Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is lightspeed really a limit?
The Register ^ | 10 October 2012 | Richard Chirgwin

Posted on 10/10/2012 10:41:01 AM PDT by ShadowAce

We don’t (yet) have any way to test this, but University of Adelaide applied mathematicians are suggesting that an extended version of Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity also holds true for velocities beyond lightspeed.

One of the main predictions of Special Relativity is that the speed of light is treated as an absolute cosmic speed limit, the line which can never be crossed; and even the notorious “faster-than-light neutrino” incident in 2011 has left the theory intact as one of the most robust in physics.

However, during the speculation that surrounded the neutrino discussion last year1, the University of Adelaide’s Professor Jim Hill and Dr Barry Cox considered the question of how the mathematical contradictions posed by a faster-than-light particle could be aligned with Special Relativity.

Their solution, which Professor Hill discussed with The Register,2 rested on ignoring the speed of light’s status as an absolute limit, and instead, using the information where the relative velocity of two observers is infinite.3.

Outside the box: Einstein's Special Relativity works inside the smallest square.

The University of Adelaide researchers have extended the mathematics

to a world beyond Einstein's limit. Image provided by Professor Jim Hill

The surprising outcome: with just two assumptions, an extended version of the mathematics for Einstein's special relativity works just as well above the speed of light as below.

“Relativity is about frames of reference,” Professor Hill explained to The Register. That is, observers with different velocities see the same event from different frames of reference.

“Einstein started working from information where the relative velocity is zero – what we knew about, such as rest mass, kinetic energy and so on – and then extrapolated what is known in the Newtonian world for velocities lower than c.

“Our thinking was: how do we make use of the essential essence of Einstein’s theory for velocities above c?”

Mathematically, what the mathematicians assumed is that for infinite relative velocity, there is a fixed relationship between the velocities of the two observers: where u is the first observer’s velocity, v is the second, the product of the two velocities is always c2.

“What we have is an equivalent theory [to Special Relativity] that applies for velocities beyond the speed of light. That theory is different from Special Relativity, but it has many of the same characteristics.

And readers with an interest in either physics or maths will be delighted with the vital assumptions: there has to be one, and only one, speed of light; and in all cases, a mathematical singularity occurs at the speed of light.

“If you believe what we’ve done,” Professor Hill said, “there can only be one speed of light in a universe. If there was a second speed of light, our mathematics wouldn’t work. If there is a second singularity [the one that occurs at the speed of light in Special Relativity – The Register] it wouldn’t work.

“This theory and method of solution is dependent on assuming that there is only one speed of light in any universe.”

To get from the theory to any practical test is another matter entirely, and Professor Hill freely admits he doesn’t know how that might be achieved (although The Register notes that the world took half a century to get from the maths of emission of radiation to the laser). He hopes, however, that a test can be devised.

“If you really don’t believe that faster-than-light is possible, then humans will be limited forever,” he said.

Einstein’s special relativity beyond the speed of light has been published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society. ®


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Technical; Testing
KEYWORDS: einstein; relativity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-156 next last

1 posted on 10/10/2012 10:41:02 AM PDT by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

No the speed of dark is much faster


2 posted on 10/10/2012 10:42:06 AM PDT by al baby (“If Barack Obama has a Harvard law degree, he didn’t earn that. Somebody else made that happen.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Salo; JosephW; Only1choice____Freedom; amigatec; stylin_geek; ...

3 posted on 10/10/2012 10:42:06 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Gravity is faster than light.


4 posted on 10/10/2012 10:44:02 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

no


5 posted on 10/10/2012 10:44:05 AM PDT by Democrat_media (limit government to 5000 words of laws. Quantify limited government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

No Ludacris speed is much faster.


6 posted on 10/10/2012 10:44:11 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Corollary - Electing the same person over and over and expecting a different outcome is insanity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

Your thesis poses the question, Does Dark Matter?


7 posted on 10/10/2012 10:44:39 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
"Activate Light Speed"
"No, Light Speed's too slow"
"Light Speed too slow!?!?"
"Yes we're gonna have to go right to...LUDICROUS SPEED!!!"
8 posted on 10/10/2012 10:45:50 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (Big Bird is a brood parasite: laid in our nest 43 years ago and we are still feeding him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
This is another one of those “mathematics predicts” papers. But without a valid way to test the math in the real world, the prediction is worthless.

Sort of like me saying this: A horse has four legs. Suppose a hour could have 20 more legs. Then the math predicts the possibility of a 24-leg horse. Of course, I offer no way to test this possibility, but you can't argue with the math: 4 + 20 = 24.

9 posted on 10/10/2012 10:52:22 AM PDT by Leaning Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

Lets hope it don’t this election cycle


10 posted on 10/10/2012 10:52:55 AM PDT by al baby (“If Barack Obama has a Harvard law degree, he didn’t earn that. Somebody else made that happen.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Photobucket
11 posted on 10/10/2012 10:54:29 AM PDT by mikrofon (Celeritas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Again, a scientist thinking that since an equation comes out right, it must faithfully describe the real world.


12 posted on 10/10/2012 10:55:26 AM PDT by I want the USA back (Liberalism is a malfunction of the brain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

I hate Lightspeed.

Their Rocket spam/email/web filter sucks on ice...


13 posted on 10/10/2012 10:58:14 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; SunkenCiv
THANKS, for the thread / post.
science ping

14 posted on 10/10/2012 10:58:35 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (WA DC E$tabli$hment; DNC/RNC/Unionists...Brazilian saying: "$@me Old $hit; w/ different flie$" :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
aviation ping

15 posted on 10/10/2012 11:00:37 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (WA DC E$tabli$hment; DNC/RNC/Unionists...Brazilian saying: "$@me Old $hit; w/ different flie$" :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Well, that part about “infinite mass” is a limit. Unless you want to reverse the Big Bang, or whatever.


16 posted on 10/10/2012 11:01:15 AM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Speed only has meaning in a relativistic measurement. It must be measured from some other object (car versus road is a different speed than car versus the sun).

Object A travels the speed of light towards object B. At the same time object C travels the speed of light in the opposite direction away from B, how fast is object C moving in relation to object A?


17 posted on 10/10/2012 11:01:22 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Gravity is faster than light.

Did you see those slo-mo slinky videos? Might make you rething that.

18 posted on 10/10/2012 11:01:56 AM PDT by T. P. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

If there is Dark Matter, maybe there are Dark Photons?
Speed of light. Speed of Dark.


19 posted on 10/10/2012 11:02:05 AM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar; KevinDavis
aviation ping
sorry, KD

20 posted on 10/10/2012 11:03:59 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (WA DC E$tabli$hment; DNC/RNC/Unionists...Brazilian saying: "$@me Old $hit; w/ different flie$" :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

“Again, a scientist thinking that since an equation comes out right, it must faithfully describe the real world.”

That concept has worked pretty well thus far, methinks.


21 posted on 10/10/2012 11:10:49 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: T. P. Pole
Did you see those slo-mo slinky videos?

yes

Might make you rething that.

Nope. Different concept there. Think black holes. If gravity was not faster than light, then light could escape a black hole. At least we'd see the light that is coming around it. Since Black holes eat up all light--including the light that is between the hole and us--that means that gravity is faster than light.

22 posted on 10/10/2012 11:14:23 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Speed only has meaning in a relativistic measurement.

True, but with one exception. Whoever measures the speed of light will always get the exact same value, regardless of the motion of the measurer, or of the light source.

According to Big Al (Einstein, that is) space and time will distort in order to keep that true.

So, for example, different observers might not agree on the time a certain light experiment takes, but they will always agree on the speed of light value itself.

Weird - so weird that Big Al never got a Nobel Prize for his Relativity paper - but many experiments have shown it all to be true.

23 posted on 10/10/2012 11:17:08 AM PDT by Leaning Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

“Again, a scientist thinking that since an equation comes out right, it must faithfully describe the real world.”

That concept has worked pretty well thus far, methinks.

The irony being we are posting using computers that are built on the foundation of equations that at one time seemed pie in the sky....


24 posted on 10/10/2012 11:18:14 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

There are two reining factors in the belief that the speed of light is an absolute: 1) the state of physics and what we know/understand about friction, gravity and the way that light travels, and 2) the ability to detect and measure anything faster.

Without knowing specifically what they are seeking to measure, it is difficult for physicists to try to detect (much less develop) an instrument that can measure something travelling at greater than the speed of light.

The speed of light is the current state of technology. As soon as we discover dilithium crystals and develop warp engines, the speed of light will be relegated to travel in the slow lane!

(Ok, I’m having a little fun and made that last paragraph up!)


25 posted on 10/10/2012 11:20:16 AM PDT by DustyMoment (Congress - another name for white collar criminals!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Object A travels the speed of light towards object B. At the same time object C travels the speed of light in the opposite direction away from B, how fast is object C moving in relation to object A?

speed of C = speed of A ie:C&A are maintaining the same distance between themselves....B just happen to be between them

26 posted on 10/10/2012 11:25:09 AM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; 04-Bravo; 1FASTGLOCK45; 1stFreedom; 2ndDivisionVet; 60Gunner; 6AL-4V; A.A. Cunningham; ..
Aviation and Aerospace ping

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Please ping me to aviation and aerospace articles. Thank you.

If you want added to or removed from this ping list, please contact EveningStar or Paleo Conservative.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

27 posted on 10/10/2012 11:28:44 AM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Is lightspeed really a limit?

No, apparently not.
In this video, Bob compares what he does to "the speed of light":

Fastest Gunman on the Planet

28 posted on 10/10/2012 11:28:58 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

“Gravity is faster than light.”

Ok... where is the “gravity” traveling from and where is it going to? How can you measure the speed? Maybe you’ll turn out to be right, but if it can’t be demonstrated, what’s the point of saying it?


29 posted on 10/10/2012 11:30:04 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thackney

2c

Any occupants in the vehicles headed toward each other would be dead twice as fast as before they knew it.


30 posted on 10/10/2012 11:32:52 AM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
speed of C = speed of A ie:C&A are maintaining the same distance between themselves....B just happen to be between them

after rethinking my answer, i further propose a new problem...B is s stationary object....A moves away at the speed of light, C moves away in the opposite direction at the speed of light....now what is the relationship between objects.

if fact, if the "big Bang" theory is correct....there is matter traveling in opposite directions.....therefore, if you are going 1/2 the speed of light north, and I am going 1/2 the speed of light south....we could never see each other. ever

31 posted on 10/10/2012 11:33:25 AM PDT by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: I want the USA back

No, I don’t think the scientists who came up with this think that at all. More than likely, it’s another case of a hyperventilating science reporter desperately trying to make his topic appeal to the public with sensationalism.


32 posted on 10/10/2012 11:37:53 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Sort of related. Amazing video where you see light travel bit by bit across a table: http://www.ted.com/talks/ramesh_raskar_a_camera_that_takes_one_trillion_frames_per_second.html


33 posted on 10/10/2012 11:40:04 AM PDT by Hokestuk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

34 posted on 10/10/2012 11:45:59 AM PDT by JRios1968 (I'm guttery and trashy, with a hint of lemon. - Laz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

Check up, they are already testing it. So far the results are showing that gravity waves travel at c.


35 posted on 10/10/2012 11:45:59 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Suppose I was sitting in the glassed in nose of a spaceship trsvelling at the speed of light, and turned on a flashlight?

What would be the forward speed of the light coming from the flashlight?


36 posted on 10/10/2012 11:58:03 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

And yet people are still looking for “dark matter”. When all the matter in the universe is visible, the end will be nigh.

The other question is how fast are we going now?

velocity of the Earth around the Sun plus the Sun around the center of the Milky Way = 156 miles per second or 561,600 MPH.

But I cannot find values for our velocity in our galactic cluster or of our cluster’s velocity in the universe at large. Nor can I find a value for our velocity relative to the mono block.

What if we are already going faster than c?


37 posted on 10/10/2012 12:03:19 PM PDT by fireforeffect (A kind word and a 2x4, gets you more than just a kind word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: thackney

A and C both see each other moving away from each other at the speed of light, not twice the speed of light. Space and time distort to make that happen. This isn’t just theory. It has been tested for slower moving objects that emit radiation, and in fact such distortions (albeit much smaller) had to be accounted for to make GPS work...


38 posted on 10/10/2012 12:05:51 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

Actually that was how I (mis)read your first question...


39 posted on 10/10/2012 12:08:52 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

The speed of light...


40 posted on 10/10/2012 12:10:41 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Gravity is a result of the bending of the fabric of space. Unless the graviton particle are proven real ....


41 posted on 10/10/2012 12:11:43 PM PDT by 11th Commandment (http://www.thirty-thousand.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

so if your on a free falling elevator and jump just before you hit, you will be OK?

I knew it was true!


42 posted on 10/10/2012 12:13:17 PM PDT by hadaclueonce (you are paying 12% more for fuel because of Ethanol. Smile big Corn Lobby,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
-- Well, that part about "infinite mass" is a limit. --

Looked at from the other direction .... I recently read that Einstein puzzled over "catching up" to a photon. If an observer is traveling at the same speed and in the same direction as a photon, the photon (which is massless) would be standing still. And, if it is standing still and has no mass, there is nothing there. So, he figured, it must not be possible to observe a stationary photon.

43 posted on 10/10/2012 12:19:48 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!
Suppose I was sitting in the glassed in nose of a spaceship trsvelling at the speed of light, and turned on a flashlight?

What would be the forward speed of the light coming from the flashlight?

This is fun (if mind-bending) stuff, so let me play a little.

Your spaceship cannot be moving at the speed of light, just really close to it. So try this:

Your spaceship is moving at 0.999c and you shine a flashlight forward. Two questions: (1) What speed do you see the light traveling away from you? (2) What speed does someone you fly past see (a) you moving, (b) the light moving relative to that someone, and (c) the light from the flashlight moving away from you?

Answers: (1) You see the light moving away from you at the speed of light. (2a) The person sees you moving at near the speed of light. (2b) The person sees the light from the flashlight moving at the speed of light relative to themselves. (2c) The person sees the light form the flashlight moving away from you at the speed of light, too!

What, makes no sense? How can that be? Without getting into the messy math, time and space distort in ways that make ALL of that happen. Again, as posted up thread, these effects occur at lower speeds, too, and in fact had to be accounted for to make GPS work.

44 posted on 10/10/2012 12:22:21 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Weirdly enough, that actually makes sense to me.


45 posted on 10/10/2012 12:30:50 PM PDT by Little Ray (AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
“If you really don’t believe that faster-than-light is possible, then humans will be limited forever,” he said.

It is for this reason alone that I do not believe the speed of light is an absolute limit.

46 posted on 10/10/2012 12:31:44 PM PDT by zeugma (Rid the world of those savages. - Dorothy Woods, widow of a Navy Seal, AMEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Wow! I did not see that coming.


47 posted on 10/10/2012 12:33:39 PM PDT by Jemian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

Depends on what you mean IMO. You can’t accelerate to the speed of light, but current cosmology predicts “inflation” after the Big Bang that moved things apart faster than the speed of light by creating space between them. That is the most likely route for getting arouns the apeed of light limit. If we don’t nuke ourselves or suffer some other collapse od civthey might crack this nut in a few more centuries or eons...


48 posted on 10/10/2012 12:44:26 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Ok... where is the “gravity” traveling from and where is it going to? How can you measure the speed? Maybe you’ll turn out to be right, but if it can’t be demonstrated, what’s the point of saying it?

It can be demonstrated quite readily.

Look at the sun.

Well, get some good welder's goggles, then look at the sun in the sky.

We know how long that light you see takes to get to the earth. (approx 8 mins if I recall correctly).

If you calculate out the motions of the sun, and earth, the gravitational effects you feel from the sun (this effects where the earth is in its orbit amongst other things), the sun is not in the position it ought to be by virtue of the gravity we feel from it.

This is because the effects of gravity travel faster than light.

49 posted on 10/10/2012 12:47:17 PM PDT by zeugma (Rid the world of those savages. - Dorothy Woods, widow of a Navy Seal, AMEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

Depends on what you mean IMO. You can’t accelerate to the speed of light, but current cosmology predicts “inflation” after the Big Bang that moved things apart faster than the speed of light by creating space between them. I think that is the most likely route we have some clue about today for getting around the speed of light limit. If we don’t nuke ourselves or suffer some other collapse of civilzation, they might crack this nut in a few more centuries or eons...


50 posted on 10/10/2012 12:47:48 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-156 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson