My guess is that it causes problems with the math.
How do you deal with negative/infinite frequencies (which implies negative time) in the real world . The math works better when velocities don't exceed c.
e.g.
Posted on 08/16/2007 10:15:43 AM PDT by LibWhacker
A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light - an achievement that would undermine our entire understanding of space and time.
According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, it would require an infinite amount of energy to propel an object at more than 186,000 miles per second.
However, Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University of Koblenz, say they may have breached a key tenet of that theory.
The pair say they have conducted an experiment in which microwave photons - energetic packets of light - travelled "instantaneously" between a pair of prisms that had been moved up to 3ft apart.
Being able to travel faster than the speed of light would lead to a wide variety of bizarre consequences.
For instance, an astronaut moving faster than it would theoretically arrive at a destination before leaving.
The scientists were investigating a phenomenon called quantum tunnelling, which allows sub-atomic particles to break apparently unbreakable laws.
Dr Nimtz told New Scientist magazine: "For the time being, this is the only violation of special relativity that I know of."
“Carying this a step further, if they truly “broke the speed of light” then the light arrived before it even left the point of origin. Totally impossible.”
I don’t see why it should be impossible. Might be impossible to measure using light as a measurment medium... but that doesn’t make it impossible.... just unverifiable.
Lets say, for the sake of arguement, that you could make a baseball travel twice the speed of light in a vacum..... and that the baseball would travel from it’s point of origion to a point in space 1 light year distant.
Day 1- Baseball leaves point of origin.
6 Months - Baseball arrives at destination.
1 Year - IMAGE (i.e. light) of baseball leaving the point of origin arrives at destination.
The light didn’t arrive at the destination before it left it’s point of origin.... it arrived before it was DETECTED (at the destination) to have left. HUGE difference..... the former represents a logical paradox, the latter simply represents our limitations of being able to MEASURE a phenominom.
Assuming these scientists have it right and I am traveling in excess of the speed of light, where am I? Where I started, where I am going, or what?
And more importantly, how do I stop?
And it shows. ;o)
My guess is that it causes problems with the math.
How do you deal with negative/infinite frequencies (which implies negative time) in the real world . The math works better when velocities don't exceed c.
e.g.
But Zephram Cochran did that...I saw it on star trek!!!
This is series!
“Dumb question alert: why is the speed of LIGHT specifically supposedly the ceiling on speed?”
It’s is partially due to this equation...
a = F/m (more commonly seen as F=ma)
...and partially due to this equation...
m = m0/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
That’s mass dilation.
So, as an object accelerates close to the speed of light, it gains mass. The more mass it gains, the more energy is required to accelerate the object. If v=c in the second equation, then mass is infinite. Any finite number over infinity is zero, so the acceleration is zero. That is, you can’t go any faster.
Theoretically.
(I believe this can be broken.)
Show me a method to detect that arriving light, and give firm proof that it can be done, and I will accept it. Otherwise, I will wait for real proof.
No, the clock only has to run backwards (time travel). LOL, I agree it cannot be measured.....mho
Theories don't exactly throw wrenches into other theories.
The evidence throws a wrench into Theory A, and then Theory B tries to avoid the wrench.
“Show me a method to detect that arriving light, and give firm proof that it can be done, and I will accept it. Otherwise, I will wait for real proof.”
I’m not arguing that the experiment proves that the speed of light was breached. I didn’t conduct the experiment ( not even a scientist) so I couldn’t.
I am just trying to illustrate that something traveling faster then the speed of light does NOT require arriving at a destination before it left the origin (a logical paradox and therefore impossible).
I don’t know of a method for detecting the light nor do I have a proof that it can be done. That doesn’t make it impossible...it just means that it can’t be proven, YET.
Go back in history 2,000 years. There was no method to proves that atoms exist, let alone sub-atomic particals. Does that mean that they were impossible....or just that they couldn’t be observed?
You are right to wait for real proof of something before accepting it. You are wrong to assume that because you don’t have it, that it is impossible or even improbable (IMO).
Sometimes photons are very particular, and sometimes they wave all requirements.
Neutron stars (heavy masses) in close orbit throw off huge amounts of gravitons. They spiral in and crash due to conservation of angular momentum.
If the Earth really were attracted to where the Sun was eight minutes ago - well, I admit I was wrong about them crashing into each other. The signs are the wrong way around :0) If gravity propagated outward from the Sun at the speed of light then its mostly radial effect would also have a small transverse component because of the motion of the target. This would act to speed up the Earth in its orbit, sending it slowly away from the sun.
How slowly? The magnitude of the tangential force acting on the Earth would be ES/GS of the Sun’s radial gravitational force, where ES is the earth's orbital speed and GS is the speed of Gravity.
ES = 30 kms/second. If GS = a mere 3 million kms a second then ES/GS is 1 in 10,000. 99.999 % of the Suns gravity would act radially on the Earth - the other fraction would run tangentially. Earth would gradually increase its distance from the sun, doubling the distance in about a millenia.
If GS is infinite, or very very large indeed, then the tangential force falls to zero, in line with observation.
Time travel is possible. Physics does not balk at a logical paradox.
I’m not arguing, I already said that my comments were to those who were already claiming time travel and other crap. My main
argument is the same as yours. There is currently no way to measure it accurately, and there is certainly no way to prove it with two prisms only 3 feet apart.
Using photons? Doubtful. I'd like to see their work.
What you suggest can be proved with pencil and paper, but where one happens to be in space and time (location, distance to and back, etc.), determines the necessary increases C times 9 (for earth to our sun and back) to C^infinity (and beyond). Each time and space location and distance is not equal to the speed necessary to travel to produce a time shift using paper and pencil.....
I'll shut up now, my head hurts....LOL
Quantum tunnelling has always been considered to be instantaneous. In fact, I just read that yesterday in one of Michio Kaku’s books. What is the big deal (other than the distance traveled)?
It doesn’t require time travel, any more then centuries ago travelers arriving in the New World before the official notice of thier departure did.
You’re conflating our ability to measure something with the thing itself.
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.