light speed
its the basis of sci fi novels and the appearant speed limit of the universe.
OR IS IT ?

relativity (einsteins main squeeze) dictates that nothing is faster than the speed of light. absolutely nothing.
according to these theories, Light-Speed is the fastest speed information can be processed.

side note: the calculated speed of light is approx 299,792,458 meters per second. roughly 300 million meters per second. Zoom Zoom!
I believe this calculation is limited to Our Galaxy Only. I believe that Light Speed Varies from Galaxy to Galaxy, and Possibly within Solar Systems as well.

with all the arguments about what light actually is, people dispute and debate but in reality it doesnt matter. either it is a wave or perhaps a light particle (some believe) or a mix of the two (i believe) the question is not what is light but how can we get to that speed?

is FTL (faster than light) travel possible?

I believe it is.

although i dont have scientific proof, i did find one piece of evidence.

If in fact Alien Crafts have been recovered on Earth with Alien Bodies inside of them, then there is no doubt where it came from.
Outer-Space.
So, after you establish that, you realize that this Craft came from another planet. Well, pick one, any one- and tell me how far away it is- in LIGHT-YEARS. Even if these Crafts came from a MODERATELY CLOSE PLANET, it would take thousands of years to get here (and thats travelling at Light-Speed). Now, These Crafts were manned by Aliens (usually around 2 per ship) - this proposes two things:
-either the aliens have extremely supernatural long LIFESPANS
-or they were travelling FASTER THAN LIGHT.

i doubt the first idea is true, a living creature living for thousands of years.
doesnt it seem more probable that these Alien Lifeforms have developed FTL travel? We are new kids on the galaxy block, whose to say other lifeforms who have been living long before us have had the time to develop the technology for this?

conclusion: theres is Faster Than Light Speed.

*note:
i believe that when light-speed is surpassed, the object travelling loses all of its color, and furthermore, any lifeform travelling FTL will not be able to see ANYTHING.

The closest star is 4.2 light years away, so they wouldn't necessarily have to break the light speed barrier, or travel for thousands of years, if they were coming from Alpha Centieri.

However, I believe there is a more simple answer than attempting to reach Light speed. It revolves around the idea that the fastest way to get from point A, to point B, is a straight line........ Well, maybe it isn't.

Yes, but i dont think any life can live on Alpha Centauri. Does it have planets revolving around it or is it merely a star ?

However, I believe there is a more simple answer than attempting to reach Light speed. It revolves around the idea that the fastest way to get from point A, to point B, is a straight line........ Well, maybe it isn't.
precisely! you speak of wormholes and black holes as shortcuts?
I think that would qualify as Faster Than Light Speed.
(light cannot escape b.holes)

My post isnt about reaching Light Speed, its about FTL Speed.
Point being that you can travel faster than light. somehow.
Other lifeforms have developed technology to do so, and we need to get on the ball.

*note: the US government had classified detailed documents on energy systems that would completely revolutionize our economy and help us get out into space soon. They are WITH HOLDING these important Documents because they have to do with UFO technology, and Because of the impact the Oil Indutry has on the world

Listen to you going on about how the aliens are from other planets. Have you completely discounted the posability that they are extradimentional, or time travelers?!

Alpha Centauri is a trinary system. Proxima Centauri is the closest of the bunch. I'm pretty sure no planets have been found around it or the others yet, if there are even any.

Also the speed of light wouldn't change in other solar systems, or other galaxies. The Universe is bound by laws and parts of it just don't disregard it. The may be ways around the light speed barrier, but I doubt we'll figure out how mechanically any time soon.

I sure hope the Oil companys are suppressing revolutionary ways of generating energy, because in about 50 years we will be sucking the last barrels of oil out of the earth, and the shortages will begin decades before that. Its sort of comforting to know that these powerful knowledgeable industrys that already own power distributing infrastructures are sitting on sources of energy that will allow us to live better than we even are now, once all the oil is gone.

Mystech no i have not discounted those kind of aliens

i simply didnt mention them because they can give a shit about travel faster than light, they are from other dimensions!
time-travelers- same thing, why would they be concerned with how fast they can travel? they can cut thru time silly!

Spymoose - so you'd rather waste your money on gas and electricity all your life, (and consume all the earth's natural resources) instead of using EVIRONMENTALLY SAFE, ZERO-ENERGY LOSS power systems ?

dude come on.

Im not exact on this but I do believe that scientist have already proven that you can change the speed of light. I read somewhere that some european and american scientist have found a way to speed up light 5X faster than normal. They said it was soo fast that the beam of light they spead up existed in two places at once. They have also found a way to slow the speed of light to somehwere around 35 miles per hour. The main use for this new research is mainly for advanced communications rather than space flight or transportation. You might want to check out more info over google or on these links

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/02/990223083631.htm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/constant_changing_010815.html

one question for blackhole:

how do you know the speed of light is exactly the same here on earth as say, inside the andromeda galaxy?
Did you measure it ? oh some scientists did. Where did they make this calculation? From earth, oh that makes sense. yea right !
U are going strictly by what other scientists said, and i bet if they said FTL speed is possible 2morrow, you would change your mind.

Bottom Line: you dont know how fast light travels anywhere else but here. We are stuck in our "reference frame" if you will. all outside assumptions shall be NULL and VOID!

We cannot apply LAWs to the UNIVERSE, thats utter nonsense. I respect Mathemeticians very greatly, but they failed to see that we can only account for what happens HERE, in our galaxy at the most.

which brings me back the my topic- we need to get going on this FTL travel, or any other type of space travel. Then we can really see how fast light goes.

oooh, and sly1 just posted some very good information! right-on !

one question for blackhole:

how do you know the speed of light is exactly the same here on earth as say, inside the andromeda galaxy?!

