## i think the speed of light is max

Message boards : Cafe SETI : i think the speed of light is max
Message board moderation

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

AuthorMessage
platium

Joined: 5 Jul 10
Posts: 212
Credit: 262,426
RAC: 0
Message 1013677 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 15:17:29 UTC

the speed of light will never be exceeded

ID: 1013677 ·
HAL

Joined: 28 Mar 03
Posts: 704
Credit: 870,617
RAC: 0
Message 1013704 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 15:40:11 UTC - in response to Message 1013677.

Should we ever need to do so - simply send the problem to congress and they'll invent a rule to bypass it.

Classic WU= 7,237 Classic Hours= 42,079
ID: 1013704 ·
gizbar

Joined: 7 Jan 01
Posts: 586
Credit: 21,087,774
RAC: 0
Message 1013716 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 15:53:35 UTC

I think you could well be wrong. It's thought that the speed of light cannot be attained, but that there may be a whole universe where things can only travel faster than the speed of light. It's not been proved, or disproved.

Time will tell.

A proud GPU User Server Donor!
ID: 1013716 ·
SciManStev
Volunteer tester

Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6631
Credit: 121,090,076
RAC: 0
Message 1013722 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 16:05:16 UTC - in response to Message 1013716.

What about gravity itself? It seems that gravity is a property of mass. In a black hole's event horizon, there are matter/antimatter reactions, but light is pulled into the void. Could gravity be the carrier of the inner matter of the black hole to the event horizon? A question I had years ago was we know there is an equation that states the gravitational strength between any two bodies. One would assume that gravity recombines at the speed of light, but if the moon were to suddenly vanish, would we feel the effect instantly, or in a few seconds? Technically gravity has not been defined. We call it delivered by gravitons, but there is no real definition for gravitons. We can easily work with gravity's effects, but we don't actually know what it is.

Steve
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1013722 ·
zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester

Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64912
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
Message 1013734 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 16:17:25 UTC - in response to Message 1013722.

What about gravity itself? It seems that gravity is a property of mass. In a black hole's event horizon, there are matter/antimatter reactions, but light is pulled into the void. Could gravity be the carrier of the inner matter of the black hole to the event horizon? A question I had years ago was we know there is an equation that states the gravitational strength between any two bodies. One would assume that gravity recombines at the speed of light, but if the moon were to suddenly vanish, would we feel the effect instantly, or in a few seconds? Technically gravity has not been defined. We call it delivered by gravitons, but there is no real definition for gravitons. We can easily work with gravity's effects, but we don't actually know what it is.

Steve

Actually Gravity is a side effect of mass, As there has been no recorded observation of any Gravitons. As Mass just attracts Mass. Now the trick is keeping Mass like in a spaceship from being attracted toward a larger Mass and You'd have something, Especially If You could turn this effect on and off at will, Of course then You could also probably figure out how to detect Mass too, which would be handy for navigation and just plain seeing something.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1013734 ·
gizbar

Joined: 7 Jan 01
Posts: 586
Credit: 21,087,774
RAC: 0
Message 1013735 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 16:18:01 UTC - in response to Message 1013722.

What about gravity itself? It seems that gravity is a property of mass. In a black hole's event horizon, there are matter/antimatter reactions, but light is pulled into the void. Could gravity be the carrier of the inner matter of the black hole to the event horizon? A question I had years ago was we know there is an equation that states the gravitational strength between any two bodies. One would assume that gravity recombines at the speed of light, but if the moon were to suddenly vanish, would we feel the effect instantly, or in a few seconds? Technically gravity has not been defined. We call it delivered by gravitons, but there is no real definition for gravitons. We can easily work with gravity's effects, but we don't actually know what it is.

Steve

Sorry Steve, too much science, not enough beer!

