Light barrier broken? Is this possible? - Page 2

sundowning · 09-16-2007, 11:42 AM

On another board it was shown this idea was 'refuted' back in 1914. It appears the author of the latest article has tenure and therefore is free to pursue his pet theories which don't actually work.

Athenian200 · 09-16-2007, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundowning

On another board it was shown this idea was 'refuted' back in 1914. It appears the author of the latest article has tenure and therefore is free to pursue his pet theories which don't actually work.

Can you elaborate on how it was refuted? I'll be glad to finally have this little case resolved.

sundowning · 09-17-2007, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by athenian200

Can you elaborate on how it was refuted? I'll be glad to finally have this little case resolved.

Here is the thread to which I'm referring.

Apollonian · 10-01-2007, 12:08 PM

I've looked at quantum tunneling a little bit (though its been a year or two). I know far more about the math of special and general relativity. From what I understand of the principle of quantum tunneling, it is weird in that it may very well occur but that the nature of the mathematics still does not let information travel faster than light. At first, this seems to be a conceptual paradox.

When we think of radio information, we think of the ability to control an RC car or send a message via cell phone. The "information" which these physicists are dealing with is probably more akin to quantum spin, momentum, or position. However, the fundamental paradigm in quantum mechanics is that you can never know the state of a particle with complete certainty (meaning you know all the information). So, when there is quantum tunneling, it may be that a particle is "moving faster than life"... minus the "moving" part. In other words, we see the propagation of spin or position information show up, but as soon as we try to verify momentum (that the particle has actually moved at all) the mathematics of the wave equation for the experiment collapse such that if the particle has moved then it has not moved faster than light OR if it has not moved then it may have other properties which seem to propagate faster than light.

Ultimately, articles on quantum mechanics are often inherently misleading because they try to explain results in terms of colloquial language which is far too imprecise to capture the reality of quantum mechanics. Words like "moves" "faster" and arguably even "particle" are almost nonsensical when it comes to quantum mechanics.

Here is a nice talk from Stanford about the "Strange World of Quantum Reality" which attempts to talk about this new paradigm in plain english.

The Strange World of Quantum Reality

Veneti · 10-02-2007, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by athenian200

DailyTech - German Scientists Declare Speed of Light Broken

I've heard vaguely of quantum tunneling before, but this is the first I've heard of anyone claiming that they've seen it. So, what does this mean? Is it possible that those particles really traveled faster than light? How do we know if it was or wasn't a detector flaw? I don't understand the precise mechanics behind the theory of quantum tunneling, but I think it proves that reality and existence aren't quite as solid as they look, and if that's possible, then I guess even such high speeds are possible.

Could this mean that the key to breaking the light barrier is finding a way to control/predict quantum tunneling?

Does this mean anything?

I've actually said for a long time that its likely that things can travel faster than the speed of light. To me its just a barrier that exists mainly due to our knowledge and current observations.

I'm not a quantum physicist or whatever, but if a black hole can bend light then has it not travelled a further distance in the same period? If a black hole can stop light escaping then just perhaps it can also eject whatever at a faster speed. (I believe black holes decay via radiation emissions). Just maybe light suffers from more friction than another potential candidate, hence maybe there are other types of energy (or whatever) that can achieve a higher speed.... there's a lot to learn out there...

Santtu · 10-03-2007, 01:03 AM

Its totally, absolutely ridiculous that people claim that faster-than-light processes would equal same as seeing into future, or better yet, retroactive causality. I am outright offended that reputable scientists may even suggest such absurdity.

It's like living at an age when the fastest means of transport is via horse, and making the simplification that for "all intents and for all purposes, things in the universe propage at the speed of a horse. If someone gets a message from the other village before a messanger with a horse could have possibly travelled the distance, he must have known the message before it was sent".

In a few years, people will remember some dogmatic views on light speed with ridicule.

We have entanglement, we have gravitation. Seeing processes faster than light, the speed of light is reduced to little more than a really fast horse.

Apollonian · 10-03-2007, 04:20 AM

Venetti, to respond quickly to your point regarding black-holes and light, you raise an excellent point (but I'd like to clarify it)...

Black holes warp the fabric of space-time. This then causes the path of a beam of light to bend, but it is no different than bending a fiber-optic cable. One way to think of it is that the light itself isn't changing direction, but that the beam of light is following the surface of spacetime in as straight a motion as it can. Since space is curved, light inadvertently follows a curved path.

So, can light travel "faster than the speed of light in vacuum"? Yes, depending on your point of reference. The reason that people say that no thing can travel faster than the speed of light is that objects obey the same laws of motion which light does. So, near the highly warped space-time of a black hole where light might travel faster or slower, so too the motion of physical objects must be bent in the same way. Ultimately, even if light were to "speed up" near a black hole, physical objects would not be able to travel faster than the light could under similar conditions.

This is Relativity, which deals with large scales. Quantum mechanics deals with very small scales. There is presently no viable theory to reconcile the two theories in the middle. The propagation speed of information in Quantum mechanics is mathematically distinct from the propagation speed of information in the Theory of Relativity. In Relativity (and not necessarily in Quantum mechanics), objects which move faster than the speed of light have an imaginary rest-mass. Thus, there is no way to verify their existence. Similarly, the benefits of quantum entanglement seem to break down at the macroscopic level of radio communication.

However, ultimately, both theories make assumptions and lead to extraneous solutions which may or may not correspond to reality. That is why there are experiments/spacecraft like Gravity Probe-B which have attempted (and mostly succeeded) to verify certain predictions of the theories.

Veneti · 10-03-2007, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apollonian

Venetti, to respond quickly to your point regarding black-holes and light, you raise an excellent point (but I'd like to clarify it)...

Black holes warp the fabric of space-time. This then causes the path of a beam of light to bend, but it is no different than bending a fiber-optic cable. One way to think of it is that the light itself isn't changing direction, but that the beam of light is following the surface of spacetime in as straight a motion as it can. Since space is curved, light inadvertently follows a curved path.

So, can light travel "faster than the speed of light in vacuum"? Yes, depending on your point of reference. The reason that people say that no thing can travel faster than the speed of light is that objects obey the same laws of motion which light does. So, near the highly warped space-time of a black hole where light might travel faster or slower, so too the motion of physical objects must be bent in the same way. Ultimately, even if light were to "speed up" near a black hole, physical objects would not be able to travel faster than the light could under similar conditions.

This is Relativity, which deals with large scales. Quantum mechanics deals with very small scales. There is presently no viable theory to reconcile the two theories in the middle. The propagation speed of information in Quantum mechanics is mathematically distinct from the propagation speed of information in the Theory of Relativity. In Relativity (and not necessarily in Quantum mechanics), objects which move faster than the speed of light have an imaginary rest-mass. Thus, there is no way to verify their existence. Similarly, the benefits of quantum entanglement seem to break down at the macroscopic level of radio communication.

However, ultimately, both theories make assumptions and lead to extraneous solutions which may or may not correspond to reality. That is why there are experiments/spacecraft like Gravity Probe-B which have attempted (and mostly succeeded) to verify certain predictions of the theories.

Interesting...

I had one concept to explain why the universe is accelerating (It’s like the light bending). If you imagine the analogy of a magnet with the magnetic paths from pole to pole, and then you imagine this like a black hole. With all the matter being ejected from one pole that then travels around to the other pole.

Now imagine this black hole is the size of our universe. It powers and recycles the universe

If our observable part of the universe has been recently ejected then relatively everything is accelerating away (everything in front is curving towards the other pole) hence, relatively everything is accelerating and that’s why we have this red shift.

This analogy would also indicate there is matter further ahead of us that is far older. And the "biggie" is that if you could successfully head towards the exit point then the current universe you live in could be a habitable and infinite, therefore lifeforms could be infinitely developed.

Anentropic IxTx · 01-15-2009, 12:17 AM

The Warp Drive.

JocktheMotie · 01-15-2009, 12:21 AM

This refers to quantum entanglement, which actually does happen.

01-15-2009, 12:17 AM	#19 (permalink)
Anentropic IxTx Power [Junior Member] Join Date: Dec 2008 Type: INTP Location: Terra [Earth] Posts: 270	The Warp Drive. __________________ Great minds think differently. http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...entropic-ixtx/

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-16-2007, 11:42 AM	#11 (permalink)
sundowning Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Type: ISTP Location: Winnipeg Posts: 259	On another board it was shown this idea was 'refuted' back in 1914. It appears the author of the latest article has tenure and therefore is free to pursue his pet theories which don't actually work.

