10,000 times faster than the speed of light! - Speed faster than lightspeed is possible!

page: 1
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

ScienceLive
The group measured the state of one photon and timed how long the entangled state took to show up in the other. They found that the slowest possible speed for quantum interactions is 10,000 times the speed of light — assuming your experiment is moving relatively slowly, at least relative to light beams.

Whereas the result may sound like a way to send faster-than-light messages, it isn't, really, because you can't know the state of the entangled photon pair before it's measured; so there's no way to control it and make the photon at the other end take on certain states and use it like a Morse code telegraph.


What does this mean for physics? According to the Theory of Relativity, speed faster than Light-Speed should be impossible because the faster something travels the more mass it creates (E=Mc2), so at light-speed, it was predicted that something would have so much mass that matter would not be able to move at such greater speed.

What do you think this mean? What do you think scientists will figure out next based on this discovery that beyond-light-speed is possible?

EDIT: I just realized something. Since The Speed of Light, was used as an absolute standard of measurement for speed, this would mean that speed is not an absolute existence but only relative.

Speed is only relative existence (comparing it to other things), since Speed of Light is not true as an absolute speed measurement, then true "fastest" or "slowest" speed does not exist and "Speed" itself can only exist in comparison to other things...
edit on 15-3-2013 by arpgme because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Interesting find and in the future it could have some viable use. However, until we complete and harness fusion power all of the practical and mathematical ideas for FTL travel can only best tested or simulated on a limited basis. We can't generate enough power yet in one place to experiment with them.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Unless I am completely mistaken, which I don't think I am here.

They are not really "traveling" faster than light. They are "popping" in and out of existence (for lack of a better description) from one location to the other. Therefore physics remains accurate, as far as we know. And the universe can continue to exist.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I seem to remember that speeds faster than the speed of light are possible but for them the speed of light is the minimum speed under relativity



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   



Sorry, couldn't resist



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   
lmao....ludicrous speed! of course it's possible....but to what extent, we may not know for decades.


reply to post by captaintyinknots
 



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Wow this is completely fascinating to me being that I have no fricking idea what you guys are talking about



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Quantum entanglement is nothing to do with traveling speed


Einstein called it "Spooky Action at a distance"


According to Albert Einstein's theory of special relativity, instantaneous action at a distance was seen to violate the relativistic upper limit on speed of propagation of information. If one of the interacting objects were to suddenly be displaced from its position, the other object would feel its influence instantaneously, meaning information had been transmitted faster than the speed of light.

One of the conditions that a relativistic theory of gravitation must meet is to be mediated with a speed that does not exceed c, the speed of light in a vacuum. It could be seen from the previous success of electrodynamics that the relativistic theory of gravitation would have to use the concept of a field or something similar.

This problem has been resolved by Einstein's theory of general relativity in which gravitational interaction is mediated by deformation of space-time geometry. Matter warps the geometry of space-time and these effects are, as with electric and magnetic fields, propagated at the speed of light. Thus, in the presence of matter, space-time becomes non-Euclidean, resolving the apparent conflict between Newton's proof of the conservation of angular momentum and Einstein's theory of special relativity. Mach's question regarding the bulging of rotating bodies is resolved because local space-time geometry is informing a rotating body about the rest of the universe. In Newton's theory of motion, space acts on objects, but is not acted upon. In Einstein's theory of motion, matter acts upon space-time geometry, deforming it, and space-time geometry acts upon matter.

Source

So the laws of physics still stand..nothing new to see here


edit on 15-3-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Haha ludicrous speed! "What is it sir?...They've gone plaid!"

Very interesting article.
At first, I thought this might be a new method of transferring messages or data almost instantly through vast distances of space, but then I read this part,



Whereas the result may sound like a way to send faster-than-light messages, it isn't, really, because you can't know the state of the entangled proton pair before it's measured; so there's no way to control it and make the photon at the other end take on certain states and use it like a Morse code telegraph. [10 Implications of Faster-Than-Light Travel]


Still interesting nonetheless, It's pretty much an experiment on Einstein's theory of motion and "spooky action at a distance".
Just a longer wait untill we get to say " beam me up Scotty" lol
edit on 15-3-2013 by ArchaicDesigns because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 04:44 PM
link   
What i want to know is how they can measure the speed.

Since we are talking entanglement we are talking about to entities that change state relative to each other.

If they are in the same lab how the blazes do they measure the time difference?

If they are far apart will not the clock being moved be slightly off compared to the stationary clock according to the well known clock-at-the-center-of-a-turntable-compared-to-the-clock-at-the-edge speculation?

Or is it a case of "Hmm, what should we tell the masses? Let's say 10.000. It's so much better than 5 and btw. Who the ***** can check it out anyway?"



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane2
What i want to know is how they can measure the speed.
They didn't measure the exact speed. They put limits on it. And if you read their paper I'm sure they will describe how they made measurements to establish these limits in detail.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Quantum entanglement is an entirely different phenomenon. This isn't movement in the classical sense.
Read here



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Re : .....................

"What does this mean for physics? According to the Theory of Relativity, speed faster than Light-Speed should be impossible because the faster something travels the more mass it creates (E=Mc2), so at light-speed, it was predicted that something would have so much mass that matter would not be able to move at such greater speed. "

sorry arp, I can't understand this. (I know I'm not the sharpest chisel in the tool shed)
If you have a fixed amount of energy, and the c the speed of light, which is the velocity in this equation looking at the velocity as being bigger, then doesn't that mean that mass would be getting smaller? As I said, I admit I'm not the sharpest chisel in the tool shed so can you explain where my thought patterns are wrong please?



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 

photons don't have mass. we know them as traveling at the speed of light, but they actually travel at the maximum rate that time can pass relative to us without going backwards in time.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
This is a no brainer nice avatar I used to use it. Also in quantum physics it's be shown that objects of light can be in more then one place at the same time. If that is true as above so below we can transport instantaneously.
edit on 15-3-2013 by metalholic because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Yes, you are correct, the interaction takes place through an as yet unknown media, perhaos another dimension, as it would not have to travel through ours, but through an infinitely small one.

Or hell , they coule be somehow we dont understand bound to the fabric of spacetime itself, which does not care about the speed of light, otherwise it would stop expanding faster than it. Or even it is a charge connection on some level we dont understand, though I doubt that.

Even Einstein had no idea, he called it " spooky action at a distance". Which says a lot about this, and our epic fail so far at understanding it.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane2
What i want to know is how they can measure the speed.
They didn't measure the exact speed. They put limits on it. And if you read their paper I'm sure they will describe how they made measurements to establish these limits in detail.

Indeed, they just found out that it must be at least 10,000 faster than c. Means anything from 10,000 * c to instantaneous.



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchitburn
reply to post by arpgme
 


Unless I am completely mistaken, which I don't think I am here.

They are not really "traveling" faster than light. They are "popping" in and out of existence (for lack of a better description) from one location to the other. Therefore physics remains accurate, as far as we know. And the universe can continue to exist.


Exactly... this is not physical travelling... its understanding and utilizing the premises of the particals that make up the universe. Ok maybe not understanding but at least utilizing.

I think the unverse is much more less complex than we think and once we learn how to grasp that... we will be able to use it functionally



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by HawkeyeNation
Wow this is completely fascinating to me being that I have no fricking idea what you guys are talking about


I saw this story pop here a few days ago and didnt post it because I had no idead what they were talking about


SNF op



posted on Mar, 15 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   





new topics
 
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join