Physics debate!

[TORAK]

PHYSICS DEBATE!


Right, there was a MASSIVE physics news thingy which has now gone global. I presume everyone has heard about the "Neutrino" that has surpassed the Speed of Light [SoL for short], well according too scientific experimentation it has, but there are debates that this may be an anomalous result. I was wondering what everyone thought about this new discovery, and what might you think of the consequences/advantages we can gain from this, if we can somehow use it. if we CAN use it, it may be feesable to timetravel, send signals back in time. [Time abhors a paradox. If someone sent a signal back to tell you when you died and you changed it, no-one would send the signal back. space-time would remove the anomaly by removing your existence]. Yeah, pretty cool stuuf. So what do you think!

[All opinions are welcome!]

Thanks, Al.

[Peace God]

Thing is, as exciting as this is, it'll be years before the LHC results are confirmed or denied.

[music is my soul]

Just saying we wouldnt be able to travel back in time only forward if i remember correctly. Let me check that for a fact real quick.

Yep. Just read this...

http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211.fall2000.web.projects/John%20E%20Salzman/Travel%20Near%20a%20Black%20Hole.htm

[TORAK]

Just saying we wouldnt be able to travel back in time only forward if i remember correctly. Let me check that for a fact real quick.

Yep. Just read this...

http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/211.fall2000.web.projects/John%20E%20Salzman/Travel%20Near%20a%20Black%20Hole.htm

Looking at the website, first glance, doesn't seem like a legitimate source.

[dnlsmth]

time travel is bullshit. cant happen. time is linear

[TORAK]

time travel is bullshit. cant happen. time is linear

Pleae give proof of your theory that; "Time travel is bullshit". I'll be happy to give second thoughts once you give a reasonable explanation. :)

[aperson444]

Carl Sagan suggested that we can travel back and forth in time while Stephen Hawkings pointed out the Grandfather Paradox (where you can literally go back in time and change the future, thus negating your existence). I believe that time travel FORWARDS is definitely possible, although difficult. I think going backwards may involve a trickier, more enigmatic issue

[huginnmuninn]

if we could time travel then it would probably affect the universe in ways we cant understand. we would be removing matter and energy from one section of time and adding it to another. although if only one or two person do this it might not have a great affect but if thousands of people do it it would possibley cause problems with gravity and stuff. and if we can travel forwards in time i dont see why we couldnt travel backwards in time unless the time travel machines require a connection between a point in this time and a point in another time which we wouldnt have in the past so it wouldnt work.

[TORAK]

Carl Sagan suggested that we can travel back and forth in time while Stephen Hawkings pointed out the Grandfather Paradox (where you can literally go back in time and change the future, thus negating your existence). I believe that time travel FORWARDS is definitely possible, although difficult. I think going backwards may involve a trickier, more enigmatic issue

Well, it IS technically possible to timetravel, but this is only feesable if we could get near a blackhole. To time travel, we'd need to be a certain distance from a blackhole, enoough to get into the orbit around it's massive gravity, but not to get sucked in [that's what she said]. The blackholes GIANT gravity slows time around it. According too Stephen Hawking, one day doing that, would be a month on Earth.

[ThatScience]

According to einstein's equation,
t'=t/sqrt(1-[v^2]/[c^2])
moving faster than the speed of light would make any person observing you see you have an imaginary time unit. For instance, moving at 1.4c would cause each second you observe in another frame of reference to be i seconds (look up imaginary units). However, there is no evidence to suggest that going faster than light would cause you to go back in time.

[TORAK]

According to einstein's equation,
t'=t/sqrt(1-[v^2]/[c^2])
moving faster than the speed of light would make any person observing you see you have an imaginary time unit. For instance, moving at 1.4c would cause each second you observe in another frame of reference to be i seconds (look up imaginary units). However, there is no evidence to suggest that going faster than light would cause you to go back in time.

You're just going on about Metaphysics there, buddy.

[ThatScience]

You're just going on about Metaphysics there, buddy.

Metaphysics is the interpretation of mathematical and physical laws. It is not a form of physics but, rather, philosophy. What I stated was Einstein's law of time dilation. A PROVEN law. I merely substituted a value larger than c in for v.
Metaphysics has nothing to do with it.

That being said, the law may well be proven wrong by this new found evidence. I'm just pointing out that, according to Einstein, moving faster than the speed of light produces non-sensical results.
PS: I made a mistake. Moving at 1.4c would produce a ratio of one second being -i seconds.

