Amazement As Speed Of Light Is Broken... Was Einstein Wrong?

[The One]

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab think they may have proved Albert Einstein's theory of relativity wrong - by breaking the speed of light.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2011/Sep/Week4/16075442.jpg

Experts at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN)http://public.web.cern.ch/public/ in Switzerland believe they have clocked neutrinos travelling fast enough to shatter the central pillar of physics.

But they cannot quite believe it themselves, they say, because according to Einstein's famous 1905 equation, E=mc2, it is simply impossible.

"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for CERN.

Mr Gillies said the readings have so astounded researchers that they are asking others to independently verify the measurements before claiming an actual discovery.

It's a shock. It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true.

Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke

They are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they have done and really scrutinise it in great detail," he said.

Ideally they want someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements, he said.

Scientists at the competing Fermilab in Chicago have promised to start such work immediately.

"It is a shock," said Fermilab head theoretician Stephen Parke, who was not part of the research in Geneva.

"It is going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it is true."

The Chicago team had similar faster-than-light results in 2007, but those came with a giant margin of error that undercut its scientific significance.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Sep/Week2/15096901.jpg

Others were sceptical about CERN's claim that the neutrinos - one of the strangest known particles in physics - were observed smashing past the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792km per second).

University of Maryland physics department chairman Drew Baden called it "a flying carpet", something that was too fantastic to be believable.

CERN says a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730km) away in Italy travelled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light.

Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant.

But given the enormous implications of the find, they still spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there were no flaws in the experiment.

"We have not found any instrumental effect that could explain the result of the measurement," said Antonio Ereditato, a physicist at the University of Bern, Switzerland, who was involved in the experiment, known as Opera.

The CERN researchers are now looking to the United States and Japan to confirm the results.

http://news.sky.com/home/technology/article/16075434

[Adi]

I don't think people realize the magnitude of this finding or announcement, I believe that this is the start of many startling, so called "discoveries", that are going to be announced in the public arena.

Like seriously people, this is incredible, it may just verify what we have read and watched over the last number of years on conspiracy forums and videos.

Adi

[Omni connexae!]

Like seriously people, this is incredible, it may just verify what we have read and watched over the last number of years on conspiracy forums and videos.

Verify what exactly?

[dreamer]

that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters


(geeze I can't spell)

[DoubleHelix]

I've always thought that the speed of thought was faster than that of light -- even though some consider thoughts to be electric impulses that take time to process, I'm thinking if you had two individuals thousands of light years apart on separate planets, one could contact the other by means of thought and touch base instantaneously!

Also, the hypothetical particle known as Tachyons supposedly break the speed-light barrier, though not proven, still an interesting theory to bandy about.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/64/Tachyon04s.gif/250px-Tachyon04s.gif

[greybeard]

David Sereda and other scientists have been saying that for years.
The simple truth is that we live in consciousness universe and the speed of one mind to another accross great distances is instant.
Remote viewing a similar case in point.
David Wilcock in a recent video claims that the energy of the remote viewer registers in the place that the viewing occurs and distance is totally irrelevant.
Science makes the mistake of wanting proof of everything even that which is obvious.
Nassim Haramein also has said the collider is looking for that which can not be found---- infinity. (the smallest particle)

Chris

[Omni connexae!]

that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters

The possible finding of an neutrino going 0.00000006 seconds faster then a photon over a given distance, that we should be treating with serious skepticism at this point, adds credibiliy to the claim that 'TPTB' have superluminal technology?

What do you mean by 'adds credibility'? (provides evidence for? supports? makes it sound a bit less crazy?)

What do you mean by 'superluminal technology'?

[aranuk]

that faster than light speed is theoretically and now, proven possible. Which adds credibility to the claim that the PTB have had superluminal technoligy for a while now...... For starters


(geeze I can't spell)

Hi Dreamer you only had one spell mistake. Remember what Mark Twain said about it. He said "I don't give a damn for those who can only spell something ONE WAY"!

Stan

[Adi]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

[Omni connexae!]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

[The One]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

please do not make this thread a troll.Why dont you pm the member you seem to be having a tick for tack moment.Lets get back on topic:focus:

[dreamer]

just simply that if verified, it would prove the theory of "faster than light" is possible... Contrary to einstein's theory, that's all.

[Omni connexae!]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

please do not make this thread a troll.Why dont you pm the member you seem to be having a tick for tack moment.Lets get back on topic:focus:

I ain't trollin. I'm not having a 'tick for tack moment'. My post was completely on topic.

Sorry if logical thinking ruins all of your wonderful 'science was wrong, we were right' moment.

I wont bother anymore.

[Hervé]

So much noise about nuttin'...
C in E=MC^2 is supposed to be a constant... which it isn't except arbitrarily.

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:


10026


That's called "refration" of light through a prism. Therefore, per the computed laws of refraction:



Refraction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/F%C3%A9nyt%C3%B6r%C3%A9s.jpg/220px-F%C3%A9nyt%C3%B6r%C3%A9s.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A9nyt%C3%B6r%C3%A9s.jpg)http://bits.wikimedia.org/skins-1.17/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A9nyt%C3%B6r%C3%A9s.jpg)
Light on air–plexi surface in this experiment mainly undergoes refraction (lower ray) and to a lesser extent reflection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_(physics)) (top ray).

Refraction is the change in direction of a wave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave) due to a change in its speed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed). This is most commonly observed when a wave passes from one medium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_medium) to another at any angle other than 90° or 0°. Refraction of light (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light) is the most commonly observed phenomenon, but any type of wave can refract when it interacts with a medium, for example when sound waves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_wave) pass from one medium into another or when water waves move into water of a different depth. Refraction is described by Snell's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snell%27s_law), which states that the angle of incidence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_incidence) θ1 is related to the angle of refraction θ2 by
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/0/a/20aa1e3d192ecb3164ac4f2095c86cd3.pngwhere v1 and v2 are the wave velocities in the respective media, and n1 and n2 the refractive indices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index). [...]

From the prism experiment, one can therefore deduce that violet and red are travelling at different speed... violet an UV being the "fastest" in that spectrum.

Therefore anything having a higher frequency/speed than UV is FTL... by definition!

So, I guess that a neutrino would go straight through the base of the above prism.


:dance:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Light_dispersion_conceptual_waves.gif

[Omni connexae!]

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

Nothing could go faster than the speed of light unless it already was. It was the barrier that was the problem.

[Hervé]

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:

Nothing could go faster than the speed of light unless it already was. It was the barrier that was the problem.

Arbitrary barrier to an increase in frequency.

[TWINCANS]

Maybe Einstein's theory was correct - but only for the 3D dimensional reality. Perhaps there are different laws of physics for different dimensions...

[Agape]

See that essentially ..energy in the universe 'predates' light . What we refer to as light is just one of the forms of energy .

Before the Universe in its current form came to being ( which is ver relative statement of its own ) there was tremendous number of energy bound to various centers of gravity that eventually created what is known as 'mass' .
The same ocean of primordial energy waves was marked by polarities , positive and negative waves and through their mutual interaction particles and energy clusters were born as well as repulsive forces .
Now , in this primordial soup ..the variation of energy centers was rather huge and each of them later gave birth to millions of stars.

Each of those energy clusters created unique physical properties in their center , different frequencies of light, different particles and total of their energy determined the speed of their 'light emition' later as well because energy was bound by gravity in every particular system its own way .

So what you call 'light speed' in this solar system is no way valid for 'all the Universe' .

In fact , even a light /energy travelling from distant galactic center and entering here has good chance of being 'trapped' to local energy grid .


And..there's still lots of 'free energy' travellling in space , for example neutrinos ..they are likely remains of the primordial soup of free energy not bound to gravity centres .



;)

[Ilie Pandia]

So much noise about nuttin'...
C in E=MC^2 is supposed to be a constant... which it isn't except arbitrarily.

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:


Wow Amzer.

That's pretty interesting stuff. I do not trust Wikipedia that much when it comes to the laws of physics. It seems they have some contradictions on the site.

They claim nothing can go faster than the speed of light (not even information!) And the there is the page about refraction... that you have quoted:



At the boundary between the media, the wave's phase velocity is altered, usually causing a change in direction. Its wavelength increases or decreases but its frequency remains constant.


Well, if that is true, with a sufficient number of incremental increases in wave length, while keeping the frequency constant... you can easily go beyond the unbreakable barrier of speed of light.

So this begs the question... when you say "speed of light" what "light" do you mean? What kind of radiation and at what frequency?! Is UV light? IR light?

In school we learn about this "Constant" speed of light. And then we see the Sun rise not being white! They explain: "because different frequencies of light travel at different speeds, therefore the violet light gets here first!" Wow... so is it constant or not!? What speed has the light beyond UV light then?

I am pretty sure I've made an error somewhere in my understanding of this "speed of light" but I can't seem to pin point it. But if the Wikipedia can be trusted.. then those 60ns (+/10ns) is no big deal!

[johnf]

So it's six nanoseconds faster, and it takes a huge complicated facility to produce it.
This sounds like an artificially small drip of info.
In this thread are numerous statements that theoretically expose the limit of the speed of light as a farce. If they already have technology that harness the real potential of FTL and free energy. To let it out at full flow would be a catastrophe to social control, as my friend Brianen states, the PTB owe me a ufo, and a replicator.

[norman]

In a book called "Einstein's Universe" I once read that according to him light will hit a moving object through space at the same speed from all directions.

Think about it, he's already contradicting himself.

Einstein has been replaced a long time ago but it's been a convenient screen to hide a lot of things behind. The main reason the majority of people don't believe ETs could be real is based on the their certainty that ETs couldn't get here. That certainty is built on their certainty that Einstein was right and infallible.

[Ilie Pandia]

The main reason the majority of people don't believe ETs could be real is based on the their certainty that ETs couldn't get here. That certainty is built on their certainty that Einstein was right and infallible.

Hm... this "major break through" could be used as Adi said (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?31035-Amazement-As-Speed-Of-Light-Is-Broken-Was-Einstein-Wrong&p=315729&viewfull=1#post315729) to pave the way to making public new technology, that "was just made possible" by breaking the speed of light barrier.

In this case, they don't really care if the theory or the experiment is correct or not. It will get repeated a few more times, quoted as fact a few more times and then, it will be come well established fact in science and "common sense truth" :biggrin:

They will add more nanoseconds as the demand for it will present it self... they don't want to admit right off, that light barrier has long been broken.

[Hervé]

So much noise about nuttin'...
C in E=MC^2 is supposed to be a constant... which it isn't except arbitrarily.

Now, as far as FTL (Faster Than Light) goes, well it should have been known ever since this thing was discovered:


Wow Amzer.

That's pretty interesting stuff. I do not trust Wikipedia that much when it comes to the laws of physics. It seems they have some contradictions on the site.

They claim nothing can go faster than the speed of light (not even information!) And the there is the page about refraction... that you have quoted:



At the boundary between the media, the wave's phase velocity is altered, usually causing a change in direction. Its wavelength increases or decreases but its frequency remains constant.


Well, if that is true, with a sufficient number of incremental increases in wave length, while keeping the frequency constant... you can easily go beyond the unbreakable barrier of speed of light.

So this begs the question... when you say "speed of light" what "light" do you mean? What kind of radiation and at what frequency?! Is UV light? IR light?

In school we learn about this "Constant" speed of light. And then we see the Sun rise not being white! They explain: "because different frequencies of light travel at different speeds, therefore the violet light gets here first!" Wow... so is it constant or not!? What speed has the light beyond UV light then?

I am pretty sure I've made an error somewhere in my understanding of this "speed of light" but I can't seem to pin point it. But if the Wikipedia can be trusted.. then those 60ns (+/10ns) is no big deal!

Well, Ilie, you got it right: what's the light which speed is taken as the constant is the first arbitrary. It's never specified.

As for the increase/decrease, when a beam enters a medium with a higher refraction indice it decreases to increase again when coming out... so, incremental increases could be worked out.

But, I too have troubles with the changing wavelength as it would change the colour of the beam when refracted. But the color doesn't change... apparently. So, it's the propagation speed that changes. However, if the wavelength decreases entering the medium, then the frequency has to increase... mystery to solve somewhere!

Which Wikipedia expresses as:



In linear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear) media, any wave pattern can be described in terms of the independent propagation of sinusoidal components.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Refraction_-_Huygens-Fresnel_principle.svg/220px-Refraction_-_Huygens-Fresnel_principle.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Refraction_-_Huygens-Fresnel_principle.svg)http://bits.wikimedia.org/skins-1.17/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Refraction_-_Huygens-Fresnel_principle.svg)
Refraction: when a plane wave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_wave) encounters a medium in which it has a slower speed, the wavelength decreases, and the direction adjusts accordingly.


The wavelength λ of a sinusoidal waveform traveling at constant speed v is given by:[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wavelength#cite_note-Cassidy-7)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/1/0/a100432cfbaa6417ffccfab51609f53b.png

where v is called the phase speed (magnitude of the phase velocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_velocity)) of the wave and f is the wave's frequency.






http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f1/EM_spectrum.svg/787px-EM_spectrum.svg.png

I guess that's the trouble with compartmentalized research... no connection with the next branch... so that when people like Nassim Haramein get in the middle saying: "Wait a minute... where's the equation for this guy?" each faction starts throwing books at him.

Sorry that I can't really answer your questions as I am being lead along the same circular path as you are....

[The One]

Albert Einstein ( 14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955) was a German-born theoretical physicist who developed the theory of general relativity, effecting a revolution in physics For this achievement, Einstein is often regarded as the father of modern physics and one of the most prolific intellects in human history.[He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics "for his services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect" The latter was pivotal in establishing quantum theory within physics.

Near the beginning of his career, Einstein thought that Newtonian mechanics was no longer enough to reconcile the laws of classical mechanics with the laws of the electromagnetic field.This led to the development of his special theory of relativity. He realized, however, that the principle of relativity could also be extended to gravitational fields, and with his subsequent theory of gravitation in 1916, he published a paper on the general theory of relativity. He continued to deal with problems of statistical mechanics and quantum theory, which led to his explanations of particle theory and the motion of molecules. He also investigated the thermal properties of light which laid the foundation of the photon theory of light. In 1917, Einstein applied the general theory of relativity to model the structure of the universe as a whole.

He was visiting the United States when Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, and did not go back to Germany, where he had been a professor at the Berlin Academy of Sciences. He settled in the U.S., becoming a citizen in 1940. On the eve of World War II, he helped alert President Franklin D. Roosevelt that Germany might be developing an atomic weapon, and recommended that the U.S. begin similar research; this eventually led to what would become the Manhattan Project. Einstein was in support of defending the Allied forces, but largely denounced using the new discovery of nuclear fission as a weapon. Later, together with Bertrand Russell, Einstein signed the Russell–Einstein Manifesto, which highlighted the danger of nuclear weapons. Einstein was affiliated with the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, until his death in 1955


nFOFYHY7sD8

[daledo]

Hmmm... this article was over 7 years old.

Konstantin Meyl Speaks on Neutrino Power and the Existence of Scalar Waves

Addressed the ExtraOrdinary Technology conference in Salt Lake City on Friday, July 30, 2004, 1:00 pm. Cites earth expansion as evidence of neutrino absorption; credits Tesla with first describing neutrinos

Professor Konstantin Meyl has written numerous books and given lectures at universities in Germany. At the conference, Professor Meyl spoke about scalar waves. He also spoke about neutrinos and how they can be used.

Dr. Meyl described how field vortices form scalar waves. He described how electromagnetic waves (transverse waves) and scalar waves (longitudinal waves) both should be represented in wave equations. For comparison, transverse EM waves are best used for broadcast transmissions like television, while longitudinal scalar waves are better for one-to-one communication systems like cell phones.

He also presented the theory that neutrinos are scalar waves moving faster than the speed of light. When moving at the speed of light, they are photons. When a neutrino is slowed to below the speed of light, it becomes an electron. Neutrinos can oscillate between e- and e+. Fusion involves e-, and a lightning flash involves e+. Energy in a vortex acts as a frequency converter. The measurable mixture of frequencies is called noise.

Meyl also mentioned that the earth is expanding at a measured rate of 10 cm a year; therefore it slows the earth’s rotation. He also noted that the earth is now expanding at a quicker rate than it was 2,300 years ago and effects the length of our year.

Meyl talked about Tesla’s scalar wave transmitter in Colorado Springs, Colorado in 1899. He transmitted energy 26 miles at velocities greater than light. Tesla measured the resonance of the Earth at 12 Hz. The Schumann resonance of the Earth is 7.8 Hz. Meyl shows how one can calculate the scalar wave of the Earth to be 1.54 times the speed of light. Meyl presented a model that ties the expansion of the earth to be the result of the earth’s absorption of neutrino energy. The ramifications of this model are that neutrino energy can be tapped. He took this the next step and postulated that Zero Point Energy is neutrino power – energy from the field; available at anytime, and everywhere present.

To show the place of neutrinos in conventional science, Meyl noted that the 2002 Nobel Physics prize was in regards to work on neutrinos.

Meyl quoted a 1898 New York Times statement by Tesla that establishes Tesla, the “father of free energy” as also the discoverer of the neutrino.

Source (http://www.pureenergysystems.com/events/conferences/2004/teslatech_SLC/KonstantinMeyl/NeutrinoPower_ScalarWaves.htm)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7NqXckz0sU

Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4WetyROVvk

Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWEUW9kJLYo

Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XRhY9dv-10

[Laura Elina]

Well, I'm waiting to see what they say next, whether they find mistakes, a margin of error that's substantial, anything that might have them say: false alarm. Sorry guys.

And if they don't? And the experiment is confirmed around the world?

Fringe science would not be that much of a daydream anymore in the eyes of the so called proven and approved science, mainstream science. On Monday your kids would go to school and in the physics class they'd entertain the possibilities of time travel and extra dimensions, take a look at the relativity theory by Einstein and wonder if the crazies talking about these things out of science fiction books are not that crazy after all.

I hope and I wish the experiment is confirmed, if it is, it would be extremely exciting times for many physicists out there and physics enthusiasts to say the least. And more importantly, possibly a jump start for the world to start dreaming a little bigger and higher when it comes to the future of our planet. Hello Captain Kirk and Spock.

[the trojan]

on british radio they are emphasising that the neutrinos were fired at ....ITALY! ?

[Agape]

So it's six nanoseconds faster, and it takes a huge complicated facility to produce it.
This sounds like an artificially small drip of info.
In this thread are numerous statements that theoretically expose the limit of the speed of light as a farce. If they already have technology that harness the real potential of FTL and free energy. To let it out at full flow would be a catastrophe to social control, as my friend Brianen states, the PTB owe me a ufo, and a replicator.


Yes that's rather correct . They pour so much money and energy to these particle accelerators that it's shame to speak about and besides that , should there be an accident they blow the planet to air.

Now whom it serves . Few really strong headed and proud-of -themselves physicists who think that physical proof is the answer to all their questions.

The distance you can reach with your mind is further, faster and number times cheaper . There is no way to 'prove everything' about universe on one little planet in the corner of space .

I'm not saying their work is right useless ..but ..there is more actual proofs and axioms in our minds .


They're great example of someone who locked their life work to one theoretical system .


Found 3 neutrinos . Great ;)

[Ecnal61]

Look at it this way for a second, do you think at educational centre`s on other inhabited planets they had E=mc2 ? the answer must be NO because THEY have been coming here for a long time and THE THEORY hasnt held them back has it. the bottom line is we are discussing earth science and that obviously is not something that has hampered other races like it has us...my two pence/cents.

[rosie]

At least this news is getting out to the public eye, just not in the physics world, and this does give me hope for others to start waking up to the fact that their world is not a set of parameters that cannot be changed. Life is stranger then fiction, and even if this is a little "leak" to let out some long held secrets, at least the leak is just not in the "conspiracy" field, but right out there for all to see, no hunting required.
Look out other dimensions, here we are! :cool:

[ThePythonicCow]

this does give me hope for others to start waking up to the fact that their world is not a set of parameters that cannot be changed.
I would take a different view :). I would suggest that the physics of the world is orderly, but that our theories of what that order is change over time, as our understanding increases, decreases, and shifts. The current standard physics models (relativity, quantum theory, big bang cosmology, ...) of the last century are due for a major shift - soon I think. But there will be new physics theory, which will in some ways at least do a better job of modeling the actual, unchangeable, order and parameters of the universe.

[Aviator]

Newton’s laws have been "truth" for several hundred of years until somebody found out, that these laws are true only within certain limits.
Like all so called "natural laws" Einstein’s special theory of relativity is also true only within a certain frame of thinking.
All these scientific laws describe specific parts of our “physical universe” reality. None of them are absolutely true. Improvement of understanding is and will be always possible. It is part of this 3 dimensional reality game.

[Red Skywalker]

There is so much knowledge on this forum, why not write together a Cosmic Book?
If that's an idea, I will start a new thread. I have some ideas to start with and so far I didn't have the time to write them down. Other ideas of me have still to be worked and discussed about. Let's bundle our knowledge! Educate ourselves, common people and even TPB with the ancient sciences.

http://home.kpn.nl/chip/forumpics/COVER_Forum.jpg

Or something like this :p
The more thanks and or replies, the more likely I'll start the new thread?

Of course the speed of light can be broken, the barrier is only for matter! Even Einstein knew this. If you have a massless force, like gravity, the speed of light is not limited! Check 'van Flandern', http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp
He made all the computations on the speed of gravity. Unfortunately the good man has passed and experiments could not confirm his ideas. But remember how 'holy' mr. Einstein is and data is forced to fit.

RED SKYWALKER

*** STARTED NEW THREAD HERE (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?31614-Asking-assistance-for-metaphysical-sacred-geometry-ideas&p=322141#post322141) ***

[Davidallany]

I await Stephen Hawking statement, if he's going to issue one.

[KiwiElf]

Einstein himself acknowledged that he "may have been wrong" before he died: That e=mc3 not e=mc2. This allows for multiple dimensions which have now been fairly well proven.

Likewise, Newtonian Physics ONLY applies to 3-dimensional physical reality. They do not and cannot apply to 4th/5th dimensional physics. Synchronicity cannot exist within these 3-dimensional "limitations" but we know synchronicity exists. So maybe it's about time we changed the formula(s).

"110 years ago we "knew" we couldn't fly. Only hundreds of years before that and we "knew" the world was flat and the Universe revolved around the Earth. What do we really "know?"

[ThePythonicCow]

Einstein himself acknowledged that he "may have been wrong" before he died:
I'm sure he did.


That e=mc3 not e=mc2.
I doubt that Einstein ever said that E = mc3 -- that would seriously confuse the calculations of how much energy nuclear reactions (whether bombs or reactors) produce. Do you have a reference for that?


This allows for multiple dimensions which have now been fairly well proven.
Could someone explain to me, from foundational math and physics on up, what "multiple dimensions" means? I take it that it means more than the 3D plus time we normally recognize. I read of (don't really understand) some esoteric string theory models of dimensions folded in on themselves in a space unmeasurably small with a dozen or two dimensions, but I do not get the sense that most references to 5D or 10D are referring to that.


Likewise, Newtonian Physics ONLY applies to 3-dimensional physical reality. They do not and cannot apply to 4th/5th dimensional physics.

Well, while Newtonian physics (though still quite fine for building bridges) was already replaced a century ago for matters closer to the extremes, and
while that replacement, using relativity and quantum mechanics, may well be due soon for yet another replacement, for matters closer to the extremes (cf. my many mentions of LaViolette)
still the phrase "4th/5th dimensional physics" is something I hear mentioned, but am puzzled as to the actual meaning of, in a well grounded scientific basis.

[Revere]

I could easily get out of my depth on this topic but, I always thought that "entanglement" was an interesting example of a Super Luminal action. This is very interesting in the context of the Zero point Field. Everything is entangled; we are, thoughts are, Consciousness, time, everything is and has happened.

This "proof" could be the hole in the Dike that main stream science has built?


Peace,
-R-

[Davidallany]

So it's six nanoseconds faster, and it takes a huge complicated facility to produce it.
Sure thing six nanoseconds is a long time, still the Millennium Falcon was faster than most ships by more than 6 parsecs.

[mosquito]

My understanding of this dilemma, and I may be wrong, is that it's only things with mass which are supposedly unable to travel faster than light. Quantum collapse is known to be instantaneous - If 2 related quanta are take and sent to opposite ends of the universe, induce collapse in one of them and the otrher collapses at precisely the same instant (if my terminology is wrong there, please correct me). I've always felt uncomfortable about the speed of light, somehow it doesn't sit well with me (maybe I'm just not clever enough !), but did Einstein not predict that anything which travels at the speed of light also travels at the speed of time ?
Well ponder this, speed = distance divided by time, if a car travels 120 km in 1 hour, divide 120 by 1 and you get a speed of 120 km/h etc.
So, if Einstein is correct, and anything travelling at the speed of light also travels at the speed of time, then we hit the following problem: object x "travels" 190,000 km and arrives at the instant it departed, therefore, 190,000 has to be divided by zero to obtain the speed. Divide anything by zero, and the answer is ...... zero. Therfore thye speed of light doesn't actually exist.
And what about light itsself ? Does it also travel at the speed of time ?
My (possibly false) conclusion is that natural, cosmic "light" is somehow the fabric of space/time, and does not actually travel anywhere, it's simply an illusion, along with time. In contrast with artificial light whose speed we can measure.
The big bang wasn't an event which happened sometime in the past, it's an ongoing process which we're still experiencing.
Please feel free to deconstruct my logic)

[Buck]

This allows for multiple dimensions which have now been fairly well proven.
If someone could explain to me, from foundational math and physics on up, what "multiple dimensions" (meaning I presume more than I think we have) mean, then who knows ... perhaps. Meanwhile, looks like more nonsense to me.

still the phrase "4th/5th dimensional physics" sounds like more nonsense to me.
[/LIST]


Paul, not intending to single you out, per se, but the derisive tone of your comments from KiwiElf caught my attention. But your statements are at odds with what modern day (as in for the last 80 years) physics, and the more current fractal geometry and string theory perspectives on reality seem to point to.

You said something so great on another thread earlier- it was in reply to eyes wide open re his rejection of Dr. Judy Woods theories- something like just because someone doesn't have all the evidence worked out, doesn't mean that their theory is at fault. That would apply here too- yes?

because, as it turns out-

Back in the 1930s,
"spooky action at a distance" was Einstein's phrase for describing the perplexing and unexplainable phenomenon of how a particles could be instantaneously affected by an one another even when physically separated.

what does that mean?

just SOME of the implications; telepathy, time travel and, oh yes-

multiple dimensions/ multiple realities

multiple time lines

sounds preposterous! Oh.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-god-particle-quantum-entanglement-and-the-holographic-universe-2011-4

the Chinese are way ahead on this;

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/5896471-quantum-teleportation-breakthrough-over-16km-achieved-in-china

and it affects larger systems, biological systems. Like us;

http://www.kurzweilai.net/quantum-entanglement-in-a-real-biological-system-found

[Buck]

This was written a while ago, but it is a great overview touching on the general issues;

http://www.greenspirit.org.uk/resources/QuantumEntanglement.shtml

[Mad Hatter]

I'm obviously wrong (as is so often the case ;)) but...

I was under the impression Einstein was talking the speed of light in a vacuum...thus to my mind this begs the qusetion how did they create a vacuum between CERN and Italy in order to conduct the experiment accurately??? :p

just sayin....

[ThePythonicCow]

That would apply here too- yes?
It sure could apply :).

You're right that I was too derisive in my tone. Thanks for noticing!

I will go back now and see if I can improve the matter.

[Buck]

wow you are a fast learner! See? you can go back in time :)

[Fructedor]

Google & YouTube - Edward Witten on String Theory and multi-dimensional reality

[Fred Steeves]

Later, together with Bertrand Russell, Einstein signed the Russell–Einstein Manifesto, which highlighted the danger of nuclear weapons.

