Is FTL an allowed speed?

[mkirkpatrick]

Hey Sub ole buddy,lighten up, let go of your baggage, and rise above it, remember only a while ago on another post we were all going to share with each other,you said your house was open to all? remember! Life is too long for this upsetting stuff to continue, I charge you now my friend, LET GO of it all and become again a brother of the TOE.

kind regards michael.

[Planet_Bob]

Though Einstein provided a subjective method to interpret our observations, Lorentz provided the physical interpretations. Lorentz supposed that motion would alter the physical state of objects, including our measuring devices, and thus the MEASUREMENT of the speed of light in a vacuum would always render the same value. LORENTZ WAS RIGHT!

Lorentz's work was not based on a single direction of light, but on an average.

So rather than stating so emphatically that Lorentz was correct, would it not be better to qualify your statement by saying that he is correct when you take an average, which does not imply that he is right at all.

[dleviwing]

Lorentz's work was based on light being the result of the vibrations of electrical charges to explain Maxwell's electromagnetic theory in the 1890's.

[baudrunner]

I wish you would spend less time assaulting others' ideas and more time contributing your own. Thus far I have read only one idea of yours concerning why nothing can exceed light speed but it is based on the same false assumption that is held by too many others who also believe that photons fly across the Universe, which is simply not the way it is. I have explained the way that it is and all the research ever conducted to examine the nature of the behaviour of light actually supports this explanation.

I understand the fundamentals; also the nature of light; the nature of EM propagation and the absolute rate of atomic interaction leading to the false and misleading theory of "light speed"; the nature of relativity as an accommodation to this freakish three dimensional reality we find ourselves in; our place in the cosmic scheme of things; what we represent within it; why evolution is acellerating; the nature of creation; the relationships that the three cosms of the colossal, the macro, and the atomic have with reality; the fact of the inevitable demise of our existence even as new existence is founded at the periphery of this Universe; and so on. It all amounts to a good description of the fundamental nature of reality based on the observations and interpretations of physical evidence and above all rational logic, not to mention some pretty deep insight. You see how this must have Heisenberg rolling in his grave.

I hold up Einstein as one of the greatest thinkers of all time because he made the community aware of the fact of relativity and established the absolute limit imposed on the rate of EM propagation based on experimental evidence. His interpretations led to his explanation of time dilation. This took a gifted imagination. I have interpreted why he said all that without contradicting myself or Einstein, if you would only read it, and you led me to believe that you had read about this in one of my early posts and that you understood it but you by far prefer to assault an idea rather than understand it. Your persistence and consistency in this style of posting only reveals you by way of your posturing. Your contributions are actually minimal. I cannot see a reason why you place yourself above others so because I cannot see where it is merited.

We will continue to disagree until you accept that the premises upon which you defend your refutations involve theory which is essentially wrong and not completely understood because they are not yours to begin with. I am not referring to Dave's explanations - we know on which point we disagree but we do not fight over it, but simply clinging to the lab coats of the status quo does not make you right.

[timer]

Does anyone here know about matter waves? Matter waves and the quantum, h, is the foundation of quantum mechanics. E=mc^2=hw is how relativity and QM are equated. DeBroglie's equation for matter(fermion)wavelength is h/mv, which makes them far too short to be in the 4000 to 7700 angstrom visual wavelength range*, and speed of the matter wave crest is U=c^2/v or 9 x 10^16 km/sec in the momentum-line state(no mass-change of state)when v=0. What that means is a GLOBAL velocity of c^2 and LOCAL velocity of v=0, or covering a light year in 105 sec, and frozen at 0 deg K(analogy : competely at rest on a jet). U=c^2/v made relativists go ballistic, thus their hokey group/phase "cover story", and consigning DeBroglie to the "crazy aunt alice" catagory. How often do you hear physicists talk about HALF of your physical existence other than the occasional "wave function"(which they hope you'll mis-understand as EM waves)? *"time" is dKE is mass is W>P or over running matter Waves(in newtons of wave force)which is deceleration, which is gravity(bose bonding fermions in a capacitance well). Your body is your "time-eye", and at c^2 the matter waves tying the sun to the earth are NOT at c(8 minutes retarded), at c^2 it's 149,000,000 km/9 x 10^16 kps = 1 x 10^-9 sec. Research to verify.

[baudrunner]

Shouldn't you be quoting Schrödinger?

[dleviwing]

Timer;
I think you're giving DeBroglie credit for something Compton did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_effect

[timer]

Schrodinger? Compton? In 1919 Eddington took the famous eclipse photographs that verified Einstein's warped space theory, it was one of those EUREKA moments in science. Louis DeBroglie, a frenchman, didn't want his counry to be upstaged by this german physicist; so he began with Nels Bohr's wave/particle theory(light is BOTH a wave and a particle)and asked himself : ok, if light(bosons)is both a wave and a particle, why shouldn't matter(fermions)also be waves as well as particles? He published his theory in 1922, the putative matter wavelength given by h/mv and speed of wave crest as U=c^2/v. In 1926 Davisson and Germer at the Bell Labs were bombarding the face of a pure nickel crystal with electrons at the normal angle. Instead of bouncing off randomly they recoiled at about a 54 deg angle. A stunning result that could only be interpreted as if the Ni crystal lattice was acting as a diffraction grating for the electron's MATTER WAVES. Thus QUANTUM MECHANICS was born. E=mc^2=hw is how it all ties together in the relativity/QM revolution of the 1920's. Compton was earlier, Schrodinger was later. No, it was Louis DeBroglie who was the key theorist here, and over running matter wave Force is time and gravity(W>P).