It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


E=MC2 Discovery A Gateway To Disclourse?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:52 PM
As alot of you have probably seen and heard on the news in the past couple of days scientists are scratching their heads over the amazing discovery that the famous assertion E=MC2 may after all be flawed. Of course these findings are now being rechecked and evaluated. But if it is indeed shown that such a fundamental error has been discovered then it throws open the very real possibility that time travel, travelling through space at warp factor 8 and wormhole travel is all possible after all. Not to mention free energy etc.

With that in mind i could not but help think whether this is yet another stepping stone towards disclourse. What better way than to do it by saying well hey there folks we got it all wrong, ET could indeed travel to Earth from great distances after all. By making this announcement. are we not being being futher prepared for a First Contact/Disclourse event? When you think about it 10 years ago people would have laughed their heads off at you and most likely make several snide comments. 5 years ago it was a maybe/if possibility. Now we are in the position of finding ourselves being told actually ignore the past 100 years of physics, lets do something new.

Interesting times ahead i very much suspect lies ahead of us.

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 04:58 PM
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

Sooooo... where is your link for this?

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:05 PM
reply to post by bananabond

My apologies. Here is a link from BBC News explaining the discovery and the implications

E=MC2 Busted?

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:05 PM
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

post by Wirral Bagpuss
By making this announcement. are we not being being futher prepared for a First Contact/Disclourse event?

No I don't think we are , don't lose sight of the fact that this claim has yet to be peer reviewed so at the moment its just an interesting anomaly , but if it is found to be true then that opens up a whole realm of possibilities ....I hope its true

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:08 PM
eh changed my mind sorry
edit on 9/24/2011 by iforget because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:28 PM
What's a disclourse?

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:48 PM
Its a brilliant thing indeed., Its probably like most things real though. That they theoretically know about something, but still 50 years later, there's still no way of doing it physically. Think of the Mekon on his hoverboard. Where's he eh ?

Scientist think they know exactly what happens inside a black hole, but nobody has been inside one. How many years is it going to be before someone creates a device that you can wear to enable you to project your consciousness out into space to go there in person so to speak, but without physically having ever been there. A machine that splits your mind and senses from your body and then projects you to a real place as your current conscious state. How long till they can do that ? A few centuries maybe ? But they know what happens in there theoretically.

Thats where my problems lie with geting excited about it, Its Fascinating, yet its too far away in years to get excited about theory when I'll never see it.

I must admit, that it did cross my mind that it could be used as a tool to break long known info, when I first heard about it. But I struggle putting too much weight behind it as a truth. Think its more likely that its simply People being brilliant sometimes.

Even knowing that though, It doesn't stop me getting excited like a little school boy. There's possibly a bit more room for time machines becoming a reality for Cliffs sake !! I don't care if I ever see it. It makes the world a more wonderful place. We could do with more of that at the moment don't you think ?

I like to be real about things, But its still great to be presented with a possibility.
edit on 24-9-2011 by pot8er because: Added Stuff

edit on 24-9-2011 by pot8er because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:06 PM
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

The topic is misleading. Nothing was discovered that was wrong with E=MC^2, what was discovered was the possibility of the speed of light being broken, before any collective nuts can be busted, this must be studied.
Here's my prediction:

If this in fact does turn out to be an error, and the discovery is walked back, there will be some here on ATS who will accuse the whole thing of being a cover up.

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:20 PM

Originally posted by darkendmetal
What's a disclourse?

Dyslexia for cure found....

Leave the guy alone lol.. We all get excited and while typing out our thoughts we will misspell words.

There is nothing wrong with being Lysdexic... We even have our own suupport group - DAM - Mothers against Dyslexia.

Back to topic I think this discovery will be a game changer. We shouldnt throw Einstein out the window just yet though since a lot of his work is valid. If anything if Einstein were alive today I dont think he would have one issue with others challenging his work. I think he would embrace it.

All it takes is one obscure theory from way back when that is locked up in a drawer somewhere, only to be found and realize its a missing puzzle piece that would solve the puzzle..

I say warp factor 8... Of course I will remain on the planet.. You guys let me know if it works

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by Wirral Bagpuss

Disclosure? Nope. Faster than light causing time travel? Nope. It's all down to perception. Everything we have based our physics on is based on human perception. "I saw the event happen before it happened?" No you "perceived" the event to happen before it happened due to your inbuilt limitations. Cause and effect is intact no matter what the speed.

For example, the CERN experiment shows the speed of light to either be faster than we thought or of no significance. They FIRE (cause) the muon neutrinos then they DETECT (effect) the neutrinos. Surely if they're travelling faster than the speed of light and according to modern theory we should DETECT (effect) the neutrinos before they are fired (cause). But we don't see that. We see, instead, a clear cause and effect no matter what the speed.

If CERN said, "We are detecting neutrinos before we fire them." then I would be intrigued. But they are not saying that at all. In fact they have said the speed of light has been broken but "cause and effect" remains intact.

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:29 PM

edit on 24-9-2011 by StarPeace because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:51 PM
reply to post by PW229

so, we got the speed of light wrong the whole time? well, that begs the questions is light getting faster somehow and what else did we get wrong

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:59 PM
I don't understand how the speed of light could be's still the speed of light regardless if the neutrinos can travel faster than it or not. I can, however, see the implication of the "universal speed limit" being disproven if other physicists observe the same thing.

This is potentially a huge breakthrough for physics and I'm so excited to see another observer witness the same event. What a golden age of discovery we live in!

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 07:19 PM
They're not saying that the speed of light is wrong. They are saying that If the speed of light is right and they measured particals going faster than they should over a known distance, then there is a chance that somehow the particle has travelled through a say a worm hole type thing, or through a rip in spacetime or whatever. It could be that Einstein was wrong of course. It questions what we know as fact either way.
edit on 24-9-2011 by pot8er because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 07:22 PM
reply to post by duhdiggitydan

Take a laser beam and go outside and shine it at your garage door.

Take the same laser beam, go to your pool and fire it into the water.

You will find light slows down when it is in water due to bending.

Is it possible for light to travel slower than the speed of light, especially when the theory is light speed is a constant.

A few years back scientists in Austrailia, if I remeber, fired a laser into cesium gas, creating a jump so to speak. The light hit the cesium and then apparently "jumped" ahead of itself.

To me lightspeed is a lot like humans. We know it there, we know we can interact with it and on the outside it looks simple.

Crawl inside though and you will find many factors affecting many different things. We are still trying to figure it out, which requires trial and error.

Maybe Quantum mechanic advances will eventually shed some light (pun intended) on this and many other mysteries?

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 07:24 PM

Originally posted by darkendmetal
What's a disclourse?

It's a secret ATS code for GTFO

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 07:35 PM
reply to post by pot8er

EDIT: Got confused
edit on 24-9-2011 by duhdiggitydan because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:42 PM
I think they should modify the notation to account for time dilation caused by gravitational fields. So to be proper, instead of "c" it should be c with a subscript "gravity Earth". (Saying that c refers to the speed of light in a vacuum and not some optical medium likely isn't enough.) The thing is, the atomic clock used to measure the speed of light will also be affected by time dilation. So a "c" with a subscript "gravity Epsilon Persii VIII" will still show the same value. However if the known amount of time dilation can be accounted for, as in number of planet A seconds per unit of planet B seconds as measured with local atomic clocks being compared... Then it would be possible to calculate the actual variation in "c" while under the influence of varying gravity. It's also likely that objects undergoing acceleration create a gradient around them which affects this "c" variable much like gravity. (Probably why you can't go "faster". When light gets closer, it speeds up as it enters that gradient.)

I guess it looks funky, but it should be considered that when one of "constants" in relativity is actually a relativistic variable. Whether or not any actual scientists would pick up on such an idea is something that remains to be seen.

It's also funny in this regard, we all very well could be going much faster than the speed of light when you're considering the light that's trapped within the event horizon of a black hole. But compared to the light where we're at now, we can't even reach a mere percentage of it. It's all about one's frame of reference. Maybe there should be a modified recursive relativity theory?

I know I'm just a mere layman, but if anyone can explain why such thinking is unsound I'd like to be filled in on the details.

posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 08:49 PM
I think that they will find a systematic error. The reason I think this is because they repeated the experiment many many times. They checked and rechecked everything to make sure it was as they thought it should be. A systematic error, however, could evade them.

That's why they want it repeated by someone else. But only 2 can repeat it, I think.
edit on 24-9-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 08:45 AM
Wrote this in a nother thread but hopefully I could get some cleaver responds here due to the topic is basicly the same.

Heres a thought;
In a video that the 'inventor' made of this theory (the theory of timewaves) he said that there is a possibility of the device of timetravel would be invented and therefor change the aspect of the as we know it.

Isn't that excactly what has been proven in the device that just broke Einsteins law of physics?
Moving an object sideways in time or even backwards to move it forward in time to another place appering
to be faster than light or am I missinformed about this subject?

In this aspect the posibility that an grand grand grand grand son of mine is living in this timeline as myself but in a far away distant star like Sirius, would make one heck of a Paradox and would indeed change the way we see time and it would be a fun philosophical argument.

Just a fun theory

Video Im refering to;

Fun that the guy was high on mushrooms wile making this theory of his :>
Makes me wanna go Mariostyle.

edit on 25-9-2011 by Mouline because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in