Thanks The One, I never knew these two teamed up. Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but I have to ask if anyone knows why a Jewish physicist named Einstein was working with a well known eugenicist named Russell, who would later proudly proclaim something like this:


“I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing... War... has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full... The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's... There are three ways of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that of general misery except for a powerful minority...”
- Bertrand Russell, THE IMPACT OF SCIENCE ON SOCIETY 1953


Closer to subject, I hate to be a wet blanket here, but why are we so excited about what CERN is telling us? Why sould we even trust them for that matter? I've been assuming that this kind of technology has been around for quite some time now already in the black projects, and far superior to what they are supposedly so excited about...

Tesla had these kinds of things worked out a century ago. That's why he's never talked about, just guys like Marconi, Edison, and maybe even our old buddy Einstein. I won't dive down the rabbit hole of speculation here as to why CERN would be releasing something like this now, but it's worthy of consideration.

Just my take.:)

Cheers,
Fred

[MorningSong]

Here is an article explaing the Swiss CERN- Italian OPERA connection and this experiment...


Faster-than-light neutrino claim bolstered
21:15 23 September 2011 by Lisa Grossman

Representatives from the OPERA collaboration spoke in a seminar at CERN today, supporting their astonishing claim that neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light.

The result is conceptually simple: neutrinos travelling from a particle accelerator at CERN in Switzerland arrived 60 nanoseconds too early at a detector in the Gran Sasso cavern in Italy. And it relies on three conceptually simple measurements, explained Dario Autiero of the Institute of Nuclear Physics in Lyon: the distance between the labs, the time the neutrinos left Switzerland, and the time they arrived in Italy.

But actually measuring those times and distances to the accuracy needed to detect differences of billionths of a second (1 nanosecond = 1 billionth of a second) is no easy task.
Details, details

"These are experiments where the devil is in the details – the details of how each piece of equipment works, and how it all goes together," said Rob Plunkett of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois.

The detector in the Gran Sasso cavern is located 1400 metres underground. At that depth Earth's crust shields OPERA (which stands for Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus) from noise-inducing cosmic rays, but also obscures its exact latitude and longitude. To pinpoint its position precisely, the researchers stopped traffic in one lane of a 10-kilometre long highway tunnel for a week to place GPS receivers on either side.

The GPS measurements, which were so accurate they could detect the crawling drift of the planet's tectonic plates, gave precise benchmarks for each side of the tunnel, allowing the researchers to triangulate the underground detector's position in the planet. Combining that with the known position of the neutrino source at CERN gave a distance of 730,534.61 metres, plus or minus 20 centimetres.

To determine exactly when the neutrinos left CERN and arrived at Gran Sasso, the team hooked both detectors to caesium clocks, which can measure time to an accuracy of one second in about 30 million years. That linked the labs' timekeepers to within one nanosecond.

"These kinds of techniques that we have been using are maybe unusual in high energy physics, but they are quite standard in metrology," Autiero said. Just to be sure, the collaboration had two independent metrology teams from Switzerland and Germany check their work. It all checked out.

The researchers also accounted for an odd feature of general relativity in which clocks at different heights keep different times.
A ‘beautiful experiment'

Other physicists are impressed."This is certainly very precise timing, more than you need to record for normal accelerator operations," Plunkett told New Scientist. His project, the MINOS experiment at Fermilab, has already requested an upgrade to their timing system so they can replicate the results, perhaps as soon as 2014.

"I want to congratulate you on this extremely beautiful experiment," said Nobel laureate Samuel Ting of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge during the question and answer session that followed Autiero's talk. "The experiment is very carefully done, and the systematic error carefully checked."

But only time will tell whether the result holds up to additional scrutiny, and whether it can be reproduced . There is still room for uncertainty in the neutrinos' departure time, Plunkett says, because there is no neutrino detector on CERN's end of the line. The only way to know when the neutrinos left is to extrapolate from data on the blob of protons used to produce them.

"Of course we need to approach it sceptically," he says. "I believe everyone will be pulling together to figure this out."


http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20961-fasterthanlight-neutrino-claim-bolstered.html

[MorningSong]

And here is another article discussing/questioning this experiment's results:


Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to cheat light speed
12:05 23 September 2011 by Lisa Grossman

A CERN experiment claims to have caught neutrinos breaking the universe's most fundamental speed limit. The ghostly subatomic particles seem to have zipped faster than light from the particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, to a detector in Italy.

Fish that physics textbook back out of the wastebasket, though: the new result contradicts previous measurements of neutrino speed that were based on a supernova explosion. What's more, there is still room for error in the departure time of the supposed speedsters. And even if the result is correct, thanks to theories that posit extra dimensions, it does not necessarily mean that the speed of light has been beaten.

"If it's true, it's fantastic. It will rock the foundation of physics," says Stephen Parke of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois. "But we still have to confirm it."

Neutrinos are nearly massless subatomic particles that are notoriously shy of interacting with other forms of matter. An experiment called OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emusion tRacking Apparatus) sent beams of neutrinos from a particle accelerator at CERN to a detector in the Gran Sasso cavern in Italy, 730 kilometres away.

The neutrinos arrived 60 nanoseconds sooner than they would have if they had been travelling at the speed of light, the team says.
Supernova contradiction

If real, the finding will force a rewrite of Einstein's theory of special relativity, one of the cornerstones of modern physics (and a theory whose predictions are incorporated into the design of the accelerators at CERN). "It's not reasonable," says theorist Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.

One problem is that the CERN result busts the apparent speed limit of neutrinos seen when radiation from a supernova explosion reached Earth in February 1987.

Supernovae are exploding stars that are so bright they can briefly outshine their host galaxies. However, most of their energy actually streams out as neutrinos. Because neutrinos scarcely interact with matter, they should escape an exploding star almost immediately, while photons of light will take about 3 hours to get out. And in 1987, trillions of neutrinos arrived 3 hours before the dying star's light caught up, just as physicists would have expected.

The recent claim of a much higher neutrino speed just doesn't fit with this earlier measurement. "If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy," says Sher. "They didn't. The supernova contradicts this [new finding] by huge factors."
Fuzzy departure

It's possible that the neutrinos that sped to the Italian mine were a different type of neutrino from the ones streaming from the supernova, or had a different energy. Either of those could explain the difference, Sher admits. "But it's quite unlikely."

A measurement error in the recent neutrino experiment could also explain the contradiction.

"In principle it's a very easy experiment: you know the distance between A and B, you know how long it takes the neutrinos to get there, so you can calculate their speed," Parke says. "However, things are more complicated than that. There are subtle effects that make it much more difficult."

For instance, although the detectors in Italy can pinpoint the neutrinos' time of arrival to within nanoseconds, it's less clear when they left the accelerator at CERN. The neutrinos are produced by slamming protons into a bar-shaped target, sparking a cascade of subatomic particles. If the neutrinos were produced at one end of the bar rather than the other, it could obscure their time of flight.

Sher also mentions a third option: that the measurement is correct. Some theories posit that there are extra, hidden dimensions beyond the familiar four (three of space, one of time). It's possible that the speedy neutrinos tunnel through these extra dimensions, reducing the distance they have to travel to get to the target. This would explain the measurement without requiring the speed of light to be broken.

Antonio Ereditato with the OPERA collaboration declined to comment until after a seminar to be held at CERN today at 4 pm Geneva time.
Extraordinary evidence wanted

In the meantime, Parke is reserving judgement until the result can be confirmed by other experiments such as the MINOS experiment at Fermilab or the T2K experiment in Japan.

"There are a number of experiments that are online or coming online that could be upgraded to do this measurement," he says. "These are the kind of things that we have to follow through, and make sure that our prejudices don't get in the way of discovering something truly fantastic."

In 2007, the MINOS experiment searched for faster-than-light neutrinos but didn't see anything statistically significant.

Although sceptical, he is willing to give their colleagues at OPERA the benefit of the doubt. "They certainly didn't do anything that's obviously stupid, or they would have caught that," Parke says.

"They're smart people, these are not crackpots," Sher agrees. "But as the old saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is about as extraordinary as you get."

Reference: arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20957-dimensionhop-may-allow-neutrinos-to-cheat-light-speed.html

[Mad Hatter]

Mad Hatter dons his cynics cap...

Being a fan of the empirical approach I do realise proponents of the post modern paradigm might not agree with the following deconstruction.

As is usually the case with any new information we have open minds as exemplified by

"If it's true, it's fantastic. It will rock the foundation of physics," says Stephen Parke of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois. "But we still have to confirm it."
and closed minds as exemplified in this case by

"It's not reasonable," says theorist Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.
Of course Mr Sher may be concerned that...

If real, the finding will force a rewrite of Einstein's theory of special relativity, one of the cornerstones of modern physics
and thus several lifetimes worth of endeavour will be invalidated and further funding for those lines of enquiry will not be forthcoming. The following platitude is served up to encourage preservation of the status quo...

Fish that physics textbook back out of the wastebasket, though: the new result contradicts previous measurements of neutrino speed that were based on a supernova explosion. What's more, there is still room for error in the departure time of the supposed speedsters. And even if the result is correct, thanks to theories that posit extra dimensions, it does not necessarily mean that the speed of light has been beaten.
Now this experimemnt ran from...

CERN to a detector in the Gran Sasso cavern in Italy, 730 kilometres away
measured using...

GPS measurements, which were so accurate they could detect the crawling drift of the planet's tectonic plates
and for timing...

hooked both detectors to caesium clocks, which can measure time to an accuracy of one second in about 30 million years.
but...but...but...says Sher...

One problem is that the CERN result busts the apparent speed limit of neutrinos seen when radiation from a supernova explosion reached Earth in February 1987...Because neutrinos scarcely interact with matter, they should escape an exploding star almost immediately, while photons of light will take about 3 hours to get out. And in 1987, trillions of neutrinos arrived 3 hours before the dying star's light caught up, just as physicists would have expected.
and the proof that physicists new when to start that measurement was based on neutrinos arriving on mass unexpectedly before the light identified the source as a supernova...??? Feel free to help me out here...

"If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy," says Sher. "They didn't. The supernova contradicts this [new finding] by huge factors."
and the GPS units and the caesium clock where placed whereabouts on the star that went supernova???

Neutrinos are nearly massless subatomic particles that are notoriously shy of interacting with other forms of matter
and as noted above escape an exploding star 3 hours before light can...
but...but...but...

The neutrinos are produced by slamming protons into a bar-shaped target, sparking a cascade of subatomic particles. If the neutrinos were produced at one end of the bar rather than the other, it could obscure their time of flight.
and just what mysterious substance is that bar made of to have such a slowing effect???

Perhaps in attempt to either cover all the bases or save face we get...

Sher also mentions a third option: that the measurement is correct. Some theories posit that there are extra, hidden dimensions beyond the familiar four (three of space, one of time). It's possible that the speedy neutrinos tunnel through these extra dimensions, reducing the distance they have to travel to get to the target. This would explain the measurement without requiring the speed of light to be broken.
And the proof that light only exists in these four dimensions is???
I'll leave you dear reader, to ponder what the results might have been if the neutrinos decided to to the long way through those other dimensions!!

lastly...

Although sceptical, he is willing to give their colleagues at OPERA the benefit of the doubt. "They certainly didn't do anything that's obviously stupid, or they would have caught that," Parke says.

"They're smart people, these are not crackpots," Sher agrees. "But as the old saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is about as extraordinary as you get."
Perhaps someone should point these two at the papers on quantum entanglement after they have recovered from the current bout of cognitive dissonance.
cheers

[Carmody]

I've mentioned this one story before, and I'll mention it again.

I Know of a guy with about, at last count..105 patents in the telecommunications industry.

He had made working, finished, beyond theory, beyond prototype to actual working finished manufactured hardware (ready for mass production)....for a telecommunications system that worked at 300x the speed of light, and had no 'limits' (worked through anything/unblockable).

He then started to talk about being watched and then he ended up getting cancer, in his brain. Then he died.



Source:

Direct, family. blood. They worked for the man, they were his friend. The man I'm speaking of was the head of a telecommunications technology development firm.

In essence, you, we , me, them, us, we are all being artificially --- held back. Held back as this sort of thing has been discovered HUNDREDS of times before. Hundreds. Evey kind of over unity technology and such that you can imagine, has been discovered and created, in total, finished applicable science and as an engineered solution. Every kind you can imagine, and more.

I could, if given the time and the minimal financial capacity to do so, could create a hundred different types of devices--of just about any type and kind (communication, energy, matter conversion, etc).

Once the concepts are understood it is actually, incredibly easy.

The problem is manifold.

--something is holding us back, by murder, death, butchery, coercion, guile, promise.... and any workable method that may suit the situation at hand.

--Can you handle technologies that can kill us all, if used improperly? Ie, do you trust the emotional integrity of the next door 16 year old very smart-- but angst and anger filled Kid?

You get both sides of the coin. You get infinite promise, infinite energy, but you also get......... infinite danger---all at the same time.

[<8>]

Hi guys..


I like the part in the Electric Universe Theory, about Gravity being instant, or else the stars and the planets in the universe would just float away.
It just make alot of sense to me.

If i remember right, in the accepted theory, they had to make up black holes to compensate for gravity losing strengt because of the distance..
Remember no one have seen a black hole yet..:P

This is by memory, so i might be wrong....

P.s i hear some talk about they are just using Gravity for traveling faster then light. Maybe im all wrong, or im right, who knows...:)

[araucaria]

If there is nothing faster than the speed of light, then what does it mean to state that energy is a function of the square of that speed? Either E=mc² is a mathematical, as opposed to a physics, equation, or faster-than-light speed is a given.

Astronomers presume that gravity is instantaneous, i.e that gravity is infinitely faster than light. More reasonable people think it is a little slower than that... ;)

[Ernest]

If you want to check out the article where it this was announced you can find it here (http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897).

[DeDukshyn]

If there is nothing faster than the speed of light, then what does it mean to state that energy is a function of the square of that speed? Either E=mc² is a mathematical, as opposed to a physics, equation, or faster-than-light speed is a given.

Astronomers presume that gravity is instantaneous, i.e that gravity is infinitely faster than light. More reasonable people think it is a little slower than that... ;)

We still don't understand gravity at all ... no one wants to admit that though. Einsteins theories indicated that gravity operates like a wave that travels at the speed of light - but this has never been proven - it is just one way that may explain how gravity might work (bending space), but is still disputed.

[araucaria]

If memory serves, Tom van Flandern has discovered that the speed of gravity is at least two billion times the speed of light, and suggests that it is probably limited in its field of action. He returns to Laplace's old idea of gravitons - infinitesimal particles pressing down rather then sucking down. See his book Dark Planets...

[DeDukshyn]

If memory serves, Tom van Flandern has discovered that the speed of gravity is at least two billion times the speed of light, and suggests that it is probably limited in its field of action. He returns to Laplace's old idea of gravitons - infinitesimal particles pressing down rather then sucking down. See his book Dark Planets...

That's pretty close to my personal belief on gravity as well ... sounds like an interesting read, thanks!

[Hervé]

[...]
He had made working, finished, beyond theory, beyond prototype to actual working finished manufactured hardware (ready for mass production)....for a telecommunications system that worked at 300x the speed of light, and had no 'limits' (worked through anything/unblockable).

[...]

The problem is manifold.

--something is holding us back, by murder, death, butchery, coercion, guile, promise.... and any workable method that may suit the situation at hand.

--Can you handle technologies that can kill us all, if used improperly? Ie, do you trust the emotional integrity of the next door 16 year old very smart-- but angst and anger filled Kid?

You get both sides of the coin. You get infinite promise, infinite energy, but you also get......... infinite danger---all at the same time.

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

[Ilie Pandia]

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

I'd ask him back: "What does synchronize mean if you have no time?" :p

[Davidallany]

Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's
This is one of the top two ignorant statements I've ever known, it's hypocritical and immoral.

[Carmody]

[...]
He had made working, finished, beyond theory, beyond prototype to actual working finished manufactured hardware (ready for mass production)....for a telecommunications system that worked at 300x the speed of light, and had no 'limits' (worked through anything/unblockable).

[...]

The problem is manifold.

--something is holding us back, by murder, death, butchery, coercion, guile, promise.... and any workable method that may suit the situation at hand.

--Can you handle technologies that can kill us all, if used improperly? Ie, do you trust the emotional integrity of the next door 16 year old very smart-- but angst and anger filled Kid?

You get both sides of the coin. You get infinite promise, infinite energy, but you also get......... infinite danger---all at the same time.

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

You make all devices identical. You make a detection/firing system that is independent.

This device, this firing or timing creation device emits a signal that is also 'out of time'. It becomes the timing device that fires each one, as they each receive the timing signal.

There will still be errors, yes, unless the timing systems and the devices themselves are both of an 'out of time' nature, as devices go. Your errors will creep in, within the scope of the translation devices, the components that are standard electronics in nature.

I can't (won't) explain my solution but I've got half the solution done some years back. (the hard part, the detector/emitter) is done. Sort of.

I don't work in these areas, I just understand the problem, to some degree.

Basically, you have a hard limit, that is tied directly to the given standard electronics design and materials that may connected to said signal/detector/device.

[Hervé]

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

I'd ask him back: "What does synchronize mean if you have no time?" :p

Pertinent question, indeed!

However, from what I understood of the interview, that was his bug in producing the device...

[Carmody]

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

I'd ask him back: "What does synchronize mean if you have no time?" :p

Pertinent question, indeed!

However, from what I understood of the interview, that was his bug in producing the device...

For the larger part, they self sync with no errors, except for that in the standard electronics end of the given devices.

For example, I have largely fixed this problem--on and in all levels within the scope of the article and beyond:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-scientists-superconducting-nanowires-resistance-free-state.html

[Hervé]

[...]

Reminds me of something that Pete Peterson mentioned in his Camelot video interview: "How do you synchronize communication devices which work on no time?"

You make all devices identical. You make a detection/firing system that is independent.

This device, this firing or timing creation device emits a signal that is also 'out of time'. It becomes the timing device that fires each one, as they each receive the timing signal.

[...]

Thanks Carmody, that makes it simple and workable.

[Hervé]

For the larger part, they self sync with no errors, except for that in the standard electronics end of the given devices.

For example, I have largely fixed this problem--on and in all levels within the scope of the article and beyond:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-scientists-superconducting-nanowires-resistance-free-state.html
There you go Ilie!

Thanks Carmody

[Carmody]

As well, there will be no new 'Einstein', or 'Newton' to emerge from this change for humanity. The opening is across the board and there will be no special individual.

