Faster than speed of light?

Discussion in 'Physics' started by Sparky, Aug 16, 2007.

  1. Sparky

    Thread Starter AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 1, 2005
    75
    0
  2. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    Is this another potential attempt at forging an 'apparent faster-than-light' which have been proposed several times through the literature? Incidentally, contrary to some beliefs 'apparent FTL' does not violate the laws of general relativity.

    Dave
     
  3. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Got a flash for the krauts & the tabloid - tunnel diodes were doing just that 40 years ago. Also, Cerenkov radiation derrives from photons exceeding light speed in the medium they are passing through. It's a common phenomenon.
     
  4. n9352527

    AAC Fanatic!

    Oct 14, 2005
    1,198
    4
    Not to mention Lucky Luke, who did it a long long time ago :D
     
  5. GonzoEngineer

    New Member

    Jul 8, 2007
    46
    0
    There are a lot of things faster than the speed of light....

    The speed of thought comes to mind.......if you ever did Peyote, you would know that you can get to Saturn in just moments!:D:D:D:D
     
  6. Salgat

    Active Member

    Dec 23, 2006
    215
    1
    And silly me thought only tachyons traveled faster than the speed of light:p
     
  7. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    Do you have an example of something with mass that is faster than light?

    Dave
     
  8. recca02

    Senior Member

    Apr 2, 2007
    1,211
    0
    well phase velocities of waves exceed speed of light in vacuum.
     
  9. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Wave velocity does not involve particles with mass.

    There is a Danish scientist who managed to get a packet of photons slowed down to 17 m/s. My old Dodge Dart was therefore a FTL vehicle.
     
  10. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    Like beenthere says, EM waves in the particle model are photon based and therefore possess no mass. So I'm still open to suggestions about something with mass that is faster than light

    Dave
     
  11. recca02

    Senior Member

    Apr 2, 2007
    1,211
    0
    hmm, well that was just an example of only thing i know which is faster than light irrespective of mass.
    the only thing with mass though one of the smallest mass perhaps i think wud be a nutrino particle but its velocities are close to light its not FTL . i dont think any of such FTL (apart from MR beenthere's dodge :D) particles exist.
     
  12. mOOse

    Member

    Aug 22, 2007
    20
    0
    I don't know if it has mass, but the speed of bullshit is unlimited!
     
  13. recca02

    Senior Member

    Apr 2, 2007
    1,211
    0
    lol! taking the meaning literally
    poor bull :D
     
  14. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    You will find the speed is finite - its the quantity that is unlimited!!

    Dave
     
  15. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Yes, let's remember that the propulsion is usually from a fan blade.
     
  16. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    Lol! In this case, it doesn't necessarily have to be from a bull does it! :D

    Dave
     
  17. mOOse

    Member

    Aug 22, 2007
    20
    0
    The deadliest bullshit is odorless and transparent. -- W Gibson
     
  18. Mike M.

    Active Member

    Oct 9, 2007
    104
    0
    Using quantum entanglement, information induced into a particle with mass can be transferred to its pair particle with mass instantaneously to induce a mirror image change in it. That involves mass and FTL but it doesn't involve mass actually going FTL. A Bose-Einstein Condensate is a grouping of atoms that exhibit the properties of a single quantum particle and can be influenced to perform quantum leaps that are faster than light but the distance and/or time is an inverse function of the energy violation. The greater the violation, the shorter the distance and/or time it may violate the conservation of energy. This usually involves very small distances and time scales though.

    This is an interesting search that is related
     
  19. cumesoftware

    Senior Member

    Apr 27, 2007
    1,330
    10
    As long as they don't exceed light speed on vacuum. The normal light speed on water is substatially lower than the one in vacuum. That causes refraction, since photons entering/leaving the material change velocity and attack angle. Thus we have Cerenkov radiation visible in water submerged reactors.
     
  20. Dave

    Retired Moderator

    Nov 17, 2003
    6,960
    145
    So no mass travelling faster than light. That is the crux here.

    I am open to the suggestion of an example that challenges the status-quo...not sure I'll get one mind you.

    Dave
     
Loading...