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.
Originally posted by PurpleVortex
What's faster than the speed of light? Speed of THOUGHT.
I can think my way to another galaxy much faster than light can reach...
What is your source for this quote? If you are going to quote Einstein, please provide the source.
Originally posted by 0mage
Einstein said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"
In case you don't know the meaning of "v > c" it means velocity greater than the speed of light. As long as the theoretical faster than light particle never slowed down to the speed of light, it wouldn't have infinite mass.
Now the fundamental fact of relativity is that
E² − p² = m²
where E is an object's energy, p is its momentum, and m is its rest mass, which we'll just call 'mass'. In case you're wondering, we are working in units where c=1. For any non-zero value of m, this is a hyperbola with branches in the timelike regions. It passes through the point (p,E) = (0,m), where the particle is at rest. Any particle with mass m is constrained to move on the upper branch of this hyperbola. (Otherwise, it is "off shell", a term you hear in association with virtual particles — but that's another topic.) For massless particles, E² = p², and the particle moves on the light-cone.
These two cases are given the names tardyon (or bradyon in more modern usage) and luxon, for "slow particle" and "light particle". Tachyon is the name given to the supposed "fast particle" which would move with v > c. Tachyons were first introduced into physics by Gerald Feinberg, in his seminal paper "On the possibility of faster-than-light particles" [Phys. Rev. 159, 1089—1105 (1967)].
Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by PurpleVortex
What's faster than the speed of light? Speed of THOUGHT. I can think my way to another galaxy much faster than light can reach
In neuroscience there is something of a mystery regarding how two sections of the brain can activate simultaneously.
Faster than the signal should be able to travel to that section, it has lead research into the idea that the brain is a quantum computer of some kind, using entanglement to operation.
So you are more right than you even suggested.
If by "nothing" you mean "space" then it's always there, thus doesn't need to travel from here to there because it exists everywhere.
Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by 0mage
For something to be qualified as nothing, you would need something to be nothing......Nothing would then need to be something and then you have something being nothing....As long as this is true, then nothing really is something, but only in the effect of something being nothing to begin with......
I am sure you follow me......
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
What is your source for this quote? If you are going to quote Einstein, please provide the source.
Originally posted by 0mage
Einstein said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"
His mathematics say as an object approaches the speed of light, its mass, and therefore the energy needed to accelerate it approaches infinity. This doesn't necessarily translate to the questionable quote you provided;
Do tachyons exist?
In case you don't know the meaning of "v > c" it means velocity greater than the speed of light. As long as the theoretical faster than light particle never slowed down to the speed of light, it wouldn't have infinite mass.
Now the fundamental fact of relativity is that
E² − p² = m²
where E is an object's energy, p is its momentum, and m is its rest mass, which we'll just call 'mass'. In case you're wondering, we are working in units where c=1. For any non-zero value of m, this is a hyperbola with branches in the timelike regions. It passes through the point (p,E) = (0,m), where the particle is at rest. Any particle with mass m is constrained to move on the upper branch of this hyperbola. (Otherwise, it is "off shell", a term you hear in association with virtual particles — but that's another topic.) For massless particles, E² = p², and the particle moves on the light-cone.
These two cases are given the names tardyon (or bradyon in more modern usage) and luxon, for "slow particle" and "light particle". Tachyon is the name given to the supposed "fast particle" which would move with v > c. Tachyons were first introduced into physics by Gerald Feinberg, in his seminal paper "On the possibility of faster-than-light particles" [Phys. Rev. 159, 1089—1105 (1967)].
Didn't you ever hear of Einstein's talk about "Spooky Action at a Distance" which is faster than the speed of light?
There are already too many misunderstandings about what Einstein said, without you quoting him as saying something he didn't say, so please, don't do that.
He actually said that he had nothing to say about it. He said (or wrote) "For velocities greater than that of light our deliberations become meaningless;"
Originally posted by 0mage
unless Einstein was wrong. it is as stated .. the item would have to convert to "nothing", then make it's travel and then reconvert itself back into 'a thing' once more to reach its destination.
You claimed Einstein said something that he didn't say. Remember this?
Originally posted by 0mage
"According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, published in 1905, nothing can exceed the speed of light"
do we have a problem with english in this forum?
Originally posted by 0mage
Einstein said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"
Not only did Einstein not say that, but anyone who claims Einstein said that is also wrong, though it's a commonly stated oversimplification of his theory. This video shows shows something faster than light which doesn't violate Einstein's theory and there are other examples as well.
Originally posted by 0mage
Einstein said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"
You can break the speed of light in your back yard! (but don't worry, Einstein is still right)
So are you starting to see why Einstein never said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"? Because it's not exactly true. There's a whole list of things that travel faster than light at that link, none of which violate Einstein's theory.
The phase velocity of an electromagnetic wave, when traveling through a medium, can routinely exceed c, the vacuum velocity of light.
I suspect it's because I've studied advanced concepts in physics and you've only studied the fundamentals that I'm aware of these nuances which you are not.
Originally posted by 0mage
have u ever studied physics? this was taught as a fundamental in school. Einstein derived from his theory that nothing can exceed the speed of light. why is this so alien to you?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Not only did Einstein not say that, but anyone who claims Einstein said that is also wrong, though it's a commonly stated oversimplification of his theory. This video shows shows something faster than light which doesn't violate Einstein's theory and there are other examples as well.
Originally posted by 0mage
Einstein said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"
How to break the speed of light
You can break the speed of light in your back yard! (but don't worry, Einstein is still right)
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Another example of something that can travel faster than light is the phase velocity of light:
Phase velocities above c
So are you starting to see why Einstein never said "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light"? Because it's not exactly true. There's a whole list of things that travel faster than light at that link, none of which violate Einstein's theory.
The phase velocity of an electromagnetic wave, when traveling through a medium, can routinely exceed c, the vacuum velocity of light.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I suspect it's because I've studied advanced concepts in physics and you've only studied the fundamentals that I'm aware of these nuances which you are not.
Originally posted by 0mage
have u ever studied physics? this was taught as a fundamental in school. Einstein derived from his theory that nothing can exceed the speed of light. why is this so alien to you?edit on 24-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification
If you're saying that general science presumes wrong, and you're right, why do you care what education I've had? I've been taught by professors that think science is right, and that people who say general science is wrong and haven't published a paper to back up their claims are usually full of hot air and have no idea what they're talking about. In my experience, these professors are right a lot more often than they are wrong.
Originally posted by 0mage
this is because light itself does not travel anywhere. light is brought to a dark room via an apparatus that does not project light as general science would presume.
In this context dark matter doesn't reflect light but you may have used the term in another context?
In astrophysics and cosmology, dark matter is hypothetical matter of unknown composition that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation to be observed directly, but whose presence can be inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter.