This is really bothering me... (Physics)

[Breezy]

so i was reading through the thread labeled something about UFOs, and i just got really irritated by the ignorant statements that people were making about physics.

the one that really got me was something like, "the shortest path between two points is a straight line", yes this is true... BUT that is assuming that the world is 3 dimensional. THE UNIVERSE IS CURVED AND HAS AT A MINIMUM OF 11 DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS(string theory/m-brane theory as reference). Imagine the universe as a sheet of paper; draw 2 random dots on this paper, the shortest path would be a straight line if the paper is FLAT. now, slightly curve that paper, now the shortest distance between the two would be a line going through one side and into the other. im not going to elaborate on this, i think it is pretty self-explanatory, to anybody with a good spatial sense.

just to clear a few things up:

1.WORM HOLES ARE VERY REAL, though traveling through one is at the moment IMPOSSIBLE hence, the Einstein-rosen bridge, and the immense gravitational forces that would literally rip you apart upon entering one.

2.A theory is a hypothesis that has been PROVEN multiple times by different scientists. Therefore, none of Einstein's theories can show these "cracks" of which you speak. After all, his theory of relativity did help create the nuclear bomb, the whole splitting of the atom.

3.I realize that i am a nerd...

had to get that off my chest...
sorry if i insulted somebody in a way that i can't even begin to comprehend.

[Jenae LaTorque]

Worm Holes are real??? C'mon now. Wormholes are possible. You prove to me that wormholes are real. For that matter, what is "real"?

[dannlov]

Worm holes are theoretically possible. Though the theory can be abolished at some point

[NCC-1701]

of course they are possible, but then again isnt anything possible?

[TheSkronkDonkey]

Originally Posted by Breezy

so i was reading through the thread labeled something about UFOs, and i just got really irritated by the ignorant statements that people were making about physics.

the one that really got me was something like, "the shortest path between two points is a straight line", yes this is true... BUT that is assuming that the world is 3 dimensional. THE UNIVERSE IS CURVED AND HAS AT A MINIMUM OF 11 DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS(string theory/m-brane theory as reference). Imagine the universe as a sheet of paper; draw 2 random dots on this paper, the shortest path would be a straight line if the paper is FLAT. now, slightly curve that paper, now the shortest distance between the two would be a line going through one side and into the other. im not going to elaborate on this, i think it is pretty self-explanatory, to anybody with a good spatial sense.

In your analogy, the shortest path between two points is STILL a straight line.

Originally Posted by Breezy

just to clear a few things up:

1.WORM HOLES ARE VERY REAL, though traveling through one is at the moment IMPOSSIBLE hence, the Einstein-rosen bridge, and the immense gravitational forces that would literally rip you apart upon entering one.

Wormholes are theoretical, not "very real".

Originally Posted by Breezy

2.A theory is a hypothesis that has been PROVEN multiple times by different scientists. Therefore, none of Einstein's theories can show these "cracks" of which you speak. After all, his theory of relativity did help create the nuclear bomb, the whole splitting of the atom.

A theory is a working model involving an hypothesis. Theories aren't "proven"; they're continually tested and held as accurate while there is failure to disprove.

And let me get this one right: Because Einstein's work (indirectly) led to the creation of the atomic bomb, that somehow means his General Theory of Relativity is wrong and should be discarded?

Originally Posted by Breezy

3.I realize that i am a nerd...

An uninformed nerd from where I'm sat.

Sorry if any of this has offended you.

[CreativeMind]

Originally Posted by NCC-1701

of course they are possible, but then again isnt anything possible?

Well, me getting a date with Areeya is theoretically possible, but in all probability highly unlikely!

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Breezy

so i was reading through the thread labeled something about UFOs, and i just got really irritated by the ignorant statements that people were making about physics.

the one that really got me was something like, "the shortest path between two points is a straight line", yes this is true... BUT that is assuming that the world is 3 dimensional. THE UNIVERSE IS CURVED AND HAS AT A MINIMUM OF 11 DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS(string theory/m-brane theory as reference). Imagine the universe as a sheet of paper; draw 2 random dots on this paper, the shortest path would be a straight line if the paper is FLAT. now, slightly curve that paper, now the shortest distance between the two would be a line going through one side and into the other. im not going to elaborate on this, i think it is pretty self-explanatory, to anybody with a good spatial sense.

That's nice. But we know the universe is flat with a 2% margin of error. See this page for more information:
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html

[Tread]

What is possible and not in astronomic dimensions, is a bit like to speculate. We know nearly 5% of the composition of the universe, the visible matter. No one realy know what dark energy and dark matter is, but in the currently theories they must exist. Even the origin of mass is unknown. It must be the higgs boson, but it's never proven.
There are more questions about the universe then answers.

[Breezy]

Originally Posted by TheSkronkDonkey

In your analogy, the shortest path between two points is STILL a straight line.



Wormholes are theoretical, not "very real".



A theory is a working model involving an hypothesis. Theories aren't "proven"; they're continually tested and held as accurate while there is failure to disprove.

And let me get this one right: Because Einstein's work (indirectly) led to the creation of the atomic bomb, that somehow means his General Theory of Relativity is wrong and should be discarded?



An uninformed nerd from where I'm sat.

Sorry if any of this has offended you.

it doesnt offend me at all. worm holes are REAL, though they only exist for a brief period of time, i was trying to say that in THEORY one would be able to travel trough one, not that their existence is theoretical.

about the straght line analogy. it would appear to be straight if u were veiwing it from a a higher dimension. since we cant DO THAT YET; it would appear curved from our perspective.

i never said that shit about his theory needing to be discarded. i have no idea how u even reached that conclusion.

and the word wouldnt be "uninformed", it would be "misinformed", if that were the case.

[Jenae LaTorque]

This is all a dream. You will wake up. Don't worry about it. LOL

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Tread

What is possible and not in astronomic dimensions, is a bit like to speculate. We know nearly 5% of the composition of the universe, the visible matter. No one realy know what dark energy and dark matter is, but in the currently theories they must exist. Even the origin of mass is unknown. It must be the higgs boson, but it's never proven.
There are more questions about the universe then answers.

True, but that's off the topic. The original thread was about "Thoughts on UFO's" and the answers we have are relevant to such things like, are aliens constrained by the speed of light? Can they use wormholes? Would using other dimensions allow them to get here any quicker? This thread was created because Breezy doubted what was being said.

[Rachel]

Science is not an absolute. We dont have the answers to everything and probably never will. However the scientist is inflexible and believes there must be a logical explanation for anything. Stating things like "You cant travel faster then the speed of light" is an example of this inflexibility. Maybe in our scientific world you cant but it certainly is a big universe and maybe some other beings can.

[Tread]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

True, but that's off the topic. The original thread was about "Thoughts on UFO's" and the answers we have are relevant to such things like, are aliens constrained by the speed of light? Can they use wormholes? Would using other dimensions allow them to get here any quicker? This thread was created because Breezy doubted what was being said.

Yes, but Breezy create a new thread about physics, and didn't post in "Thoughts on UFO's".
He said that worm holes are real. No one has ever proven that one exist. The most people in this thread say, that they are theoretically possible, and I want to add that is possible in our currently view of the universe. We know 95% only from indirect influences. Maybe in future we will see that laws of dark energy won't allow a worm hole, or maybe we can inflence the higgs field so that we can bend the space-time. Or if you want the aliens can now.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Rachel

Science is not an absolute. We dont have the answers to everything and probably never will. However the scientist is inflexible and believes there must be a logical explanation for anything. Stating things like "You cant travel faster then the speed of light" is an example of this inflexibility. Maybe in our scientific world you cant but it certainly is a big universe and maybe some other beings can.

Originally Posted by Jenae LaTorque

"Nothings impossible, we just can't do it right now"

Originally Posted by NCC-1701

of course they are possible, but then again isnt anything possible?

