Scientific Forums


Pages: (134) 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... Last »  ( Go to first unread post )

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


> The impossibility of something faster than light
Michael A. Will
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 02:24 PM


Unregistered









"As viewed from the Earth's frame, light from the Sun has aberration. Light requires about 8.3 minutes to arrive from the Sun, during which time the Sun seems to move through an angle of 20 arc seconds. The arriving sunlight shows us where the Sun was 8.3 minutes ago. The true, instantaneous position of the Sun is about 20 arcs seconds east of its visible position, and we will see the Sun in its true present position about 8.3 minutes into the future. In the same way, star positions are displaced from their average position by up to 20 arcs seconds, depending on the relative direction of the Earth's motion around the Sun. This well-known phenomenon is classical aberration, and was discovered by the astronomer Bradley in 1728."*

Fact: Gravity Has No Aberration


Poynting-Robertson effect:

"Small bodies such as dust particles in circular orbit around the Sun experience a mostly radial force due to the radiation pressure of sunlight. But because of the finite speed of light, a portion of that radial force acts in a transverse direction, like a drag, slowing the orbital speed of the dust particles and causing them to eventually spiral into the Sun."*

The effect of gravity propogating at light speed would be similar to the Poynting-Robertson effect cept reversed, since the force outward of radiation is in opposition to the force inward of gravity.

"If gravity were a simple force that propagated outward from the Sun at the speed of light, as radiation pressure does, its mostly radial effect would also have a small transverse component because of the motion of the target. Analogous to the Poynting-Robertson effect, the magnitude of that tangential force acting on the Earth would be 0.0001 of the Sun's radial force, which is the ratio of the Earth's orbital speed (30 km/s) to the speed of this hypothetical force of gravity moving at light-speed (300,000 km/s). It would act continuously, but would tend to speed the Earth up rather than slow it down because gravity is attractive and radiation pressure is repulsive. Nonetheless, the net effect of such a force would be to double the Earth's distance from the Sun in 1200 years. There can be no doubt from astronomical observations that no such force is acting."*


I feel badly quoting so much from a website that may not appear legit since it doesnt carry a popular base url. But I am at work at it would be a sin to word something poorly when it has already been done perfectly by someone else.

All of this information is courtesty of Tom Van Flandern at Metaresearch (http://www.metaresearch.org)

It is a good read.. you should all check it out. If you aren't interested the parts that apply here are quoted above.

Based on physics, expirements and current idealogy Tom comes up with a viable number for the speed at which gravity propogates.

Conclusion: The speed of gravity is (2*10^10)*c

But of course, as I said before, noone really knows. The only thing we ARE sure of at this point is that it propogates beyond the speed of light.


* http://www.ldolphin.org/vanFlandern/gravityspeed.html



Top
Piro
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 02:51 PM


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 68
Joined: 7-December 04

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


well, in terms of what gravity is, i can't say anything positive, but i can give my opinion.

First off, lets remember that everything, when brought down to a basic level, is made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons. For this explanation, neutrons don't really play a role, but more electrons and protons. Gravity becomes greater around things that are larger and/or more dense. So, after thinking about it for a while, i thought, what gets stronger as more of it is there, but doesn't wear down. And then it hit me... magnetism. Now i'm not talking about polar magnetism, i'm talking about pure electron to proton magnetism. On a base level, everything has a magnetic attraction to and from the things around it. We don't notice it because the things we are used to being around are so small and non-dense that we don't notice it, but the earth, and other planets/stars are large enough and dense enough to create a magnetic force powerful enough to hold us onto it. This would also explain why more dense things and larger things are affected more by gravity... it's like oil and water. The more dense things will be pulled to the center of the gravity while the less dense things will be pushed out. The more dense something is, the more electrons/protons gravity has to act upon, while the less dense it is, the less it has to act upon.

Again, this is only what i think, and has no real experimental data to back it up, but then again, it does seem to make sense.
Top
Tylerious
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 04:20 PM


Unregistered









QUOTE (Prof. S. B. Palmer @ Aug 16 2004, 08:05 PM)
rolleyes.gif If the speed of light is the limitation, then explain the tachyon particles that move three to twenty times faster than the speed of light and are 1800 to 2500 times more massive than a proton.

