Things traveling faster than light has already been found (notice that they use a medium to travel in) while the speed of light is measured while in vacuum. Notice that the press release was something of a leak, and that many specialists has been invited to Cern and that the experiment in its simplicity has been sent out to various universities and facilities so that a confirmation can be done as soon as possible.
On a side note; Einstein did not state that nothing can travel faster than light, he stated that nothing can accelerate to a velocity faster than that of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special..._of_relativity
Quoting: "One of the consequences of the theory is that it is impossible for any particle that has rest mass to be accelerated to the speed of light."
Hmm, for those of you questioning my use of medium i mean medium other than such as ether.
-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether
On a side note; Einstein did not state that nothing can travel faster than light, he stated that nothing can accelerate to a velocity faster than that of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special..._of_relativity
Quoting: "One of the consequences of the theory is that it is impossible for any particle that has rest mass to be accelerated to the speed of light."
Hmm, for those of you questioning my use of medium i mean medium other than such as ether.
-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether
| Vox Moderated Message: |
| The theory of an aether is long outdated, could you provide an example of a medium which something can travels faster than light in that actually exists? Alternatively, provide a source that shows an aether does exist, either one would add here. |
Last edited by Vox; Sep 24, 2011 at 01:55 PM.
Now doing recoloring for people not in the clan as-well, PM for more info!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
Originally Posted by Smogard49
Things traveling faster than light has already been found
No previous discovery has shown that information can be transferred faster than c (there is a very important distinction here). If this discovery is true, then that would mean that information can be transferred faster than c, something previously thought impossible.
| Vox Moderated Message: |
| See the following post for an expansion on this topic: |
http://forum.toribash.com/showpost.p...3&postcount=18
Originally Posted by Smogard49
On a side note; Einstein did not state that nothing can travel faster than light, he stated that nothing can accelerate to a velocity faster than that of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special..._of_relativity
Quoting: "One of the consequences of the theory is that it is impossible for any particle that has rest mass to be accelerated to the speed of light."
Neutrinos have rest mass (albeit extraordinarily small) and they were accelerated in one of the various colliders CERN has. Ergo if this is true it invalidates a Einstein's theory.
Last edited by Vox; Sep 24, 2011 at 07:58 PM.
Originally Posted by Dalliance
Neutrinos have rest mass (albeit extraordinarily small) and they were accelerated in one of the various colliders CERN has. Ergo if this is true it invalidates a Einstein's theory.
Though I'm not studying physics I vaguely remember that they are not created and then accelerated but on creation they already have a velocity.
Originally Posted by OrAclE
And that implies that time always goes forward. We have never established for certain that you can't go back in time, merely we're not capable of it. If I remember some string theory mumbo jumbo I heard a while back, it can be likened that time is like a 4th dimension and, being on the 3rd dimension, we can only progress linearly along the 4th dimension. However, something that exists on the 4th dimension can go backwards and forwards through time, similarly how we can go backwards and forwards within 3 dimensional space. It was posted here a while back, I'll see if I can find the video that explained it.
Even Einstein said that if you move faster than light, you will go back in time.
Speeking of dimensions: There are theories that the neutrinos haven't moved faster than light but took a shorter way by moving through other dimensions. That could explain the result while following the theory of relativity.
| Vox Moderated Message: |
| Please provide a source for this information. |
e: I read the part with the dimension travelling neutrinos in an article of the German newspaper FAZ, todays issue (09-24-11). I doubt that's gonna help anyone. I'll search for some english articles with the same topic.
e2:
Heinrich Paes, a physicist at Dortmund University, has developed another theory that could explain the result. The neutrinos may be taking a shortcut through space-time, by travelling from Cern to Gran Sasso through extra dimensions. "That can make it look like a particle has gone faster than the speed of light when it hasn't," he said.
- source
I can't find any more expanation on what his theory is based on. The paper "Neutrino Timetravel" sounds much like what Päs was saying though they are talking of theoretical "sterile neutrinos". I don't know if Päs was talking about that.
Last edited by psycore; Sep 25, 2011 at 12:56 AM.
Signature temporarily out of order.
Originally Posted by psycore
Though I'm not studying physics I vaguely remember that they are not created and then accelerated but on creation they already have a velocity.
That's photons, not neutrons.
Oh and Vox, tachyons haven't even been proven to be real, so I fail to see how they are relevant. And that pdf you linked in no way proves information can be sent faster than c. It merely postulates that if tachyons exist it is possible. And as for the other three possibilities (Group velocity, Evanescent wave coupling, and quantum non-locality), they do not allow superluminal information transferral, despite seemingly doing so.
| Vox Moderated Message: |
| Thanks for providing a backup for your claims, as you say tachyons have not been proven to exsist, hence the (hypothetical) mark I added, I believed that quantum nonlocality did allow for superluminal information transfer, but you seem cirtain this is not the case, has this been demonstrated? (I haven't been able to find any papers on the subject showing this to be the case.) Sorry to waste your time if I'm indeed wrong. |
Quantum non-locality would not allow superluminal information transfer (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9901035)
Last edited by Dalliance; Sep 26, 2011 at 12:05 AM.
