It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

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

 

Light going slower than light in space? Look here!

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   
This might emerge into a new field of science.

Hope this gives FTL proponents out there a time to relax and slow down for a moment


www.universetoday.com...


The speed of light is the speed of light, and that's that. Right? Well, maybe not. Try and figure this out. Astronomers studying radiation coming from a distant galaxy found that the high energy gamma rays arrived a few minutes after the lower-energy photons, even though they were emitted at the same time. If true, this result would overturn Einstein's theory of relativity, which says that all photons should move at the speed of light. Uh oh Einstein.




posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Pretty interesting. Reminded me of this...

www.wired.com...

Maybe a big BEC in space?


vger

"Learn all that is learnable and then return that knowledge to the creator"



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by vger6
 


That made really think!
It think it's plausible but can also be probabilistic. If there's BEC involvement, we might expect some gamma rays being delayed and some aren't, unfortunately, it wasn't discussed in greater detail in the link I gave.

I have actually found many references to the most energetic gamma rays moving at something like 0.9999997c in my astrophysics research. Sadly, I wasn't able to retain those links. And they were discussing a completely different matter, not the speed anomalies.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ahnggk
This might emerge into a new field of science.

Hope this gives FTL proponents out there a time to relax and slow down for a moment


www.universetoday.com...


The speed of light is the speed of light, and that's that. Right? Well, maybe not. Try and figure this out. Astronomers studying radiation coming from a distant galaxy found that the high energy gamma rays arrived a few minutes after the lower-energy photons, even though they were emitted at the same time. If true, this result would overturn Einstein's theory of relativity, which says that all photons should move at the speed of light. Uh oh Einstein.



The answer to this unexplainable phenomina is simple if scientists were to reject their theories of warping space and ultra massive black holes.

Current theory says GRBs are supposedly located on the edge of the universe and go off when a star goes super-nova and collapses into a black hole.

Plasma physicists and electrical engineers have much simpler explanation for GRBs.

Gamma-Ray Bursts from Discharges in Plasmas
Li Ti-pei et al 1997 Chinese Phys. Lett. 14 557-560
doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/14/7/022

GRBs are not caused by collapsing super-novas, they are caused by exploding electrostatic double layers of plasma in the Sun's outer heliosphere or galactic plasma currents.

The reason why we see a delay in the rays compared to the light is because light is emitted before the charged particles have had a chance to accelerate fast enough to emit gamma rays.

both are moving at the same speed.


As for the "blazar" in the story, it presents some serious problems for standing theory.

I discuss "blazars" here.




[edit on 7-7-2009 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Or, rather than becoming electric-universe promoters, we could simply ask ourselves whether the generation of the secondary (Cerenkov) radiation might possibly involve a delay, and if so, why. There is probably some interesting real physics to be done here by qualified people who don't jump to conclusions.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


ahhh....but isn't asserting the validity of the GR model also jumping to a conclusion?


Plasma Cosmology has plenty of its own supporters and represents a theory that has proven to be every bit as valid as GR. Let's not forget that Einsteins musings are still only theory.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
ahhh....but isn't asserting the validity of the GR model also jumping to a conclusion?

What, after nearly a century of theoretical and experimental verification?

I applaud your caution, especially when contrasted with your eagerness to dignify 'plasma cosmology' with scientific respectability.


Plasma Cosmology... represents a theory that has proven to be every bit as valid as GR. Let's not forget that Einsteins musings are still only theory.

Now, now, bigfatfurryfeller, I know that isn't really you in your avatar.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


LOL...not really me, but a close enough representation.


But if there were nothing to plasma cosmology, why would LANL be devoting its own time and resources to it?

plasmascience.net...



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

I've been to that site before. I think it's an engineer thing, y'know?

Anyway, getting back to my take on the topic: I understand Cerenkov radiation is emitted after the disruptive high-energy particle has passed through the medium. There's a delay implicit in the process. Perhaps the mysterious result is best explained by some such effect?



