[QUOTE=KestasLT;19829466]And you thought you couldn't go faster than light[/QUOTE]
People and spaceships =/= informationless particles
[QUOTE=OvB;19835109]I like to tell myself nothing is impossible.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.wirecase.com/pictures/1605-1148560849_2_2.jpg[/img]
Go slam it.
[QUOTE=Swimbound;19831157]so incredibly fake
I mean wow
you CANT do that.[/QUOTE]
Well it looks like we were wrong. We've been wrong before.
"Explorer Christopher Columbus discovers you can go around the earth, showing that it is a ball, not a flat surface."
so incredibly fake
I mean wow
you CANT do that
[editline]11:22PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=aznz888;19834979]can someone fucking tell me what this means? how the hell do radio waves NOT carry information? where's the source? the universe is a fucking lie. :psyboom:[/QUOTE]
I don't know what this really means for science except that we now know that we were wrong as a species again. Oh, and radio waves are really just a form of radiation that we can use to transfer information, but they aren't magical data escorts.
[editline]11:22PM[/editline]
And the source is in the OP.
[editline]11:30PM[/editline]
It looks like they already made a way to go faster than light. And you still obey physics!
[img]http://img695.imageshack.us/i/unnecessary.jpg/[/img]
Nothing is true. Everything is allowed.
[QUOTE=aznz888;19834979]can someone fucking tell me what this means? how the hell do radio waves NOT carry information? where's the source? the universe is a fucking lie. :psyboom:[/QUOTE]
Quite easily, when you talk about something moving it can either be something physical such as a particle moving through space, or an effect that propagates at some rate but isn't in itself moving(though it can be). For example, if you get a bunch of nukes and set each one to go off at one second after the previous one and you move the nukes out so they are evenly spaced at like 1AU from each other, the nuke chain will explode faster than the speed of light, but nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. Another example is if you get a large sphere and spin a laser pointer in the centre, if the sphere has a large enough radius the laser beam's point on the sphere's surface will move faster than the speed of light, but again, nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. In both of these cases, you cannot send information faster than c, you're just doing something that causes a conceptual thing to occur at a rate faster than it.
[QUOTE=Valdor;19834907]Chances are that Einstein wasn't 100% correct about everything he said...
(Disagree's/Boxes incoming!)[/QUOTE]
Well one thing Einstein was wrong on was the matter of the heisenberg uncertainty principle. One such idea that he had to contradict the principle was ironic because he didn't realize his own research (in this case gravity's affect on clocks) disproved his hypothesis.
[QUOTE=Rubs10;19833332]It only looks like you're going back in time, but time always goes at the same pace, it's only light that plays the illusion.
Enders Game showed how this would work.
If your friend stayed on Earth and you got on a spaceship that went two light years in one year(Twice the speed of light) and you sent him a message exactly one year after you left using a device that [I]instantly[/I] sends a message no matter where someone is at (The Ansible from Enders Game), he would have gotton the message exactly one year after you left at the exact same time you sent it.[/QUOTE]
The rate at which an observer observes their own time to pass is always the same, but what it is compared to other observers depends on the velocity.
Time cannot pass for an object travelling at the speed of light. Objects travelling twice the speed of light is unphysical, as is a device that can send information instantly.
[QUOTE=Darkcoder;19836957]Quite easily, when you talk about something moving it can either be something physical such as a particle moving through space, or an effect that propagates at some rate but isn't in itself moving(though it can be). For example, if you get a bunch of nukes and set each one to go off at one second after the previous one and you move the nukes out so they are evenly spaced at like 1AU from each other, the nuke chain will explode faster than the speed of light, but nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. Another example is if you get a large sphere and spin a laser pointer in the centre, if the sphere has a large enough radius the laser beam's point on the sphere's surface will move faster than the speed of light, but again, nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. In both of these cases, you cannot send information faster than c, you're just doing something that causes a conceptual thing to occur at a rate faster than it.[/QUOTE]
None of that pertains to the propagation of waves? Also neither of your examples seem to have anything to do with ftl movement.
[editline]12:33AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=ThePuska;19837058]The rate at which an observer observes their own time to pass is always the same, but what it is compared to other observers depends on the velocity.
Time cannot pass for an object travelling at the speed of light. Objects travelling twice the speed of light is unphysical, as is a device that can send information instantly.[/QUOTE]
The idea behind the ansible was that it was two points connected by something akin to a higher dimension.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;19837074]Also neither of your examples seem to have anything to do with ftl movement.[/QUOTE]
Because it's not possible?
Also, now that I look at it, wiki has a list of all these 'FTL' things here: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light#FTL_phenomena[/url]
Still can't travel faster than bad news.
