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.

 

There has to be a particle that can travel faster than light

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:09 PM
link   
There has to be a particle that travels faster than light because of non locality. Many people talk about non locality as "spooky action at a distance."

I don't think this is the case. I think people talk about non locality in this way because they treat the postulate nothing can travel faster than light as a religious tenet. I think the logical conclusion that's gained from non locality is that there has to be a particle that travels faster than light that carries information between separated, entangled particles. So there isn't any spooky action at a distance, it's just a particle that travels faster than light that we can't observe and is hard to measure.

Maybe we will be prohibited from using the particle to carry a message because causality would break down or maybe causality will break down if we learn to send a message through these faster than light particles.

Say you and a friend are driving down the highway and he gets into an accident and dies. You can call him on a faster than light iPhone and tell him to drive off of the exit before the crash.

Would he still be alive and you both become entangled in a universe where he didn't die or because you already observed his death would you simply be communicating with a parallel universe and he will still be dead in the universe where he died in the crash. It could get interesting.




posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


I think this thread could become more interesting if you share why you think that this is the case. Why can't it be a force? Or a bridge in a higher dimension? Just to give some other options. How did you come to the conclusion it has to be a particle?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Pretty much as the poster above me said. Why does the default answer have to be a particle?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Time and space co-exist. When you look at the stars, you are seeing what they looked like in the past.

Therefore anything that exists in the physical realm is subject to the speed of light constraint.

Perhaps the soul can travel faster then light.

edit on 15-3-2012 by IndieA because: sp



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
ah quantum entanglement!!!!
my theory is that there is a particle that can go that fast
but it is in the quantum~quantum world trillions of times smaller than a plank length (trillions of trillions of times smaller than an atom)
and that these are so fast moving they appear omni-present (1 particle in 2 places)

for instance the particles travel so fast they appear to be more than one
when in fact there is just one going really fast

maybe explains why a twin feels pain of another....
maybe they share particles that move so fast they appear to not move at all



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   
It's impossible to ever claim limits on anything. As we can never know if we have all the facts. While the speed of light being the cosmic speed limit may work in our current model. Who is to say that the current model is all there is?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Namaste1001
 


Exactly!

We assume that there must be "spooky action at a distance" when it comes to things like non locality because we assume that there can't be anything that travels faster than light.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by neoholographic
I think people talk about non locality in this way because they treat the postulate nothing can travel faster than light as a religious tenet.


That isn't strictly true. Eistein said that nothing can accelerate to the speed of light.

Relativity fully allows for particles to be emitted at greater than the speed of light - Eistein was well aware of this. No rules would be broken.

To date, there is no data suggesting that such particles exist, but that may or may not change in the future.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   
this thread is a more specific way of saying that relativity and quantum mechanics cannot both be true in their present forms because they contradict each other, though both seem to be true.

something with mass cannot travel faster than the speed of light because it's mass would be infinite and infinite quantities cannot exist with time. it's essentially a singularity in the equation, like trying to divide by zero.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Do the greater macro forces and energetic systems have a larger effect on the layout of the universe,, or does the quantum world build everything up and set the laws and such....... or are there equal effects,,,,, ?


in short are all macro events results of micro events, the other way around,,, or a mish mash of both?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Quantum entanglement is a quantum state of matter where two particles, typically photons or electrons, form a matched pair based on their physical qualities such as up or down spin for electrons and polarization for photons. When a pair of these particles becomes entangled, quantum mechanics states that measuring one of the pair will instantly force the unmeasured into a corresponding state, regardless of the distance they have been separated by.
www.dailytech.com...

I know it isn't a particle traveling faster then the speed of light, it is INFORMATION traveling faster then the speed of light, but thats something travelling faster then the speed of light so maybe its a good start

edit on 15-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
this thread is a more specific way of saying that relativity and quantum mechanics cannot both be true in their present forms because they contradict each other, though both seem to be true.


In other words it is saying something that has been explicitly known to be false since at least the 1920s.
en.wikipedia.org...

Also, no faster than light communication happens in quantum mechanics. Wave function collapse does not transmit any information of any kind. Probabilities changing does not indicate the communication of information, or any physical change at all, and is something that happens in normal every day life, e.g., en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
anything smaller than the length-scale at which known quantum effects take place do not exist in our three dimensional space manifold.

the problem of instantaneous communication between entangled particles is rectified as a braid group in one or two dimensions which intersects our threeD.


three dimensional thinking cannot solve this problem.

your particle is useless I'm afraid.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 



Also, no faster than light communication happens in quantum mechanics. Wave function collapse does not transmit any information of any kind.

quantum entanglement says otherwise. we don't know what triggers wave function collapse, nor much about it at all.

an experiment was performed where two particles traveling the exact same speed on a collision course was set up in an attempt to get around the heisenburg uncertainty principle. they were going to measure the position of one, and the momentum of the other and thereby know both for each particle. they found when they measured one, the other particle changed instantaneously so that both the position and momentum of a particle could not be known at the same time. this hints at a higher structure to the universe than we have yet described.

the issues between quantum mechanics and relativity haven't been sorted out yet.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


WHY is light traveling?

Answer me that question and i would be very pleased.

In order for information to exist it has to be a whole. Within that whole exist potential. The information for the all exist within all of the information for the all..
edit on 15-3-2012 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Light is just a wave length, different types of light have different wave lengths depending on the spectrum. So it is possible for some particles to have a faster vibration wave length...like the tacyhon, but the question I suppose then would be does the particle, object or whatever vibrating at a faster wave length than light just disappears from the visible spectrum analysis...that being said things could already be moving faster than the speed of light, and if they are how the hell are we to observe them, or even know they are there if they are not in the visible spectrum?
edit on 15-3-2012 by Darkchemistry because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
It was my understanding that tachion particles were thought to travel faster than the speed of light.

Has this been debunked?

(Maybe I should get rid of my betamax VCR and go with the new-fangled VHS I hear they have)



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

tachyons are a theoretical particle that have been debunked. it's humorous in a way, because they travel so fast that they go backwards in time, which would cause the results of the test for tachyons to be known BEFORE the test was performed.

if a particle was discovered that actually did travel faster than light, then physicists (usually having a great sense of humor) would probably name the particle tachyons, or tachyonic-whatever.

there are things that do travel faster than light through a vacuum, it's just that nothing with mass can do this. light has been made to travel 300 times the speed of light through a non-vacuum (excited cesium gas if i remember correctly), and the pulse of light exited the far side of the chamber before the main pulse entered the front, then the main pulse was cancelled out because the light exiting emitted the exact opposite frequency backwards, or something. pretty cool stuff.



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


Thanks for the education.


Has there been studies that could slow down the speed of light?



posted on Mar, 15 2012 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkchemistry
 

the wavelength of light doesn't affect it's speed at all. it doesn't matter how fast or slow it vibrates, it goes the same speed.

we see this with the red shift of light from distant stars. the light moves towards us, but we're moving away from the source, so although the speed of light is constant, the frequency appears at a lower energy spectrum. there is also a blue shift that occurs when we're moving towards the source of light, the speed of light is constant, but the frequency seems higher than it would to a stationary object relative to the emitting source.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join