Welcome to the ToeQuest.

View Poll Results: Are Super-Luminal speeds possible?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    14 63.64%
  • No

    8 36.36%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 55

Thread: Speed of Light

  1. #21
    Banned subversion is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    562
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by <<>>

    the actual problem is that nothing defines that we are going backwards or forwards, and we will probably never notice it, here I'm not looking at time as a dimension, but more as the motion of things. the universe could have started inmensily big (although for human logic and in life, it is ussually the other way round) and end up being a extremely small object becoming nothing at a point.
    Indubitably. I would even propose that our universe did start immensily big and will end immensely small, it's just that with respect to this sequence we are running in reverse time. As you said, for the purpose of human logic we always consider ourselves to be running forward in time, although whether it can really be considered forward or backward is entirely subjective. But I disagree with you that we cannot define our direction in time. Our direction in time is characterized by the fact that entropy is always on the rise. In a reverse-sequence version of our universe, entropy would always decrease, just like a video that's being played backwards.

    In actuality I think that time runs in both directions at all times (time is arbitrary), but we only experience one direction. In this manner, we are constantly intersecting with reverse time at every instantaneous moment. Right now is happening forward and backward, so is right now, so is right now. The sequence, however, only happens in one direction, or at least we only experience it in one direction. But again, our sequence is always in reverse with respect to an opposite one, so yes you can't really define which is which. However, with respect to just one universe unto itself we say by default that entropy increases when time is running forward for that universe. It may be that conscious creatures only experience time that runs "forward."
    Last edited by subversion; 06-06-2005 at 08:29 PM.

  2. #22
    The Thinker Guille is a glorious beacon of light Guille is a glorious beacon of light
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    3,278
    Blog Entries
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 12x in 9 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by subversion
    Indubitably. I would even propose that our universe did start immensily big and will end immensely small, it's just that with respect to this sequence we are running in reverse time. As you said, for the purpose of human logic we always consider ourselves to be running forward in time, although whether it can really be considered forward or backward is entirely subjective. But I disagree with you that we cannot define our direction in time. Our direction in time is characterized by the fact that entropy is always on the rise. In a reverse-sequence version of our universe, entropy would always decrease, just like a video that's being played backwards.

    In actuality I think that time runs in both directions at all times (time is arbitrary), but we only experience one direction. In this manner, we are constantly intersecting with reverse time at every instantaneous moment. Right now is happening forward and backward, so is right now, so is right now. The sequence, however, only happens in one direction, or at least we only experience it in one direction. But again, our sequence is always in reverse with respect to an opposite one, so yes you can't really define which is which. However, with respect to just one universe unto itself we say by default that entropy increases when time is running forward for that universe. It may be that conscious creatures only experience time that runs "forward."
    Yes. And all this is without expecting other time dimensions, becausethe the level of freedom would be infinite.

    But lets stick to the subject "light speed".

  3. #23
    Blue Belt davidgow77 will become famous soon enough
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    107
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    28
    This is all very interesting, but is ostensibly in the field of Cosmolgy which I am not well versed in. I am interested in modualr cosmogony and a subject I like to call hOLISTICS, WHICH INVOLVES LOOKING CLOSELY AT THE BIG PROBLEMS OF SCIENTIFIC PHILOSOPHY.

  4. #24
    Banned subversion is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    562
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    oh yes, sorry for the digression. But yeah, I think that going faster than the speed of light is elementary. I think it may not be long before we do it.

    can ya'll please describe to me what Tachyon teleportation is, and also modular cosmogony

  5. #25
    Blue Belt davidgow77 will become famous soon enough
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    107
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    28

    Post

    Tachyon teleportation is a concept used to circumvent Einsteins stipulation that nothing (no 3-d, mass carrying object) can travel faster than the speed of light. Tachyon teleportation is where phenomena travels so fast that the human brain cannot keep up with its movement, and it appears to teleport. This would explain the behaviour of quarks in space.... they "hop" from location to location. Modular cosmogony is essentially an assertion that all phenomena should be represented in a modular format that allows us to make predicitions about behaviour of any given systems that we analyse. Bohr diagrams and Feynman diagrams are good examples, but so are Reiman diagrams, pie charts, Minkowski sapce time.... essentially are are visually/modular based tool of communication used for the extrapolation of proofs.... which must always be represented by calculus.

    DG

  6. #26
    Green Belt undef00 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    87
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    24
    phantasies unlimited - for a limited time only

    faster than speed of light? no!

    but on the other hand yes!

    yes -because i do assume (sure there is lot of science not agreeing i can suppose and some others might have come up with the same thing) light doesn't "travel" at 299,792,458 meters per second (in general i don't agree with any constants in an universal meaning) at every point of view at least if you just go to detect the origin (and if you're kind of facing the ray of the light it would be possible i further assume to kind of instantenous (it is not travelling but kind of virtually stretching towards you) deliver any kind of information from one galaxy to another galaxy - sure that will require at one side lot of power to install such a "signal lamp" which emits in an acceptable term a signal for the other side to receive and process the signal (sure that will require perfectly shaped fine tuning) - even i suppose the latter easier to build than a real powerful and 100% controlled light (something like gamma-rays and beyond would make a better job i guess) emitter - sure that technology hurdle also does favor to other possible intelligent species (even if just evolving) in our universe we can assume - but we even may be capable of getting something to know what we shouldn't know.

    phantasy always wants more ....

    back to reality:

    in general i don't understand why we do think about travelling faster or as fast or not even close to light - by that time we have advanced speed to reach for the very first time interstellar space in a reasonable period of time we will be rather satisfied that just information (or a similar expression upgraded) has to be transferred to get us kind of travelling around. it further allows a possible contact to another intelligent species a more or less controlled "meeting" ... sure i personally wouldn't travel to a less advanced species compared to humans by that time ... again ... my phantasy wants more ... sorry!

  7. #27
    Raider of the lost time AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold AntonioLao is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    11,265
    Blog Entries
    10
    Thanks Given
    1,083
    Thanked 1,411x in 1,137 Posts
    Rep Power
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by undef00
    in general i don't agree with any constants in an universal meaning


    As I have mentioned in other posts, nature is abounded with all sorts of natural constants. And whether you agree or not, the constant body temperature of a healthy human being is set at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit or 37 degrees Celsius. A few degrees more or less, you die. Temperature can be expressed in terms of mass, energy, pressure, volume, and density with the help of other constants. So, if you generally don’t agree with any of these physical concepts you are basically disagreeing with everything else.

  8. #28
    Green Belt undef00 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    87
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    24
    i don't agree with everything - it is just not exact enough to me!

  9. #29
    The Observer dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold dleviwing is a splendid one to behold
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,140
    Blog Entries
    5
    Thanks Given
    25
    Thanked 144x in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    58
    No….. The speed of light is NOT a constant.

    The MEASUREMENT of the speed of light in a vacuum is constant for all reference frames.


  10. #30
    Green Belt undef00 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    87
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    24
    what do you exactly mean by that?

    sometimes my english just isn't good enough...

    sure i could try to solve that because it is just one sentence:

    The MEASUREMENT of the speed of light in a vacuum is constant for all reference frames.

    it kind of confused me ....

    especially please explain to me how that can be proofed ....

    and just for the fun of it:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/050831071025.htm
    (i didn't read all)

    i would accept that speed of light=boundless (as a "constant") - now i confused myself ....


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. My Time Paradox
    By Guille in forum Time Travel
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 05-26-2009, 08:12 AM
  2. The cause of gravity
    By wisp in forum Forces of Nature
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 06-21-2007, 04:57 PM
  3. The TOE part one:
    By baudrunner in forum Your TOE Theory
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 03-19-2006, 02:35 PM
  4. My Project For A Central Time-coordinates System
    By humanbydefault in forum Spacetime
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2006, 11:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Back to top