but i read in the papers that a scientist proved him to be wrong what did he say.please explain in simple language.
2007-10-30 22:24:27 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
Einstein theorized: "...if an object could travel twice the speed of light, time travel to the past could be done." (paraphrased) Otherwise, Einstein's comments are based on his theories, which, by the way, have been proven...theoritically! It may very well be proven someday if development "pulse acceleration" proves to be successful. But, here again, that too is only a theory!
2007-10-30 22:48:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
What Einstein said is that if a body is travelling below the speed of light, it cannot be accelerated to reach the speed of light. Consequently it cannot exceed it. This result has been well tested and I am not aware of any result that contradicts it to date - the paper is clearly wrong.
However, it does not itself set the speed of light as a limit. It is possible that there is a class of particles that *always* exceed the speed of light. The maths works backwards for such particles in that, odd as it seems, their energy would increase as they slowed down, and the same rules would mean that they could not be slowed to the speed of light without gaining infinite energy. Such particles have not been shown to exist, even though they are theoretically not forbidden.
Notional faster than light travel like worm holes actually do not exceed the speed of light. Instead, they use gravity to curve space so that there is, in effect, a short cut between two regions of space.
2007-10-31 06:54:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
not sure. 'proved' is a very strong word though, and should be used with caution. experiments can 'suggest' things quite easily, but to 'prove' is something else entirely
anyway...
i think it was mostly that information cannot go faster than c. although there are claims to beat this...
it certainly seems acceptable to assume that massive objects (anyhting with mass) cannot go faster than the speed of light
Arent most of the experments you read about talking about light going faster than c (and not quite a normal 'object')? and only under certain conditions and with limitations? they usually turn out not to violate any theories that we have
who knows?! it's all a bit wierd
you might have to wait a long time (decades? centuries?) to get an acceptable answer
on another note, quantum entanglement is quite certainly a good option to get information to travel faster than light (instantaneously). there's a lot been printed about this over the last decade or so. it shouldnt be too hard for you to find out about, and it's quite interesting
2007-10-31 06:09:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I found the article and read it. The author discusses research done that would prove the speed of gravity to be faster than the speed of light. He states that as the universe ages the speed of light slowly diminishes, however the speed of gravity has remained constant and is now over twice that of light. His article refers to a created universe and at the end he mentions angels and god, which prompts me to dismiss the entire article as religious hoopla.
2007-10-31 05:49:47 · answer #4 · answered by Jack 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Einstein said a lot of things he didn't mean. We took him way too seriously! He peaked out as a clerk in the patent office where we should have left him.
His mother would agree.
The math is right there for anyone to see. The guy with the bullet answer obviously didn't study it.
The guy with the Delorian knows his stuff.
The girl offering the compromising pictures doesn't have a clue! (Made you look!)
2007-10-31 05:44:22 · answer #5 · answered by Warren W- a Mormon engineer 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Don't know since I didn't see it. However, it is true that nothing can surpass the speed of light since light is pur energy. The only way to bet the speed of light is to bend the time/space continuum in order to make the place you are to be the place want to go. (teleportation)
2007-10-31 05:28:07 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
actually he said that no object can accelerate to the speed of light... i'm not sure if he said that nothing can travel at or faster than light
2007-10-31 05:31:27 · answer #7 · answered by EeE 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
See FTL (faster than light) which deals with worm holes (but remember that the only thing worse than finding a worm in an apple is ... Ta Da ... finding half a worm!).
2007-10-31 06:22:26 · answer #8 · answered by Kes 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Simple
If you had a gun and was traveling at the speed of light, then pulled the trigger where would the bullet go.
2007-10-31 05:29:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
how could a scientist prove him wrong? if something went faster then the speed of light it wouldn't be visible and thus would be unprovabe
2007-10-31 05:29:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