Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · Next
Author Message
Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8489
Credit: 4,189,960
RAC: 1,809
United Kingdom
Message 1323717 - Posted: 2 Jan 2013, 19:30:32 UTC - in response to Message 1323617.

I still predict that particles and things can travel at faster than light speed, without breaking any of Einstein's theories. I don't know how, I'm not a scientist, but I am absolutely sure it is possible.

OOooer...

That sounds just like our friend Guinness reincarnate... You sure you're not his multiple-login alter ego?...


Keep searchin',
Martin

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

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1323725 - Posted: 2 Jan 2013, 19:49:09 UTC - in response to Message 1323717.

I don't disagree with him for the point that we have not actually proven beyond a doubt that light speed cannot be broken. We know it would require a great deal of energy to overcome it. So who is to say we don't, in the future, find a source of energy that supplies that power and enables us to move things faster than light
____________
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 Allie in Vancouver
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 07
Posts: 3949
Credit: 1,604,668
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1324275 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 18:53:21 UTC

It has been shown in experiments that both mass increases and time slows with increased speed and the the changes are directly in line with Relativity's predictions.

At the speed of light time passage drops to zero and mass becomes infinite. It would require not just a massive amount of energy to go faster but an infinite amount of energy to go faster. Because time has stopped, it would also require an infinite amount of time for this infinite amount of energy to make this infinite amount of mass to go faster.

I, like most everyone else, wishes it were otherwise but it is a fact that the speed of light is the absolute speed limit.
____________
Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324280 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 19:04:02 UTC

KenzieB is correct. All of our observations track Einsteins predictions of time speed and gravity perfectly. When we observe supernova, or jets from black holes, everything we observe follows the predictions. This is also true for super colliders. We smash protons at energies that haven't been seen since the beginning of the universe, but no sub-particle travels faster than light. If we aren't seing anything faster than light at these tremendouse energy levels, for both the very massive, and the very small, then it is not reasonable that a workable, containable level of energy would produce different results.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32053
Credit: 13,735,420
RAC: 26,891
United Kingdom
Message 1324299 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 19:28:48 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jan 2013, 19:32:42 UTC

Hi Martin, no it is me, I promise! JG was an amusing distraction, but he made too many outrageous claims, and gave misleading information. When called out and challenged, he disappeared. I base my prediction upon my opinion, that I believe that ET has been here before. That would not be realistically possible without FTL travel. Of course I cannot prove it, and you all know that, but hey, a man is entitled to his thoughts.

Steve, I simply don't know how FTL travel could work, certainly not within the laws of physics and the universe as we currently know them. Kenz and ES99 have a far better understanding of scientific principles than I do, but again they are both constrained within current knowledge, as indeed you are. Yes it will need some massive breakthrough. For the reason I gave above I think it will happen one day, sadly I won't be around to see it.

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324313 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 19:46:41 UTC

I hope we do Chris. One thing I admit I don't understand is the expansion of space. That seems to defy logic, but the mechanism isn't known. Dark energy is really a way to describe that "We don't know, but X quantity of Dark Energy is required to balance observations." The same can be said for Dark Matter, but with the effect of keeping galaxies from flying apart.

In dealing with particle physics, or enormous energy levels, there is no indication that anything travels, or could travel faster than light. Usually a new discovery would be based on an observation that goes outside the structured knowledge, but we don't even have that.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2490
Credit: 5,214,993
RAC: 8,183
United States
Message 1324322 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 19:58:27 UTC - in response to Message 1324299.

Hi Martin, no it is me, I promise! JG was an amusing distraction, but he made too many outrageous claims, and gave misleading information. When called out and challenged, he disappeared. I base my prediction upon my opinion, that I believe that ET has been here before. That would not be realistically possible without FTL travel. Of course I cannot prove it, and you all know that, but hey, a man is entitled to his thoughts.

Steve, I simply don't know how FTL travel could work, certainly not within the laws of physics and the universe as we currently know them. Kenz and ES99 have a far better understanding of scientific principles than I do, but again they are both constrained within current knowledge, as indeed you are. Yes it will need some massive breakthrough. For the reason I gave above I think it will happen one day, sadly I won't be around to see it.