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
we could simply ask ourselves whether the generation of the secondary (Cerenkov) radiation might possibly involve a delay, and if so, why. There is probably some interesting real physics to be done here by qualified people who don't jump to conclusions.


I believe the effect is near instantaneous(or instantaneous to human perception). Gamma ray, collides with air molecules generating charged particles traveling at high relativistic speeds. The action generates Cherenkov Radiation - which is an electromagnetic radiation...

I seriously doubt the process would take 4 minutes to cause the 4-minute delay in the OP. Further read on Cherenkov Radiation and MAGIC telescope here:

en.wikipedia.org...
MAGIC Telescope

[edit on 7-7-2009 by ahnggk]



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to OP by ahnggk
 

Then there are nutrinos, which seem to travel faster than light -


SN 1987A

SN 1987A was a supernova in the outskirts of the Tarantula Nebula in the Large Magellanic Cloud, a nearby dwarf galaxy. It occurred approximately 51.4 kiloparsecs from Earth, close enough that it was visible to the naked eye. It could be seen from the Southern Hemisphere. It was the closest observed supernova since SN 1604, which occurred in the Milky Way itself. The light from the supernova reached Earth on February 23, 1987. As the first supernova discovered in 1987, it was labeled "1987A". Its brightness peaked in May with an apparent magnitude of about 3 and slowly declined in the following months. It was the first opportunity for modern astronomers to see a supernova up close.


Neutrino emissions
There were 3 neutrino bursts observed. The Mont Blanc computer detected a burst of five pulses about 8 hours before the first optical observation, followed by a second burst of three pulses about 2 hours later; Kamioka and Baksan reported observations of a burst made by eleven and five pulses, respectively, delayed by 4.7 hours in comparison with the Mont Blanc burst. (Refer adsabs.harvard.edu...)

Approximately three hours before the visible light from SN 1987A reached the Earth, a burst of neutrinos was observed at three separate neutrino observatories. This is due to the neutrino emission (which occurs simultaneously with core collapse) preceding the emission of visible light (which occurs only after the shock wave reaches the stellar surface). At 7:35am Universal time, Kamiokande II detected 11 antineutrinos, IMB 8 antineutrinos and Baksan 5 neutrinos, in a burst lasting less than 13 seconds. Water-based instruments detect only antineutrinos of thermal origin[6], while a gallium-71-based instrument detects only neutrinos (lepton number = +1) of either thermal or electron-capture origin.

Source : Wikipedia



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


Very nice.

About time Albert Einstein took his real place in history.



None of the ideas of Albert Einstein were completely new. He drew on the works of James Maxwell and Max Planck. No less an authority than Stephen Hawking has said that none of the works of Einstein were original. Hawking provides a list of names of scientists, all of whom are unknown to the general public today, but who had the ideas now associated with Einstein before Einstein had them.


Just one of many links to doubts about Einstein

There are many unorthodox scientists out there who are questioning relativity as a whole and take an entirely different approach to come to a Unified Field Theory.

Here for example

We are not far from alternative (ZPE) energy disclosure I feel, (which would disprove Einstein). It has been in the sole hands of the military long enough now.

What is Dr. Turtur thinking?

S+F



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
What's this?
You mean science has been proven wrong, yet again?

Ok, so maybe science is not entirely wrong on this but any related theories will now have to be corrected and updated on account of these new findings.

Slightly OT, wavelengths traveling faster than the speed of light reminds me of the old movie "Prince Of Darkness", (with Alice Cooper as the homeless guy), where a group of students are receiving video signals from space that are travelling faster than the speed of light, showing events of the near future, specifically the arrival of Satan.

Maybe there is a connection???



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
The speed of light is only constant in a vacuum.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alxandro
What's this?
You mean science has been proven wrong, yet again?


Science only seems to work in a society that is not based on money I am afraid... Any invention or insight threatening the current economy power structure is shelved or bought up by military. The scientists simply obey their masters who write their checks regardless of what they find.

Sounds familiar?



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by visible_villain

There were 3 neutrino bursts observed. The Mont Blanc computer detected a burst of five pulses about 8 hours before the first optical observation, followed by a second burst of three pulses about 2 hours later; Kamioka and Baksan reported observations of a burst made by eleven and five pulses, respectively, delayed by 4.7 hours in comparison with the Mont Blanc burst. (Refer adsabs.harvard.edu...)

Approximately three hours before the visible light from SN 1987A reached the Earth, a burst of neutrinos was observed at three separate neutrino observatories. This is due to the neutrino emission (which occurs simultaneously with core collapse) preceding the emission of visible light (which occurs only after the shock wave reaches the stellar surface). At 7:35am Universal time, Kamiokande II detected 11 antineutrinos, IMB 8 antineutrinos and Baksan 5 neutrinos, in a burst lasting less than 13 seconds. Water-based instruments detect only antineutrinos of thermal origin[6], while a gallium-71-based instrument detects only neutrinos (lepton number = +1) of either thermal or electron-capture origin.

Source : Wikipedia



If i am correct, they are saying that the reason the light came after the neutrinos is because the supernova occured 3 or 8 hours under the surface, before it was visible at the surface. Neutrinos were sent out of the star early, unlike light, because neutrinos pass through almost all matter. About 6 trillion neutrinos from the sun pass through your body every second. By the way my avatar is the Super Kamiokande in green scale.


[edit on 7-7-2009 by GlassRunner]



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by VitalOverdose
The speed of light is only constant in a vacuum.


The researchers are proposing that maybe the radiation is interacting with "quantum foam". This is a theoretical property of space itself, and predicted by quantum gravity theory – a competitor to string theory.


If the Gama rays are interacting with something (quantum foam, in this case), then Einsteins laws are not broken, because as VitalOverdose mentioned, the speed of light is only a constant in a vacuum. Interacting with "quantum foam," if that is indeed the case, means that the Gama rays are being slowed down by something, which explains why they're late on arrival.

To be clear, Einstein is not wrong, and the nay sayers of Relativity on this site are totally ignorant of real science. Like detractors of Evolution, they do not even know what relativity is, so they are long and far away from disproving it, let alone even understanding the debate.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by GlassRunner
 


You said :
If i am correct, they are saying that the reason the light came after the neutrinos is because the supernova occured 3 or 8 hours under the surface, before it was visible at the surface. Neutrinos were sent out of the star early, unlike light, because neutrinos pass through almost all matter. About 6 trillion neutrinos from the sun pass through your body every second. By the way my avatar is the Super Kamiokande in green scale.

Yes, I would tend to agree that's what they're saying ...

But, then they say lot's of things, don't they ?



Anyways, I always thought it was pretty interesting the nutrinos got here before the light did.

And, finally, nice avi !




posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 

I agree that four minutes seems like a heck of a long time. However, the process of observation here isn't instantanous. The Cerenkov radiation is observed, then there's some 'working backwards' to be done.

From your OP ink:


When the gamma rays strike the atmosphere, they release a cascade of particles and radiation. The Cherenkov technique detects this cascade, and then works backwards to calculate the direction and energy level of the gamma rays.

It suggest to me that there is some issue with the method as currently applied that causes it to give differing results for high- and low-energy gamma rays. Not a technical issue; a theoretical one, which if investigated might lead to new knowledge.

I find it unlikely that one set of photons was travelling faster than another, don't you? If that kind of thing were common, it would surely have been discovered before. Clearly the odds are much better that it is some local phenomenon causing the effect, than that the speed of light in vacuo has suddenly begun to vary.

The 'giant BEC in space' idea is intriguing, though it's hard to imagine how such a thing might come about.

Early neutrinos: as GlassRunner points out, the time lag between neutrino and photon detection in the supernova case would be due to the lag between the collapse of the star's core and the arrival of the shockwave at its surface. No paradox there.



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


This is an entire galaxy away.

Under what circumstances do we know for sure nothing slowed down the light from gravity? Like making a gravity prism.

The more energy something has, the more it drags from space time.

Mass and energy both contribute to space time dragging.

This is a foundation upon current time altering experiments, such as with Dr. Mallet.

I see nothing contradictory to normal science here.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join