Scientists Confirm Faster than light travel is actually possible, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 30 times

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 07:19 AM by Ironclad

Originally posted by Strapping Young Lad
Having worked in optics for over a decade and having studied the physics of light the "law" that nothing can go faster than light never made sense to me. Without even getting into the theory of relativity and light theory Ive always thought you could break the argument down pretty simply. Like who says that there should be a law saying that its impossible that anybody can outrun my cousins 750hp blown 87 Monte Carlo SS?

Ive delved abit into Einsteins theories. I get the theory of relativity thats fine. Makes perfect sense. But when it gets down to there being nothing possible at all in the infinite expanse of the universe that can go faster than light that its just physically impossible just never seemed right but hey...I mean its Einstein right? I dont know all of his masterful theory work but Ive just allways thought hes just flat wrong on this one.

If anyone out there can post in laymans terms why hes right and all these brilliant scientists decades later are wrong then please feel free to educate...

Light has 0 mass.

An object with mass can never be pushed to a speed of an object that has no mass, even if it uses the Object with 0 mass as a propelant.

On the other hand, one can theoretically, Use a very, very strong electro magnetic field to litterally pull space toward you & then push it away behind you.

In theory, you might only be travelling at a speed of 50mph & yet you cover a distance that you would aquire at a speed several times the speed of light.

Common theory. Just got some unknown variables due to the fact we cannot at this time, produce a energy field strong enough to manipulate 0.E on a massive scale.

[edit on 12/23/2007 by Ironclad]

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 11:24 AM by welivefortheson

electromagnetism is mass.

one day youl see it.

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 02:59 PM by ProTo Fire Fox

I may be wrong here, but isnt the bulk of space theorys...just...theory ? as in no 100% proff. e.g hawking and that lot all coming up with amazing theorys, but thats all it is, a thoery. O and ive seen in here people saying that ATS is full of narrow minded people who de-bunk every thing and are sooo arrogent, 100%....true, this place needs a new member list.

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 06:01 PM by Ironclad

reply to post by ProTo Fire Fox

Some of the brightest minds in our past had theories & many of them proved to be true.

Perhaps Hawkings is wrong, mabe he's right. Who knows.

But frankly, I'd rather put my trust in his intelligence & the intelligence of his peers, than i would in half the Theorists on ATS..lol

THese guys have credentials to back them up.Most of you peeps don't..

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 09:58 PM by Anonymous Avatar

Originally posted by Ironclad

Light has 0 mass.

An object with mass can never be pushed to a speed of an object that has no mass, even if it uses the Object with 0 mass as a propelant.

On the other hand, one can theoretically, Use a very, very strong electro magnetic field to litterally pull space toward you & then push it away behind you.

That's the biefield-brown effect you are referring to I think.
Brown-Biefield Effect

Originally posted by Ironclad

In theory, you might only be travelling at a speed of 50mph & yet you cover a distance that you would aquire at a speed several times the speed of light.

That how ever is not part of the theory and would like to know where you heard that...

Originally posted by Ironclad
Common theory. Just got some unknown variables due to the fact we cannot at this time, produce a energy field strong enough to manipulate 0.E on a massive scale.

[edit on 12/23/2007 by Ironclad]

What is O.E? We can produce electrical currents strong to enough to induce the propulsion effect, how ever it is simply a matter of volts vs. mass. =)

reply posted on 23-12-2007 @ 10:01 PM by Anonymous Avatar

Originally posted by welivefortheson
electromagnetism is mass.

one day youl see it.

Electromagnetism can be affected by photons, how ever in the end it is created by electrons, which does have a tiny amount of mass, and their interactions with certain matter, which of course has mass. This does not relate though to Ironclad's statement that photons do not have mass.

reply posted on 24-12-2007 @ 10:14 AM by jfj123

reply to post by ZeuZZ

One of the main points used by debunkers of Aliens having ever reached Earth is that they are just too far away, that it would take millions of light years to reach us and that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light.

Here are a few points:
1. There are stars just a few light years from earth meaning that if an alien civilization could travel close to the speed of light, they could arrive here in just a few years. Of course this really screws up the return trip for them but I digress.
2. Just because aliens could get here doesn't mean the did come here. Of course it also doesn't mean they didn't.

However a blockbuster new paper, to be published in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society early 2008, changes all of that by stating that infact the laws of physics do allow such a device if certain methods to use these laws are employed to propell it.

This is actually not new information. I've been reading about a scientist working on the theoreticals for a few years now and NASA has even looked into his research with their Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Project.

reply posted on 24-12-2007 @ 10:57 AM by Anonymous Avatar

reply to post by Anonymous Avatar

Unless you are talking about electromagnetic waves, which of do not have mass but how ever are made entirely of and from photons.

[edit on 24-12-2007 by Anonymous Avatar]

reply posted on 25-12-2007 @ 10:19 AM by Eurisko2012

reply to post by dobsonion2

The aliens are here on Earth.
Some look exactly like us.
If you can sneak past the guards, you can put your hands
on a sport model spacecraft near Area 51.

[edit on 25-12-2007 by Eurisko2012]

reply posted on 25-12-2007 @ 10:22 AM by Eurisko2012

reply to post by jfj123

You can FOLD space and jump anywhere.
All you need is a CIGAR shaped starship.

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:41 AM by Spoodily

Originally posted by yahn goodey
reply to post by Spoodily

thanks spoodily for making it sound so simple---really i mean it-----i have the hardest time to try and figure complicated things out and you make it look so easy----i'm a tad jealous-----not to mention awkward---last time i jerked out the table cloth from under the dishes---they all travelled with the cloth------got to keep on trying ?

It's been eating at me about the table cloth example and I wanted to clarify (hopefully not add confusion) the scenario. I have a habit of over explaining, I don't mean to be restating the obvious.

