TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- any cosmologists?
any cosmologists?
need help settling a bet, pm me and win my gratitude 
not one professionally but I know a little..just post the question.
Isn't Omega M a physicist or something? Maybe you could PM him.
Just post it here. Heaps of people here know a lot about it without describing themselves as professional cosmologists.. it'd be interesting to read anyway.
ok basically..dont fuck me over i got 5 big ones riding on this.
"no object with mass can move faster than the speed of light"
thats what i said... he bet against that.
then he pulls up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_...ster_than_light
and now i need some authoritative documents so i can be richer
Ironically I remember hearing something about this recently, but I don't have any documents to prove, that at this point in time, we have no solid proof showing anything can travel faster than the speed of light.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Sunsnail ok basically..dont fuck me over i got 5 big ones riding on this. "no object with mass can move faster than the speed of light" thats what i said... he bet against that. then he pulls up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_...ster_than_light and now i need some authoritative documents so i can be richer |
Here's a nice page on faster than light stuff:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physi...fLight/FTL.html
You right and he is wrong. No object can move faster through light THROUGH SPACE, but space itself can (and probably is) expanding much faster than the speed of light. We have no idea what it's expanding into however and no way to measure it's true "speed" through whatever it is expanding into, because whatever lies outside our the universe is beyond our comprehension...It is entering the realm of guesswork and philosophy, not science. Everything we know and are able to measure is within our physical universe..and all matter within the physical universe is limited by the light barrier.
Objects that appear to be moving away faster than light most definitely are NOT. It is space itself that is expanding between them and us. Think of an ant walking along the surface of a deflated baloon at .01mph. If you take a huge breath and blow the baloon up completely in a fraction of a second, the distance the ant travels from it's starting position is very large. His DISTANCE has increased because the object he is traveling across has expanded in size..but the SPEED in which he is moving across the object has not changed at all. It's the exact same situation with distant galaxies. They are not moving away from us faster than light. The balloon is just getting bigger.
to summarize: yes, space itself can expand faster than light..but since space has no mass and certainly isn't an "object", he is wrong.
As far as I understand:
According to Special relativity you're right. The issue is inertial frames - since when you speak of velocity you're referring to velocity of an object within the same inertial frame as the observer. This paper should explain how galaxies observed to be moving away from us at faster than the speed of light do not contradict special relativity: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310808v2 as far as I understand it because they are not in the same inertial frame as us.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by astroboy As far as I understand: According to Special relativity you're right. The issue is inertial frames - since when you speak of velocity you're referring to velocity of an object within the same inertial frame as the observer. This paper should explain how galaxies observed to be moving away from us at faster than the speed of light do not contradict special relativity: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310808v2 as far as I understand it because they are not in the same inertial frame as us. |
the galaxies are at rest though. im arguing that "galaxies moving away from us faster than SOL" is not the same as "objects can move faster than the SOL"
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Sunsnail the galaxies are at rest though. im arguing that "galaxies moving away from us faster than SOL" is not the same as "objects can move faster than the SOL" |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton The galaxies are moving through space. |
Yes but moving faster than light from us, even though not faster at 0 distance from said galaxy.
They aren't moving faster than light from us. It's our frame of reference that's changing because space is constantly expanding. The frame of reference of an Indycar is the pavement. It is static and easy to measure. Space isn't and that's the tricky thing here. Galaxies need not be moving through space at all. They could be completely stationary yet still growing apart from us by trillions of miles per second. Their distance may increase, yes..but space itself is what is expanding so it is inaccurate to say they are "moving" at that speed. Sunsnail is right. 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton The galaxies are moving through space. |
I read this thread as "cosmetologist." As in, a beautician.
Well there is this idea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_speed_of_light
I read the book of one of the people who furthest and most recently progressed the idea about 2 years back. I don't remember much about it since I was told to disregard it as garbage and nonsense by my superiors. Now, on second thought, I think I'd like to go back and research it some more.
Anyways, the theory goes that the speed of light is variable, and not constant as is currently believed. It is an attempt to resolve some of the conflicts of physics in the early universe which dissolve as a result of an incredible density which eventually "smooths" itself into accepting our theories. A resolution would be to have the speed of light(c) as variable. For the past zillion years, the speed of light has been steady at what we see as C, but in the early years of the universe, the velocity of C was even greater.
So just imagining the outer reaches of the universe where some of the galaxies/clutter reside, maybe they are in a time-space where they are in this xMultiplier variant of C.
I read this on a Kellogs box. Disregard anything I said above.
i have copyright on the term "speed of light". please stop using it, or i will contact the authorities.
dunno if this was already disproved in this thread, but is it possible that there exist things that move faster than light, but we are just unable to detect them with current technology?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kadomony dunno if this was already disproved in this thread, but is it possible that there exist things that move faster than light, but we are just unable to detect them with current technology? |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.