Told you it's possible to go faster than the speed of light
DonDaddyD
Posts: 12,689
Way back when I made a thread about how if I applied to much Power Awesome (TM) from thighs (Jeremy and Kyle) to the crank of my bike I could (i) Fold Space and (ii) go faster than the speed of light.
Then some Fizzycist on here queried how I would compensate for the increase in mass as I reach light speed.
But look! Seems like your mortal science is finally catching up with my genius.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484
Sigh.
Then some Fizzycist on here queried how I would compensate for the increase in mass as I reach light speed.
But look! Seems like your mortal science is finally catching up with my genius.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484
Sigh.
Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
0
Comments
-
DonDaddyD wrote:Way back when I made a thread about how if I applied to much Power Awesome (TM) from thighs (Jeremy and Kyle) to the crank of my bike I could (i) Fold Space and (ii) go faster than the speed of light.
Then some Fizzycist on here queried how I would compensate for the increase in mass as I reach light speed.
But look! Seems like your mortal science is finally catching up with my genius.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484
Sigh.
Looks like you've been referred to the community, people are questioning whether you're a mistake.0 -
My theory.
It has always been possible to travel faster than light. And no traveling faster than light doesn't mean going 'back in time'.
Our perception of light has always been limiting in that we use it to measure time and bound it speed. If a beam of light is traveling to Earth and a person arrives before the light reaches Earth, they haven't gone back in time. All they've done is beaten the light to Earth.
Anyone else have a theory?Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Live a little. Sheesh...Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Since I thought it was impossible to go faster than the speed of light I've not really bothered trying.
If it is now, I might give it a go... :roll:0 -
Royalty travels faster than light. Well known fact. The instant that a King or Queen dies the heir becomes King or Queen regardless of distance.
Elizabeth II became queen in Kenya instantly from England. Granted she didn't know about it for a bit, but Queen she was.....
FCN 5 belt driven fixie for city bits
CAADX 105 beastie for bumpy bits
Litespeed L3 for Strava bits
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.0 -
You can put a meaurement on the speed of light, therefore it is theoretically possible to input a higher meaurement. Light has a speed, something will have a faster speed (though clearly not DDD)
Did these particles travel faster than light, perhaps, but so what. Did anyone ever say this was a barrier?
Time is relative to where you are, not how fast you are travelling, though the two can be interwoven."Encyclopaedia is a fetish for very small bicycles"0 -
Pratchett?SimonAH wrote:Royalty travels faster than light. Well known fact. The instant that a King or Queen dies the heir becomes King or Queen regardless of distance.
Elizabeth II became queen in Kenya instantly from England. Granted she didn't know about it for a bit, but Queen she was.....
Nothing travels faster than bad news...0 -
Wallace1492 wrote:You can put a meaurement on the speed of light, therefore it is theoretically possible to input a higher meaurement. Light has a speed, something will have a faster speed (though clearly not DDD)
Did these particles travel faster than light, perhaps, but so what. Did anyone ever say this was a barrier?
Time is relative to where you are, not how fast you are travelling, though the two can be interwoven.
whoa man, thats heavy
Keeping it classy since '830 -
The bartender says, "we don't serve tachyons here".
60ns later, a tachyon walks into a bar...Location: ciderspace0 -
Wallace1492 wrote:Did these particles travel faster than light, perhaps, but so what. Did anyone ever say this was a barrier?
Yes, a clever German chap in 1905. Can't quite remember his name....Albert something....FTT
Specialized Allez
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49364032@N03/4820302085/
Steel bike http://www.flickr.com/photos/49364032@N03/46563181470 -
So essentially these scientists have got a result that they don't understand. The big problem being that they reproduced this result lots of times and seemingly validated it. The yard stick for speed which they are using is the "speed of light". One thing that strikes me is that the "speed of light" was established a long time ago and so was it accurate and has it been questioned and tested time and again?0
-
Yes, retested many, many times.Keith1983 wrote:So essentially these scientists have got a result that they don't understand. The big problem being that they reproduced this result lots of times and seemingly validated it. The yard stick for speed which they are using is the "speed of light". One thing that strikes me is that the "speed of light" was established a long time ago and so was it accurate and has it been questioned and tested time and again?
The thing with repeating an experiment with the same kit is that if you've got some consistent systematic error you are always going to get the same, but wrong, result. That's why other groups need to validate the result.0 -
am i getting this correct, it is theoretically possible to travel faster than light.....so ok if a plane could fly faster than light would that make the plane appear like a ghost as the light that you could see being reflected off the fuselage would be old/ slowed down until light could catch up to it?
my head hurts
i need to lay off the skittlesKeeping it classy since '830 -
Wallace1492 wrote:You can put a meaurement on the speed of light, therefore it is theoretically possible to input a higher meaurement. Light has a speed, something will have a faster speed (though clearly not DDD)
Did these particles travel faster than light, perhaps, but so what. Did anyone ever say this was a barrier?
Time is relative to where you are, not how fast you are travelling, though the two can be interwoven.Keith1983 wrote:So essentially these scientists have got a result that they don't understand. The big problem being that they reproduced this result lots of times and seemingly validated it. The yard stick for speed which they are using is the "speed of light". One thing that strikes me is that the "speed of light" was established a long time ago and so was it accurate and has it been questioned and tested time and again?mudcow007 wrote:my head hurts
i need to lay off the skittles
Good to see the guys at Cern are getting the help from the community they so desperately needed. Someone should point them in this direction!- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Look, guys, lets not be so arrogant as to simply believe and accept what we are told because there was a trend towards one way of thinking. It would be foolish to accept that some aspects of science (as it currently stands) cannot be wrong.
It may be a shocker but Einstein could be wrong (on some things).
Remember, Columbus challenged the notion that the World wasn't flat. Up until that point all the World leading smart folk of the time thought he was wrong and they were taught that the World was flat.
It is only recently (in the past decade or so) that scientist are truly exploring the notion that dinosaurs evolved into birds. Back when I were a lad they were a lad they were touted as gigantic lizards with the Crocodile and Komodo Dragon as their closest ancestors.
Darwin came up with this whole theory of evolution that gave momentum to modern day genealogy, genetics, biology etc. And we know what they said about him.
Yes more qualified people will figure it out, eventually. But it shouldn't stop us from wondering and speculating with amazement and interest.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
I'm all for questioning what we know, after all that is called progress. It does beg the question, that if we do establish that things can travel faster than the speed of light, so what? How does that change our world and our day to day lives?0
-
It will turn the whole RLJing debate on its headKeith1983 wrote:I'm all for questioning what we know, after all that is called progress. It does beg the question, that if we do establish that things can travel faster than the speed of light, so what? How does that change our world and our day to day lives?0 -
If things can travel faster than light then theoretically time travel should be possible - however I don't think its time to ditch Einsteins just yet - remember what happened to fusion technology0
-
kelsen wrote:
It will turn the whole RLJing debate on its headKeith1983 wrote:I'm all for questioning what we know, after all that is called progress. It does beg the question, that if we do establish that things can travel faster than the speed of light, so what? How does that change our world and our day to day lives?
By this do you mean it will put an end to the pointless drivel that people feel the need to say over and over again on the RLJ'ing debate?0 -
If I'm traveling at the 'Speed of Awesome (TM)' which is x3.14159265 the speed of light. Is it RLJing if I'm through the lights before the beam from the red light gets to the officer policing the crossing?Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Yes, there will no longer be anything to debate if it's possible to RLJ without having to J the RL.Keith1983 wrote:kelsen wrote:
It will turn the whole RLJing debate on its headKeith1983 wrote:I'm all for questioning what we know, after all that is called progress. It does beg the question, that if we do establish that things can travel faster than the speed of light, so what? How does that change our world and our day to day lives?
By this do you mean it will put an end to the pointless drivel that people feel the need to say over and over again on the RLJ'ing debate?0 -
Jay dubbleU wrote:If things can travel faster than light then theoretically time travel should be possible - however I don't think its time to ditch Einsteins just yet - remember what happened to fusion technology
Time travel is not possible, people tend to confuse the term when science has only really got credible theories for looking into the past, not for travelling to and from it.0 -
Keith1983 wrote:kelsen wrote:
It will turn the whole RLJing debate on its headKeith1983 wrote:I'm all for questioning what we know, after all that is called progress. It does beg the question, that if we do establish that things can travel faster than the speed of light, so what? How does that change our world and our day to day lives?
By this do you mean it will put an end to the pointless drivel that people feel the need to say over and over again on the RLJ'ing debate?
It means if you pass the lights before you see the red light, it'll be safe to continuePurveyor of sonic doom
Very Hairy Roadie - FCN 4
Fixed Pista- FCN 5
Beared Bromptonite - FCN 140 -
Because we originally measured time via the passage of light people tend to muddle the two together.
Just because you've beaten light doesn't mean you've traversed time. Theories around time open up it's own set of theories such as paradoxes, causality, existence etc.
IMO (not that it's worth much) time and light are separate, except that light (and speed) can be used as a measure of time (their interaction ends there for me).Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
You are travelling by the light of a burning pie DDD?FCN 5 belt driven fixie for city bits
CAADX 105 beastie for bumpy bits
Litespeed L3 for Strava bits
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.0 -
0
-
When did he get the definite (p)article?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
