UFO Evidence Forums : General Discussion
Return to the General Discussion Homepage
User not logged in - Login or Register
Bill
12/31/2003 8:58:54 PM

Do you even know why things cant travel faster than the speed of light...most ppl dont. I do realise there is a whole universe out there, and i study it every day.

ok, whoever wrote this and it sounds like tago.....of course i could be wrong....but you say things can't go faster than the speed of light...that's old school.....yeah the theory about how things expand if you go that fast...its a theory....but do you now know that just recently man has been able to send particles faster than the speed of light in controlled experiments....and that being true....why do you find it so difficult to accept that aliens could figure out a way to do it w/ real ships? it takes 100k years at the speed of light to go across the galaxy....how long would it take at 300X the speed of light? as we have proven in our experiments?

 replies will be listed below this message edit


  Replies 1 - 10 (out of 43 total)

Don Tago
12/31/2003 10:04:03 PM

A particle is one thing. Light is made up of particles, in a way. Under certain extreme conditions, it is NOT surprising that we can manipluate particles that are 1000s of times smaller than anything we can see with our naked eye. Then there is a space ship. It would take more enegy than there is in the universe to accelerate it faster than the speed of light. E=mc^2. that says it all. As speed approaches "c" mass becomes infinite, and the amount of energy that it would take to push a spaceship faster than light does not exist in this galaxy. So there.

Robert L. Sharp
12/31/2003 10:15:51 PM

Hello:

Scientist and consciousness researcher John Lilly (1915-2001) once said:
"In the province of the mind, what is believed to be true is true, or becomes
true, within limits to be found experientially or experimentally. These limits
are further beliefs to be transcended. In the province of the mind, there are
no limits"

Happy New Year,

Robert L. Sharp

Gering, Nebraska USA


1/1/2004 2:18:24 AM

A particle is one thing. Light is made up of particles, in a way. Under certain extreme conditions, it is NOT surprising that we can manipluate particles that are 1000s of times smaller than anything we can see with our naked eye. Then there is a space ship. It would take more enegy than there is in the universe to accelerate it faster than the speed of light. E=mc^2. that says it all. As speed approaches "c" mass becomes infinite, and the amount of energy that it would take to push a spaceship faster than light does not exist in this galaxy. So there.

?. oh it wasn't surprising to the men who were able to figure out that they could make particles go 300x the speed of light?? you find this not amazing? and you state that the technology doesn't exist to so called push a space ship (maybe pull) that fast? you don't know your going on our technology you idiot.

Greg
1/1/2004 2:22:34 AM

Don,

What about the possibility of the use of wormholes? The bottom line is that if we can contemplate doing it,then it is probably possible.

DocMoriarty
1/1/2004 3:52:01 PM

This point goes to Don Tango in a ways. The experiments you are talking about are most likely the "tunnel" experiments, where information "tunnels" faster than the speed of light. But it only seems so.

Assume you have a 10m hosepipe completely filled with marbles. Now if you push another marble into the hosepipe at the speed of light, another one will drop out at the other end at the speed of light. Actual distance anything moved was the diameter of a marble, not the 10 meters of the hosepipe. So only the "information" travelled 10m at speed of x-times that of light.

While this is nice it's most likely not of any practical use in terms of FTL travel.

Way more promising are experiments with entangled photons and electrons. Obviously information is transmitted in ZERO TIME between two entangled photons, regardless how far apart they are. Experiments in that direction have been conducted by the University of Vienna for example over distances of about 600m. Now EXPLAIN that to me, Mr. Tago. What kind of connection exists between entangled quarks ? And it's pretty obvious that, whatever it is, it is a tad faster than the speed of light (zero time) in terms of our 3D (4D with time) reality. Either Mr. Einstein has few flaws in his theorie, or there is more to this world than science can explain yet (or both), as in dimensions and realities we usually have no access to with our current sensory means. But somebody else, with a way further developed science might have ...


Robert L. Sharp
1/1/2004 4:16:51 PM

Hi Doc:
Can I ask a question about entangled quarks? How do you know this is a
definite? As far as I know, quarks are a HYPOTHETICAL basic subatomic nuclear
particle held to be the basic component of protons, neutrons, etc, or a mathematically convenient parameter of a model........??????
Thanks,
Robert L. Sharp
Gering, Nebraska USA

DocMoriarty
1/1/2004 4:54:49 PM

I used the term quarks as placeholder for any kind of subatomic or energetic particles. The actual experiments were conducted with photons.
From my understanding quarks are more than just theoretical constructs to explain how hadrons (protons etc.) are built.

A good explanation i read at
http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/quarks.html
At the end there is a headline "How do we know Quarks are real" which i recommend to read.

Greetings
Doc

Don Tago
1/1/2004 5:20:02 PM

Dr Moriarty,

it is true, when you have two electrons interacting, there has to be a net chanrge of zero, if one electron has a spin of "up" the other must have a spin of "down" due the law of conservation of angular momentum. And when one of the electrons changes spin, the other, at the exact moment as the other does, changes spin likewise. So there is some sort of exchange of information going on between the two electrons that is faster than the speed of light.

