It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Scientists Challenge Einstein's Theory! Faster Than Light Travel Possible!

page: 1
10
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 06:09 AM
In 1905, Einstein established the Theory of Special Relativity that has defined space and time for a century. Scientists and researchers have been unable to definitively find anything wrong with it.

Now they have!

One scientist has even pointed that quotations from the 1905 document and Einstein’s contemporaries as well as interpretations of the Relativity equations clearly and concisely describe a confused and obviously erroneous theory. Every year millions of students are taught this theory without a critical analysis of Relativity.

So what exactly is this theory of Special Relativity? And what is the confusion all about? For starters, the special theory of relativity, deals with the relative motions of objects and describes the motion of particles moving at close to the speed of light.

Theoretical Basis for Special Relativity

Einstein's theory of special relativity results from two statements -- the two basic postulates of special relativity:

> The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter what their relative speeds.

It will be seen to be the same relative to any observer, independent of the motion of the observer -- is the crucial idea that led Einstein to formulate his theory. It means we can define a quantity c, the speed of light, which is a fundamental constant of nature.

> The laws of physics are the same in any inertial (that is, non-accelerated) frame of reference.

This means that the laws of physics observed by a hypothetical observer traveling with a relativistic particle must be the same as those observed by an observer who is stationary in the laboratory.

Peculiar Relativistic Effects

Time dilation – the time lapse between two events does not vary from one observer to another, but is dependent on the relative speeds of the observers' reference frames. For e.g., the twin paradox, where a twin who in a spaceship traveling near the speed of light, returns to find his sibling has aged much more.

Relativity of simultaneity – two events happening in two different locations that occur simultaneously to one observer, may occur at different times to another observer.

Lorentz contraction – the dimensions of an object as measured by one observer may be smaller than the results of measurements of the same object made by another observer.

Composition of velocities – velocities (and speeds) do not simply 'add', for example if a rocket is moving at ⅔ the speed of light relative to an observer, and the rocket fires a bullet at ⅔ of the speed of light relative to the rocket, the bullet does not exceed the speed of light relative to the observer.

Inertia and momentum – as an object's speed approaches the speed of light from an observer's point of view, its mass appears to increase thereby making it more and more difficult to accelerate it from within the observer's frame of reference.

Equivalence of mass and energy, E = mc2 – The energy content of an object at rest with mass m equals mc2.

Special relativity reveals that c is not just the velocity of a certain phenomenon, namely the propagation of electromagnetic radiation (light)—but rather a fundamental feature of the way space and time are unified as spacetime. A consequence of this is that it is impossible for any particle that has mass to be accelerated to the speed of light.

Fallacy Of The Theory Of Special Relativity

Having said that, take a look at the fallacy of the above effects. The diagram shows the approach to the CICS. Click on the link below to view the details in each box:

The Relativity Challenge.

In a nut shell:

There are several implications associated with the model of Complete and Incomplete Coordinate System (CICS). Some of these are listed here:

1. The speed of light is not a theoretical speed limit.
2. The speed of light is constant, but can vary by coordinate system.
3. This model applies to all types of waves.
4. Special Relativity is invalid because it fails Einstein's requirements.
5. The twin paradox goes away.
6. Length contraction does not occur.

So does that mean FTL travel is not only possible, but a fact? The implications are mind boggling! For the science buffs who understand mathematics here’s a paper written in April 2008 by Dr JH Field available in the Los Alamos National Lab archives here:

A detailed re-examination of the seminal paper on special relativity, taking into account recent work on the physical interpretation of the space-time Lorentz transformation as well as the modern understanding of classical elecromagnetism as a certain limit of the fundamental underlying theory --quantum electrodynamics-- is presented.

Many errors both of physical principle and of a mathematical nature are uncovered. The `relativity of simultaneity' and `length contraction' effects predicted in the paper are shown to be the spurious consequences of misinterpretations of the second postulate and the Lorentz transformation, respectively. The derivation of the latter in the paper is shown to be flawed.