Ok Jenae and NCC-1701, let's not get carried away. There are always some people who revel in what cannot be known, or what they perceive cannot be known. That allows them to hold on to whatever fairy tails their heart desires. But there are some things that are just not possible. Even given enough time Jenae. i.e.... you will never... ever... EVER... violate conservation of energy. EVER! That may seem trivial, but actually it puts huge constraints on what is possible and what isn't. Like going faster than the speed of light, for example.

When my daughter was 5 or 6 she said no one can be perfect. I said "what's 5+5?" She replied "10". I said "See? Your answer is absolutely perfect".

And Rachel, I agree that we will never know everything and most certainly never will. But there are things that we do know that are simply correct. And as soon as our species realized that we left the dark ages behind and became a technological civilization.

You're shooting the messenger when you say I'm being inflexible for saying no one can go faster than the speed of light. I am only relaying the physics to you. Am I being inflexible when I say 1+1 cannot equal 3? I think realistic is a better word. You could go faster than light only if your mass is imaginary (as in the square root of a negative number). I will not break etiquette by asking a woman her weight, so I will just assume you do not have imaginary mass.

[Rachel]

That is physics as we know it Tracy. However I do believe that in this vast universe there could be more intelligent beings then us. Maybe they have better science. When I say inflexible you show it. You believe in physics as an absolute.

[violet lightning]

A saw a good documentary last night on the orgins of the big bang and how different scientists theories competed for research funding and public favor.
One thing that I think pertains to recent discussion was this:
Sometimes a theory can be sound, but our technical ability to make measurements is limited. That is what changes over time. Our increasing ability to make more refined, more accurate and even hitherto impossible measurements.
Sometimes new data can further prove theories or complicate them or completely invalidate them if it conflicts with predicted outcomes.

Also, I seem to remember reading a while back that scientists had discovered particles or something previously unknown, that was traveling just ahead of light speed. Does that ring a bell with anyone?
I only mention it since the speed of light as the ultimate speed limit keeps being brought up. By all practical standards,(ie human space travel) it probably is, but that dosn't mean its the true absolute.

[Jenae LaTorque]

The particle you are talking about that travels faster than light is a tachyon which is only theoretical right now, just like wormholes.

[Tread]

The tachyon has got a imaginary mass. if it exists, it always have to be faster than the speed of light. It would be also invisible. I belief that they only exist hypothetical in math.
If they exist and you could use them to transport information, it would be possible to teleport matter faster then the speed of light. But that would contain huge problems. Teleportation works with Quantum mechanics. You need to have entangle Quantums on earth and where ever you want. You also need the technology at both places. And the original matter would get destroyed. That would be a huge risk.

The only ways to travel faster than light are:
to eliminate or reverse mass (impossible with normal matter).
find a shorter way than the light is traveling (but you are not faster than the speed of light)
or the easiest way breake the lightspeed. As far as I know the slowest lightspeed is about 61,2 km/hour, 38 miles/hour. (but that wouldn't help either)

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Rachel

That is physics as we know it Tracy.

Based on reality as we have observed. The same reality that any other alien race would observe as well.

Originally Posted by Rachel

However I do believe that in this vast universe there could be more intelligent beings then us. Maybe they have better science. When I say inflexible you show it. You believe in physics as an absolute.

I'm sure there is other life that's more intelligent than us. But I still doubt they can outdo the power of a gamma ray burst that's so powerful, it appears like it's a supernova in our galaxy, even though it's at the edge of the observable universe. Even that obeys the speed of light and other physics we're aware of.

The hypothetical more intelligent aliens may have figured out how to unify QM and relativity, but it still doesn't change the fact that you can't go faster than light.

And physics is an absolute. It works the same for everyone, anywhere in the universe.

Originally Posted by violet lightning

Also, I seem to remember reading a while back that scientists had discovered particles or something previously unknown, that was traveling just ahead of light speed. Does that ring a bell with anyone?

Is this what you're talking about?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/841690.stm

It still requires a medium for light to pass through to get this effect. There is no medium for aliens to travel through on the way to earth. Just mostly empty space.

