Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Roll over Einstein: Pillar of physics challenged

page: 6
142
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by robomont

these shockwaves can be created by charging the skin of the craft with that energy level.
for example xrays fall in the 30000-50000 VOLTS .this is the breakaway point for gravity.


So you are talking about countering the electromagnetic frequency of earth's gravity which is 30,000-50,000 volts?

Sounds like harmonic resonance. Sound is a form of wave energy propogation and given the right frequency it can break glass, bring down a bridge or even cause earthquakes.




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Odds are it was a measurement error. We're still figuring out neutrinos.

Why is it so close to being at the limit? And, if true, what did Einstein, specifically, get wrong? And, there's more than one type of neutrino. Do they all have mass?

Did this particular neutrino that they shot from Cern to Gran Sasso have any mass?
edit on 22-9-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)


My guess is that somehow the circular path for the particle requires the math to be applied in a slightly different way: for example, frame dragging effects might not have been accounted for.

-rrr



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   
If 'rules are meant to broken'... the same can apply to laws of physics. Well something really interesting in the world of physics. Perhaps WARP SPEED in Star Trek wasn't all that bogus



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
if these particles travel faster that the speed of light...they could travel in time!



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Isn't this cool? I mean, the theory of relativity as acted as a foundation for Quantum Mechanics, String theory, M-theory, and pretty much all of Hawkings work.


Theory of relativity did not act as foundation of Quantum Mechanics.


The idea in the theory of relativity is that nothing can go faster than the speed of light because as any object accelerates


That is not the idea that defined the theory of relativity. It's just a consequence.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
actually this makes perfect sense... shiva.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by rickyrrr
 


Unless, of course, there were some other, as yet undiscovered, unspecified or otherwise unaccounted for, reason for the apparent discrepancy.

ETA: Out of curiosity, how did they get the same clock to be in two places at once?



edit on 2011/9/22 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

The idea in the theory of relativity is that nothing can go faster than the speed of light because as any object accelerates, it gains mass. So the faster it goes, the bigger it gets, and the bigger it gets, the more energy is required for it to continue accelerating...


To me the theory of relativity sounds like utter non-sense. When you accelerate your car down the highway does your car get bigger, smaller or remain the same? I know my car stays the same!

Sometimes people need to think things out better. It makes little difference if we are talking about cars, shuttles or super-dooper space ships. If the space shuttle going to the moon acclerated to twice the speed it originally went, would it get bigger in volume or mass? I think not!!

Just because I have a bachelors degree in computer science and someone has a doctorate degree in astrophysics does not mean they have good intentions and I am too stupid to understand anything. Geez.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
Hmm...

It is really hard to draw any kind of conclusions from this. For those who want the most pertinent quotes:

We're -not- talking substantially faster than the speed of light, here. However, if duplicated, it would require a substantial revision of our current models - which may open up new avenues for discovering and exploiting more extreme FTL phenomena (that would be more practical).


I debated this with a friend not too long ago .. I suggested that I didn't think there had to be a limit that we just haven't observed something faster yet, not that there couldn't be .. if confirmed, this means I won that little debate! woohoo .. but seriously, it may not be a huge jump in speed but it demonstrates that faster that light speed IS possible.. if FTL is possible, then what's to say there's not also something faster than this particle .. The limit could be much faster than the speed of light ultimately



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

The idea in the theory of relativity is that nothing can go faster than the speed of light because as any object accelerates, it gains mass. So the faster it goes, the bigger it gets, and the bigger it gets, the more energy is required for it to continue accelerating...


To me the theory of relativity sounds like utter non-sense. When you accelerate your car down the highway does your car get bigger, smaller or remain the same? I know my car stays the same!


