Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
06-17-2007, 09:54 PM,
#1
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
[Image: blackhle.jpg]
Black hole: The physics are poorly understood
<!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->The theory that the speed of light is always constant has come under fire. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->Australian physicists propose that it may have slowed over the course of billions of years. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

[Image: startq.gif]
It's entirely possible that the speed of light would have got greater and greater as you go back towards the Big Bang [Image: endq.gif]
Paul Davies, theoretical physicist If true, it would mean a rethink of Einstein's theory of relativity.
<!--fontc-->
<!--/fontc-->

The idea is floated in a brief communication in the journal Nature. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

It is based on astronomical data involving light from a quasar, a very distant star-like object. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Observations suggest the light has taken about 10 billion years to reach the Earth. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

What is more, a key constant involving the interaction of light photons and electron particles seems to have changed. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

It appears to have been smaller 10 billion years ago. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

According to Paul Davies, a physicist at Macquarie University, Sydney, this can be explained only if the speed of light or electron charge has changed since then. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

"But two of the cherished laws of the Universe are the law that electron charge shall not change and that the speed of light shall not change, so whichever way you look at it we're in trouble," he says. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Star Trek hope <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Studies on black holes suggest that the second option is more likely, according to Davies' team. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

The theoretical physicist believes the speed of light was faster six to 10 billion years ago than its current value - 300,000 km (186,300 miles) per second. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

"It's entirely possible that the speed of light would have got greater and greater as you go back (through time) towards the Big Bang and if so it could explain some of the great mysteries of cosmology," he says. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

He admits that further work on light from quasars is needed to firm up the theory. In addition, the physics of black holes are known to be extremely shaky. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

But there are startling implications if the law that nothing can go faster than light is overturned. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

"Maybe it's possible to get around that restriction, in which case it would enthral Star Trek fans because at the moment even at the speed of light it would take 100,000 years to cross the galaxy," says Davies. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

It's a bit of a bore really and if the speed of light limit could go, then who knows? All bets are off." <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

<!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->---------------------------------------------------------------------<!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Wednesday, 19 July, 2000, 18:09 GMT 19:09 UK <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->
Beam smashes light barrier<!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->
By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Scientists have seen a pulse of light emerge from a cloud of gas before it even entered. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

This astonishing and baffling observation was made by researchers from the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, US. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

They conducted an experiment that involved lasers, a chamber containing cold caesium atoms and a super-fast stopwatch. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

The end result was a beam of light that moved at 300 times the theoretical limit for the speed of light. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

It was Einstein who said nothing physical could break this barrier because, among other things, to do so would also mean travelling back in time. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Dramatic demonstration <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

But the NEC scientists believe their work does not violate Einstein's theory. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Writing in the journal Nature, Dr Lijun Wang and colleagues say their light beam raced through the atom trap so quickly that the leading edge of the pulse's peak actually exited before it had entered. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

If this sounds confusing, then do not worry. Many physicists are uncomfortable with it too despite their explanations that it is a natural consequence of the wave nature of light. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Although the work of Dr Wang's team is remarkable, it is not the first time that this sort of "trick" has been performed - but it is certainly the most dramatic demonstration. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Earlier this year, a team of physicists made a microwave beam travel 7% faster than light speed. Last year, they announced that they had even slowed light down to almost a crawl. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Anomalous refractive index <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

To achieve their peculiar effect, Dr Wang's group fired laser beams through a trap of caesium atoms. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

By adjusting the frequency of the laser beams to match those of the energy levels in the atoms, the researchers were able to achieve an effect called "anomalous refractive index." This boosts the pulses' so-called "group velocity" to a speed faster than what we understand to be the speed of light - just short of 300 million metres per second. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

The group velocity of a light pulse depends upon the mixture of frequencies within the pulse and the medium through which it travels. It need not be the speed of the pulse itself. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

The important thing, however, is that whilst the group velocity can be manipulated to be faster than the speed of light, it is not possible to use this effect to send information faster than the speed of light. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Because of the fast group velocity, the leading edge of the pulse appears to leave the caesium-filled chamber 62 billionths of a second before it arrives. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Causality principle <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

And according to Dr Wang, this strange result does not threaten Einstein's theories - in particular, the causality principle, which states that a cause must precede its effect. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

Or so almost all physicists think - for now. Privately, some admit that experiments such as Dr Wang's may force a reassessment of some cherished ideas. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

According to Dr Guenter Nimtz, of the University of Cologne, who has carried out similar experiments, the NEC work is very exciting. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

He told BBC News Online: "The effect cannot be used to go back in time, only to reduce the time between cause and effect a little bit. <!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->

"The reason for this," he said, "is because the light pulse has a finite length of time, much longer than any gain obtained by a faster-than-light speed."
<!--fontc-->
<!--/fontc-->




http://www.whyevolution.com/einstein.html<!--fontc--><!--/fontc-->





<!--fontc-->
<!--/fontc-->
The InfoUnderground
TiU Radio
http://www.TheInfoUnderground.com
Reply
06-18-2007, 03:45 AM,
#2
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
The speed of light is only C in a vacuum, from what I understand. If I'm wrong please correct me.