How do you know it isn't? You seem so sure. I mean...where is YOUR analysis?

We cannot apply LAWs to the UNIVERSE, thats utter nonsense. I respect Mathemeticians very greatly, but they failed to see that we can only account for what happens HERE, in our galaxy at the most.

Math is what nature is built upon. Look at all the patterns in nature. Don't you think a galaxy would form differently under different conditions? Don't you think we'd see those differences? That's not what astronomers see. They see similar conditions; light undergoing doppler shift to a specific degree as predicted by current theory.

which brings me back the my topic- we need to get going on this FTL travel, or any other type of space travel. Then we can really see how fast light goes.

Just look at particle accelerators. Wonder why they can't accelerate particles past 99.999999% c? Because they are obeying relativity just as predicted.

..."how do you know the speed of light is exactly the same here on earth as say, inside the andromeda galaxy?"

Um, are you forgetting that the vast majority of the observable EM spectrum reaching Earth, from other stars, (whether or not observed as particle or wave) is "extra-galactic" in origin? We do not simply switch on a light bulb and apply the results to the whole of the universe. We also average in the calculated speed of light reaching us from those other galaxies/stars...and YES we do average. Gravity and matter density can and and do slow the speed at which light travels. The speed of light here on Earth is slightly slower then that in the vacuum of space...but nowhere has it conclusively proven to accelerate beyond the equations of relativity. There is no barrier that causes the speed of light to change once it enters our own galaxy, other then matter and gravity...


edit:Just thought I would also throw this in there...The speed of light is not something that Einstein cooked up. He merely identified it as a natural, universal speed limit. Scientists have been attempting to calculate the average speed of light for the better part of 300+ years, and has been theorized on longer. It is one of humanities longest, continuous scientific observations.

Logic - 1 a (1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning (2) : a branch or variety of logic *modal logic* *Boolean logic* (3) : a branch of semiotic; especially : SYNTACTICS (4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge b (1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty (2) : RELEVANCE, PROPRIETY c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable d : the arrangement of circuit elements (as in a computer) needed for computation; also : the circuits themselves
2 : something that forces a decision apart from or in opposition to reason *the logic of war*
–lo£gi£cian \l*-*ji-sh*n\ noun


Work on that.

some interesting stuff i found about the trinary star system alpha centauri.

talking about possible life within alpha centauri
....we know that Proxima Centauri is a definite no-go. It is too small, a flare star, and does not emit enough light or heat.

But Alpha Centauri A and B are very possible life-harbouring stars.
Both planets are not a lot bigger/smaller than the sun. Nor are they too hot. Though there remains some discussion around the fact if whether the spectral type of AC-B is right for life, the spectral type of A is perfect (as discussed earlier it has the same spectral type as our sun being G2)
Due to this right spectral type, elements needed to harbour life, are for sure in the core of these stars.
Scientists know for a fact that the binary pair is old enough for life, but have doubts if C is.
http://www.eso.org/outreach/eduoff/edu-prog/catchastar/CAS2002/cas-projects/nether_alphacen_1/lifepos.html

There is no barrier that causes the speed of light to change once it enters our own galaxy, other then matter and gravity...
but my question is, how do you know there isnt?
if in fact, i said if, the speed of light is altered once it enters our galaxy, we wouldnt be able to know that it has changed, we would simply observe what we have.
plus- one thing to think about:
We also average in the calculated speed of light reaching us from those other galaxies/stars...and YES we do average. Gravity and matter density can and and do slow the speed at which light travels. The speed of light here on Earth is slightly slower then that in the vacuum of space...

average meaning that the observed speeds from different sources were slightly different?
if so, i think this could account for what im trying to say. let me explain.
lets say light leaves a galaxy at a certain speed 'A'
once it reaches the vacuums of space it is said to gain speed, this would be 'A + x' (im keeping it real dumbfoundedly simple)
now youve got a faster speed of light, but when it enters our galaxy, the vacuum of space is Gone and the Light is slown down once again.
this would be a new speed, speed 'A + x - y'
Y would relate to our galactal light-speed limit, the 300 million meters per sec.

sorry guys im not trying to argue with yall
just tryin to open your minds to new ideas ;)

Ellimist,

Where exactly did we loose you in this discussion?

"sorry guys im not trying to argue with yall
just tryin to open your minds to new ideas ;)"

If we weren't open minded, we would not be open to replying to you with serious answers...

Anyway, back to the speed of light.

"once it reaches the vacuums of space it is said to gain speed, this would be 'A + x' (im keeping it real dumbfoundedly simple)
now youve got a faster speed of light, but when it enters our galaxy, the vacuum of space is Gone and the Light is slown down once again."

As far as I am aware, light is subject to the same laws of motion as anything else within the universe...As in, once the speed is reduced, it can not re-accelerate (at least not under its own momentum).

Let us use your own simple equation: If A + x is the speed of light in a vacuum, then that is the maximum velocity at which light can travel. Once the speed is reduced to A, it can not again gain + x without there being some outside force acting upon it. In fact, depending on what resistance acted upon it, light would only further decrease in velocity to A - y (Note: this reduction is infinitesimally small, and could probably only be estimated by some mathematical formula in theory)

"if in fact, i said if, the speed of light is altered once it enters our galaxy, we wouldnt be able to know that it has changed, we would simply observe what we have."

Wrong. If the speed of light drastically decreased upon entering out Galaxy, the measured Doppler (red/blue) shift would be so skewed that it would become unreliable. When light moves towards the lower energy...the wavelength increases. In the visible spectrum, this means red. If speed was drastically decreased upon entering the Galaxy, the wave length would increase giving the illusion of redshift...even if the source were moving closer toward the observer. The fact that there is even a measurable blue shift counts that out...at least for a drastic reduction in speed/energy, anyway.

I am not a scientists, so if I am wrong in any of this...please correct me.

[Notes on the Spead of Light:

The speed of light in vacuum is exactly 299,792,458 m/s (metres per second)

In 1983 the SI (Systeme International) defined a metre as:


The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.
When people refer to the speed of light, they refer to the definition above - the speed of light in a vacuum.

The speed of light is normally rounded to 300 000 kilometers per second or 186 000 miles per second.

The speed of light depends on the material that the light moves through - for example: light moves slower in water, glass and through the atmosphere than in a vacuum. The ratio whereby light is slowed down is called the refractive index of that medium.

In general, the difference in the speed of light in other mediums is ignored.

Some more Notes on Red Shift for those not familiar:

A redshift is a shift in the frequency of a photon toward lower energy, or longer wavelength. The redshift is defined as the change in the wavelength of the light divided by the rest wavelength of the light, as

z = (Observed wavelength - Rest wavelength)/(Rest wavelength)

Note that positive values of z correspond to increased wavelengths (redshifts).

Different types of redshifts have different causes.

The Doppler Redshift results from the relative motion of the light emitting object and the observer. If the source of light is moving away from you then the wavelength of the light is stretched out, i.e., the light is shifted towards the red. These effects, individually called the blueshift, and the redshift are together known as doppler shifts. The shift in the wavelength is given by a simple formula

(Observed wavelength - Rest wavelength)/(Rest wavelength) = (v/c)

so long as the velocity v is much less than the speed of light. A relativistic doppler formula is required when velocity is comparable to the speed of light.

The Cosmological Redshift is a redshift caused by the expansion of space. The wavelength of light increases as it traverses the expanding universe between its point of emission and its point of detection by the same amount that space has expanded during the crossing time.

The Gravitational Redshift is a shift in the frequency of a photon to lower energy as it climbs out of a gravitational field.

Spymoose - so you'd rather waste your money on gas and electricity all your life, (and consume all the earth's natural resources) instead of using EVIRONMENTALLY SAFE, ZERO-ENERGY LOSS power systems ?

dude come on.

Read his post a little closer. I think the idea is that he reallizes he CAN'T use fossile fules all his life, they're due to dry up in the next ten years or so, and he'd be glad to think that those happy alternatives do exist and the oil companies are just holding them back for the time being.

Look, science cannot be thought of based on hunches and this conversation cannot be taken seriously if the premise is the existence of extra-terrestrial intelligence that somehow figured out FTL travel.

I believe this calculation is limited to Our Galaxy Only. I believe that Light Speed Varies from Galaxy to Galaxy, and Possibly within Solar Systems as well.

And that is exactly what it is. A belief.

and you Believe the speed of light is unvariable. u never actually measured it but since alot of ppl agreed, you "Believe" it too. quite like religion, except ur proof is numbers not words.

i am simply trying to bring the IDea that FTL travel might be plausible, and i want to debate with what other people think.

U guys always doubt these E.T.s
we can learn alot from them !
but, some dont even think they exist :(

Well see here's the thing. There is a lot of proof that backs the c speed limit theory and relativity. If you do a quick search, you'll see a lot of the research people did to achieve those conclusions. They just didn't make shit up for the sake of it.

U guys always doubt these E.T.s
we can learn alot from them !
but, some dont even think they exist

More than some bucko.

well- firstly i dont necessarily disagree with the mathematics, just the assumption that its constant across the entire universe when no one has even stepped outside of our own solar system.
secondly, the reason there is so much backup (when u search the theories, and i do) is because people gave it a chance and over time it has gained alot of proof and backup.
point being- if we can consider that FTL speed and ZPE devices and that kind of stuff can really happen, then we can move to the next step which would be studying it and finding out "whats the deal" so we can progress our human race-
our close minded theories will keep us stuck on this run of the mill planet forever unless we consider new ideas.

- i would expect more believers of extra terrestrial life here on sciforums :(

and you Believe the speed of light is unvariable. u never actually measured it but since alot of ppl agreed, you "Believe" it too.

You really shouldn't concede my points by trying to point out "you do it, too..."

Anyway - that isn't what I was saying. Pay attention. The speed of light is relatively variable. It does change... in a vacuum, near gravity, in atmosphere and so on and so forth... But, different in different galaxies is absurd. There is absolutely no reason for it. Or evidence, for that matter. What you are talking about it speculation, not plausibility.

Highly intelligent, super-species-like aliens do not exist. How old are you?
It is a fantasy. The complete lack of evidence in porportion to the amount of claims does not help its case. Considering intelligent ETs when considering scientific laws is not taken seriously, but then again, I suppose that is why you posted in Pseudoscience as opposed to science. At least you got it in the wrong place, because the sci admins would have moved the post for you. Haha.

Aliens do not exist.

http://www.gaydeceiver.com/image/eaclogo.jpg

Highly intelligent, super-species-like aliens do not exist. How old are you?
It is a fantasy. The complete lack of evidence in porportion to the amount of claims does not help its case. Considering intelligent ETs when considering scientific laws is not taken seriously, but then again, I suppose that is why you posted in Pseudoscience as opposed to science. At least you got it in the wrong place, because the sci admins would have moved the post for you. Haha.

Aliens do not exist.

I think I've found the most arrogant, IGNORANT post EVER on this board.

Ellimist,

Please tell us, how do you know this? Billions upon Billions of Galaxies. Each of these galaxies containing Billions, upon Billions of stars(most just like our own). Very likely to contain planetary systems, just like our own. Yet, you claim that we're the ONLY ONE's??? WOW, now that's what I call fantasy.

BTW: The evidence most certainly IS THERE. For those lacking the basic functionalities of logic.... THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE & PROOF!

Ok guys. I'll say this one time. The speed of light doesn't change in materal or in a gravity field. In a materal the absorbtion and reemission of the photons causes a bit of a delay. Refraction is the effect of this. Gravity doesn't slow light down. I can be blue shifted when near large gravitational sources (i.e. black holes).


zonabi: I didn't say ETs aren't real. I'm sure life is out there in some form or other. I just don' think any of them are giving people anal probes and conspiring with our government.

point of my post isnt really about LIGHT itself, its about Faster than Light travel and the workings thereof. I mean look, you guys dont agree about the constant of light either, some say it varies sometimes others say it doesnt.
the scientist still debate on what the hell light is- some save wave some particle other have their own ideas- see what im getting at

and yes, i placed it here in psuedoscience because it is where it belongs.
the question is if this section of the forum is where You belong.
your arrogance almost causes me not to consider any valuable things you might have said

but being a nice guy i still took your words with a grain of salt.
im going to quote you ellimist:
Anyway - that isn't what I was saying. Pay attention. The speed of light is relatively variable. It does change... in a vacuum, near gravity, in atmosphere and so on and so forth... But, different in different galaxies is absurd. There is absolutely no reason for it. Or evidence, for that matter. What you are talking about it speculation, not plausibility.
maybe u should pay attention to what U say:
It does change
hooray weve got a believer
in a vacuum
meaning it might speed up after it leaves the galaxy and enters the Voids of space and begins travelling towards other places
near gravity
meaning it might slow back down once it nears some other galaxy or anything else causing gravity (say a black hole or gravastar)
in atmosphere
meaning it is further altered once reaching the earth (or whatever planets atmosphere)

from that it seems more like you support my idea than oppose it.
sorry for making you eat your words but u deserved it

Speed of light ... slowing down

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml

http://www.nature.com/nsu/030324/030324-4.html

I think I've found the most arrogant, IGNORANT post EVER on this board.

Ellimist,

Please tell us, how do you know this? Billions upon Billions of Galaxies. Each of these galaxies containing Billions, upon Billions of stars(most just like our own). Very likely to contain planetary systems, just like our own. Yet, you claim that we're the ONLY ONE's??? WOW, now that's what I call fantasy.

BTW: The evidence most certainly IS THERE. For those lacking the basic functionalities of logic.... THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE & PROOF!

You have mistaken me. I guess I wasn't clear.

Based on the evidence humans currently have (or lack of, for that matter), there are no intelligent aliens that have come to our planet.

I know there is a possibility that they exist. Ha, looking back at my post, I guess I do sound like that, don't I? I meant to say, in regard to this discussion and humans in general... aliens don't exist... not in the sense zonabi is speaking. I know the possibility and Drake's equation... and I accept it... I just failed to mention the rest... oh, and you overreacted, anyway... "most arrogant, IGNORANT post EVER " - I hope you mean in this section on the topic of FTL travel... because otherwise, you haven't been reading some of the other stuff people have posted.

Speed of light ... slowing down

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/08/07/tech/main517850.shtml

http://www.nature.com/nsu/030324/030324-4.html

To comment on the nature link. They don't really slow light down. From the story:

"But the real meaning of this slowing down is subtle. Not every photon of light that passes through the ruby travels at 57 metres per second. Rather, this is the average speed of a batch of photons in a light pulse. This measure, called the group velocity of a pulse, can do surprising things: three years ago, physicists found a group velocity faster than the speed of light in a vacuum."

http://focus.aps.org/story/v5/st23

Faster in material, not vacuum by messing with group and phase velocities.

And to the other link, a much more detailed story:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0809_cdk_davies.asp

Just to clarify some things.

taken from blackhole's moer detailed second link, in case u didnt click it:
if stars are really well over 6000 light years away, how could light have had time to travel from them to Earth? Two logically possible answers have serious problems:

God created the starlight on its way: this suffers grievously from the fact that starlight also carries information about distant cosmic events. The created-in-transit theory means that the information would be ‘phony’, recording events which never happened, hence deceptive.

The distances are deceptive: but despite some anomalies in redshift/distance correlations (see Galaxy-Quasar ‘Connection’ Defies Explanation), it’s just not possible for all stars and galaxies to be within a 6000-light-year radius—we would all fry!

But if light were billions of times faster at the beginning, and slowed down in transit, there would be no more problem.
i havent heard until now the idea that light has been slowing down since the beggining of the universe. this is quite a statement!
as u guys know i firmly believe that "C" is not constant at all, although it obeys galactal speed limits every now and then ;)
this information is important to understanding creation i believe

Barry Setterfield collated data of measurements of c spanning a period of about 300 years. He claimed that rather than fluctuating around both sides of the present value as measurements became more accurate, they had progressively declined from a point significantly higher than today’s value. He proposed that this decline had been exponential in nature, i.e. very rapid early on, gradually easing to stabilize at today’s value for c, just a few decades ago.

this is amazing, because it relates to an idea i had once (epithany):
thinking on creation of universe, and thinking on our estimation of how old the universe is- i realized one thing:
-= time was not what it is today - back then at creation =-
time, just like the universe, was small and had to grow(expand, whatever) just as with everything else-
this means, to me- that our calculations of the age of the universe or the age of our galaxy and so on- IS INCORRECT.
it would seem time was slower when the universe was created, and it grew and grew faster and bigger.
now- related to the idea that Light has been slowing down since creation, i come to the conclusion that Time and Light are inversly proportional.

i want to know what you guys think of that statement?

also, what do u think of this statement:
Time was different at the start- and grew(expanded) with everything else.

its a new idea in my head and i will have to consider giving it more thought and research, but the research available doesnt really help much. but at least we're making new discoveries everyday and getting closer to the truth.

I mean look, you guys dont agree about the constant of light either, some say it varies sometimes others say it doesnt.
the scientist still debate on what the hell light is- some save wave some particle other have their own ideas- see what im getting atThis isn't accurate. Modern science has a very good understanding of light. There isn't any debate over 'whether it's a wave or a particle'.

charming Nasor, but how about some input

Input about what? Light? Light is made up of tiny massless particles called photons. According to quantum physics, all particles have wave-like characteristics.

As for whether it's possible to travel faster than light, it's pretty well established that you can't accelerate an object faster than light through any conventional means like rocket engines. I'm not really an expert on relativity so I don’t know much about creating space warps, wormholes, or whatnot.

Hello zonabi!

I will agree with you that ET life is possible and the FTL travel would be great. FTL communication seems plausible.

However, with the basic premise that light travels at different speeds in different places, I have to disagree. Hundreds of years of observations, every telescope on earth (and in orbit above it) tend to support the concept that the rules are constant. Let's try an example.

In my back yard, water flows and it is wet. I look at my neighbors yard and see water. Is it the same? Does it flow or does it burn? I don't need to climb over the fence and find out. Just because I have never been in his yard, I am still quite confident that water flows there as well as here, especially if I am able to observe it for some time and see that it obeys the same rules. It freezes at a certain temperature, etc.

That is a very simplistic example, but the idea is obvious. We can observe light behaving exactly as predicted over enormous distances.

I am not a believer in alien visitors, nor the creation myth. I do not put any stock in light speed slowing down for the past 6000 years. That is the work of desperate writers attempting to justify their faith in the face of contradictory facts, IMHO.

However, I think there is a lot of room for new theories, realms of science as yet undiscovered, that will revolutionize our understanding of some things. And who knows? Possibly might make FTL possible.

Hello zonabi!
However, with the basic premise that light travels at different speeds in different places, I have to disagree. Hundreds of years of observations, every telescope on earth (and in orbit above it) tend to support the concept that the rules are constant. Let's try an example.

In my back yard, water flows and it is wet. I look at my neighbors yard and see water. Is it the same? Does it flow or does it burn? I don't need to climb over the fence and find out. Just because I have never been in his yard, I am still quite confident that water flows there as well as here, especially if I am able to observe it for some time and see that it obeys the same rules. It freezes at a certain temperature, etc.

First of all, I am neutral in this speed of light issue. I don't know whether or not its speed ever changes. However, I think you're example is lacking. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some here saying that the speed changes when it enters different environments/obsticles, such as gravity, or atmosphere? Your use of water as a comparison does not change environments, therefor I don't feel it applies to this discussion.

Yep, it's a crappy analogy. I like it a whole lot less after I posted it and thought about it a bit.

Basically, I was trying to point out that when we can observe an effect close to hand and see the same thing at a distance, it is logical to assume that the same rules apply. I don't see how any evidence has been put forward to indicate that crossing some invisible borderline would change the behaviour of that which we understand so well. That is where I went for "my yard vs his yard" = our galaxy vs a distant but visible galaxy.

I was shooting for a "lowest common denominator" type of example and missed.

[QUOTE=zonabi]
i did find one piece of evidence.

If in fact Alien Crafts have been recovered on Earth with Alien Bodies inside of them, then there is no doubt where it came from.
Outer-Space.
So, after you establish that, you realize that this Craft came from another planet. Well, pick one, any one- and tell me how far away it is- in LIGHT-YEARS. Even if these Crafts came from a MODERATELY CLOSE PLANET, it would take thousands of years to get here (and thats travelling at Light-Speed). Now, These Crafts were manned by Aliens (usually around 2 per ship) - this proposes two things:
-either the aliens have extremely supernatural long LIFESPANS
-or they were travelling FASTER THAN LIGHT.
QUOTE]

Or maybe this isnt evidence at all since evidence is
"To indicate clearly; exemplify or prove.
To support by testimony; attest. "
aliens are not proven to exist no matter what you believe. And as further point to prove your an idiot. All things are relative and we have no other bipedal creature similiar to the human physiology to declare what is a "natural" lifespan. Your a delusional idiot who missed his meds. I'm not sure at what point information was released stating that alien craft come to earth and are usually manned by two aliens, but im sure you can (and will) fight this tooth and nail with the amazing power of mass ignorance.

First of all, I am neutral in this speed of light issue. I don't know whether or not its speed ever changes. However, I think you're example is lacking. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't some here saying that the speed changes when it enters different environments/obsticles, such as gravity, or atmosphere? Your use of water as a comparison does not change environments, therefor I don't feel it applies to this discussion.


Some may be saying that. They are wrong. Light doesn't slow down when it enters a materal. Nor is it completely stopped by a cold ball of atoms...nor rubies. It's all quantum effects being seen. As the atoms of the materal absorb incomming atoms there is a short time delay before they reemit those photons. Refraction happens due to the effect. With a BEC, the properties of the light beam are "imprinted" on the atoms within the BEC. When another laser is used to trigger the release of photons from the BEC, they are identical to the laser used to imprint the BEC. Gravity doesn't slow light but it can cause blue shifting. I'm pretty sure that's how it goes. I may be rusty.

aliens are not proven to exist no matter what you believe. And as further point to prove your an idiot. All things are relative and we have no other bipedal creature similiar to the human physiology to declare what is a "natural" lifespan. Your a delusional idiot who missed his meds. I'm not sure at what point information was released stating that alien craft come to earth and are usually manned by two aliens, but im sure you can (and will) fight this tooth and nail with the amazing power of mass ignorance

all of this rambling has absolutely nothing to do with faster than light ideas, so screw off if your coming just to talk sh!t

In fact there is a lot of evidence to suggest the possibility that they exist, physical evidence to suggest they are visiting us, and theoretical evidence to illustrate how they can visit us.

Ignorance, is to discount all this evidence, and state, they don't exist.
:)

Ignorance, is to discount all this evidence, and state, they don't exist. :)

GREAT Quote! With emphasis on the 'EVIDENCE'.

light speed
its the basis of sci fi novels and the appearant speed limit of the universe.
OR IS IT ?

relativity (einsteins main squeeze) dictates that nothing is faster than the speed of light. absolutely nothing.
according to these theories, Light-Speed is the fastest speed information can be processed.

side note: the calculated speed of light is approx 299,792,458 meters per second. roughly 300 million meters per second. Zoom Zoom!
I believe this calculation is limited to Our Galaxy Only. I believe that Light Speed Varies from Galaxy to Galaxy, and Possibly within Solar Systems as well.

with all the arguments about what light actually is, people dispute and debate but in reality it doesnt matter. either it is a wave or perhaps a light particle (some believe) or a mix of the two (i believe) the question is not what is light but how can we get to that speed?

is FTL (faster than light) travel possible?

I believe it is.

although i dont have scientific proof, i did find one piece of evidence.

If in fact Alien Crafts have been recovered on Earth with Alien Bodies inside of them, then there is no doubt where it came from.
Outer-Space.
So, after you establish that, you realize that this Craft came from another planet. Well, pick one, any one- and tell me how far away it is- in LIGHT-YEARS. Even if these Crafts came from a MODERATELY CLOSE PLANET, it would take thousands of years to get here (and thats travelling at Light-Speed). Now, These Crafts were manned by Aliens (usually around 2 per ship) - this proposes two things:
-either the aliens have extremely supernatural long LIFESPANS
-or they were travelling FASTER THAN LIGHT.

i doubt the first idea is true, a living creature living for thousands of years.
doesnt it seem more probable that these Alien Lifeforms have developed FTL travel? We are new kids on the galaxy block, whose to say other lifeforms who have been living long before us have had the time to develop the technology for this?

conclusion: theres is Faster Than Light Speed.

*note:
i believe that when light-speed is surpassed, the object travelling loses all of its color, and furthermore, any lifeform travelling FTL will not be able to see ANYTHING.
actually, frnd ufos were ntg but spaceships lauched by usa drng d cold war against ussr. u might not have heard bout dem after ussr broke . moreover bout the accid of ufo , it was never disclosed by d mexican govt 2 d public.

actually, frnd ufos were ntg but spaceships lauched by usa drng d cold war against ussr. u might not have heard bout dem after ussr broke . moreover bout the accid of ufo , it was never disclosed by d mexican govt 2 d public.

Do we have any translaters on board?? :confused:

In space, speed kills. Space is full of trash, particulate matter, etc. One single grain of sand striking the hull [at the speeds you're talking about] would destroy the spacecraft. I'll bet you're saying, "WHAT ABOUT SHIELDS, THEY HAVE SHIELDS ON STAR TREK?"

Folding space is the answer for interstellar travel. Interplanetary speeds? That would depend on how lucky you feel. Talking about FTL is a waste of time. :rolleyes:

Trying to go even half the speed of light will destroy your speceship due to space junk left by comets and the like. The kinetic energy will be like mini nukes every microsecond and your shield will not be able to deliver that much energy assuming you have a startrek type shield. The capacitor needed to store and release such energy will be bigger than your speceship.

I found this out the hardway when my son burned the alternator and replaced a few batteries using a high powered stereo system in his car. We finally put a 1.5 Farad capacitor that was still straining at 3/4 volume.

The argument of collision with matter is a valid one, however it is assuming a propellent systen. Interstellar travel is rendered practically impossible with rocket propulsion. I suppose to countereact these collisions, one could use a repulsive field, an anti-gravitational field, although I am completely unsure of the dynamics, this is just for conjectures sake.

FTL will remain a distant dream, untill we can innovate new physics or science, that allows it. The most functional theory thus far, is the wormhole one, which creates a passage in space-time, using exotic matter, that is emptier than space.

One of my own theories, is to be able to manipulate the theoretical Higgs field, to become a state of crystalized energy, and quantumly teleport across space. That is however purely speculative.

I think, we need to first understand the dark matter and dark energy before we venture out into the galaxy and beyond. We know too little regarding the universe around us. What if we are inside a Matrix? :D

Kmguru, the chances of using being inside an artificial Matrix are incredibly high, I am serious. The chances of us being in a Matrix are 100%; we are in a matrix.
It is however irrelavant which type of Matrix we are in.

You know, we could be inside a natural Matrix. The nature knows how to build organic computers. You can even dream that look so real...a simulation done by your own brain!

That is pretty much what I said, but step it up onto a quantum level, and we have a quantum simulation.

Exactly...every possible outcomes and hence infinite simulations...and possibilities. Some have dead ends like stop the simulation in mid stream...

Haha my formula light speed travel:

Light = The square root of Mass minus Energy.

:D

How could you have thunk that?....amazing....:D

Haha my formula light speed travel:

Light = The square root of Mass minus Energy.Uh, don't you mean the square root of energy divided by mass?

The argument about colliding with space dust at high speeds is a good one, but I'm not sure it's something that would pose a problem for a very advanced space ship. Yes, at the moment we don't have any idea how to protect a ship from those sorts of impacts, but on the other hand we also don't have any idea how to accelerate a ship up to those speeds in the first place. Who knows, maybe by the time we have a way to make an engine that can get a ship up to those speeds, we'll also have a way to protect it.