Cookie for the reference
[QUOTE=Kybalt;19835772][img]http://www.wirecase.com/pictures/1605-1148560849_2_2.jpg[/img]
Go slam it.[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeafsydZaV4&feature=youtube_gdata[/media]
:smug:
[QUOTE=Darkcoder;19830444]But still, nothing is actually moving faster than c. By the looks of it, it's just light propagating through a medium faster than c/refractionIndex which isn't really that amazing.[/QUOTE]
This.
The article is making a big deal out of nothing.
Let's harvest it somehow then go find a planet like Pandora and start harvesting that for precious metals and because those mech suits look awesome.
[QUOTE=Pepsi-cola;19830456]I thought if you go faster than light you go back in time?[/QUOTE]
No you go back to the future.
[QUOTE=Darkcoder;19836957]Quite easily, when you talk about something moving it can either be something physical such as a particle moving through space, or an effect that propagates at some rate but isn't in itself moving(though it can be). For example, if you get a bunch of nukes and set each one to go off at one second after the previous one and you move the nukes out so they are evenly spaced at like 1AU from each other, the nuke chain will explode faster than the speed of light, but nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. Another example is if you get a large sphere and spin a laser pointer in the centre, if the sphere has a large enough radius the laser beam's point on the sphere's surface will move faster than the speed of light, but again, nothing is actually moving faster than the speed of light. In both of these cases, you cannot send information faster than c, you're just doing something that causes a conceptual thing to occur at a rate faster than it.[/QUOTE]
I'm glad to be seeing someone understanding their physics properly, and this is a great summary of the idea. Many things appear to move to move through space at a speed faster than light, but the rules for this are either the no information principle, or the no mass principle, in correspondency with the now famous E=MC^2 (By making M = 0 you require an infinite velocity in order to allow energy) Our good friend Fenyman made this idea well recognised through his suggestion of exchange particles in strong and sometimes weak nuclear reactions. These particles move energy around in the reaction, jumping across a distance instantly, rather than at simply relativistic speeds. This works on very large scale too, and some physicists postulate the existence of a graviton, the gravitational force exchange particle, which is considered to travel faster than light. Part of the reason with think they are FTL is due to continued failure by researchers to observe gravitational waves, that is to put as it was said, waves of gravitational force, for example from appearing matter, as observed in pair production. I've gone off on a tangent here, I'll stop now.
So how fast does it actually go.
[QUOTE=TH89;19831226]It is the end times[/QUOTE]
hahahahaha you're the only poster not to get any ratings hahahahaha
Science Marches On.
In physics we learnt that the Universe is expanding faster than the speed of light.
[QUOTE=GunsNRoses;19839657]In physics we learnt that the Universe is expanding faster than the speed of light.[/QUOTE]
A notion you adopted without giving it any thought at all, now repeating it as a fact based on authority, not on science, spreading the plague that is Misunderstood And Dumbed-Down Physics.
[QUOTE=Nallin;19829610]Can anyone say Ender's Game?[/QUOTE]
I loved that book
[QUOTE=trent_roolz;19836094]Well it looks like we were wrong. We've been wrong before.
"Explorer Christopher Columbus discovers you can go around the earth, showing that it is a ball, not a flat surface."
so incredibly fake
I mean wow
you CANT do that[/QUOTE]
1) People knew the earth was round before anyone circumnavigated it
2) Columbus didn't circumnavigate the Earth
Pseudoscience hurf durf
[QUOTE=ThePuska;19842323]A notion you adopted without giving it any thought at all, now repeating it as a fact based on authority, not on science, spreading the plague that is Misunderstood And Dumbed-Down Physics.[/QUOTE]
Hold on just a minute there, doc. Now, I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, but since you are such an advocate of well-informed science, shouldn't you be the one to tell him [i]why[/i] he is wrong? Otherwise, you're practically doing the same thing as his physics teacher.
Holy shit, they make even speedy gonzales look like regular gonazales!
Radiation is faster than light.
The quoted text is quite badly written.
Anyway, it is [b]known[/b] for years, that the pulsar's jets might seem to exceed the speed of light while they aren't.
[url=http://www.universetoday.com/2010/01/06/faster-than-light-pulsar-phenomena/]Read this up[/url].
Still a classical misunderstanding between phase- and group-velocity. Phasevelocity carries the information and is the only thing which can be used for "comparing velocities" - That one is always below or equal SOL.
Group-velocity actually can exceed any boundaries, and that's what this article is about.
(It is known for many hundred years, that group velocity can be abitrary huge. The limit for phase-velocity came with special relativity which does not influence group-velocity).
Guys, I've already discovered how to travel at the speed of light - and I'm pretty smug about it.
Just waiting for the world to catch up :smug:
[QUOTE=L-NAESA;19843997]Radiation is faster than light.[/QUOTE]
Light is radiation.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
