what was the premise and argument or proof that led to such an assumtion/conclusion.
not to insult anyone's work or carreer etc..
but I hardly believe scientists (or anyone) know why the universe exsists, or from whence it came other than an 'arbitrary' big bang concept etc...
infact, I hear of findings of many 'non local' anomalies as the study of science deepens, (as in quantum mechanics as only an example)
so how then should we go about casting such limits?
please tell me their grounds or basis for this.
thanks.
2007-05-23
14:12:47
·
12 answers
·
asked by
zentoccino
2
in
Science & Mathematics
➔ Astronomy & Space
Also, if we know absolutely nothing about anything shorter than planks lenght, how could we ever make any such universal "decree(s)" ?
2007-05-23
14:13:05 ·
update #1
To zahbudar,
answer in any way, or on any footing as you wish.
You could say my major is red building blocks in preschool.
I do not mean to insult your high mightiness.
please forgive me.
2007-05-23
16:05:56 ·
update #2
Einstein came up with the set of rules that eventually found many proofs.
Einstein actually simply said light in a vaccum is a constant. He further predicted that gravity can bend light, which was proven later on.
The actual speed of light has changed over time as our measurement processes get better
But light always remains at that absolute speed in a vaccum
We've actually proven the speed over and over with different types of instruments.
Nothing observed has evern been found to travel faster.
Small atomic partical travel near light but generally a tad under light speed.
The reason is because these particles has mass
Light is not believed to have mass
There could be many reason
Einstein postulates that as mass gets near the speed of light it's mass increases while it's size decrease.
If, for example, the universe is made up of strings as one theory says, that these strings become large enough and massive enough to act like water does when you swim. To genearte drag.
To the best of my knowledge no one has ever accelerated a slow mass object (say and electron or proton) to light speed to measure what happens.
We get close to light speed, but not to light.
I guess Einstein basically came up with this concept because it was required to explain the rest of the math on things.
He couldn't make math sense out of small particle physics with out some hard and fast rules and light as a constant was one.
Sound is also a constant. If you were to reach Mach 3 in 20 seconds travel for 20 seconds and come to a dead halt YOU would hear your own sonic boom a few seconds after you stopped moving.
So the speed of sound is a constant but we can go faster than the speed of sound
Now the original String theory REQUIRES the existance of something called a TACHYON and this puts that theory into disrespect because a TACHYON must ALWAYS travel faster than light speed.
It is possible one day someone will find and measure a tachyon and it may, indeed, travel faster than light and then we will have to rethink everything.
Einstein, however has stated that in both Newtonian space (slow moving space) and Relatavistic space the speed of light always remains a constant
We have enough proofs to give Einstein the benefit of the doubt, but as pointed out one day we may observe and measure a particle such as a tachyon and then we will have to re-define everything.
2007-05-23 15:08:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
My gosh. Here we have a self taught philosopher with PhD in Physics and Quantum Mechanics.
If there is anything faster than the speed of light, could you please give us its name and description; speed as measured in your lab = ??? Miles Per Second.
"Why the Universe exists?" What a profound question with implications beyond imagination. Who might know the answer to such a profound question? Are we to suppose that you do?
"Whence the Universe came from?" Ah, you wish to know what there was before the beginning of everything? And you suppose there is someone alive today who can answer that question with surety and proof? You must be smoking some really strong stuff.
As the study of science deepens we learn more and more. Some things we learn are composed of things which are not fully understood. That is part of the learning process, and has always been so. Were you about to share some new discovery or insight with us? Or, are you just Poo Poo - ing on the whole scientific research field in general?
Before going into any great detail with you it is important for us to know the maximum extent of your education so that we can speak with you on equal terms. Have you, for example,
completed your Masters Degree, or Doctorate Degree at a major college or university? And what was your Major please?- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2007-05-23 14:37:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by zahbudar 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
The speed of light has been derived using many experimental methods and mathematically. Other mathematical models of physics are based on the speed of light, and only work when that value, or a similar value, is used.
One early method of experimental derivation involved lanterns on hill tops. Thos obviously didn't work. Others came close with other methods you'll read about, but it was James Clerk Maxwell who got the best before the advent of modern technology, and he did it mathematically and somewhat accidentally.
You should look up the derivation of Maxwell's equations. Also check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#History
The speed of light is considered to be a constant, meaning never changing, but this may not be entirely true. There's some evidence to suggest that the speed of light was slightly faster in the very very distant past.
You may have heard of experiments where light is slowed down. The light itself never slows down but it may interact with the molecules which make up the substance through which it is traveling, and actually take a much longer, indirect path when this happens.It may also be absorbed and re-emitted by electrons orbiting the atoms in the molecules, which will takes a small amount of time.
2007-05-23 16:07:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by minuteblue 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The earth used to be in the center of the universe and it was flat at one time......i am being flip because frankly we don't know that the speed of light is the ultimate speed...we are still very limited in the knowledge of how the universe works. In only the last 20 years we have figured out blackholes are likely to be in the center of the every galaxy and that there ARE other planets around other stars. We as humans are still in the beginning stages of figuring out how things work universally.....to conclude the speed of light is the ultimate speed is naive..much like believing we are the only planet with life.
2007-05-23 14:23:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by eric f 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
it would desire to no longer be. evaluate 2 photons emanating from an identical area and time shifting far flung from one yet another the two on the fee of light. while one modifications polarity, so does the different. Einstein categorized that "spooky technology". Quantum Physics has proved the reality. feels like the religious and technology converge. In different words, there's a undeniable threat that there is yet another binding rigidity that travels quicker than the fee of light. basic physics on a macro scale breaks down on the atomic point. Physics as all of us comprehend it does not exist sub-atomically. that could desire to steer one to end that our theory of the atom itself might desire to be completely incorrect. Why no longer? At one time scientists/religious leaders thought Earth replaced into the middle of the universe. incorrect. nevertheless count might desire to no longer have the skill to pass quicker than the fee of light, what might desire to? Einstein's spooks?
2016-11-05 04:32:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is this theory by Einstein that states that if you were traveling in a car at 100,000 Km/s, and turned on a flashlight, light would still get away from you at 300,000 Km/s(speed of light, and actually there is some proof about that), so light is still faster than you no matter how fast you are moving...
But then you would think, to an static observer, it would appear as if light is getting away from me at only 200,000 Km/s, and that there is nothing preventing me from going faster. Yes, that's true, in fact, the particle accelerators can accelerate particles to nearly the speed of light.
The fun part begings at faster than light speeds. If you were traveling faster than c, and you turn on the flashlight, pointing it towards the observer(giving him a signal), you would still see him reciving the signal before you reach him(light got away from you at 300,000Km/s), and if he was to reply to that signal, he would still have some time to do so before you reach him(again, that's from your point of view). But from his point of view, he would see you flying by, and then he would recive your signal. He couldn't reply to you because you are already gone. So if saw him replying, its because he replied before he got your signal. And that fact is the only reason why scientist claim that faster than light travel is impossible. They call it causality
But again, this is based on Einstein theories, and it hasn't been proven in any way.
Edit: I'm not sure how you want to relate planck's length to speed of light. In fact, like you said on your previous post, if lenght were infinitely small, time would be infinitely big, and so speeds would be infinitely small, and it would only make things more complicated on the bigger picture, but relative to what we concive as time, c would still be 300,000km/s....
2007-05-23 17:12:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually.....light is the fastest thing that we know of or have discovered thus far.....who knows.....maybe someday soon we'll find something faster then the speed of light. We should not set limits for the potential of our future discoveries.....just because we haven't found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist......We are enlightened every day as to things that our predecessors though to be impossible......so never say the any thing is absolutely definitive......the universe just might surprise you.............
2007-05-23 14:22:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Odyssey 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The forces that comprise matter (strong nuclear force, magnetism etc) all act at the speed of light, therefore, matter cannot travel faster than the speed of light as it would require an infinite amount of energy to do so.
2007-05-23 14:56:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by often_said 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Even light is the fastest thing, it can't escape the black hole. Light travels fast but the gravitational pull of the black hole is strong and it can suck anything even big stars.
2007-05-23 14:38:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by ¿ǝɯ ǝzıuƃoɔǝɹ noʎ op 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is just nothing that can go faster than 186,000 miles per second. Nothing. Period, end of story. We don't know why, but it is.
2007-05-23 14:15:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by michaelyodepi 3
·
0⤊
1⤋