However, what you do say makes a lot of sense. It'll be hard enough to prove that a black hole forms the event horizon, when it traps (and destroys) everything that falls into it. Plus, it make it pretty inevitable that unless we come up with some amazing science, we'll never be able to find out what is on the other side. We also know that speed is in direct relationship to time, so that the faster things go, the slower their time frame will be in relation to ours.

Cosmically, the moon disappearing might not make much difference, but I do think it would make a big difference to us on the earth. I think that it might affect the orbit of the planet, and would definitely have the effect of stopping the tides (or most of the tidal effect).

Giz.

A proud GPU User Server Donor!
ID: 1013735 ·
SciManStev
Volunteer tester

Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6631
Credit: 121,090,076
RAC: 0
Message 1013744 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 16:27:33 UTC - in response to Message 1013735.

Sorry Steve, too much science, not enough beer!

However, what you do say makes a lot of sense. It'll be hard enough to prove that a black hole forms the event horizon, when it traps (and destroys) everything that falls into it. Plus, it make it pretty inevitable that unless we come up with some amazing science, we'll never be able to find out what is on the other side. We also know that speed is in direct relationship to time, so that the faster things go, the slower their time frame will be in relation to ours.

Cosmically, the moon disappearing might not make much difference, but I do think it would make a big difference to us on the earth. I think that it might affect the orbit of the planet, and would definitely have the effect of stopping the tides (or most of the tidal effect).

Giz.

The moon is actually increasing the size of its orbit by a couple of inches a year. The moon was formed by a huge impact over 3 billion years ago, and it is what condenced out of the debris cloud. When it finally does fly off into space, the spin of the earth will be more of an uncontrolled wobble. Night and day won't mean anything. The only real way to measure the effect would be for the moon top vanish all at once. I think we could measure the gravity effect, and determine if gravity travels at the speed of light, of some other speed. I would definitly not advise this experiment, as I tend to like night and day. :)

Steve
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1013744 ·
Daniel Michel
Volunteer tester

Joined: 2 Feb 04
Posts: 14925
Credit: 1,378,607
RAC: 6
Message 1013782 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 17:16:37 UTC

Maybe you can't exceed the speed of light...Maybe you can...But it may turn out to be unnecessary to move at the speed of light to get from star A to star B in a journey that won't take years.

PROUD TO BE TFFE!
ID: 1013782 ·
Iona

Joined: 12 Jul 07
Posts: 790
Credit: 22,438,118
RAC: 0
Message 1013785 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 17:22:18 UTC - in response to Message 1013782.

Maybe you can't exceed the speed of light...Maybe you can...But it may turn out to be unnecessary to move at the speed of light to get from star A to star B in a journey that won't take years.

Exactly. Just use a 'Black Hole - White Hole Tunnel'. There again, I could use my TARDIS.

Don't take life too seriously, as you'll never come out of it alive!
ID: 1013785 ·
kittyman
Volunteer tester

Joined: 9 Jul 00
Posts: 51448
Credit: 1,018,363,574
RAC: 1,004
Message 1013843 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 19:10:42 UTC - in response to Message 1013833.

I'll rely on my swiss army knife, not let me down yet!

I have a rather hearty Buck knife that I have kept in my back pocket for over 20 years. I would be lost without it.

It is a daily tool. Hammer. Pry bar. Screwdriver. Whatever.

If soanybody ever attacks me, they will find it thrust into their nearest orifice.
"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

ID: 1013843 ·
Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester

Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,199,902
RAC: 11
Message 1013876 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 19:47:20 UTC

Based on known physical laws, we can not exceed the speed of light. But to say that we never will is short sighted. Look at the technology we take for granted in our lives, and ask yourself if people 100 years ago, or 1,000 years ago, had decided man will never fly, or send pictures/sound around the world, or prevent desease, where would we be today? It might be tens or hundreds or thousands of years in the future, but exceeding the speed of light may well happen--unless we believe it can't be done.
ID: 1013876 ·
SciManStev
Volunteer tester

Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6631
Credit: 121,090,076
RAC: 0
Message 1013885 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 19:58:43 UTC - in response to Message 1013876.