The physics of space and time II: A reassessment of Einstein's 1905 special relativity paper.

arxiv.org...

FTL travel a possibility?
Courtesy: ucs.louisiana.edu

Cheers!

Refs:

www2.slac.stanford.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...
flux.aps.org...

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 06:28 AM
While I am not a Physicist I have always had contention with the speed of light as a constant and have over the years read and seen more than one thing that makes me question light speed as a maximum.

My bone of cntention with faster than lighttravel revolves around questions I have that are more dimensional in nature, it struck me long ago that if all matter or light is a wave form in multi dimension space, then it is likely that we have what a person would call a soul or spirit or , multidimensional side to ourselves..

IF this is the case, how that plays into rapid movement of a human form at greater than light speeds or through a worm hole or through a hyperspace scenario is something I really can't fully grasp, the energy needed would be enourmous..hurts my head to even theorize about this...

but in essence I agree fully that there is no reason to believe light speed can not be broken... my questions are what are the onsequences for living organisms? the exsistance of a soul/higher dimensional forms of ourselves and how does that play into the equation before all is said and done?

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 06:42 AM

Excellent find Mike! I don't know that the studies necessarily negate Einstein's work, but looks possible to augment it in some significant ways. I"ve always been fascinated with electromagnetic phenomena.... I mean, why doesn't light, for example, have an acceleration period? It manifests as lightspeed without having first gone from 0 velocity. Cool stuff.

Now, if some of this proves to be accepted -- and I'm just guessing here, no physicist I -- it seems like that might affect the Hubble constant as well, which in turn could shore up the "closed Universe" theory. Ripples.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 07:51 AM

Originally posted by mopusvindictus

But in essence I agree fully that there is no reason to believe light speed can not be broken... my questions are what are the onsequences for living organisms? the exsistance of a soul/higher dimensional forms of ourselves and how does that play into the equation before all is said and done?

It's here where science and philosophy get intertwined! There's one puzzle piece in particular that physicists hope to pick out of the debris from the LHC's high-energy collisions.

Some call it the God particle.

That would probably explain many puzzles including the interaction with matter in quantum states.

As argentus had mentioned in his post above, why doesn't light, for example, have an acceleration period? It manifests as light speed without having first gone from 0 velocity.

A good observation. Reminds me of telepathy - instantaneous communication. But how does that happen with zero acceleration? How does thought travel? What particles are involved here? The electron might have a hefty partner that physicists refer to as the selectron. The muon might have the smuon. The quark might have the squark.

Heck! I'm heading for the bar to cool of some. My brain is fried just thinking of those exotic particles that may be involved here - from quarks and gluons, from selectrons to smuons!!

And by the way, I wonder when the LHC is going to be fired up?

Cheers!

[edit on 27-6-2008 by mikesingh]

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 09:16 AM
Actual physicists first reported that they broke the "speed of light" back in 98 or 99. No one believed them. It was replicated by 4 or 5 different laboratories in as many countries within days. Still no one believed them.

Why this was not the headline in every single paper in the world is beyond me. Actually, I know why, but let's not get into that here. It's the same reason that two different high school students who developed WORKING DESKTOP *FUSION* REACTORS didn't get headlines all across the world.

Scientists have slowed light down to, literally, a snails pace. This too, has been duplicated. Either experiment should have shown that Einstein was wrong, but no one WANTS to believe he is wrong.

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 10:03 AM

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by mopusvindictus

But in essence I agree fully that there is no reason to believe light speed can not be broken... my questions are what are the onsequences for living organisms? the exsistance of a soul/higher dimensional forms of ourselves and how does that play into the equation before all is said and done?

It's here where science and philosophy get intertwined! There's one puzzle piece in particular that physicists hope to pick out of the debris from the LHC's high-energy collisions.

Some call it the God particle.