&gt;&lt; (pictures a hoover after rereading that)
NM 156
by Queensrÿche

Uniform printout reads end of line,Protect code intact leaves little time
Erratic surveys, free thinking not allowed,My hands shake, my push buttons silence
The outside crowd

One world government has outlawed war among nations,Now social control requires population termination

Have we come too far,To turn around,Does emotion hold the key
Is logic just a synonym for,This savagery, disguised in
Forgotten lost memory

Microchip logic,have we no more thought
&Is this wrong& I enter,Answers sought
Punch, punch, punch, transfer this data
Into code. Wide eyes watch my Number 156 is shown
Created from past life to perform,Illicit function, I fail this conscious
Madness I man/machine imperfection
Reply
07-13-2007, 07:13 PM, (This post was last modified: 07-13-2007, 07:16 PM by TeslaandLyne.)
#3
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
There was not enough investigation into what makes light go.
It has a velocity, but what powers it.
Does it only move toward gravitating, accelerating, bodies.
Then what stops light at a constant velocity.
Some sort of universal drag constant like dropping a pearl in a viscous liquid soap.

Yeah I could have went far with Einstein except the Nazis stopped him like they
stop any science today that reveal the National Security Secrets they hold
in America in the name of the NWO.

That GHW Bush was NWOing all over the place to appease those Nazis from Operation Paper Clip.

A modern day Chamberlain.

Hows that for a ConCen send off for crass media fooling the masses with mind control.
Illuminazi or Illuminati fed, stuffed shirt, media science disclosure.
Reply
07-26-2007, 08:14 AM,
#4
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
Listen to the Bearden, Van Flandern, Hoagland Seattle conference from the tracker. It gets talked about in there.


MMM
Give me the judgment of balanced minds in preference to laws every time. Codes and manuals create patterned behavior. All patterned behavior tends to go unquestioned, gathering destructive momentum.
- Darwi Odrade
Reply
07-26-2007, 05:15 PM, (This post was last modified: 07-26-2007, 05:17 PM by Phil999.)
#5
Einstein's Theory 'may Be Wrong'
Quote:Some sort of universal drag constant like dropping a pearl in a viscous liquid soap.
Before the relativity theory, it was commonly accepted in science that the universe consists of some sort of viscous, invisible thing, the so-called ether.
And I guess that many astrophysicists of that time hundred years ago were glad to accept a completely empty space with gravitational forces to get rid of that ether, as they could not measure nor describe it. I'm sure I would have embraced Einstein's theory too if I had lived in that time, because it's more comfortable to have the half-truth that you can calculate than the entire truth that remains a mystery (typical human behavior, a kind of cognitive dissonance).

Of course c is not a constant. There aren't any constants in the universe, the notion of constants is only the result of the human mind to fix points, to have a reliable base for calculations and predictions. It is a sign of the victory of the calculating mind over the trust in creation.

The funny thing is, and I repeat it wherever I can, as there exists a film document, the funny thing is that Einstein himself did not trust his theory in his later years and said that "sere möst be en ether", contradicting the theory of relativity in its fundament. Interestingly, all text books about him omit that detail, it is nowhere mentioned, except in this lecture he gave in the 50's and that was documented on film. The wish for control is stronger than the wish for truth it seems.

However, there are constant things in the universe, but these are not values, these are numbers and proportions. There are only a few, they are called e (Euler number, 2.71828 . . . , base of the natural logarithm), Pi (3.14159 . . . , the base for circle and sphere calculations) and Phi (1.6180339 . . . , the golden ratio).

With values (probably not the correct term) I mean the proton mass, the meter, the second, the speed of light, etc. They are not constant, as they are only a product or an effect or a condensation of spirit.

But I have to defend science, it is necessary to use these values for our perception of the world, and it is alright to use them for calculations. Otherwise, science would not be possible. Only the way we treat these values as eternal is wrong.
I am my savior
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Einstein said There Are No Black Holes - Eric Lerner vagabonder 4 921 04-24-2014, 10:55 AM
Last Post: psilocybin
  What's wrong with e85 powered vehicles? Sovereignman 6 1,219 03-04-2012, 05:56 AM
Last Post: MasterChiefa
  What's wrong with the Sun ? --- 8 1,680 06-25-2010, 03:58 PM
Last Post: Valentine
  Quantum Theory May Explain Wishful Thinking --- 3 944 05-20-2009, 09:22 AM
Last Post: rsol
  Study plunges standard Theory of Cosmology into Crisis --- 3 944 05-09-2009, 07:24 AM
Last Post: rsol
  Theory Ive been thinking of Nyte 10 1,853 11-27-2007, 12:08 AM
Last Post: SerialExpLain
  Surfer dude stuns physicists with theory of everything waxzy 1 612 11-21-2007, 05:51 AM
Last Post: blove8.
  Einstein, Cartan And Evans – Start Of A New Age In Physics? Solve et Coagula 0 525 06-17-2007, 02:22 PM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  Esquire: The Theory Of Everything blove8. 0 497 12-30-2006, 04:24 AM
Last Post: blove8.
  Theory Of Nothingness, Electric Universe, Big Bang.... inca 0 523 11-09-2006, 12:19 PM
Last Post: inca

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)