Based on known physical laws, we can not exceed the speed of light. But to say that we never will is short sighted. Look at the technology we take for granted in our lives, and ask yourself if people 100 years ago, or 1,000 years ago, had decided man will never fly, or send pictures/sound around the world, or prevent desease, where would we be today? It might be tens or hundreds or thousands of years in the future, but exceeding the speed of light may well happen--unless we believe it can't be done.

You may be right! The trick is to find something in nature that can be measured going faster, and develope theories based on that for testing. Currently we have been unable to find evidence that anything is traveling faster than light. Recently there was evidence suggested that the jets from a collapsed star may be traveling faster than light, but it was later explained as not the case. I would still guess that gravity would be the only known possibility, but I think gravity does travel at the speed of light. As gravity is a property of mass, it may either move as a solid object with the mass, or regenerate at the new location. I am doing a miind experiment of grabbing a black hole, and moving it from point A to point B. Would the garvitational field look like a jet breaking the sound barrier, or move as a complete entity. The coolest thing is that I have no problem admitting that in reality, I just don't know.

Steve
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1013885 ·
Jim_S

Joined: 23 Feb 00
Posts: 4705
Credit: 64,560,357
RAC: 31
Message 1013889 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 20:06:09 UTC - in response to Message 1013885.

Based on known physical laws, we can not exceed the speed of light. But to say that we never will is short sighted. Look at the technology we take for granted in our lives, and ask yourself if people 100 years ago, or 1,000 years ago, had decided man will never fly, or send pictures/sound around the world, or prevent desease, where would we be today? It might be tens or hundreds or thousands of years in the future, but exceeding the speed of light may well happen--unless we believe it can't be done.

You may be right! The trick is to find something in nature that can be measured going faster, and develope theories based on that for testing. Currently we have been unable to find evidence that anything is traveling faster than light. Recently there was evidence suggested that the jets from a collapsed star may be traveling faster than light, but it was later explained as not the case. I would still guess that gravity would be the only known possibility, but I think gravity does travel at the speed of light. As gravity is a property of mass, it may either move as a solid object with the mass, or regenerate at the new location. I am doing a miind experiment of grabbing a black hole, and moving it from point A to point B. Would the garvitational field look like a jet breaking the sound barrier, or move as a complete entity. The coolest thing is that I have no problem admitting that in reality, I just don't know.

Steve

True but we seem over time to break most physical barriers as Science progresses.

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)
ID: 1013889 ·
zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester

Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64912
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
Message 1013891 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 20:07:51 UTC - in response to Message 1013885.

Based on known physical laws, we can not exceed the speed of light. But to say that we never will is short sighted. Look at the technology we take for granted in our lives, and ask yourself if people 100 years ago, or 1,000 years ago, had decided man will never fly, or send pictures/sound around the world, or prevent disease, where would we be today? It might be tens or hundreds or thousands of years in the future, but exceeding the speed of light may well happen--unless we believe it can't be done.

You may be right! The trick is to find something in nature that can be measured going faster, and develop theories based on that for testing. Currently we have been unable to find evidence that anything is traveling faster than light. Recently there was evidence suggested that the jets from a collapsed star may be traveling faster than light, but it was later explained as not the case. I would still guess that gravity would be the only known possibility, but I think gravity does travel at the speed of light. As gravity is a property of mass, it may either move as a solid object with the mass, or regenerate at the new location. I am doing a mind experiment of grabbing a black hole, and moving it from point A to point B. Would the gravitational field look like a jet breaking the sound barrier, or move as a complete entity. The coolest thing is that I have no problem admitting that in reality, I just don't know.