Well to be fair, your car isn't going fast enough to make any change in mass noticeable to the naked eye
.. I think the theory of relativity will need to be re-written or seriously adjusted, but I don't think it needs to be thrown out.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 



I've wondered if black holes have been doing that experiment for aeons.
2nd line... hhhmmm plus thought... if the universe expands at the speed of light, yet is creating more black holes (trillions of zones operating faster than light) all the time... could it reach a tipping point of instability and flick back like a rubber band exponentially faster than the speed of light? Yikes ! Non existence in a nano second.
edit on 22-9-2011 by LexiconV because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
this thread is so turning me on.occasionaly tho somebody is blocking our porn.time is only relative if your in that field.what some people call a wormhole is a field around the craft or particle.a worm creates the hole as it moves along ,filling it back in as it goes through the soil/matter/space.there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum,so any equation using an absolute vacuum is invalid.thus nullifying the equation.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   
does this mean we can make possibly a neutrino based communication device to send signals into the future, and how would this work if we used this science and high powered physics to do the reverse, send it backwards by bending space time?

How about materials that lock in neutrinos? FTL spaceships?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   
If FTL were possible and someone managed to create a FTL vehicle and arrived at a destination faster than light, would you temporarily be "invisible" if you will, at your location, until light itself caught up?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   

The team measured the travel times of neutrino bunches some 15,000 times, and have reached a level of statistical significance that in scientific circles would count as a formal discovery


Wow, an amazing discovery, but in the end, there's so much we don't yet understand in the universe, so it doesnt come as a huge surprise.


But because the result is so unexpected and would wreak such havoc with our understanding of the Universe, the group is being particularly cautious. They have opted to put a report of their measurements online to subject them to wider scrutiny, and will hold a seminar at Cern on Friday to discuss the result.


We live in scientifically interesting times everyone!

www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

To me the theory of relativity sounds like utter non-sense. When you accelerate your car down the highway does your car get bigger, smaller or remain the same? I know my car stays the same!


The theory of relativity actually explains how any such shifts would be utterly imperceptible for you driving in your car.

Since you don't regularly measure flight times and decays of muons, for example, you have little need for relativity, but those who do, do.

Regarding the original result, there are many systematic effects to correct for. The authors surely did many (I haven't read the paper), but it can be hard to get "all of them". As there is no corresponding 'light in vacuum' signal to beat, they need to compute absolute velocities by knowing timings and positions.

Of course, the earth moves from one place to another due to rotation so the actual path in an Earth-centric coordinate system is not quite straight. You have to be able to get really absolute positions in 3d between transmitter and receiver---and are there systematic effects in the GPS or other computations?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


your car rolling down the road has kinetic energy.this energy is converted to mass thus increasing the effects gravity on it.by smoothing out and rounding off all sharp points then charging the car to 50000 volts then gravity is nullified even tho your car still has the kinetic energy/increased mass.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by JohnySeagull
so cool.

we can mover faster than light.

If you're a neutrino, yeah, maybe.

I haven't read the paper, but the AP article says the neutrinos arrived 60+/-10 ns faster than they should have. In 60 ns, light will travel 18 meters. Is there something that could have decreased the distance between the experimental stations by ~18 meters? It seems like a lot, too much for natural geological changes. It would have to be human error, like installing one of the sites in the wrong room or using a different datum for each site.

Here is a ten year old CERN Bulletin about neutrinos exceeding the speed of light, so the idea isn't that new.


You can read their paper here: arxiv.org...

They say that the location of the two points is known to 20cm accuracy



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by DragonFire1024
 


Just thought I would add this as it seems slightly relevant.Interesting how your thread made me think of this guy.I'm just throwing this out there for people to form their own opinion.

en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 22-9-2011 by enament because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-9-2011 by enament because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-9-2011 by enament because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by robomont
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


your car rolling down the road has kinetic energy.this energy is converted to mass thus increasing the effects gravity on it.by smoothing out and rounding off all sharp points then charging the car to 50000 volts then gravity is nullified even tho your car still has the kinetic energy/increased mass.


I don't want to travel in a car charged to 50kv. BRRRRPPZZZZZT! oops.

I guess I'm doomed to obey gravity. After all, it's THE LAW!





new topics

top topics



 
142
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join