[K626]

My understanding of this dilemma, and I may be wrong, is that it's only things with mass which are supposedly unable to travel faster than light. Quantum collapse is known to be instantaneous - If 2 related quanta are take and sent to opposite ends of the universe, induce collapse in one of them and the otrher collapses at precisely the same instant (if my terminology is wrong there, please correct me). I've always felt uncomfortable about the speed of light, somehow it doesn't sit well with me (maybe I'm just not clever enough !), but did Einstein not predict that anything which travels at the speed of light also travels at the speed of time ?
Well ponder this, speed = distance divided by time, if a car travels 120 km in 1 hour, divide 120 by 1 and you get a speed of 120 km/h etc.
So, if Einstein is correct, and anything travelling at the speed of light also travels at the speed of time, then we hit the following problem: object x "travels" 190,000 km and arrives at the instant it departed, therefore, 190,000 has to be divided by zero to obtain the speed. Divide anything by zero, and the answer is ...... zero. Therfore thye speed of light doesn't actually exist.
And what about light itsself ? Does it also travel at the speed of time ?
My (possibly false) conclusion is that natural, cosmic "light" is somehow the fabric of space/time, and does not actually travel anywhere, it's simply an illusion, along with time. In contrast with artificial light whose speed we can measure.
The big bang wasn't an event which happened sometime in the past, it's an ongoing process which we're still experiencing.
Please feel free to deconstruct my logic)


Very important post.

K

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Mad Hatter dons his cynics cap...

Being a fan of the empirical approach I do realise proponents of the post modern paradigm might not agree with the following deconstruction.

As is usually the case with any new information we have open minds as exemplified by

"If it's true, it's fantastic. It will rock the foundation of physics," says Stephen Parke of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois. "But we still have to confirm it."
and closed minds as exemplified in this case by

"It's not reasonable," says theorist Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.
Of course Mr Sher may be concerned that...

If real, the finding will force a rewrite of Einstein's theory of special relativity, one of the cornerstones of modern physics
and thus several lifetimes worth of endeavour will be invalidated and further funding for those lines of enquiry will not be forthcoming. The following platitude is served up to encourage preservation of the status quo...

Fish that physics textbook back out of the wastebasket, though: the new result contradicts previous measurements of neutrino speed that were based on a supernova explosion. What's more, there is still room for error in the departure time of the supposed speedsters. And even if the result is correct, thanks to theories that posit extra dimensions, it does not necessarily mean that the speed of light has been beaten.
Now this experimemnt ran from...

CERN to a detector in the Gran Sasso cavern in Italy, 730 kilometres away
measured using...

GPS measurements, which were so accurate they could detect the crawling drift of the planet's tectonic plates
and for timing...

hooked both detectors to caesium clocks, which can measure time to an accuracy of one second in about 30 million years.
but...but...but...says Sher...

One problem is that the CERN result busts the apparent speed limit of neutrinos seen when radiation from a supernova explosion reached Earth in February 1987...Because neutrinos scarcely interact with matter, they should escape an exploding star almost immediately, while photons of light will take about 3 hours to get out. And in 1987, trillions of neutrinos arrived 3 hours before the dying star's light caught up, just as physicists would have expected.
and the proof that physicists new when to start that measurement was based on neutrinos arriving on mass unexpectedly before the light identified the source as a supernova...??? Feel free to help me out here...

"If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy," says Sher. "They didn't. The supernova contradicts this [new finding] by huge factors."
and the GPS units and the caesium clock where placed whereabouts on the star that went supernova???

Neutrinos are nearly massless subatomic particles that are notoriously shy of interacting with other forms of matter
and as noted above escape an exploding star 3 hours before light can...
but...but...but...

The neutrinos are produced by slamming protons into a bar-shaped target, sparking a cascade of subatomic particles. If the neutrinos were produced at one end of the bar rather than the other, it could obscure their time of flight.
and just what mysterious substance is that bar made of to have such a slowing effect???

Perhaps in attempt to either cover all the bases or save face we get...

Sher also mentions a third option: that the measurement is correct. Some theories posit that there are extra, hidden dimensions beyond the familiar four (three of space, one of time). It's possible that the speedy neutrinos tunnel through these extra dimensions, reducing the distance they have to travel to get to the target. This would explain the measurement without requiring the speed of light to be broken.
And the proof that light only exists in these four dimensions is???
I'll leave you dear reader, to ponder what the results might have been if the neutrinos decided to to the long way through those other dimensions!!

lastly...

Although sceptical, he is willing to give their colleagues at OPERA the benefit of the doubt. "They certainly didn't do anything that's obviously stupid, or they would have caught that," Parke says.

"They're smart people, these are not crackpots," Sher agrees. "But as the old saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is about as extraordinary as you get."
Perhaps someone should point these two at the papers on quantum entanglement after they have recovered from the current bout of cognitive dissonance.
cheers

Neutrinos can also be in two places at once.

K

[K626]

Is light part of the fabric of the universe or not? That is the only question here.

If any kind of existing particle (neutrinos have negligeble mass) that was the building block of the universe wanted to exist 'and communicate' with other exotica, it would do outside the fabric of the universe. For the fabric of the universe we 'perceive' there is behind it a kind of 'mesh or structure' that holds it together(a sub-universe if you like). This has NO CONSTANTS OF ANY KIND.

Everything exists in all moments and all places at once.




K

[panopticon]

G'day All,
Mad Hatter I really enjoyed your cynic cap. Thank you.
In regards to your thoughts here:


and the proof that physicists new when to start that measurement was based on neutrinos arriving on mass unexpectedly before the light identified the source as a supernova...??? Feel free to help me out here...

"If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy," says Sher. "They didn't. The supernova contradicts this [new finding] by huge factors."
and the GPS units and the caesium clock where placed whereabouts on the star that went supernova???

Neutrinos are nearly massless subatomic particles that are notoriously shy of interacting with other forms of matter
and as noted above escape an exploding star 3 hours before light can...


I did a think...
The maximum speed of light (the "c" constant) is that measured in a vacuum.
Space is not a vacuum.
Light waves/particles interact with objects in space.
Neutrinos don't interact in the same way as light.

Also... (Now I'm not sure about this bit at all as it dwells in the land of particle vs wavelength quantum physics and I got no idea, no idea at all...)

Gravity has an effect on all matter including neutrinos and light (electro-magnetic wavelengths).
Mass of an object effects the effect gravity has.
If neutrinos have less mass than Light then they are effected less.

So the neutrinos might "win the race" because of less interference from gravity and other objects in space.

Just wanted to also add that Dr LaViolette's (http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/LaViolette.html) 'Subquantum Kinetics (http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/ether.html)' has no problems with superluminal velocities (http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict2.html).

Kind Regards, :yo:
Panopticon

[Spartacus]

Once we can get our heads around the idea that we're playing in a frequency-based, rather than a particle-based universe, then this news really doesn't come as such a big surprise.

After all, super luminal travel isn't rocket science.

[ThePythonicCow]

Just wanted to also add that Dr LaViolette's (http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/LaViolette.html) 'Subquantum Kinetics (http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/ether.html)' has no problems with superluminal velocities (http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict2.html).
:) :cow: :)

[Mad Hatter]

do you trust the emotional integrity of the next door 16 year old very smart-- but angst and anger filled Kid?

You get both sides of the coin. You get infinite promise, infinite energy, but you also get......... infinite danger---all at the same time.

Hmmm, the lowest common denominator issue raises it's ugly head yet again. Have we not always had this problem though?

Perhaps if the tech became widely available that would give humanity the opportunity to redress the circumstances which lead to all that angst...

[araucaria]

In the Source Field, Wilcock reports on Kozyrev's discovery than a better signal from stars is obtained by aiming at where they are now, as opposed to where they were when the light was emitted, many eons ago - and how there is even a signal from their future position..So obviously light is something of a slowcoach in all this.

[Agape]

Einstein himself acknowledged that he "may have been wrong" before he died:
I'm sure he did.


That e=mc3 not e=mc2.
I doubt that Einstein ever said that E = mc3 -- that would seriously confuse the calculations of how much energy nuclear reactions (whether bombs or reactors) produce. Do you have a reference for that?


This allows for multiple dimensions which have now been fairly well proven.
Could someone explain to me, from foundational math and physics on up, what "multiple dimensions" means? I take it that it means more than the 3D plus time we normally recognize. I read of (don't really understand) some esoteric string theory models of dimensions folded in on themselves in a space unmeasurably small with a dozen or two dimensions, but I do not get the sense that most references to 5D or 10D are referring to that.


Likewise, Newtonian Physics ONLY applies to 3-dimensional physical reality. They do not and cannot apply to 4th/5th dimensional physics.

Well, while Newtonian physics (though still quite fine for building bridges) was already replaced a century ago for matters closer to the extremes, and
while that replacement, using relativity and quantum mechanics, may well be due soon for yet another replacement, for matters closer to the extremes (cf. my many mentions of LaViolette)
still the phrase "4th/5th dimensional physics" is something I hear mentioned, but am puzzled as to the actual meaning of, in a well grounded scientific basis.




4th dimensional time-space still falls under the law of relativity as we all know ,
if you start counting from point zero of linear emergence of any closed system the evolution of events from that point to the dissolution of the system is static wave .

If you extend the same consequential logic to 'all Universe' and its events from hypothetical start to hypothetical end , the evolution of events should still appear as constant .

But as we all know again, it does not quite appear to be so, at least not the way we would find easy to comprehend so that's about where you arrive in ..

5th dimension. So 5th dimension is an open system where chances are allowed .

In 5th dimension you have possibly linear time-space with conscious alterations popping up and down from the causality and opening doors to another hypothetical time-spaces above and bellow , that's where is going to get complicated .

Because if you consider yourself 6th dimensional entity you're well taking part in that process and create accidental coincidences .

In the 6th dimensional space-time you do not evolve 'events' but rather harmonics of occurences , that is you evolve system beyond the system but you still 'evolve something'.

So we could well say that 6th dimension is the 'accidental order' or harmoics applied to 5th dimensional space-time.

In 7th dimension the dynamics would be about numbers and creation of algorithms to be applied to your 6th dimensional harmonics .