10-01-2007, 12:08 PM	#14 (permalink)
Apollonian Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Type: INTJ Location: Near Philadelphia Posts: 127	I've looked at quantum tunneling a little bit (though its been a year or two). I know far more about the math of special and general relativity. From what I understand of the principle of quantum tunneling, it is weird in that it may very well occur but that the nature of the mathematics still does not let information travel faster than light. At first, this seems to be a conceptual paradox. When we think of radio information, we think of the ability to control an RC car or send a message via cell phone. The "information" which these physicists are dealing with is probably more akin to quantum spin, momentum, or position. However, the fundamental paradigm in quantum mechanics is that you can never know the state of a particle with complete certainty (meaning you know all the information). So, when there is quantum tunneling, it may be that a particle is "moving faster than life"... minus the "moving" part. In other words, we see the propagation of spin or position information show up, but as soon as we try to verify momentum (that the particle has actually moved at all) the mathematics of the wave equation for the experiment collapse such that if the particle has moved then it has not moved faster than light OR if it has not moved then it may have other properties which seem to propagate faster than light. Ultimately, articles on quantum mechanics are often inherently misleading because they try to explain results in terms of colloquial language which is far too imprecise to capture the reality of quantum mechanics. Words like "moves" "faster" and arguably even "particle" are almost nonsensical when it comes to quantum mechanics. Here is a nice talk from Stanford about the "Strange World of Quantum Reality" which attempts to talk about this new paradigm in plain english. The Strange World of Quantum Reality

10-03-2007, 01:03 AM	#16 (permalink)
Santtu Senile member Join Date: Sep 2007 Type: entj Posts: 2,411	Its totally, absolutely ridiculous that people claim that faster-than-light processes would equal same as seeing into future, or better yet, retroactive causality. I am outright offended that reputable scientists may even suggest such absurdity. It's like living at an age when the fastest means of transport is via horse, and making the simplification that for "all intents and for all purposes, things in the universe propage at the speed of a horse. If someone gets a message from the other village before a messanger with a horse could have possibly travelled the distance, he must have known the message before it was sent". In a few years, people will remember some dogmatic views on light speed with ridicule. We have entanglement, we have gravitation. Seeing processes faster than light, the speed of light is reduced to little more than a really fast horse.

10-03-2007, 04:20 AM	#17 (permalink)
Apollonian Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Type: INTJ Location: Near Philadelphia Posts: 127	Venetti, to respond quickly to your point regarding black-holes and light, you raise an excellent point (but I'd like to clarify it)... Black holes warp the fabric of space-time. This then causes the path of a beam of light to bend, but it is no different than bending a fiber-optic cable. One way to think of it is that the light itself isn't changing direction, but that the beam of light is following the surface of spacetime in as straight a motion as it can. Since space is curved, light inadvertently follows a curved path. So, can light travel "faster than the speed of light in vacuum"? Yes, depending on your point of reference. The reason that people say that no thing can travel faster than the speed of light is that objects obey the same laws of motion which light does. So, near the highly warped space-time of a black hole where light might travel faster or slower, so too the motion of physical objects must be bent in the same way. Ultimately, even if light were to "speed up" near a black hole, physical objects would not be able to travel faster than the light could under similar conditions. This is Relativity, which deals with large scales. Quantum mechanics deals with very small scales. There is presently no viable theory to reconcile the two theories in the middle. The propagation speed of information in Quantum mechanics is mathematically distinct from the propagation speed of information in the Theory of Relativity. In Relativity (and not necessarily in Quantum mechanics), objects which move faster than the speed of light have an imaginary rest-mass. Thus, there is no way to verify their existence. Similarly, the benefits of quantum entanglement seem to break down at the macroscopic level of radio communication. However, ultimately, both theories make assumptions and lead to extraneous solutions which may or may not correspond to reality. That is why there are experiments/spacecraft like Gravity Probe-B which have attempted (and mostly succeeded) to verify certain predictions of the theories.