PDA

View Full Version : paradox.



manxman
2010-Feb-20, 03:37 PM
if they can speed light up so that you can see it leave the highly charged medium mentioned before it enters what would happen if they speeded it up enough that it could be seen a second before the source of the light was triggered?
you would have time to make the decision not to switch the light on therefore creating a paradox in the lab.


http://www.iitk.ac.in/infocell/Archive/dirjuly3/science_light.html


http://www.electrogravityphysics.com/html/speed_of_light.html

Ken G
2010-Feb-20, 04:32 PM
Paradoxes like that don't occur, it is really the fault of the people writing the articles that suggest they can. The problem seems to be that to make the article more exciting for people to read, elements are stressed that seem to lead to paradoxes, but the elements being stressed are overstated. Most of these "faster than light" experiments revolve around the ambiguity in the very meaning of when the light entered and when it left. If the technical limitations in those meanings are observed, then there is no contradiction-- the article is really saying that these systems challenge naive meanings about when light enters and when it leaves, not that it leaves before it enters.

01101001
2010-Feb-20, 06:48 PM
See topics:

What the heck is this? [FTL claim] (http://www.bautforum.com/science-technology/95302-what-heck-ftl-claim.html)
Light Barrier Has been Broken! (http://www.bautforum.com/science-technology/55072-light-barrier-has-been-broken.html)
Yet another FTL claim. (http://www.bautforum.com/science-technology/55022-yet-another-ftl-claim.html)

Keywords: NEC Scientists Doctor Dr. Lijun Wang Dr. Alexander Kuzmich and Dr. Arthur Dogariu FTL faster than light 62 nanoseconds Professor Prof. Robert Boyd University of Rochester backward light negative speed of light group velocity pulse wave photon

NEC Press release, July 19th, 2000 (http://www.nec.co.jp/press/en/0007/1901.html)


NEC Success in Superluminal Light Propagation Proves Light Can Travel Faster than its Speed in Vacuum

TOKYO July 19th, 2000- Scientists at NEC Corporation's (NEC) (NASDAQ: NIPNY) (FTSE: 6701q.l) basic research unit in the United States, NEC Research Institute (NEC-I), have proven light can travel faster than its acknowledged speed in vacuum*1 in a successful experiment in superluminal light propagation. Despite exceeding the vacuum speed of light, the experiment is not at odds with Einstein's theory of relativity and is explainable by existing physical theory. The research work, which may result in significantly faster information transfer speeds across networks and in computers, is to be published in the July 20th issue of Nature in a paper by NEC research scientists Dr. Lijun Wang, Dr. Alexander Kuzmich and Dr. Arthur Dogariu.
[...]
"Our experiment shows that the generally held misconception that nothing can move faster than the speed of light, is wrong. Einstein's Theory of Relativity still stands, however, because it is still correct to say that information cannot be transmitted faster than the vacuum speed of light," said Dr. Lijun Wang.

Part of the light pulse can travel faster than light. Light, itself, does not.

See Wikipedia: Group velocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_velocity)

manxman
2010-Feb-20, 07:45 PM
well that was in 2000 i guess they would of done it by now if they could
i get the drift of the whole thing i think thanks.

astromark
2010-Feb-20, 08:54 PM
The paradox does not exist. "You can not break the laws of physics Captain.",
and Scotty was correct.
Regardless of the velocity attained that light is not emitting until its on. Regardless of your distance from that point. You must 'see' it some moment after that. It might be possible to multiply c. It is still taking time.

Bluevision
2010-Feb-21, 12:44 AM
The paradox does not exist. "You can not break the laws of physics Captain.",
and Scotty was correct.Just wondering, the laws of physics don't say that it's impossible to travel back in time... do they?

Andrew D
2010-Feb-21, 05:45 AM
Just wondering, the laws of physics don't say that it's impossible to travel back in time... do they?

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


a closed timelike curve (CTC) is a worldline of a material particle in spacetime that is "closed," returning to its starting point. This possibility was first raised by Kurt Gödel in 1949, who discovered a solution to the equations of general relativity (GR) allowing CTCs known as the Gödel metric, and since then other GR solutions containing CTCs have been found, such as the Tipler cylinder and traversable wormholes. If CTCs exist, their existence would seem to imply at least the theoretical possibility of time travel backwards in time...

astromark
2010-Feb-21, 05:50 AM
Just wondering, the laws of physics don't say that it's impossible to travel back in time... do they?

Very clearly; ... You can slow the progression of time by altering your reference frame. The faster you go the slower time progresses... for you. Time its self can never be changed.
As for traveling back... NO, no, no.
If some event OR moment has happened it can not be UN-Happened. Traveling back in time is NOT possible. It never has been, is not and, never will be. Think about the science.

cosmocrazy
2010-Feb-21, 11:49 AM
Very clearly; ... You can slow the progression of time by altering your reference frame. The faster you go the slower time progresses... for you. Time its self can never be changed.
As for traveling back... NO, no, no.
If some event OR moment has happened it can not be UN-Happened. Traveling back in time is NOT possible. It never has been, is not and, never will be. Think about the science.

You can "measure" the progress of time differently between 2 or more reference frames but to "slow" the progress of time for yourself i'm not so sure, only relative to another frame of reference.

Travelling at "c" you would experience no time passing since you would have nowhere to go.

Although I have to agree with you Astro, that travelling back in time is not possible based on current laws of science. I would never say never.:)

hhEb09'1
2010-Feb-21, 12:35 PM
you would have time to make the decision not to switch the light on therefore creating a paradox in the lab.I read the first article, and I would say that interpretation is nonsense.

http://www.iitk.ac.in/infocell/Archive/dirjuly3/science_light.html
But there is some evidence there for time travel, of sorts. It says:
There are potential applications in communications, although the present day signal transmission speed is a measly fraction of the speed of light, hopefully the signal transmission speed can be taken to its maximum theoretical limit of c in the near future. In other words, in the near future, they will arrive somewhere in the 19th century. :)

astromark
2010-Feb-21, 07:24 PM
You can "measure" the progress of time differently between 2 or more reference frames but to "slow" the progress of time for yourself i'm not so sure, only relative to another frame of reference.

Travelling at "c" you would experience no time passing since you would have nowhere to go.

Although I have to agree with you Astro, that travelling back in time is not possible based on current laws of science. I would never say never.:)

You have said you agree... That at or approaching c.
The passage of time changes. From one or other points of view ( reference ). Thats not wrong. Just as my argument is based on just that. What has not yet happened is the future. If you are there, its the present. Historic events are locked as events recorded are in the past. I did say never. Not lightly. Fact.