8th dimension is where there are no numbers, no algorithms but precise geometrical patterns ( and not much more :) permeating 'the universe' . It's from there the algorithms are derived .

9th dimension is your 'tunnel from/to singularity' from where the complex geometrical patterns emerge and dissolve .

In 10th dimension ..the singularity itself takes shape of multiple universes .

Beyond 10th dimension ..you can either jump to multiple singulairities ...

which is what the 11th dimension would be, something like 'universe of luminiscent dots'

or alternatively , you can work on the sphere of luminosity itself and play with energies and their manifestation and dissolution in single moment of time ..

which is ultimately what the 12th dimension is about .


Because within the singularity you can still do plenty and lots of things but with perfection and without the 'accidental chaos' ,
there are dimensions above that follow similar order, it kind of repeats itself on higher level .


I'm not sure it's useful I go beyond here for now as who would read it after me ..



;)

[Agape]

So basically and hypothetically again, it's somewhere between the 8th and 7th dimension where you decide which formula will be valid in particular system of application because for example,
to put it simple, you may have cube dimension within the 8th for which E=mc2 will be correct and you may have pyramidal dimension/space-time for which E=mc3 will be corect and you may have spheroid for which E=mc and that's about .

[ThePythonicCow]

Thank-you, Agape, for taking the time to describe those higher dimensions.

Unfortunately, for this moment anyway, you might as well try teaching calculus to a cow.

:) :cow: :).

[Mad Hatter]

Thanks Agape,

Duly filed and awaiting the inevitable arrival of the piece of the puzzle that will trigger the required gesthalt for my true comprehension...

Planting toungue firmly in cheek...


I'm not sure it's useful I go beyond here for now as who would read it after me .. ;)

I hazard the guess all those that read it before you... :cool:

[grapevine]

It's a little unfair that Einstein's theory is now being billed as wrong. Lots of things have been proved using Einstein's theory as a platform, otherwise it wouldn't have held up for such a long time. Science, like everything else, is growing all the time. This latest finding is just another path on the road to discovery. I say good for Einstein and let's give him a round of applause for a theory that has stood up for more than 60 years!

A little off topic but I always thought that the speed of thought could equal the speed of light ? ? ? I gather that, even though we're completely unaware of it, a message is generated one tenth of second before we think we've thought it. :)

[Agape]

Thank-you, Agape, for taking the time to describe those higher dimensions.

Unfortunately, for this moment anyway, you might as well try teaching calculus to a cow.

:) :cow: :).


This you don't mean seriously Paul :haha: I tried my best ...and could continue yet for a while .


Imagine teaching calculus to a cow ? He/she ( the cow ) would tell another and in some 20 or 30 years they'd stage world rebellion against abductions, mind control and milk mining .

You know ..


More later . I have to run

[Calz]

Thank-you, Agape, for taking the time to describe those higher dimensions.

Unfortunately, for this moment anyway, you might as well try teaching calculus to a cow.

:) :cow: :).


This you don't mean seriously Paul :haha: I tried my best ...and could continue yet for a while .


Imagine teaching calculus to a cow ? He/she ( the cow ) would tell another and in some 20 or 30 years they'd stage world rebellion against abductions, mind control and milk mining .

You know ..


More later . I have to run

Since we are meandering off topic ... let me inject one more.

Pre-calculus.

Who says you can't teach an old cow new tricks???

NA-ST8nXl4U

Okay.

I feel better now. Back to topic.

:offtopic:

[Hughe]

It's a little unfair that Einstein's theory is now being billed as wrong. Lots of things have been proved using Einstein's theory as a platform, otherwise it wouldn't have held up for such a long time. Science, like everything else, is growing all the time. This latest finding is just another path on the road to discovery. I say good for Einstein and let's give him a round of applause for a theory that has stood up for more than 60 years!

A little off topic but I always thought that the speed of thought could equal the speed of light ? ? ? I gather that, even though we're completely unaware of it, a message is generated one tenth of second before we think we've thought it. :)
The speed of thought is slower than the light. ;) You can move faster than light by remote viewing or astral travel.

How about the destruction of Newton's three laws of motion? What would be the implication?
I won't make it long here. Any individuals if they study really hard about Newton's three laws will spot the flaw, which is 'Chicken and egg dilemma' I would call.

Newton's law has causality problem - cause and effect. He defines the 1st law of motion. Without explanation he uses motion as the building block. Then, go on next law of force (F = ma). Force is change of motion (acceleration) on an object of mass m.
And then, the 3rd law of action and reaction.

Simple question "What causes the motion?" The answer is "Force" because we know it instinctively. Then, the force contains "change of motion" within. Change of motion cause motion? it's getting weird.

Next question "How much force a car has moving at 100km/h on highway?"
We know a car is well over one thousand to two thousand tons. Right? Then, it has to have huge force. But the 1st law says there is no external force on an object at constant motion. You can calculate the kinetic energy (0.5 x mass x speed x speed). Energy is scalar quantity that can produce force. Still, I want to know the force of the car. I know the car is moving by internal force - engine. I'm at dead end. LOL

Okay, I go little further. Most cars needs 50hp to reach to 100km/h on highway. It's proven facts by numerous experiments. As a car moves at 100km/h on highway, to maintain its speed only needs 30hp. Where the 20hp goes? Applying this principal on cars will save great amount of fuels for car owners.

Another example, you put a kid on a swing and start push it and realize that the same force will make the seat moves higher and higher as long as you push at the highest point . Theoretically and experimentally you can rotate the kid with one finger. How could it possible? Newton's laws can't explain it. :confused:

A device that produces more output energy than input which supposedly impossible by conventional laws of physics do exist.
The harmonic motion of an object in nature, theoretically inertia impulse mechanism. There is another suppressed theory about the Vortex of air and liquid too.

I'm glad that I'm living in the middle of explosion of knowledge. It takes 1500 years when Newton destroyed old laws, 250 years by Einstein and Quantum physicists, less than 60 years Einstein will be replaced by others pretty soon. IMHO, based on my knowledge Einstein's relativity broken by other scientist early 1940s.

I do have great respect all the great minds. What really ruins the scientific community is 99.99% of scientists who can only do copy-paste established laws and theories.

[Alien Ramone]

Errm.... maybe something called time-travel, super luminal travel ect.

Ok, I can't stop people seeing what ever they want to see, fair enough. Cherry pick away...

cba going into the details, people don't seem that concerned about that here.

I'll just give you something to ask yourself:

1. What theory would this refute?

2. What theory said superluminal travel will = going backwords in time?

I think I see your point Omni connexae, but I also see why people are excited at this discovery being released and how it might relate to alleged Black Ops stories.

1.Based on the following Wikipedia quote I can see how the discovery wouldn't necessarily refute Einsteins theories:
"Under the special theory of relativity, a particle (that has mass) with subluminal velocity needs infinite energy to accelerate to the speed of light, although special relativity does not forbid the existence of particles that travel faster than light at all times (tachyons)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light

2. Although faster than light travel is commonly accepted as implying time travel based on Einsteins theories, if a tachyon can't be used to communicate faster than the speed of light or some similar way, I can see how it wouldn't necessarily imply time travel. Here is a web page which gives an example related to faster than light travel implying time travel:
http://sheol.org/throopw/tachyon-pistols.html

The announcement is still exciting in the sense that, although it doesn't necessarily give a lot of credibility to alleged Black Ops stories that are out there, it still seems to be a step closer in either discovery or disclosure related to those stories, just due to faster than light travel and time travel being related based on Einsteins theories.

[Violet]

I've had a discussion about this in daily-life surroundings. The only thing it brought up with was the tangibility of time-travel now that greater speeds have been proven possible (as good as?).

My opinion was and still is that time travel is not possible in our world/reality. Perhaps in some parallel dimension in which time travellers would eventually end up in another reality. But then again, we would not be able to verify that, being stuck here.

Furthermore, since we have no knowledge of the physical laws in parallel dimensions (provided we accept their existence) we can not speak of time travel because we do not know of the concept of time if any, in that particular parallel dimension.

Anywhoo, I also have the feeling that nothing new is being revealed here to the masses. This just seems to confirm what many whistleblowers have been telling us about the extraordinary spatial progress as it's been going on behind the scene.

And even if Einstein's theory was not perfect, his contributions (for so far as completely spread) seem to have been very valuable. I don't like to see people trashed just because they made one mistake. Scientists are also humans.

[Mad Hatter]

Paraphrased from comment at physorg (apologies to the original Author I've lost the URL so can't attribute).

Riddle me this

Light leaves the sun at the same speed in all directions.

Photon A leaves sun at exactly the same time Photon B leaves in the opposite direction.

What is the speed of Photon B in relation to the observer on Photon A ?? :p

I know some will recognise this as a logical phallacy but for those who do I hope you appreciate why the rest of us mere mortals might have a hard time with it...;)

[Alien Ramone]

Photon A leaves sun at exactly the same time Photon B leaves in the opposite direction.

What is the speed of Photon B in relation to the observer on Photon A ??

Since most of us aren't physicists here, you might end up getting a lot of different responses that may or may not be correct. I used to be interested in the subject and from the things I read and have seen in videos, here is how I think it would work. A hypothetical observation from Photon "A" would observe the sun moving away from it the speed of light without Photon "B" ever escaping. Basically everything would seem frozen in time to Photon "A". A hypothetical observation from Photon "B" would observe the sun moving away from it at the speed of light without Photon "A" ever escaping. Other things to keep in mind are that objects are thinner in the direction of travel to an observer as they accelerate and would take up no space at the speed of light if that were possible and would have infinite mass if they didn't have a zero rest mass.

