It's an amazing world we live in

[otterinbham 0]

If this can be proved, it's pretty amazing. Any engineers or physicists want to weigh in on what this would mean if it were true?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtm...scispeed116.xml

'We have broken speed of light'

By Nic Fleming, Science Correspondent

Last Updated: 12:01am BST 16/08/2007

A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light - an achievement that would undermine our entire understanding of space and time.

According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, it would require an infinite amount of energy to propel an object at more than 186,000 miles per second.

However, Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University of Koblenz, say they may have breached a key tenet of that theory.

advertisement

The pair say they have conducted an experiment in which microwave photons - energetic packets of light - travelled "instantaneously" between a pair of prisms that had been moved up to 3ft apart.

Being able to travel faster than the speed of light would lead to a wide variety of bizarre consequences.

For instance, an astronaut moving faster than it would theoretically arrive at a destination before leaving.

The scientists were investigating a phenomenon called quantum tunnelling, which allows sub-atomic particles to break apparently unbreakable laws.

Dr Nimtz told New Scientist magazine: "For the time being, this is the only violation of special relativity that I know of."

[AU_tiger_2000 0]

Well, photons have 0 mass, so it would theoretically not take infinite energy to accelerate them to the speed of light as it would particles (this has been proven in particle accelerators by measuring the mass of electrons accelerated to high speed).

But if this is true it means that we can throw the entire premise of special relativity out the window. Just as Newtonian physics was able to explain the world at low speeds but had to be left behind as we were able to see more of the universe, Einstein might have to also be left behind if we can exceed the speed of light.

I would hold off on booking your trip to Alpha Centauri though.

[Tigermike 4,082]

186,000 miles per second.

However, Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University of Koblenz, say they may have breached a key tenet of that theory.

Being able to travel faster than the speed of light would lead to a wide variety of bizarre consequences.

For instance, an astronaut moving faster than it would theoretically arrive at a destination before leaving.

Those guys are way behind my ex wife. She could say no before the idea moved to action.

[otterinbham 0]

Well, photons have 0 mass, so it would theoretically not take infinite energy to accelerate them to the speed of light as it would particles (this has been proven in particle accelerators by measuring the mass of electrons accelerated to high speed).

But if this is true it means that we can throw the entire premise of special relativity out the window. Just as Newtonian physics was able to explain the world at low speeds but had to be left behind as we were able to see more of the universe, Einstein might have to also be left behind if we can exceed the speed of light.

I would hold off on booking your trip to Alpha Centauri though.

Oh, I know. Although I would do about anything to make the trip.

That being said, what about more mundane applications?

[quietfan 233]

Well, photons have 0 mass, so it would theoretically not take infinite energy to accelerate them to the speed of light as it would particles (this has been proven in particle accelerators by measuring the mass of electrons accelerated to high speed).

Actually, photons already move at the speed of light in vacuum (always and in all intertial reference frames according to Special Relativity), so there is no "accelerating" them to that speed.

I'd want to read the original paper by these guys, analyze their exact methods & data, and see their alleged results duplicated by others before I'd throw out Einstein (and the multitude of experiments since him that support him). I'll be looking for independent confirmation. Until then, I'll call this so much "cold fusion".

[CCTAU 3,821]

They figured this out ten years ago. But they had to wait for us to catch up......

[otterinbham 0]

Well, photons have 0 mass, so it would theoretically not take infinite energy to accelerate them to the speed of light as it would particles (this has been proven in particle accelerators by measuring the mass of electrons accelerated to high speed).

Actually, photons already move at the speed of light in vacuum (always and in all intertial reference frames according to Special Relativity), so there is no "accelerating" them to that speed.

I'd want to read the original paper by these guys, analyze their exact methods & data, and see their alleged results duplicated by others before I'd throw out Einstein (and the multitude of experiments since him that support him). I'll be looking for independent confirmation. Until then, I'll call this so much "cold fusion".

Yeah. I wondered if this were another 'cold fusion' myself. However, as a complete and total layman who is baffled by simple calculus, I find it interesting that a number of different theoretical physicists are beginning to question Einstein's theories as absolutes.

[AU_tiger_2000 0]

Well, photons have 0 mass, so it would theoretically not take infinite energy to accelerate them to the speed of light as it would particles (this has been proven in particle accelerators by measuring the mass of electrons accelerated to high speed).

Actually, photons already move at the speed of light in vacuum (always and in all intertial reference frames according to Special Relativity), so there is no "accelerating" them to that speed.

I'd want to read the original paper by these guys, analyze their exact methods & data, and see their alleged results duplicated by others before I'd throw out Einstein (and the multitude of experiments since him that support him). I'll be looking for independent confirmation. Until then, I'll call this so much "cold fusion".

Yeah. I wondered if this were another 'cold fusion' myself. However, as a complete and total layman who is baffled by simple calculus, I find it interesting that a number of different theoretical physicists are beginning to question Einstein's theories as absolutes.

There have always been scientists who were unafraid to take on Einey. Him and Niels Bohr had some famous discussions over quantum physics including Einstein's telling Bohr "God doesn't play dice" and Bohr responding with "Don't tell God what to do."

Einstein spent his last years working on a "theory of everything" and that has been the goal of physicists everywhere since Einstein's death(since Einstein's day physics has turned more to philosophy since many of the phenomena they are theorizing about cannot often be directly observed or measured and can only be postulated upon). One example is string theory which disagrees with special relativity with what happens inside the event horizon of a black hole. Since no information can pass out of the event horizon it is all just theory, it can't be observed to see what would really happen.

[WarTim 3,539]

St. nick already busted this theory to pieces. The west vancesters fell at his feet far faster than the speed of light.

[Captain Liger 0]

All this talk of photons, black holes, and going faster than the speed of light is interesting but..... all I wanna know is, when do we get to this point?

[AU_tiger_2000 0]

All this talk of photons, black holes, and going faster than the speed of light is interesting but..... all I wanna know is, when do we get to this point?

Everybody should have know that that movie was fake. There is no way a DeLorean could accelerate to 88mph in a mall parking lot. You would need a runway built for WW2 bombers to get that fast.

[Captain Liger 0]

All this talk of photons, black holes, and going faster than the speed of light is interesting but..... all I wanna know is, when do we get to this point?

Everybody should have know that that movie was fake. There is no way a DeLorean could accelerate to 88mph in a mall parking lot. You would need a runway built for WW2 bombers to get that fast.

Don't you remember? He power-braked it effectively achieving a speed of around 60 mph before releasing the brakes. Personally, I would have shoved a flux capacitor inside something like a '76 El Dorado. Comfort and all, easy on the eyes...

[quietfan 233]

Is discussing the technology of "Back to the Future" considered more or less geeky than debating "Enterprise" or "Millenium Falcon" blueprints?

...oh well:

Didn't Doc say in the movie the DeLorian's stainless steel body was an essential part of the system? That's why he had to make it work vs. some other speedster.