However, we are talking about the quantum world, a world that is still not completely understood. And you are attempting to relate the laws of the quantum world, to laws of the macroscopic world. We do not understand all the mechanisms between what happens among all the particles in the quantum world. There are interactions we can not even begin to understand. And to think that we could somehow harness the method of transfer of information between two electrons in the quantum world, and apply that to propelling a space ship, in the macroscopic world, now THAT is science fiction. We have not even connected the relativistic world and the quantum world mathematically, and perhaps we will never be able to. But accelerating photons in glass tubes to speeds greater than "c" and noticing faster than light information transfer in the quantum world does not give us any leeway to infer that spaceships could be propelled to greater than "c" speeds.

I hope this has been helpful!

DocMoriarty
1/1/2004 8:04:33 PM

Don Tago,

oh the real point of my post is, that there are phenomenon that we don't understand as you confirmed very nicely. And the next point is, that as we progress in scientific exploration, we will someday most likely understand it, as others might have before us and might even benefit from that.

So it's not justified to claim something is "impossible", simply because we don't know everything yet, and we, and you too, know that we don't know it. Not understanding something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

That doesn't mean, UFO's propulsion systems must necessarly have something to do with etangled photons or an effect behind that phenomenon, that was just an example for what we don't know and what could be related. Also fits nicely in the topic since distance doesn't play a role, nor does time.

But you mentioned quantum physics. You might have heard of loop quantum gravity physics which can be seen as big alternative to other approaches like this silly super string crap to relate relativity and quantum physics, yet a very promising approach. A good introduction into LQG can be found here:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0007E95C-9597-1DC9-AF71809EC588EEDF

Basically this theory states that our world *inclusive space and time* is made up by a web of very small quantum "loops". Understanding that space and time is NOT fundamental to our universe, but made up of smaller quants, opens up a load of new possibilities as in completely alternate realities, dimensions etc which we will never have access to or sensoric evidence of unless we understand how to modify the underlaying loop quantum web to get access. In the first instance it is not necessary to KNOW how this works, alone the possibility is important, because it means, we can't exclude stuff like aliens visiting earth from the range of scientific valid possibilities.

I think it is very unlikely, that Aliens come from our "Einstein" reality or at least very unlikely due to the restrictions imposed by relativity in our space time continuum. They either come from alternate realities (which might not even be made up of space and time as we know it), or they kind of bend space and time to travel from their home in our universe to earth using alternate "realities" or "dimensions", some other state of the loop quantum web.

That entangled photon example actually might be related and be experimental evidence of such a loop quantum web caused effect, thats another reason why i mentioned it. On another "level" of reality these entangled photons might not even be spacely apart which explains why they switch states in no time (without violating good ole Einstein). In any case it would be stupid to claim, there is no evidence of yet unexplainable phenomenon. That clearly shows, that aliens are well within the range of possibility, i mean in science, as well as experimental as theoretical.

There are quite a number of other not yet understood phenomenon where science has sensory data and evidence but no real explanation yet (accelerated expansion of the universe, trying to explain that with "dark energy" etc.).

Ok so far we got that point of admitting, that we don't know everything straightened out and at least a line along which alien visits can be explained, not yet in detail but at least are thinkable, even within (or actually most likely without) Einstein imposed restrictions to our space time continuum.

On the other hand we have a huge load of evidence, that they are here. Sightings, abductions, crop circles, cattle mutilations, etc. This is a fact, not fiction. Not being able to explain with Einstein, how they could get here, doesn't mean they are not here. It just means, that there *is* an alternative to Einstein and we better find that fast.

The right approach to the phenomenon is not to flat negate it, it is to investigate and explain it.

Besides, do you know, why nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in our space time continuum ? I don't mean the schoolbook explanation of the closer you get to c the more energy you need to further accelerate since mass gets infinite. I mean, *why* is it like this ...

Eric
1/7/2004 7:35:19 PM

Whenever I hear about UFOs someone always says that it couldn't be aliens from another planet because the distances would be to vast for any being to survive that long. And since current theories state that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, that would be another argument against the theory that UFOs are being piloted by extraterrestrials, but has anyone ever thought that maybe UFOs are probes? Think about it. The Mars landers we create are launched from Earth and we wait months, sometimes even a couple years before they reach the planet. Then they land on the surface and take pictures, study the soil etc. Wouldn't it be likely that an advanced civilization discovered our planet, sent a probe and waited on their planet for years until it finally reached us and is now studying our planet much like our landers only much, much more advanced? And as time went by their technology continued to advance and they've sent more probes which could explain for all the different kinds of sightings over the years. All I'm saying is that there's a lot of different explinations than the old theory that it's aliens piloting flying saucers.


  Replies 1 - 10 (out of 43 total)



Return to General Discussion Homepage

 

 

Ads help to support this site: