in one single package: One original, signed and notarized Million Dollar Challenge Application. One 10m long 10MBit/sec FTL data transmission with electrical specification including schematic diagrams, interconnection hardware and power supply adaptor suitable to operate in the US. One US stamp affixed and addressed envelope. One photo-copy of my US Passport's first page. One signed and dated copy of mutual agreement of test conditions and limitations. Finally, my Faster Than Light data transmission lines or cables do not require my presence in order to function as specified. So, feel free to make any kind of test procedures that should be relevant to propagation speeds measurements. And I assume that you very well know that all electronic devices can be damaged by exciding the electrical specifications of input signals and power supply parameters.
Gotcha, Zimmerman! Try to beat that! (What this man's passport has to do with his claim, I've yet to figure out...)
 
Clark Campaigns at Light Speed (No, not Clark Kent!)
NEW CASTLE, New Hampshire -- Wesley Clark: Rhodes scholar, four-star general, NATO commander, futurist?

During a whirlwind campaign swing Saturday through New Hampshire, Clark, the newest Democratic presidential candidate, gave supporters one of the first glimpses into his views on technology.

"We need a vision of how we're going to move humanity ahead, and then we need to harness science to do it," Clark told a group of about 50 people in New Castle attending a house party -- a tradition in New Hampshire presidential politics that enables well-connected voters to get an up-close look at candidates.

Then the 58-year-old Arkansas native, who retired from the military three years ago, dropped something of a bombshell on the gathering.

"I still believe in e=mc², but I can't believe that in all of human history, we'll never ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to reach where we want to go," said Clark. "I happen to believe that mankind can do it.

"I've argued with physicists about it, I've argued with best friends about it. I just have to believe it. It's my only faith-based initiative." Clark's comment prompted laughter and applause from the gathering.

Gary Melnick, a senior astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said Clark's faith in the possibility of faster-than-light, or FTL, travel was "probably based more on his imagination than on physics."

While Clark's belief may stem from his knowledge of sophisticated military projects, there's no evidence to suggest that humans can exceed the speed of light, said Melnick. In fact, considerable evidence posits that FTL travel is impossible, he said.

"Even if Clark becomes president, I doubt it would be within his powers to repeal the powers of physics," said Melnick, whose research has focused on interstellar clouds and the formation of stars and planets.

Einstein's theory of special relativity says that time slows down as an object approaches the speed of light. Some scientists say that FTL travel therefore implies time travel, or being able to travel to the future or the past.

Clark's comment about FTL travel came at the end of a long answer to a question about his views of NASA and the U.S. space program. Clark said he supports the agency and believes "America needs a dream and a space program."

But Clark said the nation must prioritize its technological goals and take a pragmatic approach to focusing its scientific resources and talent.

"Some goals may take a lifetime to reach," he said. "We need to set those goals now. We need to rededicate ourselves to science, engineering and technology in this country."

Clark used his visit to New Hampshire -- which will hold the nation's first primary election in January -- to demonstrate that he hasn't forgotten the cyberspace activists who cajoled him into running in the first place, as well as to introduce voters to his views on a range of subjects.

"You have changed American politics, with the power of the Internet, modern communications and committed people who care," Clark told a handful of supporters Saturday at the Draft Clark movement's New Hampshire headquarters in Dover.

At the brief meeting prior to a noisy noontime rally on the steps of Dover's City Hall, Clark met some of the New England organizers of the Internet-based movement for the first time. Those are the supporters who had worked for the past six months to convince the former general to seek the Democratic nomination.

Clark's visit to the humble office -- the first opened by the nationwide draft movement-- came just 10 days after his decision to enter the race, and amid reports that some members of the draft have felt cast aside as Clark's official campaign swings into full gear under the control of seasoned political organizers, many with connections to former President Clinton.
Click to expand...
 
Light speed

Spotted this on the FT main site.

Quote..While Clark's belief may stem from his knowledge of sophisticated military projects, there's no evidence to suggest that humans can exceed the speed of light, said Melnick. In fact, considerable evidence posits that FTL travel is impossible, he said.

Didn't they say that about manned flight?
 
186.000 miles a sec or 12 miles a min
 
the speed of light barrier can be broken by not traveling in a straight line,gravity bends light possibly bends time so...........
its just a lack of imagination to say that somthing is impossible
didnt the first passengers on steam engines leapt for there lives as they thought they would be chrushed by the velocity/wind resistance at the then astonishing speed of 16mph
 
light travels,well mostly at
10to the power or 8 meters /second

thats if gravity etc dosnt slow it down speed it up etc
 
I'm fuzzy on the whole light "speed" thing, isn't light just there ? how does it go from A to B? my head hurts, you people are scaring me ...



:D
 
LobeliaOverhill said:
I'm fuzzy on the whole light "speed" thing, isn't light just there ? how does it go from A to B? my head hurts, you people are scaring me ...
Click to expand...
If God switched the Sun out one day, at exactly 12 O'clock Noon, there at the Sun, then we wouldn't know about it until, 12:08pm.

Light, in a vacuum travels at 186,000miles per second. It can indeed be slowed down, being made out of photons, which have a tiny amount of mass. It can't (according to Albert Einstein) be speeded up. It has a top speed, which is a constant and makes a lot of other things work, like E=MC² for example, where C is the constant of the speed of light.

That means that if you put enough energy in, through acceleration for instance, any matter involved will be converted at least partially into energy itself. BANG!

This also means that as a piece of matter accelerates towards the speed of light, C then more and more energy would be needed to continue it's acceleration, as it's increasing its mass, eventually you would need to apply infinite amounts of energy to get it up to light speed and that's not easy.

So, most attempts to go light speed significant distances (parsecs, light years, etc.), usually involve some sort of sneaky, nipping round the back of our reality warping of multi dimensional space, or something.

If possible, this would also involve mindbogglingly vast amounts of available energy to power it, but at least less than infinite amounts. Perhaps only the complete conversion of a star system, or two, or the creation and manipulation of a couple of spinning singularities, or even making a couple of hundredweight of anti-matter.

That sort of thing. Hope that helps to clear things up. ;)
 
What the *&^% is a Photon?

A photon is a discrete bundle of energy given off, at an angle, by an electron when you hit it with something and it's knocked off course in some way. The photon is a sort of vectored wave/packet that only exists when it hits something, otherwise, it's sort of potentially eternal.

I've said that it has a tiny amount of mass, but thinking about it, as it travels at the speed of light (in a vacuum), then its potential mass must be a function of its being a sort of parcel of energy, being pushed along at the speed of light.

It must have mass, because it's affected by gravitational fields and it gives up its energy again when it bangs into something, this could also make more photons (see gamma radiation, etc.). It depends on the amount of energy parcelled up in the photon wavicle to begin with.

Rynner could probably put us all right on this, if he felt like it.
 
Re: What the *&^% is a Photon?

AndroMan said:
Rynner could probably put us all right on this, if he felt like it.
Click to expand...
Er... [looks it up in encyclopaedia]

Ah! Photons are massless, but they do have energy and momentum.

The curvature of light (or any orbit) in a gravitational field is a function of the General Relativity interpretation of gravity as a distortion of spacetime in the region around a massive body.

So light reacts to gravity, but, being massless, it does not create any gravitational effects itself.

Further than that is a matter for physicists to discuss! :D
 
So light reacts to gravity, but, being massless, it does not create any gravitational effects itself.

Not quite right, I'm afraid; light has energy, and does exert a gravitational pull itself, according to the formula e=mc^2...

energy itself creates gravity as if it were the equivalent amount of mass
(but this is a very small effect unless you are talking about black holes)
(you can increase the gravity of a black hole by shining a light into it, for instance)
 
p.younger said:
What about Tachyons ?
Click to expand...
Rather disappointing, Im afraid, perhaps the most backward members of the subatomic particle family.

Also prone to the worst form of premature ejaculation you can imagine. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top