What role do tachyons play in physics and how does belief in tachyons differ in kind from belief in God?

Question

Given that the limiting velocity in our universe is the speed of light and tachyons move at greater than light speed and can never slow down to light speed, therefore being doomed to exist (if at all) forever beyond our event horizon how can their existence ever be proved? And if proof of their existence is not possible then is belief in their existence similar in kind to a belief in God, i.e., requiring faith? So just what is the role of tachyons in contemporary physical theory?

Fresh Prince - Funny, the devil doesn't consider his advocates idiots.

eyeonthes...-This is NOT a question of religion. That was just your interpretation. And you didn't even attempt to answer the (obviously) scientific part of the question.

Answer 1

As scientists study field theories, they come across situations they can't explain or can't solve consistently. Then, someone may say, "What if there were a particle like this with these properties? How would that fit into out theories?" The scientific community then does calculations and thought-experiments to predict behavior of the particles and how they might explain observed phenomena. If they find too many problems and contradictions, they discard the idea and try another, because they have proved the particle can't exist. But if they find no contradictions, they can't prove it doesn't exist.

The most convincing way to prove it does exist is to find it or to build it. It took a long to find meaningful evidence of the top quark. Until then, it was just a proposed, hypothetical particle. Those studying this hypothetical particle had enough 'faith' or confidence in their work that it could be real, that they were willing to devote their lives and carreers to finding the answer. But they weren't betting their eternal destiny. If the top quark were never found during their lifetime, they would be disappointed, but they would be satisfied that their dilligent efforts built up evidence against their existence and helped reach a reasoned evaluation that their existence was extremely unlikely.

They were working on a question of right or wrong, not a question of good or bad. If God created me and (legitimately) makes demands on my behavior, then it is my highest duty to learn what God expects of me and to obey. If I don't do that, I'm not simply wrong about some matter of fact. I have violated the supreme, most fundamental law of my existence. It's only reasonable to expect a penalty for that. A stiff penalty, since I have failed to accomplish the purpose of my existence. If I'm wrong about the top quark or about tachyons, I may still have contributed to science. Newton was no less a great scientist because he didn't consider relativity or quantum mechanics.

Another difference is that quarks and tachyons and gravity waves are matters of physical science. They are subject to physical measurement and experimentation. We might not have the technology to do the experiments. I know of no experiment we can perform and get the results while we are alive to prove or disprove the existence of God.

We can study the theories. If God is real and provided truth about Himself to us in the Bible, then what does it mean? Many people have studied that and have concluded it is true. Then, they place their 'faith' in God as revealed in the Bible. They are betting their eternal destiny that by doing so, they are obeying God's laws, funfilling their purpose, achieving the rewards for obedience, and avoiding the penalties for disobedience. If they are wrong, the consequences could be severe, or there could be no consequences at all. They are motivated to study the message for consistency. They look at predictions made by prophets of God and study history to see if they came true. The penalty for a false prophet was death. All of the prophecies whose time of fulfillment has passed have come true. That's not proof, but it's very strong evidence. Scientists make predictions based on theories all the time. If experiment shows the prediction is wrong, they go back and modify the theory. In true science, there is no death penalty. But if a large body of experimental evidence supports a scientific theory, scientists tend to believe the theory. If a large body of evidence supports the idea of the God of the Bible, some people believe it, but some choose not to believe it, because it makes demands on their behavior and acknowledges a power higher than they are. It's not simply a matter of believing a fact. It has fundamental implications about who we are. Belief in tachyons doesn't do that.

Answer 2

Tachyons have an imaginary number for mass and have real values for energy and momentum, this is how they can theoretically achieve faster than light travel.

Experimentally, there was a study on the mass of neutrinos in tritium beta decay, and its supposed tachyonic property, however there was no definitive conclusion.

So what role do they have in physics? They are the alarm that indicates there is something odd or inconsistent in field theories. Tachyons are defined as the quantum of a field in quantum field theory, and they represent instability in the field vacuum.

Answer 3

It's possible to detect even tachyons, if they exist, through Cherenkov radiation, which is sort of like an electromagnetic "sonic boom". While not a part of the Standard Model of particle physics, the concept does make its appearance in quantum field theory and string theory. Existence of tachyons is not considered to be a fact by physicists because it's not yet demonstrated experimentally, directly or indirectly.

Answer 4

is that this a tachyon seize to seize the unsuspecting anomalous everyday visitors? :-) yet to respond to your question: It sounds such as you already understand plenty approximately tachyons – a minimum of the rudimentary stuff (and what you don’t understand you need to continually relatively “google�) – so i'm no longer gonna bore you to dying with technical information right here. basically submit to in recommendations that tachyons, a minimum of as they stand in immediately’s physics, are seen basically hypothetical debris/theoretical constructs, even although greater than a number of severe researcher have long proposed extraordinarily smart experiments aiming at verifying their life circuitously. As an avid fanatic interior the situation, you additionally can locate their string concept remedies refreshingly eye-catching. In any experience, no scientist, to my awareness a minimum of, has ever claimed that a tachyon ought to have created/originated the Universe. Nor has any scientist ever declared having faith in its all-powerful and omnipresent powers. basically because of the fact there's a valid theoretical foundation for the life of a “hypothetical� particle, it does no longer advise that it relatively is in comparison with the theory of God, a minimum of no longer anymore than the different hypothetical/theoretical build/axiom, at the same time with a “factor� or a “line�, and so forth., must be. P.S. The singularity of the great Bang kind is possibly quite nearer to the final thought of what you had in recommendations right here - yet even then it relatively is not in any respect a query of religion.

Answer 5

Why do idiots keep comparing scientific theory to belief? Look, Tachyons are hypothetical particles, we haven't experimentally found them, but there is mathematical evidence for it. Its not like somebody just said one day "let's believe in tachyons!". Physics doesn't work based on faith.

Answer 6

Hi. I can't imagine praying to a tachyon. They are only theoretical. As opposed to theological.

Answer 7

I believe this question is misplaced. Science and math questions should be related to the scientific method. Questions of religion should be related to faith, not the scientific method.