Only a few have been detected in a twenty year period, stopping one to examine it has so far been impractical, since according to estimates it could easily pass through 3500 light years of solid lead.

Dr. Palmer

tachyons? sounds like someone has been watching too much star trek.

i always thought that while things could travel up to the speed of light, it would stop changing. so if a person got up close to the speed of light and appeared to the observer to travel for a hour, it would seem like much less than than to the body in motion. but once you reach light speed, the body stops changing altogether. so theoretically you can't go faster because then the body would reverse itself.. or something..
Top
Michael A. Will
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 05:28 PM


Unregistered









The charge of an electron is equal and opposite to the charge of a proton and thusly they cancel each other out.

Gravity is purely based on mass and not on charge.

I used to have lots of strange theories when I was a little kid smile.gif
Top
Matt
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 07:23 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 634
Joined: 6-December 04

Positive Feedback: 100%
Feedback Score: 1


QUOTE
If the speed of light is the limitation, then explain the tachyon particles that move three to twenty times faster than the speed of light and are 1800 to 2500 times more massive than a proton.

Only a few have been detected in a twenty year period, stopping one to examine it has so far been impractical, since according to estimates it could easily pass through 3500 light years of solid lead.


Can you site something that shows that a tachyon has been detected?

Last I heard they were simply mathamatical abstractions someone came up with while playing around with Einstein's equations.

They travel faster than light. backwards in time, and have imaginary mass. I'd like to see how they were detected.
Top
Piro
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 08:16 PM


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 68
Joined: 7-December 04

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


QUOTE (Michael A. Will @ Dec 14 2004, 01:28 PM)
The charge of an electron is equal and opposite to the charge of a proton and thusly they cancel each other out.

Gravity is purely based on mass and not on charge.

I used to have lots of strange theories when I was a little kid smile.gif

gravity is based on mass and density... and it's not so hard to believe that it's a sort of magnetic pull that affects everything... if something is tremendously massive and/or dense made out of mostly elements containing a negative charge, then the end result will be an object that seriously attracts positively charged things to it. This would explain why some things (for instance helium) seem to be less influenced by gravity than other things (for instance lead). Also, as in chemical reactions, when an element gets to a certain heat it will not be attracted and combine with the elements it usually combines with (when things turn to gasses). This would explain why things like air don't seem to be effected as much. This charge could also be forced in some way to go in a certain direction... this would cause a polarization on a large scale (ie the creation of our magnetic N/S) and would also cause our earth to rotate on it's own (the movement of the magnetic forces would cause this). As for us moving around the sun, the same rule would apply as in the rotation of the planet itself. Explaining a lot about why the planets (with the exception of pluto) all orbit around the sun on the same plane. I also suspect that in time even pluto will align itself with this plane.
Top
Matt
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 08:28 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 634
Joined: 6-December 04

Positive Feedback: 100%
Feedback Score: 1


Pluto, the asteroids, the other Kuiper Belt Objects(which pluto is) Oort Cloud Objects, all of these do not follow the plane of the other 8 plantes.

in fact of all the things that orbit the sun, which there are millions of, most do not orbit in the plane of the plantets.
Top
z
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 08:33 PM


Unregistered









Hi,

I agree with Michael A> Will. You should check out Tom Van Flandern's work. He is a very sharp dude. I've heard him interviewed a few times.

One of his ideas is that the curved path of light in a gravitational field may be explained by the idea that space has a varying refractive index depending on the strength of the gravitational field, and other parameters of the space through which the photons are traveling.

z
Top
V2-V3
Posted: Dec 14 2004, 10:04 PM


Unregistered









Well if you consider Quantum Teleportation the properties of an object can be transfered to an object of any distance instantanusly so can that be mesured as a speed? probly not. this reminds me of a gas reaching Absolute Zero and having a volume of Zero.


Top
tygrus
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 12:49 AM


Unregistered









I'm no expert so take this with careful consideration.

Test speed of gravity:

Two 1ton 1m diameter objects are set in a parallel motion of 1000km/s and 10km apart. How does gravity affect each object's motion. The object at it's new position (N) would feel the effects of gravity from the other object when it was at its old position (O).

CODE

O1->N1
\   /
 \/
 / \
/   \
O2->N2

This effect would slow the objects down if gravity was speed of light.

