Thanks Lonesome in Massachussets.
Some more about the earlier topic.
· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·
Posted on 09/24/2011 6:19:59 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets
CERN scientists ‘break the speed of light’
The Telegraph | Sept. 22, 2011 | Uncredited
Posted on 09/22/2011 6:57:08 PM PDT by danielmryan
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2782478/posts
Hi - well it wasn’t being sold on Amazon yet. How you doing?
I see in you the makings of a great scientist. That is the kind of question Einstein asked. Maxwell's equations, which are very useful in describing electromagnetics, predict, or at least account for, the speed of light in terms of two independently measurable quantities, the permittivity and permeability of space.
Before Special Relativity, scientists recognized that this speed (as you perceived) must be referred to some medium in which the light waves travel. Effort was expended to find out what this medium was. The most famous and best experiment was the Michelson-Morley attempt to measure the speed of the earth through the "luminescent ether". The earth moves around the sun at 18 km/sec. Attempts to detect a difference of 36 km/sec in the speed of light, or any difference in speed, depending on direction, failed completely.
What was going on?
Einstein showed that one could get consistent results by abandoning an absolute frame of reference and the notion of absolute time, if all [inertial] reference frames were treaty equally. This required adopting some counter-intuitive ideas, but lead to a consistent laws of physics. One counter intuitive result was the lengths of objects in relative motion changed along the direction of motion. May I recommend A.P. French's very readable Special Relativity, for a more complete answer to your question?
Not a all off-topic, but completely on point. The “laws of physics” are about as settled as science ever gets, which means, none-too-settled. To claim that AGWT is “settled science” is to betray ignorance of the entire enterprise of science.
So, if the speed limit for ‘things’ in our spacetime is the speed of light, if a ‘thing’ is moving faster than the speed limit that ‘thing’ is no longer existing in our spacetime ... if not a timing bias, perhaps a bias toward what is Time? To this point in human History, there have been no observations of anything that has not already occurred, so would this ‘phenomenon’ being reproted be approaching observation of a current —that’s a present, not past— event? BWahahhahahaha, science is so much fun.
How do you detect something moving faster than light? I’m not sceptical, just curious.
IIRC, the feat is accomplished by measuring the interval from emission to detection and comparing that ‘time interval’ to how fast the two events would occur at light speed in a vacuum. It’s kind of like mathematically showing the Sun has a greater radius than the surface area would indicate if using the Euclidian equation for finding the surface area given the radius, or finding the radius of a spherical object given the surface area. Richard Feynman gave an amusing lecture on this topic in his Caltech lectures.
Well, the short answer is YES.
Like the speed of light, from the time Obama's brain senses a wallet, the synapses close and the signal to remove said wallet is GREATER than the speed of light.
He also deal in figures that like the speed of light are unimaginable...like TRILLIONS and if he ever figgr's out what comes after a trillion, God help us all.
Scientists have a great faith to follow... They have faith in science...
The idea of the defintion of time is actually quite profound, and not at all easily answered. In physics, time arises from the observation of sequential events, the interval between them being "time". Up until 1967, time was defined by gravity, as reckoned from the observation of astronomical events. The timescale arising from these observations was called "Ephemeris Time" or ET. It was the most uniform and accurate timescale known. In 1967, time, or more properly, the second, was redefined in terms of a quantum electromagnetic phenomenon, specific the band gap energy of a certain transition of the Cesium atom, giving rise to a timescale now called TAI. (International Atomic Time or Temps Atomique Internationale)
The remarkable thing is, that within the accuracy of our ability to measure, there is absolutely no inconsistency between ET (now replaced by TD or TDB, for Dynamical Time or Barycentric Dynamical Time) and TAI. In other words, either the cesium atom "knows" what the planets are doing, or the planets know what the cesium atom is doing, or events associated with both are progressing in response to a thing called "time".
I say the ring laser gyro is the spookiest, and cleverest, use of General Relativity. GPS would work with or without General Relativity. Actually, General Relativitistic effects are a nuisance to the designers of GPS, while it is the very basis of the ring laser gyro.
“Science” with a capital “S” is a religion and a matter of faith for people like Al Gore and Barak Obama, who have no idea what it is they are talking about. Real science is nothing more than the systematic and honest examination of experience. Some of the mathematical technique is quite abstract and takes some getting used to, admittedly.
In chosing one’s faith in scientists, you have to be careful Chose scientists who can predict eclipses and built GPS constellations and who are open to examination and refutation. Be wary of any who make unprovable claims or reject challenges to their theirs and will not disclose their methods and data.
What is the speed of dark?
Only Steven Wright knows for sure.
We are not amused.
There is no dark, only places the light has not reached yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.