[runround04]

My friend has a DeLoren that goes 88 mph... Just a little humor to ease the tension

[Rachel]

They used to say if man was meant to fly he would have been born with wings lol. And now look at us.

[crossingoceans]

I read somewhere on the internet about a device that, apparently can allow data to travel faster than speed of light, it also said that only microwaves can do this. It's still experimental but if they can perfect it, it's gonna be a huge milestone in technology. Specially to communicate with astronauts when they're in mission on other planets.

[Tread]

Originally Posted by Icekiller

I read somewhere on the internet about a device that, apparently can allow data to travel faster than speed of light, it also said that only microwaves can do this. It's still experimental but if they can perfect it, it's gonna be a huge milestone in technology. Specially to communicate with astronauts when they're in mission on other planets.

Never heared of that. Have you any links or verificationon this?
I can't belief that it is possible.

[crossingoceans]

Let me search for it. I read it on overclock.net but it seems like the thread was deleted...

EDIT: I found it, here it is

http://current.com/items/90301786_sc...t.htm?xid=ch60

[TracyCoxx]

I'm interested in that link too. Are you talking about the polarization synchrotron?

[TracyCoxx]

Nothing is actually traveling faster than the speed of light though. Here's a better explanation:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/19957

They're trying to mimic the way they say the magnetic field behaves around some neutron stars. They say the neutron stars rotate so fast that at a distance large enough away, the polarization of the surrounding plasma rotates faster than light. But that's not really anything moving faster than light. It's like if you had a really bright flashlight and were shining it on a bigass wall 1 light year away, and you swept the light back and forth real fast. There would be a spot on the wall moving faster than light since it's so far away. But a fast moving spot of light doesn't violate anything, because it's not the same packet of light moving that fast... it consists of different photons all the time.

The real interesting part of the article, if it's true, is that due to the polarization rotating faster than light that they can get the light or radio signal to maintain its intensity better. Normally, if r is the distance from the source, its intensity would decrease 1/r^2 from the source. These guys claim they can cause the light or radio beam to decrease in intensity 1/r from the source, which means you don't have to have such an intense source to be received by someone else far away. To really test this though, they're going to have to test it over distances of 10s of thousands of miles. The reflector on the moon left by astronauts would be a good way to test it.

[Tread]

It seems to be a generaly wave effect, similar to the experiment that TracyCoxx linked. It look like the wave is faster than the speed of light. Measurements show that the wave arrive before it is send. That mean to effect the past!? But in this experiments no information or particles travel faster than the speed of light. The entire particles cause the effect as wave.

The faster than the speed of light experiments are currently repeat by others to verify or not.
Tryes to send a waves, that are unpredictable, showed that the arrived wave was not the same as the emitted.

I search an english article.

[Tread]

The most named critical is Raymond Chiao from the University of California, Berkeley 1967-2006 / University of California, Merced 2006-today.

I don't know how thrustfull the pages are, Chiao is a respectable physicist.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=120094&page=1
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1082.htm

Also interesting: quantum tunnelling, 1.7 faster than the speed of light.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Faster...ons-a015570666

I must inform me about magnetic fields around pulsars, but I think it's the same or a similar effect.

[TracyCoxx]

Also interesting: quantum tunnelling, 1.7 faster than the speed of light.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Faster...ons-a015570666

Quoting from that article:

This result doesn't necessarily violate the notion that cause precedes effect. To send a message or cause a real effect, a shutter must be opened or something else happen to create a sharp break in a wave packet. A wave packet's peak can never overtake this boundary.

The front velocity -- how quickly the boundary travels -- never exceeds the speed of light, Chiao says. It's this speed that conveys information and ensures that cause comes before effect.

With quantum mechanics, you can tunnel, but nothing useful will ever travel faster than light. It's complicated to explain, but that's it I'm afraid. And sub atomic particles, or even small atoms can routinely tunnel small distances, but the larger or more numerous the particles the less likely it will occur. i.e., there's about a 1 in 10^80 chance that I can tunnel through the wall in my house. So it's possible, but not likely.