Faster than the Speed of Light.


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Faster than the Speed of Light.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3
Author Message
Profile PKII
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 May 07
Posts: 138
Credit: 1,611,614
RAC: 188
United States
Message 1101816 - Posted: 29 Apr 2011, 20:29:48 UTC

The gravitational force of a black hole exceeds the speed of light. If it didn't then light could escape. :)

Profile Wahnsinn Images
Send message
Joined: 21 Apr 11
Posts: 7
Credit: 7,977
RAC: 0
Germany
Message 1101828 - Posted: 29 Apr 2011, 21:03:23 UTC

For interstellar traveling, there may be some trick you could use.
You'll never be faster than Light, but you can fly another way so your way is shorter than the Way the Light goes. if you want to do this, you need very much gravity, means a black hole. there is a small area near the black hole, where you can take a shorter way.
This Way looks like beeing longer, because you are flying a courve around this black hole, or better, it seems like you're flying a courve, but actually the light does. This means you can send a Radio signal to the aimpoint and you can be there before the signal comes. So it seems like you where faster than light without travelling in time.

Profile john3760
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Feb 11
Posts: 334
Credit: 3,400,979
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1101848 - Posted: 29 Apr 2011, 21:47:59 UTC - in response to Message 1101601.
Last modified: 29 Apr 2011, 22:21:07 UTC

I'm new here :D and loving these threads

so am i . i think johnny is great if i was in ireland he would be just the person i would love to have a pint and a chat with

edit- how does everybody else get their quotes to turn blue and italic i copied and pasted and it looks as though i wrote it myself? :p

edit again before i went out i was watching a documentary about the theory of time travel with steven hawkins and other well known theoretical scientists which of course mentioned more than once about travelling faster or close to the speed of light and even those bright people basically concluded that because of increased mass as you travel closer to the speed of light you would require an infinate amount of energy (a lot more than we can harness) im pretty sure einstien concluded that almost 100 years ago .we havent really come far in this have we? all the theorists now seem to be talking about bending space time to travel great distances instead of travelling faster than the speed of light but this is pretty much still theoretical . i concluded that they still aren't really sure about how the universe really works but they do make extremely good television programmes ;)

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1102086 - Posted: 30 Apr 2011, 12:34:27 UTC - in response to Message 1101816.

The gravitational force of a black hole exceeds the speed of light. If it didn't then light could escape. :)



I don't think that is quite right. The force exerted by the black hole is so great that even light can escape. light is a photon. The gravity is so immense that even a photon is stopped in its tracks.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,180,410
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1102118 - Posted: 30 Apr 2011, 14:53:27 UTC

Space is so curved up upon itself that no light can escape. The escape velocity is greater than the speed of light.

What then I wonder of Hawking radiation ??

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3868
Credit: 396,192
RAC: 202
Italy
Message 1102148 - Posted: 30 Apr 2011, 15:32:48 UTC - in response to Message 1102118.

Space is so curved up upon itself that no light can escape. The escape velocity is greater than the speed of light.

What then I wonder of Hawking radiation ??

I think that is a quantum fluctuation, obeying Heisenberg's relations.
Tullio
____________

C Olival
Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 10
Posts: 209
Credit: 10,675
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1102298 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 0:03:52 UTC - in response to Message 1102118.

Sagittarius A* (pronounced "Sagittarius A-star", standard abbreviation Sgr A*) is a bright and very compact astronomical radio source at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, near the border of the constellations Sagittarius and Scorpius. It is part of a larger astronomical feature known as Sagittarius A. Sagittarius A* is likely to be the location of a supermassive black hole

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1102300 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 0:16:29 UTC - in response to Message 1102298.

and?
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,651,675
RAC: 101
Ireland
Message 1102342 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 3:15:41 UTC - in response to Message 1101848.
Last modified: 1 May 2011, 3:22:26 UTC


so am i . i think johnny is great if i was in ireland he would be just the person i would love to have a pint and a chat with

;)

Thanks John3760!
Hopefully we will meet for a pint some day!

Guys,
Its funny reading this thread. I have to restrain myself from saying too much here. But i will say this;

This figure - 3x10^8m/s is what we are told is the speed of light, today!!!

Well its wrong. We can and we will travel faster than that speed! And time won't slow down, and we won't be crushed to the size of a pea travelling at that speed, and we won't travel backward or forward in time either. Thats my prediction as a result of the scientific information i have acquired.

John.
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,180,410
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1102381 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 8:02:40 UTC
Last modified: 1 May 2011, 8:29:54 UTC

Ya know,

I thought that we americans were the only ones who still enjoyed the "pint"--albeit a measly 16 ounce one. I figured by now you all would be drinking your 500 milliliters instead of your "proper pints"

As a fact, clocks have slowed due to space travel, and have varied on an airplane going east as opposed to west. A clock at the bottom of a clock tower has been measured to run at a different rate than one at the top due to the difference in gravity due to the difference in distance from the center of the Earth. All of this has been carefully measured and the Atomic bomb did actually go off.

The cesium clock (in the UK by the way) has a frequency of 9,192,631,770 cycles per second and it' s accuracy is better than one part in ten to the thirteenth power. Thus, the effects that are described by Einstein and Lorentz can and have been measured. Our astronauts are a few seconds younger than their birthdays indicate.

I too have developed my own analysis and i will now choose to divulge this to claim precedence over Johnny's work:

Profile john3760
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Feb 11
Posts: 334
Credit: 3,400,979
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1102445 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 12:20:24 UTC - in response to Message 1102381.
Last modified: 1 May 2011, 12:23:40 UTC

Yes Daddio, in england we can still enjoy a pint, but only on draught :(
wines,spirits,bottles,cans etc have all been converted to ml :(
but we have still been able to hold on to our beloved pint :)

(although i have occasionally dropped one ;))

cheers!!
john3760

great comics by the way !!

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3093
Credit: 2,651,675
RAC: 101
Ireland
Message 1102565 - Posted: 1 May 2011, 21:49:56 UTC - in response to Message 1102381.


I too have developed my own analysis and i will now choose to divulge this to claim precedence over Johnny's work:

Dad, Dad, Daddio,
Your scientific and mathematical documentation is second to none! I take it the big scribble is a precision drawing of the detonation of an atomic bomb in the equation!

John.
____________

RealX1
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 11
Posts: 4
Credit: 610
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1102677 - Posted: 2 May 2011, 7:27:57 UTC

Is it possible that 'distance' is an illusion and therefore bypassable? My understanding is that in quantum entanglement two electrons for instance are synchronized without time lapsed between their movements. I realise that we are just beginning to understand these things but I guess that's my point. It would seem to me that many of these puzzles we struggle with are related to a misunderstanding of how distance, time, speed, frame of reference, space etc really function and how they relate to and affect eachother.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1102713 - Posted: 2 May 2011, 12:19:22 UTC - in response to Message 1102677.

Is it possible that 'distance' is an illusion and therefore bypassable? My understanding is that in quantum entanglement two electrons for instance are synchronized without time lapsed between their movements. I realise that we are just beginning to understand these things but I guess that's my point. It would seem to me that many of these puzzles we struggle with are related to a misunderstanding of how distance, time, speed, frame of reference, space etc really function and how they relate to and affect eachother.

I watched the same show last night. Though how this gets us to other places is unknown. Perhaps the star trek "subspace" isn't so far fetched now.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,180,410
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1102730 - Posted: 2 May 2011, 14:15:35 UTC

This has always been a little fuzzy to me. If you look at the local particle that is entangled then you see it's state (spin)--then you know the state of the other particle. In theory the state is not determined until you look then the remote particle assumes the opposite state. Well-- rational thought says that the state was already determined and then how can the information be "time stamped" at the remote location to see the state selection occurrence. And if you looked before hand that would ruin the experiment.

Since this seems like philosophical sophistry to me, I will have to study quantum mechanics more to appreciate what is being said in this regard.

Right now it looks to me like "if a tree fell in the forest and no one observed it was a sound made" I claim the sound was made but nobody heard it. If you posit that a sound can only exist if someone hears it then you have a different answer. I say a sound is a disturbance in the surrounding medium and therefore a sound was created. I say that the state was determined and you will find out when you look.

I am aware of the two-slit anomalies in this regard--just trying to get an understanding of what may not be understood.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1102753 - Posted: 2 May 2011, 15:41:58 UTC - in response to Message 1102730.

Thats true what was interesting is that the state of the first particle changed and over a great distance the other particle changed as well. It was more than just knowing what state one particle is in so the other can be determined. They knew what both particles were doing. Logic would dictate that at great distance 2 objects would take time to react to each other. The test actually proved that there wasn't any lag time
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2645
Credit: 1,180,410
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1102923 - Posted: 3 May 2011, 2:41:37 UTC

They could not know since they can't communicate from one place to the next faster than the speed of light.

Shouldn't it not be called entanglement since I believe that one spin is positive and the other is negative. How do you determine that the particle is in both states or neither without looking. If we could flip the state locally and have synchronized clocks at both sites then we could see if the information was transmitted faster than the speed of light. We should be able to alter the spin with microwaves.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8601
Credit: 4,257,640
RAC: 1,339
United Kingdom
Message 1103267 - Posted: 4 May 2011, 13:06:25 UTC - in response to Message 1102923.

They could not know since they can't communicate from one place to the next faster than the speed of light.

What if they already know? They were entangled after all...

Shouldn't it not be called entanglement since I believe that one spin is positive and the other is negative. How do you determine that the particle is in both states or neither without looking. If we could flip the state locally and have synchronized clocks at both sites then we could see if the information was transmitted faster than the speed of light. We should be able to alter the spin with microwaves.

Claims of 'instantaneous' suggest that there is no communication being done. Whatever state/information is already there.

Hence the idea that there are 'hidden variables' in the system that resolve deterministically into something that is observed dependant on an initial state and subsequent history.


For example for a trivial example, assume that your particles oscillate in the presence of each other at a very high frequency between two observable characteristics. Once separated again they remain stable oncemore in opposing states. The act of testing the state destroys a particle.

Hence, post-entanglement, testing one particle can then be used to predict the state of its entangled partner...


The real test is to devise a test that in effect 'untangles' entangled particles...

Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8601
Credit: 4,257,640
RAC: 1,339
United Kingdom
Message 1103269 - Posted: 4 May 2011, 13:16:54 UTC - in response to Message 1102730.
Last modified: 4 May 2011, 13:31:41 UTC

... I am aware of the two-slit anomalies in this regard--just trying to get an understanding of what may not be understood.


No anomaly there. The clue is in that a single photon can 'interfere' with itself...

Assuming your 'particles' are actually a unit 'bundle' of waves, the waves can interfere all by themselves around close enough slits at the site of the Young's slits. The wave packet then carries on its way on whatever angle away from the slits.

My argument there, is that the single wave packet goes through BOTH slits simultaneously.

That idea is backed up by the observation that evanescence[*] is possible.


Keep searchin',
Martin

* No, not the musical version!
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Faster than the Speed of Light.

Copyright © 2014 University of California