That would probably explain many puzzles including the interaction with matter in quantum states.

As argentus had mentioned in his post above, why doesn't light, for example, have an acceleration period? It manifests as light speed without having first gone from 0 velocity.

A good observation. Reminds me of telepathy - instantaneous communication. But how does that happen with zero acceleration? How does thought travel? What particles are involved here? The electron might have a hefty partner that physicists refer to as the selectron. The muon might have the smuon. The quark might have the squark.

Heck! I'm heading for the bar to cool of some. My brain is fried just thinking of those exotic particles that may be involved here - from quarks and gluons, from selectrons to smuons!!

And by the way, I wonder when the LHC is going to be fired up?

Cheers!

[edit on 27-6-2008 by mikesingh]

Hey Mike nice post...
I always refer telepathy as advanced blue tooth technology. Just a thought... The ETs must be using their brains to pass their communication to each other like in blue tooth tech, they allow or block the access to their brain.

I think this is the field where humans needs to develop.. developing the power of brain... human body is a amazing machine. we need to learn how to control it and thats where spritualism comes.We ned to learn to use best part of our body... thats our brain

I also need to cool my brain... so will take beer

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:46 AM
I think the "constant speed of light" hypothesis has always been the nub of the problems with SR. Examination of any number of textbooks makes it apparent that authors interpretation of what is meant varies widely.

With respect to what the speed is measured is never made clear. Often expressed as "speed the same regardless of velocity of emitter" or similar words - is completely ambiguous in meaning. Is the speed measured with respect to the emitter the same, or the speed with respect to the observer ? Are we talking about one-way speed or to-and-fro speed ? In fact only the latter is measurable but opinion often claims the one-way speed is always the same - which is surely impossible is it not ?

Einstein's 1905 paper actually uses (and needs to use) a speed of light of c+v and c-v in the "observed" system in order to derive the Lorentz transformations !!

Also finally, the well known Doppler effect demonstrates experimentally that the light must be travelling at c+v (blue shift) or c-v (red shift) as otherwise a universal constant speed would render any such Doppler shifts impossible !

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:47 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Also finally, the well known Doppler effect demonstrates experimentally that the light must be travelling at c+v (blue shift) or c-v (red shift) as otherwise a universal constant speed would render any such Doppler shifts impossible !

Right! That's very intriguing to say the least! So how come? Can a scientist on the Einstein bandwagon explain this? If light is not a universal constant, then the implications are that the velocity of light is a variable depending upon the relative velocity of the target object!

Cheers!

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:55 AM
This may be hard to convince the scientific community that one of earths most brillant people could of been wrong. This will definetly motivate modern scientists to set the limit again, unless they dont accept this new information.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:47 AM
Hey Mike, I was reading this today.

"Quantum computers also could take advantage of the bizarre behaviors of quantum mechanics - some of which are counterintuitive even to physicists - in ways that are hard to fathom. For example, two quantum computers could, in concept, communicate instantaneously across any distance imaginable, even across solar systems."

They are coming closer and closer to quantum computers, if the theory of these quantum computers is right. Faster than light is possible.

Source

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:41 AM

Originally posted by kdial1
They are coming closer and closer to quantum computers, if the theory of these quantum computers is right. Faster than light is possible.
Source

Hi kdial,

You must've heard of Torsion Fields too.

These fields come in at least three types: E-fields, S-fields, and G-fields. The E, S, and G stand for Electric, Spin, and Gravity fields. The torsion field and its emanations are subtle energy fields. They are separate and distinct from classical Electric, Magnetic, and Gravity fields.

Generators for these fields can be shielded against electro-magnetic fields but the torsion field still manifests itself through such shielding. Torsion fields can be generated, detected, switched on and off (such as for communication purposes), and are a distinct type of energy field heretofore not included in today's classical physics.

Torsion field emanations can travel at velocities at least as high as 109 times the speed of light.

