are you in dream ? i think you have not take enough rest!!!!!!!1

Reply

Light, as we know it is by definition a wave. However, my feeble attempts at understanding physics have made me come to believe that a wave is kind of like another state of matter. There is a theory in physics called wave-particle duality, which states that all particles can become waves based upon the circumstances in which they are observed. Thus light could be reduced to particles given the right circumstances. The particles they have reduced light to are called photons, but photons aren't only light. They make up the entire electromagnetic spectrum. E=MC^2 basically says that Matter is Energy. So that also goes the other way around and all Energy is Matter, which means that light does have mass, although in it's wave state, the mass is immeasurable.





As stated above, light is actually a section of the electromagnetic spectrum which is all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. However, visible light only accounts for a very small section of this spectrum. in order for light to remain light, it would have to stay within that small range. If you speed it up or slow it down too much, you will turn it into a different form of electromagnetic radiation. Thus, about the only thing you can do with your discovery is change colors.



If you remove time and/or velocity from the equation, what would you use to measure your speed.

 

 

 

Reply

actually it should be possible to accelerate particles to a speed greater than the speed of ligt already: take an average particle accelerator as they are in use today, accelerate your particle(s) to a speed near the speed of ligt in vacuum [yes, that does take a huge amount of energy ... those accelerators are usually run at night when the cities nearby don't consume as much energy as during the day] and make it crash into something where light travels slower than in vacuum (there are ways of slowing light down to something like 50 m/sec) - and during a short time, your particle should be travelling faster than light...



It's when matter travels in waves ... like waves in the sea or a rope when you tie one end to a tree and shake on the other end (or, somewhat more complicated to explain, sound -- there is no sound in a vacuum since sound waves are basically atoms or molecules interacting with each other and finally with your ear or a microphone's membrane or whatever happens to be in the way)



Actually the difference between "light" and "electromagnetic radiation" (which is, as you stated correctly, the same thing with different names) is not the speed but the wave length. The part of the electromagnetic spectrum which is called visible light is between wave lengths of 750nm (red) and 400nm (blue) (give or take a bit, depends on the tables you're referring to) red light travels just as fast as blue light, even though red and blue light behave differently when they change the medium they travel in due to those differences (from air to water or from air to glass ... that's the way prisms work)...

Reply

Thanks Brainless for the correction, however, I don't quite think that this evidence will ever amount to FTL speeds as we are trying to achieve c speeds, not slow light down which moves at c in a vacuum. c is constant. I think that we need to find new mechanics rather than try to debunk E=mc^2. Research has been done in areas like quantum tunneling and wormholes that I think will produce more results than anything else. Quantum Tunneling has achieved "speeds" like 4.2c or something. This is not an actual speed, and therefore not outside of the theory of relativity, but rather, kind of finding a shortcut.

Reply

From what I've learned, light is the fast traveling thing. It goes 170,000+ mph per second. I honestly don't ever think that we can invent something (ever) that will be as close or fast than the speed of light.

Reply

The way I see it is if the universe is flat, you will only travel up to the speed of light, but our universe it assumed to be very close to flat but not quite there, I speculate caused by random quantom flauctuations. Lately with all the talk about string theory and extra dimensions you can make a parallel to our world that allows of faster travel. Say we have a plane that goes speed of light, and it goes from Mexico to Poland, now traveling in a striaght path it will take longer then flying North and then back South to Poland. Imagine that this fourth dimension does exactly the same thing, but that would require our universe to be curved. These quantom flauctuations could be simulated one day and possibly result in squashing a fourth dimension to allow us to explore the stars. Isn't that what star trek does or do they just fold space?

Reply

I guess everybody's a Star Trek fan (including me). I recently got this book called "The Physics of Star Trek" with a foreword by Stephen Hawkings. It's by Lawrence M. Krauss, and it totally explains (according to physics as we know them today) how the technology in Star Trek works. It not only talks about the [bold]warp drive used in Star Trek[/bold], but also transporters, tractor beams, phasers, photon torpedoes, and subspace communication.

