The future is impossible
-
Lately I am seeing articles from Futurist who say that this or that is impossible. A good example would be faster than light speed travel. I'm old. I've seen everything from floor model radios to 98 inch flat screen TVs with Netflix etc. I would be afraid to say any technological advance is impossible.
Leadership equals wrecked ship. If you think you are leading my look behind you. You are alone. If you think I am leading you, You are lost.
-
Lately I am seeing articles from Futurist who say that this or that is impossible. A good example would be faster than light speed travel. I'm old. I've seen everything from floor model radios to 98 inch flat screen TVs with Netflix etc. I would be afraid to say any technological advance is impossible.
Leadership equals wrecked ship. If you think you are leading my look behind you. You are alone. If you think I am leading you, You are lost.
Anybody ever wonder why the speed of light is represented by the constant c? It's because it's not the speed of light. Nobody other than optics researchers much care about the speed of light. What they do care about is the speed of causality (which, you'll note, starts with the letter 'c'). It just so happens that - in our universe - light (in a vacuum) travels at the speed of causality. If you can exceed the speed of causality, then guess what you've just invented? Not something as mundane as FTL travel. You've invented a Time Machine.
-
So, now I have a question: One is in a medium with n > 1 looking out into a medium with a lesser n How does the external light appear to them from the point of view of their higher n medium?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
Light (but not necessarily other particles) is affected by a move between media. You get effects such as refraction, total reflection, etc. If you want to see how the outer world looks when looking out from a medium where n > 1 to a medium where n == 1, dive into a pool and open your eyes. Experiment always trumps theory. :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
But that still doesn't completely rule out the Alcubierre drive[^]. We just need to find some exotic matter with a negative energy density. If everyone here could have a look down the back of their sofas, I'm sure we'd be able to find some. :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I'm searching. Sofa so good. Getting my coat
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
-
Have we the technology to observe faster particles?
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
For those that can collide with existing particles, yes. We'd have no way to determine their speed if they existed, but if they did and could collide with matter - then yes, one would notice an impact. ..what about all those planets that should have intelligent life? Any aliens passed by recently?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
I'm searching. Sofa so good. Getting my coat
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
Almost as good as the "Sofa King" slogan - "They're Sofa King good". :D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Light (but not necessarily other particles) is affected by a move between media. You get effects such as refraction, total reflection, etc. If you want to see how the outer world looks when looking out from a medium where n > 1 to a medium where n == 1, dive into a pool and open your eyes. Experiment always trumps theory. :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
Experiment always trumps theory.
So theory is fake news! :D
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
-
W∴ Balboos wrote:
if moving at c to begin with, a photon entering a new medium with a higher index of refraction will, momentarily, exceed see.
Special Relativity does not forbid a photon (or other particle) moving at higher than the Speed of Light in a medium. It only forbid moving faster than the Speed of Light in vacuum. EDIT: As for the scissors' blades, the question is - what started them moving? The signal that the part of the blade closer to the join is rotating cannot move faster than the Speed of Light, so at any time - the blade will not be moving faster than light. Note that this problem involves acceleration (any point on the blade is moving in a circle), so it can't be solved by using Special Relativity.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
I thought it was only things with mass that cannot travel faster than the speed of light, but it is possible for things without mass to exceed the speed, even in a vacuum.
-
Almost as good as the "Sofa King" slogan - "They're Sofa King good". :D
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Ok, that is an unreachable standard! :laugh:
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
-
I thought it was only things with mass that cannot travel faster than the speed of light, but it is possible for things without mass to exceed the speed, even in a vacuum.
Nope. Massless objects (such as photons) are constrained to always move at the Speed of Light (when they are in vacuum). When is a different medium, such as water, they may move slower than the Speed of Light, but never faster.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Light (but not necessarily other particles) is affected by a move between media. You get effects such as refraction, total reflection, etc. If you want to see how the outer world looks when looking out from a medium where n > 1 to a medium where n == 1, dive into a pool and open your eyes. Experiment always trumps theory. :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Except I'm interested not in the classical view but the relativistic view. What is 'The c' from my point of view of light in the lower-index medium? From the reverse situation, 'The c' is slower in the higher index medium when viewed from the lower index medium. Do I see, for exemple, a Cherenkov radiation view of all outside light? Your "do the experiment" works if I were to look up at stars from earth. OK: let's pretend for a moment that it is a Cherenkov radiation view: the effect could be trivial, too dim, or radiating elsewhere than toward my point of observation. The pretend, of course, can be wrong. What I see is what I've always seen - so I'd not know. I'd imagine someone has considered this by now - but I'm at work and can't go off on this particular google search right now. Seeking that quick-answer. (Should I post this in Q&A ?).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
Experiment always trumps theory.
So theory is fake news! :D
CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. I'm a puny punmaker.
Yes, until it is verified by experiment. :)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Except I'm interested not in the classical view but the relativistic view. What is 'The c' from my point of view of light in the lower-index medium? From the reverse situation, 'The c' is slower in the higher index medium when viewed from the lower index medium. Do I see, for exemple, a Cherenkov radiation view of all outside light? Your "do the experiment" works if I were to look up at stars from earth. OK: let's pretend for a moment that it is a Cherenkov radiation view: the effect could be trivial, too dim, or radiating elsewhere than toward my point of observation. The pretend, of course, can be wrong. What I see is what I've always seen - so I'd not know. I'd imagine someone has considered this by now - but I'm at work and can't go off on this particular google search right now. Seeking that quick-answer. (Should I post this in Q&A ?).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
What you see when you dive into a pool is the relativistic view; do you think that when you jump into a pool that you are suddenly transferred into a Newtonian Universe? (Note that it is impossible to treat light in any manner other than relativistic. The Theory of Special Relativity was formulated in order to resolve the non-Newtonian behaviour of electromagnetic waves).
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Anybody ever wonder why the speed of light is represented by the constant c? It's because it's not the speed of light. Nobody other than optics researchers much care about the speed of light. What they do care about is the speed of causality (which, you'll note, starts with the letter 'c'). It just so happens that - in our universe - light (in a vacuum) travels at the speed of causality. If you can exceed the speed of causality, then guess what you've just invented? Not something as mundane as FTL travel. You've invented a Time Machine.
The speed of light is represented by the letter c because the Latin for speed is celeritate (which gives us words such as acceleration).
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Nope. Massless objects (such as photons) are constrained to always move at the Speed of Light (when they are in vacuum). When is a different medium, such as water, they may move slower than the Speed of Light, but never faster.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Tachyons?
-
What you see when you dive into a pool is the relativistic view; do you think that when you jump into a pool that you are suddenly transferred into a Newtonian Universe? (Note that it is impossible to treat light in any manner other than relativistic. The Theory of Special Relativity was formulated in order to resolve the non-Newtonian behaviour of electromagnetic waves).
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
My view, insider or outside of the pool is still (for all practical purposed) the normalized perceptions. My interest was in how a totally relativistic entity, light, would appear from a different point of view - not as I see it with eyes. This is a theoretical view that I'm wondering about. If I "perceive" light moving slower than 'c' as it moves through a higher index medium than that from which I observe it, what would I observe if the media were switched? Could I thereby "observe" light (in the lower index medium) exceeding "my local c" ? Observation here does not refer to human perception: what would I measure from my frame of reference? I'll look it up, later.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Tachyons?
Tachyons are considered impossible in Special Relativity - they can send information into the past, and so reverse cause and effect. In a Universe where Tachyons existed, it would be possible for you to kill your grandmother before your mother was born, thereby making you disappear - poof! :)
There was a young woman called Bright
Who could travel much faster than light
She went out one day
In a Relative way
And returned the previous night-- Anon.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
My view, insider or outside of the pool is still (for all practical purposed) the normalized perceptions. My interest was in how a totally relativistic entity, light, would appear from a different point of view - not as I see it with eyes. This is a theoretical view that I'm wondering about. If I "perceive" light moving slower than 'c' as it moves through a higher index medium than that from which I observe it, what would I observe if the media were switched? Could I thereby "observe" light (in the lower index medium) exceeding "my local c" ? Observation here does not refer to human perception: what would I measure from my frame of reference? I'll look it up, later.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
W∴ Balboos wrote:
Observation here does not refer to human perception: what would I measure from my frame of reference?
They are one and the same; what you see is (or should be) what Physics predicts that you see. If you are asking "what would it look like to a photon that entered a medium where n > 1?", I can't answer that. It's an interesting Gedanken experiment...
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Under what gravity?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Tachyons are considered impossible in Special Relativity - they can send information into the past, and so reverse cause and effect. In a Universe where Tachyons existed, it would be possible for you to kill your grandmother before your mother was born, thereby making you disappear - poof! :)
There was a young woman called Bright
Who could travel much faster than light
She went out one day
In a Relative way
And returned the previous night-- Anon.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Yeah, fair enough, I guess unless a hypothetical particle has been observed we must assume it is impossible. I wonder what they're doing with the LHC these days....