We should hope JG is working on his book so he can amaze the world.
____________

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1324373 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 21:23:38 UTC

Ok suppose we are able to make and control a light photon bubble(stolen from star trek) and were able to manipulate that bubble to the speed of light. The interior of the bubble would not be affected by the mass equation in that scenario
____________
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 Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32053
Credit: 13,735,420
RAC: 26,891
United Kingdom
Message 1324374 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 21:26:30 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jan 2013, 21:31:05 UTC

Hi Betreger - Well I would like to see him back. He went on holiday for reasons I have no absolutely no idea about, and disappeared shortly afterwards.

@Steve - the expansion of space as we can observe it from earth, is the result of our local big bang, in our part of the one and only single universe. Probably from a supermassive black hole exploding. The rate of expansion that we can observe is increasing, but it would do. You pop a bag of flour in spsce, and what is there to stop the particles speeding away in all directions with increasing velocity? No gravity, no air friction ....

Supposing you laid on your back on the moon and fired a high powered rifle into space, how fast would that bullet finally achieve in MPH? Or would the reaction alter the moons orbit in some miniscule way?

There is one Universe, there are many big bangs happening all over it, and expanding within it, like a cauldron bubbling on a stove, we just happen to live in the aftermath of our own local one. All the matter from our big bang will be devoured by other supermassive black holes elsewhere, and it all starts again.

As good a theory as any ....

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324427 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 23:46:08 UTC - in response to Message 1324374.

Hi Betreger - Well I would like to see him back. He went on holiday for reasons I have no absolutely no idea about, and disappeared shortly afterwards.

@Steve - the expansion of space as we can observe it from earth, is the result of our local big bang, in our part of the one and only single universe. Probably from a supermassive black hole exploding. The rate of expansion that we can observe is increasing, but it would do. You pop a bag of flour in spsce, and what is there to stop the particles speeding away in all directions with increasing velocity? No gravity, no air friction ....

Supposing you laid on your back on the moon and fired a high powered rifle into space, how fast would that bullet finally achieve in MPH? Or would the reaction alter the moons orbit in some miniscule way?

There is one Universe, there are many big bangs happening all over it, and expanding within it, like a cauldron bubbling on a stove, we just happen to live in the aftermath of our own local one. All the matter from our big bang will be devoured by other supermassive black holes elsewhere, and it all starts again.

As good a theory as any ....

You might be right about the caldron effect. Galaxies have been moving toward a certain area. I have guessed that it might be another big bang product, being massive enough to attract millions of galaxies.

The increasing acceleration of expanding space is the mystery to me. The expanding flour from a flour bag bursting in space, would never accelerate past it's initial state. It's true that nothing would slow it down, and it might be sped up due to gravity of a local body, but if that were the case, all the particles would eventually be headed in the same direction.

As far as firing a rifle bullet, there is no source of acceleration other than the initial chemicle reaction. Once again, if fired toward a massive body, it would accelerate, but even if fired into a black hole, it would not exceed light speed. It would however be strethced into a molecule thick string and be absorbed into the pure mass of the black hole. I think of a black hole as a solid particle, containing nothing but itself. All the previous particles had collapsed into just 1 chunk of mass.

I would love for there to be some observation that would give us a clue to FTL speed, but in the familiar dimensions we all experience throughout the visible universe, there are no such observations, regardless of energy levels. As far as we can see, every single particle is bound by light speed as a limit.

I would think that since theory is lacking on a FTL mechanism, as well as observation, it limits my thinking. The expanding universe, or in particular the accelerating expanding universe does tweak my mind a bit.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile Allie in Vancouver
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 07
Posts: 3949
Credit: 1,604,668
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1324436 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 0:34:02 UTC - in response to Message 1324373.

Ok suppose we are able to make and control a light photon bubble(stolen from star trek) and were able to manipulate that bubble to the speed of light. The interior of the bubble would not be affected by the mass equation in that scenario


Light photon bubble? Oooookayyyy. <backs slowly from the room>

____________
Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2490
Credit: 5,214,993
RAC: 8,183
United States
Message 1324443 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 1:06:30 UTC - in response to Message 1324427.

Steve, my guess is that is if we were to travel long distances in a short period of time it would involve the distortion of space. FTL travel would not be involved but the net effect would be the same.
____________

musicplayer
Send message
Joined: 17 May 10
Posts: 1457
Credit: 708,558
RAC: 759
Message 1324444 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 1:16:08 UTC
Last modified: 4 Jan 2013, 1:17:12 UTC

Speaking of light - I happened to watch this New Year's Eve fireworks through a couple of binoculars.

Interestingly, what appeared to be the light coming from the from the exploding fireworks appeared to be flashing out at blindingly fast speed, much faster than the visible, more physical remnants which also were visible by means of their illuminating parts.

My guess is that I may not be observing something which is traveling at the speed of light, but rather it is the energy which is coming from the initial explosion of the actual detonation of the fireworks itself in the air. I do not know what speeds may be around here, but definitely this goes extremely fast.

Perhaps SciManStev is able to explain this phenomenon better than myself? Possibly this may be observed during lightning as well and may then be called "sprites".

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324445 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 1:17:58 UTC - in response to Message 1324443.

Steve, my guess is that is if we were to travel long distances in a short period of time it would involve the distortion of space. FTL travel would not be involved but the net effect would be the same.

You could be right, but up to now, we have no evidence of that being possible or practical. I did read about the experiment someone wants to do in that arena on these forums, but I remain skeptical until something tangible is observed or shown feasible. Even with a controlled, directional distortion of space, wouldn't you have to manipulate the distortion at faster than light? Extra dimensions are a mind bender, and M-Theory requires 11 dimensions. As Tullio has indicated, there is no observational/experimental evidence for M-Theory, but it is the first theory where the math works for the very large, and the very small.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324446 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 1:23:40 UTC - in response to Message 1324444.

Speaking of light - I happened to watch this New Year's Eve fireworks through a couple of binoculars.

Interestingly, what appeared to be the light coming from the from the exploding fireworks appeared to be flashing out at blindingly fast speed, much faster than the visible, more physical remnants which also were visible by means of their illuminating parts.

My guess is that I may not be observing something which is traveling at the speed of light, but rather it is the energy which is coming from the initial explosion of the actual detonation of the fireworks itself in the air. I do not know what speeds may be around here, but definitely this goes extremely fast.

Perhaps SciManStev is able to explain this phenomenon better than myself? Possibly this may be observed during lightning as well and may then be called "sprites".

There is certainly nothing in what you observed traveling faster than light, but what is added is the shock wave caused by the explosions. The shock wave is much, much slower than light. Measuring the speed of light is easily done by cause and effect over a given distance, and happens much to fast for human perception. I certainly can't react to 186,000 miles per second. If the exact time a photon is released is known, then detected after a known distance, then the speed is easy to calculate.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2490
Credit: 5,214,993
RAC: 8,183
United States
Message 1324454 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:11:23 UTC - in response to Message 1324445.
Last modified: 4 Jan 2013, 2:20:02 UTC

Steve, after touring the LIGO observatory at Hanford I was able to get my head around the distortion of space by gravity, sort of. As I see it, it gravity from large masses may be a key to the riddle.
Of course we have not detected a gravity wave yet so this is very hypothetical. This is why I also crunch E@H.
____________

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324456 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:23:17 UTC
Last modified: 4 Jan 2013, 2:23:34 UTC

I crunch Einstein also, as it's a really cool project.
I always thought of gravity as a property of mass. It is a warpage of space, which gets more intense with greater and greater masses. Although I see a black hole a single particle, I have invisioned various physical sizes of black holes. Maybe one with a mass of a million suns is only a few inches (units) less in diameter than one with the mass of a billion suns.

Anyway, I would be very interested to learn of any controlling mechanism that could "steer" gravity.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2490
Credit: 5,214,993
RAC: 8,183
United States
Message 1324457 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:31:24 UTC - in response to Message 1324456.

As I understood it, space also get warped by gravity, at least that is what the LIGO observatories are trying to measure.
If true, I am certain we will not live long enough to see tangible space travel results.
____________

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324458 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:36:00 UTC
Last modified: 4 Jan 2013, 2:37:28 UTC

It's certainly facinating stuff to think about. I have been thinking about this kind of stuff since I was a small boy, and I never get tired of it.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Profile SciManStevProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 4878
Credit: 82,990,961
RAC: 39,131
United States
Message 1324459 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:58:51 UTC

I guess in keeping with the topic of this thread, I like to follow the evidence where ever it leads. If the existing evidence doesn't lead in a particular direction, I can't make my mind go there, but I can easily follow where it does lead. I really don't care where I end up, but that I follow the existing evidence to where it leads. I can easily reverse direction if new evidence contradicts what I learned previously, provided that it is substantiated.

Steve
____________
Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence

Copyright © 2014 University of California