Cheers!

[edit on 28-6-2008 by mikesingh]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 07:31 PM

A good observation. Reminds me of telepathy - instantaneous communication. But how does that happen with zero acceleration? How does thought travel? What particles are involved here? The electron might have a hefty partner that physicists refer to as the selectron. The muon might have the smuon. The quark might have the squark.

Kind of reminds of quantum entanglement? or String theory? (why not speed of thought, through astral travel?) Strum a chord and the 'vibrations' will be felt instantaneously...anywhere. All particles have infinite possibilites, yet while one is affected, the other alters itself, for balance, for duality, no different particles or anti-particles, just one type of particle, changing it's colours.

I always felt light speed was an obstacle, not a limit.

nice find, flag!

EMM

[edit on 28-6-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

[edit on 28-6-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:16 PM
It was nice to see this thread and discussion on Special Relativity, and to see my material linked in the posting. I invite you to visit the blog at blog.RelativityChallenge.com... for up-to-the-minute information about my findings and research. There you'll find videos of presentations that I gave at the University of Connecticut last May (2007), challenging SRT on mathematical terms, and at the University of New Mexico this April (2008) presenting a revised interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment.

Personally, I think an amazing thing happens when you understand how Einstein reached his initial conclusion of Relativity, Time Dilation, and Length Contraction. You can really see what assumptions Einstein had to make and why he reached those conclusions. I have tried to explain this in the context of my model of Complete and Incomplete Coordinate Systems and invite you to watch Episodes 12 through 15 for more details. Of course, I welcome any feedback you might have.

I agree with the other comments in this thread in that we will have a chance to come up with new interpretations of space and time and what this means to us. This is an exciting time!

Cheers!
Steven
www.RelativityChallenge.com

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 03:01 AM
Food for Thought

Given that the speed if light is constant -

a. What constrains the finite value of c? Why isn't c smaller or larger?
b. The solar system is slowing down. The Universe is expanding. C is constant? At the level of logic, it would be easier to accept the c is constant if it was a ratio, but c is thought to be an independent quantity.

d

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 04:37 AM
i probaly have no idea, rotate a computer cd at high velocity and it will float depending on the direction of rotation clockwise or counterclockwise depending on which side of the equator you are on, north or south.
the collider, is used to collide or near miss two protons in an outer electron field, when this happens they rotate at high velocity. when thy rotate, they create a gravity or antigravity depending on the direction of rotation. clockwise rotation, north of the equator will cause the protons to collapse in on itself, causeing a wormhole thru space and time. the collapse of the protons bends light and manipulates the mass to make to far away points much closer. example, take a peice of paper put two dots on opposite ends fold the paper so the dots touch. this is part of what the collider does that they are exsperimenting on. you can go faster than the speed of light if you manipulate the mass. im an average jo on the street and that is my oppion.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 10:39 AM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Given that the speed if light is constant -

a. What constrains the finite value of c? Why isn't c smaller or larger?
b. The solar system is slowing down. The Universe is expanding. C is constant? At the level of logic, it would be easier to accept the c is constant if it was a ratio, but c is thought to be an independent quantity.

That's the point. Is c a universal constant? As Anon ATS mentioned above..

The well known Doppler effect demonstrates experimentally that the light must be travelling at c+v (blue shift) or c-v (red shift) as otherwise a universal constant speed would render any such Doppler shifts impossible !

Interesting! So that proves c isn't a constant? Does it depend on energy and mass? The equation says so. Therefore, if any one of the parameters is changed, can it affect the speed of light?

Cheers!

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 08:59 PM
Imagine alien races who have an advanced knowledge of Quantum Mechanics, they could utilise its effects for instantaneous information relay, perhaps its properties could be used in some way to view the universes farthest reaches in "real-time", as opposed to the limits of viewing in visible light, therefore looking back in the past as we do.

And who knows, maybe even instant transportation.

top topics

10