It might make more sense to think of objects moving away from the sun at close to the speed of light instead of at the speed of light. From the sun's point of view "A" and "B" would be moving away from it in opposite directions at close to the speed of light. "B" over a set period of time would see itself as very far away from the sun while seeing "A" as much closer to the sun and would see "A" as moving faster than the sun sees it moving, but still slower than the speed of light. "A" would see things the opposite of "B" from it's point of view with "A" being far away from the sun and "B" being closer. The reason for this is that observers in different frames of references can see things as being in different locations and can see events as happening at different times. (Based on hypothetical instantaneous observations)

The only way it will make sense is if you think about many of the different thought experiments that are online or in books about time and distance dilation and dig into the equations a little. In some of the thought experiments inertia comes into play and that's even more difficult to intuitively understand.

[Agape]

It's a little unfair that Einstein's theory is now being billed as wrong. Lots of things have been proved using Einstein's theory as a platform, otherwise it wouldn't have held up for such a long time. Science, like everything else, is growing all the time. This latest finding is just another path on the road to discovery. I say good for Einstein and let's give him a round of applause for a theory that has stood up for more than 60 years!

A little off topic but I always thought that the speed of thought could equal the speed of light ? ? ? I gather that, even though we're completely unaware of it, a message is generated one tenth of second before we think we've thought it. :)


Thoughts are information , basically and light /energy on any frequency is but a carriage .

Information travel fastest in the Universe, of all things . It travels fastest within the realm of biological universe.

Living Universe is an Intelligence . Imagine all the complicay that non living nature would produce 'this' ?

It's not happening ...we are born of mothers ...the same way we are born from Spirit , in better terms we are descendants of biological intelligence which is organized on higher level than we are .

Living Universe has its own Time ..

How do we know , because and only till there's consciousness, if there's none there's no 'I', no 'You', not anyone to think a thought or do a conscious move .
Consciousness is so called Self-Born , it lasts as long as it remains ;)


Within that infinitely small moment of time ...a lots happens , life forms are born to their own worlds, big and small,
ants and elephants, what is an elephant in your world ..is an ant to a microbe .

There are dimensions within dimensions and each have their own time ..


Consciousness is the intelligence forming ideas within infinitely small realm of time in the frame of physical universe but ..it interacts with it in its own way ,

they are yin and yang, the strong and the subtle ..


How do we know again, it is from experience , we can communicate with biological intelligence of other beings .


You talk to an ant ..it has to be quite an experience ..it might be end of his life ..

How long do you think he lives inside his mind ? ''All life'' . The average of his species . His ancestor , the ancient ant was many times bigger ..

Yet , see how the biological times and physical circumstances are barely matching , you intrude to each others world .


The same way we are part and in communication with other advanced intelligencies in the universe .


Relativity is still valid with living systems, you see .



:yo:

[Ernie Nemeth]

Oops, I shouldn't peek in here like this, very rude.
But...

The proposition of Photon A and Photon B, is a mind experiment. And here's the prpblem with those, including Shroedinger's (?) cat, - it's impossible for an observer to be either on Photon A or Photon B to make such an observation. And in Shroedinger's cat, no one can be in the box with the cat. What's more, when proposing these scenarios what it occuring is the assembly of a perfectly closed system where the impossible becomes possible.

Hope that helps.

[Agape]

Paraphrased from comment at physorg (apologies to the original Author I've lost the URL so can't attribute).

Riddle me this

Light leaves the sun at the same speed in all directions.

Photon A leaves sun at exactly the same time Photon B leaves in the opposite direction.

What is the speed of Photon B in relation to the observer on Photon A ?? :p

I know some will recognise this as a logical phallacy but for those who do I hope you appreciate why the rest of us mere mortals might have a hard time with it...;)



Problem , no ? Do you create much problems to everyone too ;)

[araucaria]

On the subject of poor Albert:

1. It is said that many of his discoveries were made by Mrs Einstein - makes you wonder why they weren't shot down ages ago. :confused:
2. He didn't like 'spooky action at a distance', but he is also famous for saying 'God doesn't play dice'.

No, God doesn't 'play' dice - he cheats, and his trump card is... 'spooky action at a distance'. :p

[araucaria]

Oops, I shouldn't peek in here like this, very rude.
But...

The proposition of Photon A and Photon B, is a mind experiment. And here's the prpblem with those, including Shroedinger's (?) cat, - it's impossible for an observer to be either on Photon A or Photon B to make such an observation. And in Shroedinger's cat, no one can be in the box with the cat. What's more, when proposing these scenarios what it occuring is the assembly of a perfectly closed system where the impossible becomes possible.

Hope that helps.

Here is a vague memory of Schrodinger's book What is Life? Man for example has to be about as big as he is so that the number of his atoms is large enough to offset any statistical quantum effect relating to specific atoms. Will check for a quote if anyone is interested

[Agape]

That's what for you have 4th dimensional physics you see .. Photon A and B can't leave the nuclear reaction at the same time , everything is happening in a chain, time lock in reality .

''They leave at the same time'' you see . Time is a spin . They travel on sinus wave .

[Agape]

Since we are meandering off topic ... let me inject one more.

Pre-calculus.

Who says you can't teach an old cow new tricks???



XrkThaBWa5c



It's always good to have some fasionable conditioning ...


Thanks :haha:

[Violet]

Paraphrased from comment at physorg (apologies to the original Author I've lost the URL so can't attribute).

Riddle me this

Light leaves the sun at the same speed in all directions.

Photon A leaves sun at exactly the same time Photon B leaves in the opposite direction.

What is the speed of Photon B in relation to the observer on Photon A ?? :p

I know some will recognise this as a logical phallacy but for those who do I hope you appreciate why the rest of us mere mortals might have a hard time with it...;)

As somebody said up here, not all of us are physicists. So, I'll grant all physicists here the pleasure of a layman's attempt.

I would say that the observer would sense a speed increased by one times his own speed. So, if both leave at the speed of time, observer photon A would think photon B to be travelling at twice the speed of light (I don't know how you could ever think such a thing - I can't even think of how one time speed of light would differ from one and a half time speed of light - but hey).

But if the observer used accurate measuring tools he should come to the conclusion that they are both actually travelling at the same speed.

[Ernie Nemeth]

It is like saying this infinity is bigger than that infinity...

[Beren]

Pardon me please if someone already made this comment but Nikola Tesla found that in 1899 and patented it on the following year. Officially US patent was recognized in 1905. He named those particles Neutrino.
SO a century before Cern... HELLO!!!

Yep it was easier to brand him mad scientist for being not aligned with JP Morgan and banksters...

[ThePythonicCow]

Scientists at the world's largest physics lab think they may have proved Albert Einstein's theory of relativity wrong - by breaking the speed of light.
Oops -- looks like it was just a bad connector :).

From BREAKING NEWS: Error Undoes Faster-Than-Light Neutrino Results (Science Insider - 22 February 2012) (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster.html?ref=hp#.T0U_N0pYVRc.twitter):
It appears that the faster-than-light neutrino results (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/11/faster-than-light-neutrinos-opera.html?ref=hp), announced last September by the OPERA collaboration in Italy, was due to a mistake after all. A bad connection between a GPS unit and a computer may be to blame.

Physicists had detected neutrinos travelling from the CERN laboratory in Geneva to the Gran Sasso laboratory near L'Aquila that appeared to make the trip in about 60 nanoseconds less than light speed. Many other physicists suspected that the result was due to some kind of error, given that it seems at odds with Einstein's special theory of relativity, which says nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. That theory has been vindicated by many experiments over the decades.

According to sources familiar with the experiment, the 60 nanoseconds discrepancy appears to come from a bad connection between a fiber optic cable that connects to the GPS receiver used to correct the timing of the neutrinos' flight and an electronic card in a computer. After tightening the connection and then measuring the time it takes data to travel the length of the fiber, researchers found that the data arrive 60 nanoseconds earlier than assumed. Since this time is subtracted from the overall time of flight, it appears to explain the early arrival of the neutrinos. New data, however, will be needed to confirm this hypothesis.

[Intranuclear]

The CERN particle physics laboratory in Geneva has confirmed Wednesday's report that a loose fiber-optic cable may be behind measurements that seemed to show neutrinos outpacing the speed of light. But the lab also says another glitch could have caused the experiment to underestimate the particles' speed.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/official-word-on-superluminal-ne.html?ref=hp

I love this back and forth, but it does demonstrate science at work. I think this beautifully demonstrates why belief is not the operative word but rather tedious, continuous, excruciatingly painful attention to details kind of work is at the core of science and why it takes so long for confidence to build to the point of announcement.

[ThePythonicCow]

But the lab also says another glitch could have caused the experiment to underestimate the particles' speed.
I merged your new thread, with this additional news about possibly underestimating the particle's speed, into the existing thread discussing this experiment and whether it demonstrated faster than light motion.

[lyubomir]

Before few months they told that soon can achieve information from materials... like the stone start talking... I think that as usual there and many others researches that hey made, but they are kept from public knowledge...

[Fanna]

That experiment that proved that light did not travel at the correct speed was on high energy gamma bursts travelling across basically the entire universe. This doesn't prove einstein incorrect, but more speaks of the topology of the smallest scale of the universe. Small cars feel the road much more roughly. Small light too feels the bumps in the topology of the plank scale and over an incredible distance is shown to "change" the speed of light. Don't get me wrong, Einstein is wrong about a few things, but light is pretty well behaved (despite having vast capacities outside of scientific attribution).