WOW! I can't even begin to wrap my head around this! (attn. P-hole)

[Thumper]

This is incredible and P-hole ... I know you'll like it too.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/oAVjF_7ensg?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Buckrub]

"In some cases faster than the speed of light"????

Oh yeah??? Prove it!

[Thumper]

Hence the title: WOW! I can't even begin to wrap my head around this!

BUT ... being a math major, you may want to study up on this angle. :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

[Captain]

Faster than the speed of light... That would out drag a Chevy! :D

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[Buckrub]

Know all about hypothetical particles.

I didn't say they didn't exist. I didn't say it wasn't possible. I said PROVE IT.

To do so, you cannot use any measurement. You have to extrapolate.

That is, assume that an object is at Position A, moving at Velocity V, towards Position B. If you know the distance from A-B, assume to be Y, then you can calculate the Time (T) that it would take for the object to travel from A to B. Since V = D/T, and D = Y, then T = V/Y. Then calculate T based on a known constant of "C", the speed of light, approx 186,000 m/s. If Your T is less than the known calculation for T, then the object's V exceeded the speed of light getting to Position B.

But of course, that's just extrapolation. You can't measure such speeds.

[Captain]

I drank a sufficient quantity of Wild Turkey (WT) over a known period of time (T) that I'm sure what I'm feeling is the need to Pee (P) Therefore WT/T=P I have proven this hypothesis many times. :D

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[Thumper]

Ha ha! Good one Cappy. :D

Bucky, for one thing, you're using the speed of light as "C" (your constant). That's fine, because we're "assuming" it's "constant" (at least for our basic calculations). What we do NOT know, is what the speed of light was immediately following the "Big Bang" (I know, I know ... IF there was one) or what the speed of light might be a trillion years from now. All we have is a VERY small window for measurement ... just a matter of a few years, which is an almost immeasurable amount of time when discussing the universe.

BUT ... that's a VERY interesting perspective you're taking.


I didn't say they didn't exist. I didn't say it wasn't possible. I said PROVE IT.

We've argued semantics here for years ... when it comes to religion, I have ALWAYS described myself as an "Agnostic", but you were always there to argue that's impossible and have ALWAYS, from day one, referred to me as an Atheist. In "YOUR" mind, there are only two possibilities ... either you're a believer (in YOUR God), or you're an athiest ... there's no "in-between".

From the dictionary:

ag·nos·tic, agˈnästik
noun

1. A person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Now, when it comes to God, why can't I turn the tables and say, "I didn't say He doesn't exist. I didn't say it wasn't possible. I said PROVE IT?"

I cry foul! Do "hypothetical particles" exist? Screw science and math ... God is hypothetical IMHO, but (using the Bucky approach to religion) ... YOU can't pick the middle of the road regarding hypothetical particles ... I don't care what you think, I'm telling you that in YOUR mind, they do NOT exist, period!

Pick one or the other brother! ;)

[jb]

And there are a few really big dumb asses that think we are alone in the Universe.

[Thumper]

Of ALL those possibilities out there Bubba ... that would be REALLY hard to believe. I just hope I live long enough to be around when they find proof of another civilization. I don't dwell on it and don't go around chasing UFO's and space creatures, but I find it impossible to think we're "alone".

[Buckrub]

Sorry, Thump. I also have a minor in Physics. The speed of light is a definite constant, now and forever. Ask your Physicist Bud if you don't believe me. That's not one you get to be agnostic about. It's an immutable fact. I know, you hate knowing those exist, but they do.

[Buckrub]

And you know............and I'm NOT trying to pick on you at all..........but I just thought of this.

To me (and this is JMHO), this is a good example of why you are confused about religion. You are convinced that everything is up for discussion, that every idea and 'fact' is suspect and can't be proven. You are the one that brought this up this time not me. But for a person to actually believe, sincerely, that the speed of light is not a constant.......that it can't be proven, and use that as an analogy for all other ideas, is simply.........well, sorry, but it's ludicrous. Beyond dumb. I didn't say YOU were dumb, you're not. But the idea that you can validly challenge everything, that NOTHING is a given, and using one of the most firm and hard FACTS in the universe as an example............well, that just tells me something. It says that you are not going to allow anything to be a fact, and there's no standard you'll accept as a measuring stick of right and wrong, so there's no point in discussing things with you. If there is no standard to go to to check your ideas, if there are no absolutes, then I honestly have nothing more to use to have meaningful discussions with you on such subjects. Everything is not solely an opinion.