Who knows, maybe by the time we have a way to make an engine that can get a ship up to those speeds, we'll also have a way to protect it.

It is like saying, exporting jobs is good for you because, who knows, someday we will come up with a new technology that would employ everybody paying high salaries so that we can buy more junk. :D

Your right, my bad

i think all the talk about crashing into a particle of dust is hogwash.

in a spaceship that is worthy of space travel, there must be gravity propulsions and electromagnetic forces that drive it. rocket science is pre-school in the cosmos' college, ya catch my flow? dont you think that spaceships would be more reasonably able to travel the vast spaces if they tried to mimic the very forces that drive our planets and stars in the same vast space?

if any of you have witnessed UFOs, they dart of and can dissappear. the idea here is, after u take off, you speed up until you reach the point of hyperspace speed (i guess when the engine becomes charged up by electromagnetism) and this is when the craft dissappears. you see, its not like its ZOOMing across space at incredible speeds, its more like it dissappears at point A and reappears at point B.
i hate to say this again (because of the ridicule that i receieved) but its like once the craft surpassed a certain "speed limit" (which i think is the galactal speed of light- which is believed to be the maximum speed information can travel) it suddenly rips into the fabric of time, causing it to dissappear from our specific time and space.
let me try and explain how i see this right now:
they say "c" is the max. for information.
now my question is, what about Time?
how fast does time travel itself? I think this varies, obviously.
but if the speed of light is said to be the maximum (and i will agree to this on the terms of it is the maximum in this galaxy alone) then time would have this as its maximum possible speed also? if this is the case, then my proposition at the top of this post seems to be plausible:
when the ship passes the maximum speed limit of the galaxy, it dissappears-
meaning it doesnt have to worry about colliding with any rocks or whatever.
only thing u have to worry about is where u slow down, where u plan to "land" or "arrive" if you will. make sure u dont materialize inside of a rock or worse yet inside of a flaming gaseous planet (remember HG Well's "Time Machine" when all of a sudden he materialized inside of a damned rock...)
but of course this can be avoided easily with simple (maybe not that simple) planning and advanced knowledge.

so , what i lay upon you all are a few questions to help me understand some things better:
1- how does Time tie in with the "c" speed of light ?
2- has anyone here done any considerable research on gravity propulsion and electromagnetism, such as ZPE, or ARV ? any1 looked into whats available on Tesla's work?
3- what do you all think about my earlier prediction:
i believe that when light-speed is surpassed, the object travelling loses all of its color, and furthermore, any lifeform travelling FTL will not be able to see ANYTHING.

that seems to coincide with my newly touched-up idea on FTL. because when the idea of it passing the speed limit of light means two things:
1- nothing can be visible- for light doesnt have the chance to catch up, and light is what makes things visible.
2- you either bend time or time bends you. this is why you dissappear as u shoot off, and reappear wherever your destination- also a reason why you would actually be travelling "thru" time- when compared to the time of your departure or even compared to the time of your arrival.

thats enough for now , let me know your thoughts (please serious feedback only)

This isn't "Star Wars" zonabi. Nor is it "The Time Machine". The truth is, if you were to accelerate to near the speed of light, objects in your way would cause you trouble. Satellites are in danger now and that is with paint chips and screws traveling at 17,000 mph. Kinetic energy is the key.

zonabi: so , what i lay upon you all are a few questions to help me understand some things better:
1- how does Time tie in with the "c" speed of light ?

That's easy. Learn relativity. Or do you think that's wrong? I doubt you've opened a book on the subject.

2- has anyone here done any considerable research on gravity propulsion and electromagnetism, such as ZPE, or ARV ? any1 looked into whats available on Tesla's work?

How would we access ZPE? It's related to the fact that there can't be zero energy at a particular point in space (related to the uncertainty principle). It is not what most people think it is. And as far is anyone is concerned, Tesla was a smart guy but not a super genius making spacecraft in his basement.

3- what do you all think about my earlier prediction:

Color is what we make of it. What you really mean is an object's emissions will cease. It's a moot point anyhow. You can't exceed the speed of light linerally. Just look to particle accelerators for proof. Besides, if you WERE going faster than light, you'd probably be able to see the light in front of you. But then the laws of relativity wouldn't exactly be opperating if that were the case.

Is that serious enough for you? Or are you still upset because I don't agree with your questionable scientific interpretation.

Just a thought. Have you realized that the velocity at which UFO's travel on Earth, is many magnitudes slower than the speed of light. This suggests either:

1: UFO's do not travel faster than the speed of light, and are originating from a nearby place.

2: UFO's can only travel faster than the speed of light in space.

1: UFO's do not travel faster than the speed of light, and are originating from a nearby place.

2: UFO's can only travel faster than the speed of light in space.

yes, both good interpretations, ive thought of them both as well.

That's easy. Learn relativity. Or do you think that's wrong? I doubt you've opened a book on the subject.
ive read einstein's theory of relativity by max born, but i still dont agree with everything there... well i agree but i have one main discrepency i guess.

i like crazymikey's #2 up there, it makes alot of sense to me. i believe in outer space, outside of galaxies and in the voids of space, speed limits that we are so sure about cease to exist.

i book i like better is Kip Thorne's Black Holes and Time Warps.
i see more chance for space travel here than anywhere else.

Tesla was a genius, how can you deny that?

i have one new question now:

1- if light is travelling at its supposed maximum, called "c", then howcome a black hole is said to have enough gravitational force to pull the light away and suck it in? does this mean the gravitational force is greater than "c" ? and does this mean that it pulls the light faster than it was going? hence, does the light speed up, faster than "c" when being pulled into the singularity of a black hole??

First off. Why would light being in a void act any different than it buzzing by the Ort cloud or past Jupiter? Do you believe it has something to do with inflation or something?

Second. To answer your question. The gravitational field of a black hole prevents what falls into it from escaping, even if your escape velocity happens to be c. With light, there is no "speeding up". It follows the curvature of spacetime as if it was going in a straight line...sort of a path of least resistance. Given the rather large graviational bending effects of black holes, photons would fall into the event horizon if too close (like a marble rolled too close to a dimple in a sheet that falls toward the center). If it is unlucky enough to pass the event horizon, it's gone for good. It can not escape because it would need an escape velocity greater than c.

i think it has to do with gravity.
think about what we said about the black holes.
its gravity has an effect on the light (or anything for that matter)
i believe the gravity in each galaxy would have different effects on how photons (light) travel within it.
and in the voids is also another story.
i have heard that there are no particles in the voids of space, hence the ability to see stars millions of light years away...
i think light speeds up in the vacuums (voids) of space. inflation ? maybe inflation of gravity...
all the controversy of dark matter and black holes, things of this nature make me question how the rest of the universe really is

You're throwing out a lot of stuff. Sit back and think for a minute. If I said that gravity DOESN'T slow down light, why would it matter if it is in a void or not. Not to say that gravity doesn't HAVE an effect on light...it does, through the effect of gravitational redshift. Light escaping large gravitational wells lengthens in wavelength. But is has to be an intense source, like a neutron star, or light from a black hole that is far enough from an event horizon to escape, like the light produced from the accretion disk around the blackhole. There is gravitational lensing that bends light around stars and other large objects, but light still is at c.

There is no 'inflation of gravity'. The fabric of spacetime is believed to be expanding if that is what you mean.

The bottom line is there is very likely a limit to how fast one can go from one point to another.... "In a Straight Line". The real question is, how do we get around that straight line.

Hre is a couple thoughts on travelling at the speed of light.

Why not send human DNA information throughout the universe and hope some intelligent entity might pick it up and reproduce you. At the same time send a brain scan of your brain with all its knowledge along with instructions on integrating both into a human.

The above thought is not possible right now because we havent figured out how to extract info from brain scans but who knows maybe in the future.

Another thought send DNA info throughout the universe and hope that the information would stimulate primitive living matter into organizing itself per DNA instructions.

funny thing is;

what if instead of trasmitting our DNA out into space, the truth was that our DNA was 'transmitted' onto earth from outer space

Zonabi, that may be the case. It may be that science will at some point find a way to remotely program DNA in living things.

What we think as ideas may actually be signals beamed to us via a telepathic medium. All we have to do is condition our selfs to readilly accept transmitted information.

I dont know if we can tune into electromagnetic transmissions but perhaps there's a telepathic "ether" that allows telepathic signals to propagate through the universe.

Part of our brains may be able to tune into this ether and some investigation has to be performed to locate the section and encourage it's development.

I contribute the above thought to the ether. :D

right on !

yes, Greco, many of the wild thoughts people seem to conjure may in fact be channeled works, or help from the outside if u know what i mean.

I believe that we arent very aware of the telepathic abilities mostly because we are still in our 3rd density of existance (3D world that we perceive)
but still some people are able to tune in , these are special souls. :) this is how ESP occurs, or when u know the phone is going to ring... etc. your telepathic ability connects in these instances, and you somehow communicate with another soul without physical connection.

from what i gather, we are about to enter the transformation into 4th density; and this is scheduled to happen soon, with the coming of certain celestial objects nearing earth (comets, planets, strange things, 'sedna')

i am not completely sure the validity of these claims, but my intuition sees some truth in it. as anyone with a sense of awareness would know, the events unfolding have a strange, unheard of, tone. something is going to happen that is going to change our world. but thats besides the point here.
lets go back to FTL talk:

i got a funny e-mail today from my father, thought one line was relevant to this thread. it deals with what i was trying to say about traveling faster than light :

If you're in a vehicle going the speed of light, what happens when
you turn on the headlights?

this is what i was trying to say, when i stated that if you are travelling faster than the speed of light, would not everything lose its color? or would anything even be visible if light has not been able to hit the objects and reflect in your retina?
someone here said that perhaps theres some other light already there, or coming from a different source, direction. I cannot really perceive how this would effect my idea's theory, but i kind of see what they meant.

ok, something else now:

Another thought send DNA info throughout the universe and hope that the information would stimulate primitive living matter into organizing itself per DNA instructions.

where i see this is good idea, i do not think that simply sending DNA info out in space would stimulate an amoeba into forming intelligent life DNA strands. I think there has to be someone there to apply the genetic DNA code to the primitive life form. (scratch the amoeba- we're talking apes, lizards, birds)
don't you think that life forms would want to participate in the genetic DNA applications, rather than just 'sending the DNA code out and wishing it well on its way out' ?

what im saying is, where DNA genetics can be VERY helpful to primitive life anywhere- it needs an engineer to apply the genetics to the life form.
where as i cannot say that DNA just shot out to space WILL NOT effect another primitive lifeform, i think that it will be 100000X less likely to happen, and less likely to happen effectively.

The latest theory of the origin of the universe says the universe "boiled" out of the fabric of space and from a pinpoint and a set of natural laws expanded to what it is today. Well let's taked it one step further and assume that DNA info is spontenously produced out of a chemical soup. Why not? If the universe can self start with a set of laws, why not DNA combinations out of chemical soups. Also what if those DNA combinations could be urged from remote?

I dont know if scientists have tried beaming information into chemical soups and if they have, what they have found. If not, maybe some energetic soul out there can look into it. I already know that sound beamed at fluids can create shapes and encourage chemical reactions.