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

Skip to comments.

Berkeley Lab Physicist Challenges Speed of Gravity Claim
spacedaily.com ^ | 23 Jun 03 | staff

Posted on 06/23/2003 9:25:12 AM PDT by RightWhale

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300301-308 last
To: MikeD
"2. From the Earth's point of view, the Sun is always where it "really" was 8 minutes ago."

And yet, without "seeing" where our Sun is at this very moment in the present, the Earth is nonetheless drawn not to where the Sun was 8.3 minutes ago, but to where the Sun resides at the present moment.

Hmmm...

301 posted on 06/27/2003 9:10:19 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Not joking.

Sigh.

If you're talking about direction (inward or outward), you must be assigning a velocity to the field propagation, because if it were infinite, there'd be no direction. The whole field would just appear or disappear.

Now let's suppose you turn on your magnet and leave it on for a year. However fast you imagine it to be, the field will reach to some region of space. Since you left it on for a year, it will take a year to collapse at the same speed. But you must admit that the the field close to the apparatus will collape almost immediately after you flick the switch. So in order for the "inward collapse" to reach the apparatus just as you are flicking on the switch, the collapse has to begin much earlier--a year earlier, in fact.

302 posted on 06/28/2003 5:50:50 AM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
They are utterly superfluous to the theory. As Laplace told Napoleon, "I have no need of that hypothesis."

That was when Laplace showed Napoleon his treatise on celestial mechanics, Napoleon asked him what place X had in his theory. Laplace replied that he had no need for that hypothesis.
303 posted on 06/28/2003 9:59:03 AM PDT by AdmSmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Thank you.
304 posted on 06/28/2003 2:52:39 PM PDT by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
"If I may suspend levity for a moment; how would one show an acceleration greater than c?"

"C" is a velocity, not an acceleration.

Interestingly, one "g" (32.174 ft/s/s) equals 1.03 light years/year/year.

Merely accelerate at one g for one year and--neglecting relativistic effects--you will be "near" c and half a light-year out.

Each kilogram of mass (again neglecting Einstein) will have 4.89 x 10^17 joules of kinetic energy. Since one year is about pi x 10^7 seconds, this works out to about 1500 megawatts operating over one year to accelerate your kilogram.

To account for various inefficiencies, call it 2000 MW. Or two San Onofre nuclear power plants.

If you plan for any payload or structure on your 1-kg spaceship, and you plan to have the powerplant on board, the problem is reduced to stuffing two nuclear power stations in--say--100 grams and a few cc. Scale up until you hit 'Enterprise'.

The problem is that humans are too puny to deal with such power and power densities; it is like stuffing the Sun into the Rose Bowl.

Among the questions I mean to ask the Almighty is: "Why did You make us so short-lived?" and "Why did you put everything so freeping far apart?!?" It is almost as if the Universe is designed to prevent communication/contact among intelligent species--assuming that we are not alone.

Personally I have been forced to conclude that we are alone or very nearly so.

--Boris

305 posted on 06/28/2003 3:01:17 PM PDT by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
"Well, I was going to point out the minor adjustments in position, velocity, and acceleration as indicated by the Lorentz equations, but after reading back over the thread I'm pretty sure that's not what you're looking for."

That is certainly correct; he would not even understand it.

--Boris

306 posted on 06/28/2003 3:04:49 PM PDT by boris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: All
For anyone still trying to follow this discussion, it has inexplicably been moved to an older thread here.
307 posted on 06/29/2003 4:22:55 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

Note: topic is from 2003.

308 posted on 08/12/2008 9:57:16 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/_______Profile hasn't been updated since Friday, May 30, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300301-308 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