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.

# "Man has made what goes faster than light itself...

page: 1
0
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:09 PM
and faster than instant itself!!!"

^^What do you think is made so in that respect by man?

It's any object after it is made by man. Look at any man-made object from one end to the other end... It is right there under your nose faster than light speed itself that even the light, reflecting its very image into your eyes, cant clock. Finished made objects are outside speed which puts them so indeed faster than light speed and faster than instant.

Anyone else see the fact in this, besides me?

All this time we have been looking right at what we made that is faster than light and faster than instant. Any material object made. Even a made car just parked somewhere is faster than light speed while still. Any made object not moving is faster than the speed of light. Even something made still (a car closed door) that is put in moving at, say, 20 miles per hour is still in itself faster than the speed of light. When we move still objects we, in a kind of half way aspect depending on what we're paying attention to, put them in a seeming way outside of their faster than light speed, still array.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by Mabus]

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:29 PM
So would this parked car go the speed of thought then? As the speed of thought would be a lot faster than light. However, a parked car is stationary and only moves as fast as the planet earth so I don't think that this theory will hold any water.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:33 PM
How is a parked car faster than the speed of light, let alone an instant?

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:38 PM
I always figgered the speed of thought was based on electrons moving and since they also move at the speed of light, would be equal.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:41 PM
When you look at a car just sitting there, you are actually seeing the reflected light waves, and the light waves move at the speed of light right? If it is just sitting there it is just reflecting light waves. I dont see how it could be moving faster than the speed of light. IF you could provide another example that would be good.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:41 PM
Any made material object outside of aging is faster than the speed of light and faster than instant. Any made material object that is faster than the speed of light and faster than instant is outside of aging. Anything outside of aging is outside of moment, if moment is defined by any aging (like decaying) or changing or altering in cycle or rate or measure or factor in of its own self. Example: If you sit on a metal chair, the chair is not in of its own self in a moment if it doesnt change in it's current way of remain, reguardless of you sitting on it or not.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Mabus

All this time we have been looking right at what we made that is faster than light and faster than instant. Any material object made. Even a made car just parked somewhere is faster than light speed while still. Any made object not moving is faster than the speed of light. Even something made still (a car closed door) that is put in moving at, say, 20 miles per hour is still in itself faster than the speed of light. When we move still objects we, in a kind of half way aspect depending on what we're paying attention to, put them in a seeming way outside of their faster than light speed, still array.
]

How on earth is 20miles per hour faster than 186,000 miles per second?

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:49 PM
The only theory about going faster than the speed of light was something to do with quantum tunnelling
www.telegraph.co.uk.../

'We have broken speed of light'

By Nic Fleming, Science Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 16/08/2007

A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light - an achievement that would undermine our entire understanding of space and time.

Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921

According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, it would require an infinite amount of energy to propel an object at more than 186,000 miles per second.

However, Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University of Koblenz, say they may have breached a key tenet of that theory.

The pair say they have conducted an experiment in which microwave photons - energetic packets of light - travelled "instantaneously" between a pair of prisms that had been moved up to 3ft apart.

Being able to travel faster than the speed of light would lead to a wide variety of bizarre consequences.

For instance, an astronaut moving faster than it would theoretically arrive at a destination before leaving.

The scientists were investigating a phenomenon called quantum tunnelling, which allows sub-atomic particles to break apparently unbreakable laws.

Dr Nimtz told New Scientist magazine: "For the time being, this is the only violation of special relativity that I know of."

[edit on 9/21/2008 by altered_states]

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:56 PM

If a man made material object is faster than the speed of light (according to your theory)... wouldn't make mans existence work by the same rule?

Pffft.. Maybe we live in a quantum tunnel.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:57 PM
Before light, a still object, in of itself, is! Light can not be faster than the speed of "already still there" nor something later-made put "still there", which light has to travel across, or through, or has to bounce off of to reflect. But man-made material objects that are in moment are not faster than light speed, since their moment is clocked as not going faster than light speed.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:08 PM

How on earth is 20miles per hour faster than 186,000 miles per second?

Inside the 20 miles per hour case the still object (say a car's closed door) is, in of itself, faster than the speed of light. It's right under your nose while inside of some case that is going 20 miles per hour.

It's so faster than the speed of light even says you because you dont even notice it so under your observation.

Dont act like a sec hand isnt going faster while in with an hour hand that's going slower in, say, a classic clock. It is a case within a case indeed.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by Mabus]

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Monsterenergy791
How is a parked car faster than the speed of light, let alone an instant?

You are looking at one case, but not the other case. In one case and point the car isnt traveling to why you would say it isnt going faster than the speed of light. But! In the other case a still object being that same object not traveling is faster than the speed of light.

What is faster than light speed, does it even travel a speed at all, even though what may be carrying it on in part wise may in some case be traveling a speed?

^^That's the question you should be thinking.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Mabus
and faster than instant itself!!!"

^^What do you think is made so in that respect by man?

Maybe they are talking about your bowel movements after eating at a bad mexican restaurant.....i know thats almost faster than instant

But seriously....if you were on some sort of craft moving at the speed of light....and you somehow walked at 1mph to the front of the craft...would you be moving 1mph quicker than the speed of light? Sorry im a bit rusty on my physics

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:29 PM

Originally posted by Mabus

Originally posted by Monsterenergy791
How is a parked car faster than the speed of light, let alone an instant?

You are looking at one case, but not the other case. In one case and point the car isnt traveling to why you would say it isnt going faster than the speed of light. But! In the other case a still object being that same object not traveling is faster than the speed of light.

What is faster than light speed, does it even travel a speed at all, even though what may be carrying it on in part wise may in some case be traveling a speed?

^^That's the question you should be thinking.

Im not saying that it isnt possible its just I cant quite grassp what your saying, correct me if im wrong, if I put a pair of trainers inside a suitCASE they would be travelling faster than the speed of light?

Edit to add: whats the dance with these cases?

[edit on 9/21/2008 by altered_states]

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:45 PM
Often the most obvious is right in front of us. I think from what I read, that the simplest concepts are often the hardest understood by the unenlightended mind. Its like when spiritual people say we are all one, or I am god. Some people just don't get it and never will.

I agree with your concept and sum it up with this. All that exists is the here and now, and God is all that is. The speed of light only counts if one can see it. So if you close your eyes the speed of light is non existent. So in the reality of life all is an illusion.

Nothing is as it appears. The reflection of light does not make what seems to be real any more real. Just because we as people see things does not make it any more substantial. Just because we don't see things doesn't mean they don't exist. I have never seen a million dollars but many people have. With or without the speed of light it will exist as long as someone believes it is in their reality.

But again, the things we see have to be reflecting vibrations. The speed of light could very well be why we see anything.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:53 PM

yes but this is the speed of light your talking about? the thread clearly states faster than the speed of light, if it was as simple as opening car doors wwe would be travelling all over the universe

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:54 PM

I'm not positive, but I don't think that is how it works. Light speed is constant relative to position. Meaning, if I am in a craft moving at half the speed of light and I turned on my headlights, one may think that the light-beam only moves away from the craft at the OTHER HALF the speed of light, but this isn't so. The light still moves away at 186,000 miles per second.

Light speed is constant relative to position. It is a barrier. I've read on the ultra-dimensional ideas and how they speculate they can possibly fold space this way, but I don't understand it at all. And I really don't think anyone else does either. Unless someone is simply withholding the info.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:59 PM
That must be some good # you are smoking.

The point of relativity is that nothing moves faster than the speed of light, therefore if you are traveling the speed of light, and you shine a flashlight forward, the photons in the beam still travel at the speed of light as well, just not relative to your reference frame. This results in time being perceived differently depending on the point of view of the observer.

Which may or may not be true, but I can't imagine that a century of observation supporting it would lead me to discount it in favor of the belief that my car can achieve warp speed.

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:16 PM
No one can measure outside and over the speed of light because they have the very light entering their eyes that keeps 'em back from realization. The instrument would have to work faster than light speed, too. And we all know electronically it aint happening.

So it takes a human mind's perception to be the instrament in noticing that outside and over the speed of light is any still, in itself, object all along, whether or not, it is within another object (case with/in case) observed/viewed in another way as not going over the speed of light. Dont need nothing, but the human mind to realize that in mental measurement or judgment.

Only our human mind can read in better judgement certain things that electronics cant pick up and certain things that even the fooled human mind didnt from before pick up.

If your nose was a snake turned inward it would have been had you bitten.

[edit on 21-9-2008 by Mabus]

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:28 PM
"If your nose was a snake turned inward it would have been had you bitten"? would of been had you bitten?
this does not make sense for someone who makes einstien look inferior

[edit on 9/22/2008 by altered_states]

new topics

top topics

0