Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence
Previous · 1 . . . 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
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 ____________ Mandriva Linux A user friendly OS! See new freedom Mageia2 The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3) | |
| ID: 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 | |
| ID: 1323725 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324275 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324280 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324299 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324313 · | |
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. We should hope JG is working on his book so he can amaze the world. ____________ | |
| ID: 1324322 · | |
|
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 | |
| ID: 1324373 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 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. 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 | |
| ID: 1324427 · | |
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> ____________ | |
| ID: 1324436 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 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 | |
| ID: 1324445 · | |
Speaking of light - I happened to watch this New Year's Eve fireworks through a couple of binoculars. 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 | |
| ID: 1324446 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324454 · | |
|
I crunch Einstein also, as it's a really cool project. | |
| ID: 1324456 · | |
|
As I understood it, space also get warped by gravity, at least that is what the LIGO observatories are trying to measure. | |
| ID: 1324457 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324458 · | |
|
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. | |
| ID: 1324459 · | |
Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Prejudice v. Science: When Theory Trumps Hard Evidence
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |