FreakensteinAG
Active member
Another member confuses Layman Theory with Scientific Theory
You must be registered for see images
So I was on a thread yesterday just reading what people are saying.
- Thread starter Cyber
- Start date
DeadManWonderLand
Active member
Shadows "speed" doesn't hinge the surface itself.
It it the empty space filled that is void of light.
It hinges on light.
DeadManWonderLand
Active member
It annoys me when people usually zealots bring up the big bang theory while having no clue to its placement in the theory of everything.
This is based upon the concept of Lorentz Transformations within the Theory of Relativity.
[video=youtube;C2VMO7pcWhg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2VMO7pcWhg[/video]
Frankly, under Relativity, the Sagnac Effect (what Laser Ring Gyros use) wouldn't work - so I'm not of the opinion that Relativity is entirely valid to begin with (at least in terms of predictive capability - I do not believe Relativity will be sufficient to accurately predict behavior of massive bodies near light speed under various scenarios).
However, under Lorentz transformations, should one ever move faster than the speed of light, it results in a reversal of time and also breaks causality - meaning that if event B occurs after event A, under Lorentz transformations, it is possible that traveling faster than the speed of light will allow you to view event B before event A - thereby breaking causality.
This is generally the issue taken with 'teleportation' - when applying Lorentz transformations to any form of FTL, it results in causality-violating scenarios where someone could see the outcome of events yet to take place (more or less). This allows for various forms of effective time travel. Other applications of Lorentz transformations allow for the sending of matter or data back in time through the use of theoretical 'worm-holes' (though these are so stupendously theoretical that there is literally no observational evidence to work from in regards to what limitations, complications, etc there are - it is also built around the concept of mathematical singularities, which are currently being viewed as less likely to be real - with 'black holes' being more along the lines of a new state of matter similar to a Bose Einstein Condensate).
From the other end, if you could actually get something to physically move faster than the speed of light, Lorentz transformations suggest that the matter would undergo a reversal of time, as well. This is generally considered the epitome of "what-if" thought-experiments, since both theory and observations support the increase of mass with the increase in velocity (or at least the apparent increase of mass). The experimental data is very limited in its form, and it may be possible many years from now to do more direct experiments on the nature of travel at substantial portions of the speed of light - but every indication is, currently, that it would require an infinite amount of energy for an object of mass to reach the speed of light, much less break it in a conventional sense.
But we're still trying to wrap our heads around gravity, so it will be quite a while before there are any kind of sound answers on the concept of what happens under teleportation, FTL, and other scenarios.
It might hinge on light but that doesn't means shadows move at the speed of light, that depends on the speed of the object or person who is casting the shadow thanks to the light reflecting on them and no person or object can reach lightspeed.
chopstickchakra
Active member
I don't think you're as good with time as you think you are. A few decades ago? Even if we don't take your "few" at literal sense which is a small number no more than 10(and that's being generous) 10 decades ago is 100 years. in 1915 we knew and accepted the Earth was round. Hell even in Columbus's time(1492) they knew the Earth was round because his plan was to sail west until he reached the East, he couldn't have thought to do that if he thought he'd fall off the edge by going West. Even in Galileo's time there were people who thought the Universe existed in some form of heliocentric way. It's just that the powers that be tell the majority a different story and they believe it for the same reason most of us believe authority figures in our life "why would they lie to me".
Well you missed my point: What people say is not necessarily the truth and is limited by the average scientific awareness of the time. So worrying about what people say ... especially if it is something as muddled as the Time Theory ... is silly.
chopstickchakra
Active member
No I got your point, and I agree with it. How does my comprehension of your point impact your inaccuracies though.
Well in a sense an object capable of going faster then light would be able to time travel as well, but not like people say(and this is coming from a documentary I watched on Discovery channel a long time ago), Acc to Stephen Hawkins hypothesis the laws of universe physics dictates that no object can travel faster then light so if that body reached 99.999...% speed of light time would slow down for it(as it approaches it-time slows down), so if this thing kept on moving at that speed for 100 years(our time) in it's time only only like few days(or some other short time-I don't know how the proportions scale)would've passed and when it stopped(say it's a train) people coming off that train would find the world around changed and for us they would be time travelers from the past. That's how it is.
The rays from sun takes like 5-6 minutes to reach the earth.
