Speed of light finally broken?

Jim Crafton

Wow, that's a fascinating interpretation. Could you describe any of the math behind that?

¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog

Josh Smith

Jim Crafton wrote:

Could you describe any of the math behind that?

Yes.

:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.

Miszou

I think it means that from an observers point of view, the astronaut would arrive at his destination ahead of the photons from the origin, effectively showing the astronaut in two places at once. It's rather poorly worded, but sort of makes sense if you think about it from the point of view of a 3rd party observer, and the astronaut is moving toward you.

Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page

Rajesh R Subramanian

ToddHileHoffer wrote:

Speed of light finally broken?

Chuck Norris did it forty times, twelve years ago.

Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->ßRÅhmmÃ<-·´¯`·.

Chris Maunder

It can't turn back time but it will violate causality.

cheers, Chris Maunder

CodeProject.com : C++ MVP

El Corazon

Josh Smith wrote:

Yes.

feeling a bit "puckish" today? ;)

_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

MatrixCoder

I see Warp Engines over the horizon! And here's an interesting thought on Time Travel.

Trinity: Neo... nobody has ever done this before. Neo: That's why it's going to work. Static Caffeine

Josh Smith

El Corazon wrote:

feeling a bit "puckish" today?

Yes. ;P

:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.

Chris Maunder

"in which particles summon up the energy to cross an apparently uncrossable barrier. " Oh man. Someone shoot that journalist. Or point him to this.[^]. There's no energy increase. That's why it's called "tunnelling". If they had summoned up the energy it would be "Quantum climbing-up-the-energy-barrier-and-getting-over-to-the-other-side. Which is no where near as catchy. Seems to me they have to be very careful here: they are relying on Qauntum effects and measuring things very closely whih can cause all sorts of things to happen to the photons waveform. Maybe it's not violation of Special Relativity but merely a problem with interpretation.

cheers, Chris Maunder

CodeProject.com : C++ MVP

El Corazon

Either I mistake your shape and making quite, Or else you are that shrewd and knavish sprite Call'd Robin Goodfellow: are not you he That frights the maidens of the villagery; Skim milk, and sometimes labour in the quern And bootless make the breathless housewife churn; And sometime make the drink to bear no barm; Mislead night-wanderers, laughing at their harm? Those that Hobgoblin call you and sweet Puck, You do their work, and they shall have good luck: Are not you he?

_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

Roger Wright

Good enough for me - I've always wanted to violate someone's causality. Now how do I hitch a ride on a photon?:-D

"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"

El Corazon

Roger Wright wrote:

Now how do I hitch a ride on a photon?

first you must diet until you reach negligable mass... then....

_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

Josh Smith

El Corazon wrote:

And bootless make the breathless housewife churn;

Yeah, that's me. ;)

:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.

Chris Losinger

i'm guessing it was just a sloppy choice of metaphor.

image processing toolkits | batch image processing

Roger Wright

:laugh::laugh::laugh: I'm nearly there, much to my coworkers' annoyance. They're all eating microwaved diet meals; I'm feasting on a heap of greasy chips smothered in cheese and guacamole.:-D

"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"

Anton Afanasyev

Jim Crafton wrote:

Or was this just the typical misrepresentation of science by a journo unable to comprehend beyond the 6th grade?

That more like the truth. I still dont get how they can teach that "it turns back time". All that happens is that you start seeing things that happened some time ago, is all. You dont actually "turn back time", you just see the lighting that happened some time ago. Though even that is not _really_ possible, since light goes out in all direction from Earth, and since you cant just make an object(of a relatively large size) move at the speed of light immediately, the object will start moving at that speed somewhere in space, beyond Earth, where it just wont be able to see "object" as it does on Earth - they would be distorted due to light travelling in all directions. Not sure if what I said made sense, since its only my interpretation based on what I know/understand, but essentially it doesnt turn back time, you just start seeing objects as they appeared some time ago.

:badger:

Nathan Holt at EMOM

Jim Crafton wrote:

"Travelling faster than light also, in theory, turns back time. According to conventional physics, an astronaut moving beyond light speed would arrive at his destination before leaving." Does anyone know if this is *really* what current theories about this state? Or was this just the typical misrepresentation of science by a journo unable to comprehend beyond the 6th grade?

It's an over simplification. The special theory of reletivity describes how things traveling at different speeds have time going in different directions. If someone traveled faster than light to alpha centauri, he could easily arrive after he left from our view point, but someone traveling at near light speed in the right direction would see him arrive before he left. It is true that any means to travel faster than light can be used to travel back in time. Nathan Holt

Dan Neely

It is. When added relativistically your speed in space and speed in time equal the speed of light. If your speed in space is greater than C your speed in time actually is negative. It's not just outracing your photons you really could go back in time and try to kill your father before you were born.

-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer

Jorgen Sigvardsson

You have to give the photon some extra boost. Speed = c does not violate causality. It will only violate the law of energy conservation. Since you have mass, you will have infinite kinetic energy, which means that all the energy in the universe will be in/on/with you (what is the proper preposition anyway?) Perhaps that is how big bang started? Some moron managed to travel at c :-D

-- Smell-o-vision users, insert nostril tubes now

Jorgen Sigvardsson

Atkins diet?

-- From the Makers of Futurama