But that post is indeed a very interesting one, and I enjoyed it. Thanks. I don't know if we are alone or not. I know that I personally will never get to know in this life.

[Thumper]

I guess I simply like to explore the options. If everyone thought like you ... we'd all still believe the world is flat.

And I didn't state it as fact ... I simply said we do not know. Me personally? I'd consider the speed of light as a constant ... and as far as TODAY'S math is concerned ... it's the accepted rule.

[jb]

Just a quick search. Bucky the physics you learned 40 years ago is 40 years old.
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-09/fyi-can-anything-move-faster-light
http://gizmodo.com/5908206/did-scientists-really-just-break-the-speed-of-light
http://www.livescience.com/27920-quantum-action-faster-than-light.html

[Thumper]

Well heck, I decided to lean on my old friend Mr. Google and found there actually are questions out there. Again, I consider it as a constant for all practical purposes ... that doesn't mean I don't think science may eventually change that.

I don't want to bore everyone to tears here by pasting the whole article, as it'd be a bit dry for most, but you brought up my "Physicist Bud", whomever that is.(?) Here are some physicists who may disagree with you.

Speed of Light May Not Be Constant, Physicists Say

By Jesse Emspak, LiveScience Contributor | April 27, 2013 07:51am ET

Einstein's theory of special relativity sets of the speed of light, 186,000 miles per second (300 million meters per second). But some scientists are exploring the possibility that this cosmic speed limit changes.

http://www.livescience.com/29111-speed-of-light-not-constant.html

[Thumper]

Well dang! Looks like Bubba beat me to it while I was reading. :(

[LJ3]

Pretty neat story. Kinda hokey and the line "the most important image ever recorded" is a bit of a stretch for me. Still pretty dang cool stuff. The last line that "we're but a small particle in a huge universe" isn't exactly ground breaking stuff. It's basically astronomer porn, if you axe dis brotha.

[Thumper]

Man! Tough crowd around this joint!

And to think, P-hole is the main dufe I directed this to, because I know he likes this stuff ... yet he's totally ignored the thread so far. :huh

[BarryBobPosthole]

Honestly I was waiting on Bucky and everyone to quit pissing in your corn flakes. I saw this story the other day and thought it was cool as hell. And to think funding for Hubble was cut and the program was essentially over based on cuts by a certain president who shall remain nameless since everyone seems to think he gets blamed for shit he didn't do. but it was basically cut in 2005. Since its en vogue to compare current politicans peole in history like say, Hitler, let me just say that cutting exploration like this would be the equivalent of Queen Elizabeth I defunding Sir Francis Drake who in my opinion is probably the greatest explorer in our history. Well, British history anyway.

Hubble is a bargain. Its been a platform where we've tested some pretty serious remotely controlled repairs and successfully too. Those skills and technology are mandatory if we're ever to really make space a place to live and work. Its also teaching us in a lot of other ways. The 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics, one of Bucky's favorite subjects, was won by someone who did most of the really central work on his project with Hubble. This is a cool subject and what's mind boggling about this story to me are the distances and times involved. Its hard enough to get your brain wrapped around that you keep wondering "Can this possibly be right?". Yet the Physics says they are. Mind you up until about 900 years ago mankind thought the earth was the center of the universe. Don't know about you, but science's credibility kind of took it on the chin with that one so don't tell me anything is for certain. That 900 years is just a nanofuckit in the time it takes the light from one of those galaxies to get here. That's just crazy cool.

anyway, yeah I saw it and yeah that stuff is very cool.

BKB

[Chicken Dinner]

I was at a dinner last spring for some Aerospace organization because Matt and his buddy won an award from them in the science fair. At any rate, the associate head if NASA spoke and they've got a telescope in the works that will put the Hubble to shame. Both in size and ability to penetrate deep space. This guy was a former Shuttle astronaut and very good at his job. There was no way you could listen to his talk and not be like, "Hell, yes! Let's do this space thing."

[Thumper]

Well, here ya' go Buckster.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/myjaVI7_6Is?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Sunshine]

:)