Skip to comments.
Light may arise from relativity violations
Indiana University ^
| 22 March 2005
| Press release
Posted on 03/22/2005 3:40:06 PM PST by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
To: Physicist
Thanks, doc . . . It's an amazing place we live in!
To: DBrow
As I recall reading their experiment neither proved or disproved the existence of ether, rather that there was no ether wind. Pro and anti-neutrinos are just itching to interact.
42
posted on
03/22/2005 6:34:34 PM PST
by
Nuc1
(NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668)
To: AntiGuv
Whatever the means by which light arises it cannot be a 'violation' of something which doesn't exist, even if it were recently thought to exist. That assumes the experiments bear out this theory.
That's what I was thinking. A poor word choice.
43
posted on
03/22/2005 6:41:39 PM PST
by
spinestein
( "I thought I knew everything. I didn't get it. I'm here to say I was totally wrong." --B. Boxer)
To: Redcloak
The instruments are made from large, resonant cavities. Let's see if we can get Teddy Kennedy's skull when he croaks. |
44
posted on
03/22/2005 6:43:42 PM PST
by
Nick Danger
(You can stick a fork in the Mullahs... they're done)
To: PatrickHenry; Physicist
I actually understood some of the words with more than 4 letters.
Man. I hope Physicists have as much trouble deciphering molecular biology as I has with this.
In the meantime, I will have to defer judgment to Senor Physicist and his ilk, but it will help when some experimental data are generated.
Now my head hurts.
45
posted on
03/22/2005 6:46:59 PM PST
by
furball4paws
(Ho, Ho, Beri, Beri and Balls!)
To: Nick Danger
Why wait? The advancement of humanity is at stake..
46
posted on
03/22/2005 7:18:25 PM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: Physicist
47
posted on
03/22/2005 8:01:38 PM PST
by
spodefly
(This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
To: Physicist
What exactly is supposed to be violating relativity? It certainly isn't the speed of light, b/c it seems hard to think that that could be the source of light itself? Is it areas of space-time which don't have the curvature that one would expect under special relativity?
48
posted on
03/22/2005 8:05:02 PM PST
by
KayEyeDoubleDee
(const tag& constTagPassedByReference)
To: PatrickHenry
WARNING: Relativity Violations are known to the State of California to cause cancer.
49
posted on
03/22/2005 8:05:13 PM PST
by
festus
(The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
To: carlr
What I think is fascinating is the concept of interdigitating supersymmetry and it's implications for quantum gravity. I thnk it could easily lead to a new hermaneutic with certain heuristic properties.
I could be wrong, though.
50
posted on
03/22/2005 8:16:29 PM PST
by
JusPasenThru
(http://giinthesky.blogspot.com/)
To: PatrickHenry
To: Nick Danger
It wouldn't be a very stable mount for the optics; soft and mushy in some parts, too thick in others...
52
posted on
03/22/2005 10:06:36 PM PST
by
Redcloak
(There is no "I" in team. But then again, there is no "us" in it either. There is "meat" however.)
To: PatrickHenry
A ten-kilowatt laser would seem to be a bit more than a "shimmering"; let alone the output of a star.
53
posted on
03/23/2005 1:28:05 AM PST
by
boris
(The deadliest weapon of mass destruction in history is a leftist with a word processor.)
To: AntiGuv; RadioAstronomer; Focault's Pendulum; zygoat
"Light may arise from relativity exceptions" or perhaps "Light may arise from relativity distortions"....given the amount of "light matter" vs the amount of "dark matter" out there...Interesting article. and the "mini maglite as a relativity violator" :^)
54
posted on
03/23/2005 7:55:30 PM PST
by
skinkinthegrass
(Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :^)
To: VadeRetro
Naah. Not Darkons, Hardons.
Full Disclosure: Back in the dark ages (reference to Darkons, there, get it?), I first ran across the term hadron and misread it as "hardon".
Being an immature adolescent I couldn't stop giggling for *days*.
Naturally, this is the kind of thing that I couldn't explain to anyone at the time...
Cheers!
55
posted on
03/23/2005 9:21:39 PM PST
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: El Gato
slow vectors down? Vectors are only a form of expression for multiple-dimensional forces and whatnot.
56
posted on
04/02/2005 12:45:15 PM PST
by
oneofthem
([www.teencritics.com/forums])
To: PatrickHenry
"a shimmering of ever-present vectors in empty space" Now that makes it perfectly clear!
To: PatrickHenry
Bush's fault.
58
posted on
10/09/2005 8:48:36 PM PDT
by
Bratch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson