|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
WHAT IF FASTER-THAN-LIGHT TRAVEL IS POSSIBLE
The OPERA experiment has been carried out for over three years in
secret. Yet in 2008 John Baez, the Tomas de Torquemada of Einsteiniana, suddenly declared that theoretical physics is moving in a schizophrenic direction, decisively abandoned it and is presently an expert in ecology or anything else that could prove profitable: http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, OUR PICTURE OF THE WORLD WILL BE DEEPLY SCHIZOPHRENIC. (...) I realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity." Other priests in Einsteiniana also gave signs that Divine Albert was not in their hearts any mo http://www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/148 "Many physicists argue that time is an illusion. Lee Smolin begs to differ. (...) Smolin wishes to hold on to the reality of time. But to do so, he must overcome a major hurdle: General and special relativity seem to imply the opposite. In the classical Newtonian view, physics operated according to the ticking of an invisible universal clock. But Einstein threw out that master clock when, in his theory of special relativity, he argued that no two events are truly simultaneous unless they are causally related. If simultaneity - the notion of "now" - is relative, the universal clock must be a fiction, and time itself a proxy for the movement and change of objects in the universe. Time is literally written out of the equation. Although he has spent much of his career exploring the facets of a "timeless" universe, Smolin has become convinced that this is "deeply wrong," he says. He now believes that time is more than just a useful approximation, that it is as real as our guts tell us it is - more real, in fact, than space itself. The notion of a "real and global time" is the starting hypothesis for Smolin's new work, which he will undertake this year with two graduate students supported by a $47,500 grant from FQXi." http://www.newscientist.com/article/...erse-tick.html "It is still not clear who is right, says John Norton, a philosopher based at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Norton is hesitant to express it, but his instinct - and the consensus in physics - seems to be that space and time exist on their own. The trouble with this idea, though, is that it doesn't sit well with relativity, which describes space-time as a malleable fabric whose geometry can be changed by the gravity of stars, planets and matter." http://www.humanamente.eu/PDF/Issue13_Paper_Norton.pdf John Norton: "It is common to dismiss the passage of time as illusory since its passage has not been captured within modern physical theories. I argue that this is a mistake. Other than the awkward fact that it does not appear in our physics, there is no indication that the passage of time is an illusion. (...) The passage of time is a real, objective fact that obtains in the world independently of us. How, you may wonder, could we think anything else? One possibility is that we might think that the passage of time is some sort of illusion, an artifact of the peculiar way that our brains interact with the world. Indeed that is just what you might think if you have spent a lot of time reading modern physics. Following from the work of Einstein, Minkowski and many more, physics has given a wonderfully powerful conception of space and time. Relativity theory, in its most perspicacious form, melds space and time together to form a four- dimensional spacetime. The study of motion in space and all other processes that unfold in them merely reduce to the study of an odd sort of geometry that prevails in spacetime. In many ways, time turns out to be just like space. In this spacetime geometry, there are differences between space and time. But a difference that somehow captures the passage of time is not to be found. There is no passage of time." http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...me-an-illusion Craig Callender in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN: "Einstein mounted the next assault by doing away with the idea of absolute simultaneity. According to his special theory of relativity, what events are happening at the same time depends on how fast you are going. The true arena of events is not time or space, but their union: spacetime. Two observers moving at different velocities disagree on when and where an event occurs, but they agree on its spacetime location. Space and time are secondary concepts that, as mathematician Hermann Minkowski, who had been one of Einstein's university professors, famously declared, "are doomed to fade away into mere shadows." And things only get worse in 1915 with Einstein's general theory of relativity..." I am not suggesting that all priests in Einsteiniana knew about the OPERA experiment. The cleverest among them, John Norton for instance, are able to deduce the falsehood of special relativity from the Michelson-Morley experiment alone: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/companion.doc John Norton: "These efforts were long misled by an exaggeration of the importance of one experiment, the Michelson-Morley experiment, even though Einstein later had trouble recalling if he even knew of the experiment prior to his 1905 paper. This one experiment, in isolation, has little force. Its null result happened to be fully compatible with Newton's own emission theory of light. Located in the context of late 19th century electrodynamics when ether-based, wave theories of light predominated, however, it presented a serious problem that exercised the greatest theoretician of the day." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE." Pentcho Valev |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
WHAT IF FASTER-THAN-LIGHT TRAVEL IS POSSIBLE
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopOpinion
Michio Kaku: "According to relativity, as you approach the speed of light, time slows down, you get heavier, and you also get flatter (all of which have been measured in the lab). But if you go faster than light, then the impossible happens. Time goes backward. You are lighter than nothing, and you have negative width. Since this is ridiculous, you cannot go faster than light, said Einstein." Einsteinians know no limits. Nothing can stop them when it comes to destroying human rationality. Pentcho Valev wrote: Einsteinians devise idiotic red herrings in panic and despair: http://www.thestar.com/news/world/ar...neutrinos?bn=1 "Damn those neutrinos. (...) "All of our understanding of cosmology and subatomic matter - everything will have to be revised," says Neil Turok, director of the Perimeter Institute in Waterloo, among the world's leading centres for research in theoretical physics. "We will have to work out everything all over again." (...) "If this experiment is right," says Turok, "from one point of view, the particles would have gone backward in time." In such a universe - one that permits chronological movement in reverse - it might also be possible for the consequences of an action to precede the action itself, and you don't need a PhD to be troubled by that. "That's kind of at the root of this," says Turok." Pentcho Valev |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Device Makes Radio Waves Travel Faster Than Light! | Double-A[_3_] | Misc | 24 | July 20th 09 06:42 PM |
Device Makes Radio Waves Travel Faster Than Light! | Warhol[_1_] | Misc | 8 | July 7th 09 04:22 AM |
Device Makes Radio Waves Travel Faster Than Light! | BradGuth | Misc | 4 | July 2nd 09 08:39 PM |
Device Makes Radio Waves Travel Faster Than Light! | Double-A[_3_] | Misc | 0 | July 2nd 09 02:31 AM |
Celestia & faster than light travel | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | August 25th 05 07:17 PM |