[TORAK]

Metaphysics is the interpretation of mathematical and physical laws. It is not a form of physics but, rather, philosophy. What I stated was Einstein's law of time dilation. A PROVEN law. I merely substituted a value larger than c in for v.
Metaphysics has nothing to do with it.

That being said, the law may well be proven wrong by this new found evidence. I'm just pointing out that, according to Einstein, moving faster than the speed of light produces non-sensical results.
PS: I made a mistake. Moving at 1.4c would produce a ratio of one second being -i seconds.

Well Metaphysics is the study of reality, but that's bayond the point.
Why not just say; "It's impossible due to Einsteins theory of relativity."

[ThatScience]

Well Metaphysics is the study of reality, but that's bayond the point.
Why not just say; "It's impossible due to Einsteins theory of relativity."

I wanted to point out WHY it is impossible (or non-sensical) to move beyond c according to Einstein.

Physics is the study of natural phenomina in a physical sense (what we observe).

"Metaphysics", as a word, is a misinterpretation of the title of a set of books written by aristotle, "ta meta ta physika biblia" or "the books that come after the [books on] physics".
He took physical laws he had explored and elaborated and interpreted them, speculating on the nature of the unseen or unexplained. Specifically, they had the answer to the question "What?" but not "How?". The "How?" is what aristotle explored with metaphysics.

"Meta" actually means "after", as aristotle intended the context to be or "beyond", the context in which it was understood. It is fortuitous that the two meanings, whilst not universally synonymous, were interchangeable in the context used.

So: Metaphysics means "after physics" or "beyond physics".
i.e. The philisophical exploration of what we cannot see based upon the physical properties which we can.

Einstein's theory of time dilation is a mathematical representation of what we observe. It is, in no sense of the term, metaphysical.

[TORAK]

I wanted to point out WHY it is impossible (or non-sensical) to move beyond c according to Einstein.

Physics is the study of natural phenomina in a physical sense (what we observe).

"Metaphysics", as a word, is a misinterpretation of the title of a set of books written by aristotle, "ta meta ta physika biblia" or "the books that come after the [books on] physics".
He took physical laws he had explored and elaborated and interpreted them, speculating on the nature of the unseen or unexplained. Specifically, they had the answer to the question "What?" but not "How?". The "How?" is what aristotle explored with metaphysics.

"Meta" actually means "after", as aristotle intended the context to be or "beyond", the context in which it was understood. It is fortuitous that the two meanings, whilst not universally synonymous, were interchangeable in the context used.

So: Metaphysics means "after physics" or "beyond physics".
i.e. The philisophical exploration of what we cannot see based upon the physical properties which we can.

Einstein's theory of time dilation is a mathematical representation of what we observe. It is, in no sense of the term, metaphysical.

"In Western philosophy, metaphysics has become the study of the fundamental nature of all reality — what is it, why is it, and how are we can understand it. Some treat metaphysics as the study of “higher” reality or the “invisible” nature behind everything, but that isn’t true. It is, instead, the study of all of reality, visible and invisible; and what constitutes reality, natural and supernatural."

[ThatScience]

"In Western philosophy, metaphysics has become the study of the fundamental nature of all reality — what is it, why is it, and how are we can understand it. Some treat metaphysics as the study of “higher” reality or the “invisible” nature behind everything, but that isn’t true. It is, instead, the study of all of reality, visible and invisible; and what constitutes reality, natural and supernatural."

If you study metaphysics as part of philosophy in university you interpret and speculate as to what causes the physical phenomena observed as allowed to what we ACTUALLY observe. Occasionally we get people studying philosophy come to PhysicsForums to ask for advice to help them in their study of metaphysics.
If you say something is metaphysical in general conversation, it is implied that the subject transcends the natural universe. Immaterial. Unobservable. Metaphysical.

[kaiba]

They might be real results but we will never except them becuase it goes against the basic fundamentals.....if in decades time everyone agrees they can't disprove it they will just say its mystery and that it still went wrong anyway

[TORAK]

They might be real results but we will never except them becuase it goes against the basic fundamentals.....if in decades time everyone agrees they can't disprove it they will just say its mystery and that it still went wrong anyway

These results go break the so called "basical fundamentals".

[tHe_Jester1080]

Just because we can travel really fast in the present doesn't mean we can all of a sudden go into the past or future