It is about time. Sorry, inside joke. Two German physicists claim to have done the impossible and broken the speed of light.If their claims are confirmed, they will have proved wrong Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity, which requires an infinite amount of energy to propel an object at more than 299,792,458 metres per second.
...
"This is the only violation of special relativity that I know of."
----
Well not really. Special Relativity has been a crock for a long time. One supposed aspect was that a gravity field and acelleration field were indistinguishable. There are at least three immediately obvious contradictions to that bit. Still, tunneling photon packets has promise for going back in time and stopping the housing bubble.
12 comments:
First and Murst!
Don't you go back in time if you travel faster than the speed of light?
First & Murst
No Fair @ha38349. Time travel is not a legitimate tool for getting first and murst.
Well, there is a phenomenon in quantum physics (which as you know Einstein was not fond of) called entanglement in which the quantum states of two particles which are originally together become forever afterward related or complementary, and what is done to one particle is immediately reflected in the other particle no matter the distance involved.
Still --
"Observations on entangled states naively appear to conflict with the property of relativity that information cannot be transferred faster than the speed of light. Although two entangled systems appear to interact across large spatial separations, no useful information can be transmitted in this way, so causality cannot be violated through entanglement. This is the statement of no communication theorem.
Although no information can be transmitted through entanglement alone, it is possible to transmit information using a set of entangled states used in conjunction with a classical information channel. This process is known as quantum teleportation. Despite its name, quantum teleportation cannot be used to transmit information faster than light, because a classical information channel is required." (Wiki)
Don't forget to take into account the BLACK HOLE that is sucking in subprime loans, prime loans, realtors, mortgage brokers, and lenders.
Hey by the way, I just got back from 1 year in the future..and the housing market still sucks.
Dawg,
Maybe I'm the only one, but I still look at your "seemingly off-topic" posts for the hidden meaning. I guess that makes me like a stoner circa 1975 listening intently to ELO records and staring at album covers. Except I am looking for clues that you have been tipped off about Snowflake's arrest.
Also off-topic, this article in Wired is a very fun read. "Peak" oil fanatics won't like it.
http://www.wired.com/cars/energy/magazine/15-09/mf_jackrig
Mad Max won't be coming to your neighborhood. There's plentiful oil. My prediction stands: An oil bust soon.
Maybe I'm the only one, but I still look at your "seemingly off-topic" posts for the hidden meaning. I guess that makes me like a stoner circa 1975 listening intently to ELO records and staring at album covers. Except I am looking for clues that you have been tipped off about Snowflake's arrest.
LOL that one made me laugh. I wondered about that myself when he amde some comments "Hmmm, did Rob say what I think he just said?" Kinda like the way he chewed nigel out when he popped up, never to be seen again. He didn't come right out and say it, but apparently it was enough to make Nigel run back under his rock.
Technically it's general relativity (not "special") which equates acceleration and the gravitational field. There are some contradictions with general relativity, most glaringly the fact that the theory predicts singularities, points of infinite density, inside black holes. I wouldn't call it a crock per se, but there will someday be a better theory for describing nature... which will someday be overthrown by a better theory... which will someday be overthrown by a better theory, etc.
Relativity doesn't "predict" black holes, etc. People who came along after Einstein applied his theories to extreme situations, and found that his theories predict very bizarre things happening under those circumstances.
But what people don't understand is that a theory works best at its core, when it is describing the situations it was meant to describe. When you get out on the periphery, and attempt to use the theory to describe extreme situations, it breaks down and produces crazy results.
But, as it turns out, crazy results sell lots of books, and cosmologists would be flat out of a job if they had to actually use the theories the way they were meant to be used. Unfortunately, I suspect we're doomed to a nearly endless stream of crazy, wild-eyed astrophysics sensationalism until we can actually develop the technology to reliably test new theories that move beyond relativity.
The issue isn't how much oil may be down below but a) the cost of getting it out and b) refinery capacity. Not to mention more Katrina-style hurricanes, Persian Gulf brouhahas, and so forth which can easily drive the price to $100/barrel.
As this applet demonstrates, by summing waveforms appropriately, you can get a combined wave moving much faster than any of the components. But it's useless if nothing can actually "ride" the combined wave. What Nimtz is talking about (and he's been talking about it for ten years) is less straightforward because it's quantum and therefore involves probability "waves". But my impression is that ultimately there's nothing to it.
Post a Comment