Steve

Except that there's no evidence of a Gravity Field, Nor of a Graviton... As without Mass, There is no gravity. The thing We called Gravity is merely an effect of a Larger Mass attracting Smaller Masses, Hence why objects appear to fall as they are pulled down to a planets surface.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1013891 ·
SciManStev
Volunteer tester

Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6631
Credit: 121,090,076
RAC: 0
Message 1013903 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 20:24:34 UTC - in response to Message 1013889.

True but we seem over time to break most physical barriers as Science progresses.

I agree with you except that for all the barriers we have already broken, we have been able to observe other phenomenon that lead us in a direction. In exceeding the speed of light, we have never observed a phenomenon that demonstrates this possibility, so there are no tracks to follow. Even an exploding nuclear bomb is much slower than light. There is some question on the Big Bang expansion rate, but I am not up to date on the latest thinking on that front. The strange thing in the universe we are currently experiencing is that the rate the universe is expanding is increasing. There is no known mechanism for that acceleration. It may be something with Dark Energy, but I have a problem with something that has a name which is undefined. That is the same thing with gravity as well. Does it move or is it static? I never have a problem with experimenting in a new direction, but I need something to latch onto that might allow me to deduce a theory of its mechanism. I freely admit I don't know as much as I would want to, but it certainly is interesting!

Steve
SciManStev = Science Man Steve before aol allowed longer screen names. :)
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1013903 ·
Jim_S

Joined: 23 Feb 00
Posts: 4705
Credit: 64,560,357
RAC: 31
Message 1013912 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 20:35:56 UTC

Would a probe launched from something traveling at light-speed then excede light-speed?

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)
ID: 1013912 ·
SciManStev
Volunteer tester

Joined: 20 Jun 99
Posts: 6631
Credit: 121,090,076
RAC: 0
Message 1013920 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 20:45:16 UTC - in response to Message 1013912.

Would a probe launched from something travel faster than light excede light-speed?

No. It would be launched but never gain above light speed. I took an online course in Relativity, and the result was that clearly it would not. What happens is that it takes more and more energy to get closer and closer to light speed. Because of E=MCÂ², as more energy is added to accelerate the probe, the more massive it gets, until you are expending an infinite amount of energy to move an object of infinite mass. This is a limit because there is no such thing as a greater than infinity amount of energy. A good book that explains this is Spacetime Physics. So for the probe to already be at light speed, an infinite amount of energy would have been expended just to get it to that speed. Now, gravity, time, and light are closely related in that the more massive an object becomes, the slower time passes. the same is true with light. The faster you get the slower time advances. This can be measured and calculations hold true.

Steve
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website
ID: 1013920 ·
Gundolf Jahn

Joined: 19 Sep 00
Posts: 3184
Credit: 446,358
RAC: 0
Message 1013946 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 21:31:16 UTC - in response to Message 1013912.

Would a probe launched from something traveling at light-speed then excede light-speed?

You can't bring anything, from which to launch a probe, to light speed in the first place (see SciManStev's post). So the question can't be asked that way, and consequently can't be answered ;-)

GruÃŸ,
Gundolf
Computer sind nicht alles im Leben. (Kleiner Scherz)

SETI@home classic workunits 3,758
SETI@home classic CPU time 66,520 hours
ID: 1013946 ·
platium

Joined: 5 Jul 10
Posts: 212
Credit: 262,426
RAC: 0
Message 1013957 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 21:52:57 UTC - in response to Message 1013920.

its nice to have your input on the speed of light, i am please i came on here with the level of knowlege most message boards lack
ID: 1013957 ·
Scarecrow

Joined: 15 Jul 00
Posts: 4520
Credit: 486,601
RAC: 0
Message 1013996 - Posted: 9 Jul 2010, 23:00:52 UTC

You all are talking WAY over my head with most of this. But I will interject a piece of information that may apply. "On a good day, a well fed Scarecrow travels at 1/2 the speed of smell."

_________________
*** Just doing my part to advance science.
ID: 1013996 ·
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

Message boards : Cafe SETI : i think the speed of light is max