After reading some of the more complex sections, I finally understood exactly how the warp drive worked. In almost all of the Star Trek novels, they explained it as "shifting from normal space where faster-than-light travel cannot exist, to a fourth dimension where warp drive is possible". However, the ship itself does not totally disappear from our universe, or they wouldn't be seeing the stars flying by.

Not only that, but I also recently read a Star Trek novel talking about the development of the fictional warp technology by "Zefram Cochrane". This novel, "Star Trek: Federation" by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens, greatly illustrates the fictional development throughout the ages.

Ahem, going back to the present age, faster-than-light travel according to our existing physics would have to constitute a form of bending space and time, but the dilemma of time dilution presents itself. If the warp drive was possible, but existed only according to our terms of physics, then thousands of faster-than-light ships would have time move at thousands of different speeds, completely screwing up the management of time throughout the Federation (and beyond).

If I would only stop focusing so much on Star Trek.

Now, the authors weren't fools, so they based the warp drive technology on a concept that people can understand today; they made it so that the ship is [bold]never powering itself beyond the speed of light. In fact, although the ship physically moves to places faster than light could, the ship itself is not travelling faster than light; rather, space is bent so that the ship can go so fast.[/bold]

But this conflicts with many of the other preexisting theories because the Star Trek fictions always talk about how "structural integrity fields" keep the ship in one piece and how "forward navigational shields" move debris aside so that the ship can travel so fast. The story developers have actually done this step wrong because the speed they're referring to should not be warp speeds, but actually sub-light speeds because that's what the ship is physically moving at in normal space-time.

Anyways, find the Federation and Physics of Star Trek books and read them for yourself. It would take me an article the length of a novel to fully explain the topic. The ISBN of the Federation book is 0671894226 and the ISBN of the Physics book is 0465005594. You might be able to find them at your local library.

Reply

I think that some things in Star Trek are just not possible, if you look to physics.
It is not possible to contact earth, but traveling in lightspeed (or more).

When you get close to the speed of light, time is going much slower for you, than the time for the people on earth. So when they talk to someone on earth on the ship, while already travelled a few lightyears, the people you now on earth don't exist anymore. It's a very complex theory to explain this, but it is explainable.

There is a formula that the speed is equal to distance divided by the time.
When the distance is the same for both the observer and the person that is moving, but the speed is for the moving person much greater, the time must be a lot slower. This is only for the person that is moving so fast. But he himself will never notice. Till he contact earth and sees everyone that you first knew, are dead.

This is a very complex theory, and it possible that not everyone understands.
But if you have ever reed a book of Einsteins theory's; you will .

Reply

Another possibility would be to transmit large enough pieces of information at light speed that we could reconstruct that information into mass with existing energy at the other end of the information line. Kind of like a transporter on star trek I would assume.
You would need a 4 dimensional type of 4 dimensional printer/scanner more or less. It would scan the 4 dimensions of spacetime in the local area, digitize it, and send it over a laser or some other light based techonology, and at the other end, you would have to have a second one that could "print" your existence to that space/time with matter/energy that already exists in the local area.
Right now we are able, with pigments, to only recreate refractions of light. We need to focus on smell, taste, texture, etc, and create a device that can recreate all of these things.

This is kindof a joke, but wouldn't it suck if you scanned yourself and there was a "paperjam" as you were printing out at the other end.

Reply

Unless I'm mistaken, black holes have never been proven to actually exist; they are thus far merely a theoretical and science fiction concept.


Why is it that so many people believe Einstein's theories so whole-heartedly, when there is really no solid evidence to prove that they are anything more than a concept?


Google is your friend.

Concerning the concepts of high-speed travel in general, I think that there's more merit in the concepts of quantum physics (and the concepts of spacial folding) than in gravitational physics. Especially since so many quantum physics properties have been proven (such as the ability to transfer the properties of one atom to that of another atom using an energy stream).

Reply