The table cloth being pulled from underneath the plate is a good example of the 'idea' of whats going on in the travelling process. The plate never moved in a linear fashion although it did change location on the table cloth, though. The example is over exaggerated in that the entire table cloth is moving.

In the case of a 'ufo' the surrounding area is pulling, moving, crumpling, holding and releasing the 'tablecloth' of the universe. Only the area around the craft is being distorted. The tablecloth is elastic and can be stretched. Think about how light can be bent from a large body of mass in space. If the path of light can bend, the fabric the light is on is bending. Light travels in a straight line. The line is always straight. The medium is warping.

Anyway, I wrote this at 5:40 in the morning so hopefully it is coherent to someone other than me.

[edit on 1/20/2008 by Spoodily]

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:23 PM by tangent45

Originally posted by ZeuZZ
The Current Status of the Warp Drive Proposal; Quantum Field Constraints; Photon Propagation through the Warp Field; Alternative Faster than Light Drives. Where the latter may be based upon alternative versions of Einstein’s gravity such as Brans-Dicke theory or Yilmaz theory, or based upon alternative suggestions for interstellar travel such as the Krasnikov tube and wormholes.

Confirmed Speakers

Casimir Energy: A Fuel for Traversable Wormholes
Remo Garattini, Bergamo University, Italy

Computer Tensor Codes to Design the Warp Drive
Claudio Maccone, International Academy of Astronautics

Warp Drive: From Imagination to Reality
Jeremy Gardiner

The Status of the Warp Drive
Kelvin Long

Warp Drive: A New Approach
Richard K. Obousy & Gerald Cleaver, Department of Physics, Baylor University, Texas

Warp Drives in Cosmology
Pedro F. González-Díaz, Instituto de Física Fundamental “Blas Cabrera”, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Spain

Can the Flyby Anomalies be Explained by a Modification of Inertia
M.E. McCulloch

Space Teleportation with Present Day Technology (Poster)
Yvan Bozzonetti

This paper gives a very good summary of all the possible ways that superluminal speed could be achieved, for communication and for travel;
math.ucr.edu...

[edit on 18-12-2007 by ZeuZZ]

I am no physicist, can someone please explain to me how you can travel to a destination that is unknown? If you are located in galaxy A that is 200 million light years away from Galaxy B and want to go to a small solar system within B, how can you picture it accurately, describe it and adjust your systems to "warp" there- You have no clue what it is, just some general direction, given to you by advanced telescopes obviously. But even then its not safe since it has taken the light from Galaxy B millions of years to reach you, anything could have changed during that time, you could end up warping into a supernova, asteroid belt or a huge planet.

If you have a good way of telling what exactly is there before you travel there, its no use travelling there, is it?

[edit on 20-1-2008 by tangent45]

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:35 PM by projectvxn

Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov developed a gravitic pulse generator that travels at 64c which is 64 times the speed of light using EM fields and superconductive materials. Below is a link to the actual research paper.

arxiv.org...

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:39 PM by projectvxn

reply to post by tangent45

First step is to travel to another star. It would make sense to me that traveling to another galaxy might very well be a bad idea right off the bat. But start small and work your way up I say.

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 05:46 PM by tangent45

Originally posted by projectvxn
Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov developed a gravitic pulse generator that travels at 64c which is 64 times the speed of light using EM fields and superconductive materials. Below is a link to the actual research paper.

arxiv.org...

64x speed of light is fast but it would still take 1500 years just to cross the Milky Way (100.000 light years diameter, incl. arms). The closest galaxy with a size comparable to our own is Andromeda, it's 2 million light years away so it would take us 31250 years to travel there with the same speed.

But on the other hand, why travel to another Galaxy, the Milky way is a pretty large galaxy comprising more than 200 billion stars (estimates 200-400). Should be enough to explore as it is ;-)

Thanks for reply. (edited).

[edit on 20-1-2008 by tangent45]

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 07:09 PM by projectvxn

reply to post by tangent45

That's still better than millions of years..And we could just colonize every uninhabited planet..Build a star gate system...Evolve ascend to a new plain of existence...Reseed the galaxy with human life...Only for a tv show to be made about it.

[edit on 20-1-2008 by projectvxn]

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 07:43 PM by FireMoon

Blimey.......If this thread were on the TV programme QI we'd be on about -5000 points by now...

As far as i am aware..Einstein never once said the infamous phrase..."Nothing can travel faster than light". What he did say was that... "Nothing can accelerate past the speed of light". There is a huge conceptual difference between the language used by Einstein and how it has been wrongly interpereted..

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 08:13 PM by DogHead

Originally posted by tomcat ha
i actually remember a large bombshell article that said that according to one guys vision of quatum physics we can reach a speed of 369 times the speed of light.

Vision is a wonderful thing. It lets me see my roof. But I will still need a ladder or a trampoline or maybe a helicopter to stand on my roof. And for a ladder, or a trampoline, or a helicopter, I need the same laws of physics, and they need to work the same way for me, for the roof, for everything in Creation.

Personally, I've seen with my own eyes a big black triangle, up close, and I know it's one of ours. I've been privileged enough to see some other stuff too. So yes I know those things are real and solid. I've also seen some things that are not susceptible to normal evidence in the ordinary course of events. But even those things, truly, are not totally outside the realm of human analysis even if they are outside the realm of the commonly held knowledge of our arts and sciences.

Ignorance is the darkness in which we live, but even though the light of knowledge may not yet have lit up an area beyond what we are familiar with, our education and our reasoning can shine a torch out there, temporarily. We can therefore be more confident going out into the dark about what we will find. There is nothing in the dark that is not there when the light is on. Seen or unseen.

reply posted on 20-1-2008 @ 08:48 PM by zorgon