The earth and sun would not matter so much beacuse the earth would be running into gravity of the same force and angle no matter how fast it was moving. Gravity is a constant omni-directional force and is not necaserially restricted in direction.

If gravity is energy then is it being used up and why doesn't it decay passing through an object. If its not energy the laws of 'conservation of energy and matter' and the 'transfomation of matter to energy' is broken by an object being accelerated towards the earth, having an impact and releasing the momentum as energy. The force of gravity acts in both directions so the moving of one object also moves the other in the opposite direct by the same amount of energy. Is that the conservation ?

BTW: Einstien described gravity as warping the time dimention and so was neither a particle or energy. It is this warping of the time-space continum that lead to the idea of special relativity and the apparent changes in the perception of time while travelling fast.

Top
QuantaConcious
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 02:56 AM


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 40
Joined: 14-December 04

Positive Feedback: 0%
Feedback Score: 0


The dude was right about tachyons. You guys forgot about dark matter/energy. Quantum scale answers Cosmo scale and versa. To me it's all about containment by symmetry equal opposing forces distributed between two worlds creating a continuum. 1/3
Top
Good Elf
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 11:41 AM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 4161
Joined: 4-December 04

Positive Feedback: 73.08%
Feedback Score: 26


Hi All,

I can't work out where all you guys are hailing from. The velocity of light was measured again recently. Surprise, surprise... It is equal to the speed of light within the errors of the experiment. Guy named Sergei Kopeikin. You need to stop getting your science knowledge from the back of Corn Flakes packets. Tom Van Flandern bet Kopeiken was wrong and he got beaten. Everything is in the experiment, not in flights of fancy.

Sure it would be nice if the experiment showed something new but that the luck of the draw.

That's what makes science good - the ability to show that the argument "holds water" in the real Universe not in Comic Books. Stick with that and you will go far - otherwise you will always be asking questions and telling us all where we are going. You got to take on board what really is, not what you like. Science is not a popularity contest.

I really don't know why all you guys are so daft when it comes to trying to come to grips with standard science. What is it you want from it. If you want God - go to a church - don't try to find him here - that requires real scientists. If you want to hit us with anti-jewish politics, buzz off and keep your prejudices to yourself.

Do something useful, click on the Hunger Site. Costs you rich b”””””ds nothing.
Hunger Site
If you can’t provide food for thought give some poor starving person a bowl of meal.

Cheers dry.gif I think!


--------------------
"Aa' menle nauva calen ar' ta hwesta e' ale'quenle"
Top
Good Elf
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 12:16 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 4161
Joined: 4-December 04

Positive Feedback: 73.08%
Feedback Score: 26


PS:
QUOTE
you can say that time moves slower or faster in an area by how much something has decayed/grown in that area over a certain period, but that is really just the area affecting the molecular activity (for instance, humans don't age as much in space... it's not because time is slowed down, it's because the cells don't have to reproduce and split as much)........However, we see the light from things at certain distances a few minutes to a few thousand years later than they actually happened (our sun for example... the light from the sun takes 8 minutes to reach us). This is hardly the work of something that travels in stopped time.

No the passage of time can be measured. It is fundamental to Science. It is a "measurable" of a system. It is not simply a psychological affect. The concept of time stopped for light you also got to realize that length contraction is also occurring at the same time to an infinite extent. You can't have one without the other. The gap the photons are "jumping" is always infinitely short in the frame of reference of the photon. What we see is quite a different thing, we live in a “different world”.

Remember all forces in the Universe that propagate with any range (other than Gravity) are caused by those photons. All those feelings you have about solidity are due to electromagnetic force and is not due to anything "solid" at all. Press your fingers together that is electromagnetic force - nothing else. Get used to it. It is taking a hundred years for some of you out there to get it.

Cheers


--------------------
"Aa' menle nauva calen ar' ta hwesta e' ale'quenle"
Top
Michael A. Will
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 01:46 PM


Unregistered









Who let the elitist in?

Just who are your insults targeted at?
Top
ARtone
Posted: Dec 15 2004, 04:51 PM


Advanced Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 775
Joined: 14-July 04

Positive Feedback: 54.55%
Feedback Score: 2


Hi Jynx

I'm working on it

AR
Top

Topic Options Pages: (134) 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... Last »

Add reply · Start new topic · Start new poll


 

Terms of use