1 of 2
1
Old science thoughts in new science packages
Posted: 19 February 2012 12:24 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  699
Joined  2008-10-26

When I last reported on Keppler, the wonders of rocky, blue earth-like planets outside our solar system were speculation.  Now what breaks have begun in our scientific thought and observation - the new planets must be targeted and we should keep a close eye on their reportage.

But here on Earth things are happening that should generate as much excitement: the use of the European collider, CERN, has suggested that the speed of light is not a cap on velocity.  As scientists looked for the Barn particle 10−28 m2 (100 fm2) it appears that we have reached new plateaux in astronomy and science.  The most exciting particle is the Higgs-Bosun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs-boson) also called the god-particle, was mathematically examined, but was not seen.  Using CERN now, these particles have been “seen” and this is ver important.

I’d hope that those of you interested in astronomy/cosmatology and the physics/math combinations will come here and offer their knowledge and ask many questions following the thought that 20C science is about to be changed in almost every aspect as modern scientists search the small and the large looking forward in the 21C.

[ Edited: 19 February 2012 12:32 AM by Fat Man ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 12:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31

Ecrasez l’infame! You are back again!
Looking forward for new discussions with you!

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 03:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26

As a layman, I have a few very basic question,

If a photon propagates by a “probability wave” function at SOL would a FTL boson not also propagate as a wave function? As I understand it, observing a particle’s physical properties collapses the wave function.

How long do these FTL particles exist below the event horizon?  And if we observe their particle properties (I saw a picture of the collision and the physical trail of the suspected boson) how do we avoid the collapse of their wave function?

Are these FTL particles ‘‘virtual” (negative mass) that must travel at FTL speeds?

If so do we need to accelarate them to FTL in order for them to exhibit any physical properties?

If so how do we achieve FTL acceleration? I understand that CERN can only achieve near SOL speeds of massive particles due to terminal energy limitations. Does (can) the collision generate FTL acceleration?

[ Edited: 19 February 2012 03:29 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 06:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31
Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

As a layman, I have a few very basic question,

Basic questions? I would say speculative questions. FTL particles are not established.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If a photon propagates by a “probability wave” function at SOL would a FTL boson not also propagate as a wave function? As I understand it, observing a particle’s physical properties collapses the wave function.

Everything propagates by QM laws.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

1. How long do these FTL particles exist below the event horizon? 2. And if we observe their particle properties (I saw a picture of the collision and the physical trail of the suspected boson) how do we avoid the collapse of their wave function?

1. Event horizon? Are you talking about black holes?
2. That is a logical contradiction. Measuring means collapsing the wave function.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

Are these FTL particles ‘‘virtual” (negative mass) that must travel at FTL speeds?

Virtual particles are not the same as particles with negative mass. The idea of negative mass leads to inconsistencies, so there is no reason to believe that they exist. Antimatter has positive mass. Tachyons would also have positive mass, but need endless energy to slow down to SOL.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If so do we need to accelarate them to FTL in order for them to exhibit any physical properties?

Nothing with rest mass can be accelerated to SOL or above.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If so how do we achieve FTL acceleration? I understand that CERN can only achieve near SOL speeds of massive particles due to terminal energy limitations. Does (can) the collision generate FTL acceleration?

Not. No.

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 10:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26
GdB - 19 February 2012 06:18 AM
Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

As a layman, I have a few very basic question,

Basic questions? I would say speculative questions. FTL particles are not established.

Oops, perhaps I was confusing the discovery of the Higgs boson with the report a while ago that they had discovered an apparent FTL particle.
Every subsequent question I asked was based on that false assumption.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If a photon propagates by a “probability wave” function at SOL would a FTL boson not also propagate as a wave function? As I understand it, observing a particle’s physical properties collapses the wave function.

Everything propagates by QM laws.

ok

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

1. How long do these FTL particles exist below the event horizon? 2. And if we observe their particle properties (I saw a picture of the collision and the physical trail of the suspected boson) how do we avoid the collapse of their wave function?

1. Event horizon? Are you talking about black holes?
2. That is a logical contradiction. Measuring means collapsing the wave function.

1.Another oops, I was assuming that SOL was also called the event horizon.
2.ok, that was my understanding.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

Are these FTL particles ‘‘virtual” (negative mass) that must travel at FTL speeds?

Virtual particles are not the same as particles with negative mass. The idea of negative mass leads to inconsistencies, so there is no reason to believe that they exist. Antimatter has positive mass. Tachyons would also have positive mass, but need endless energy to slow down to SOL

Aaah. Another false assumption (among many confused ). i actually looked up virtual particle in wiki and am ‘beginning’ to understand the concept of virtual particle
But re tachyons. This I don’t understand. How could a tachyon with positive mass exceed SOL. Is this mass acquired from its speed or is it rest mass?

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If so do we need to accelarate them to FTL in order for them to exhibit any physical properties?

Nothing with rest mass can be accelerated to SOL or above.

ok, as i understand it, the photon has zero rest mass. But would a tachyon not have have negative rest mass in order to exceed SOL?

Write4U - 19 February 2012 03:21 AM

If so how do we achieve FTL acceleration? I understand that CERN can only achieve near SOL speeds of massive particles due to terminal energy limitations. Does (can) the collision generate FTL acceleration?

Not. No.

ok. That was point I was aiming at with my questions. But obviously my basic premise was false….. red face

[ Edited: 19 February 2012 10:31 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Pardon my possible ignorance since I’m probably not up to speed on current events, but isn’t one of the problems here the fact that the possible FTL particle has NOT been confirmed?

If I recall correctly, the Higgs Boson is problematic as well.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 11:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31
Write4U - 19 February 2012 10:19 AM

But re tachyons. This I don’t understand. How could a tachyon with positive mass exceed SOL. Is this mass acquired from its speed or is it rest mass?

Tachyons would have their minimal energy when having infinite speed. It needs energy to slow them down. The speed limit is SOL, i.e. they cannot be slower. Maybe these theoretical absurdities heal you from putting them in your world view.

Write4U - 19 February 2012 10:19 AM

But would a tachyon not have have negative rest mass in order to exceed SOL?

No. Negative mass would be even more absurd than tachyons. Negative masses would move in the opposite direction of the force that attracts positive mass (F = -mA) And we would get energy from creating it (E = -mc²... etc. To repeat: anti matter has positive mass. Antimatter falls down in a gravitational field, it creates energy when it is destroyed (by normal matter of course…)

Write4U - 19 February 2012 10:19 AM

basic premise was false….. red face

Maybe you should not build your word view on physics you do not understand…

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 11:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 19 February 2012 10:34 AM

Pardon my possible ignorance since I’m probably not up to speed on current events, but isn’t one of the problems here the fact that the possible FTL particle has NOT been confirmed?

True. We only know two things. Nobody has yet pointed to an obvious error in the experiments. But nobody has also done a similar experiment that conforms the observations. We’ll have to wait…

Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 19 February 2012 10:34 AM

If I recall correctly, the Higgs Boson is problematic as well.

Well, it has not definitely been found. But it also has not definitely not been found. We’ll have to wait…

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 11:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26

Note that all my question are designed to further my understanding. This is why I started with the qualifier that I am a layman. And I sincerely appreciate your indulgence, landsman.. cheese  After all I did not invent the term “tachyon” (FTL particle)
However as physics are mathematical in nature, I reserve the right to use logic in generalizations about physics.

[ Edited: 19 February 2012 11:23 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 08:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  699
Joined  2008-10-26

We could have some fun with the Higgs-Boson particle, too, it seems, (the Guardian Newspaper ran a competition, for example, to find another name for the Higgs-Bosun):

‘Lederman said he gave it the nickname “The God Particle” because the particle is “so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive,” but jokingly added that a second reason was because “the publisher wouldn’t let us call it the Goddamn Particle, though that might be a more appropriate title, given its villainous nature and the expense it is causing.”’

Much like the theories which surround the Higgs-Bosun leading from and to “string theory” which everyone talks about avidly but which has never been defined (indeed there are five or six theories depending on who you are).  Science seems to be traveling at a speed which is faster than itself and some scientists have committed their entire productive lives to parts of these theories but most of them will go to their graves muttering “it IS the string thing…”, but not yet knowing.

And then there is the American problem:  no money and bunches of politicians who want to throw the theoretical physics research out with the Boson bathwater and spread poverty and government cheese allocations weekly around with christian fundamentalist ignorance.  The Italians are going great guns with the Collider, the British have started a multi-disciplinary program to keep digging, and the European space program is working on manned Mars visits with Russian rockets.  And we aren’t even going back to the moon.

If these other groups get String and its bling right first, we won’t know what to do because our money will have been given to the rich who are all having fun in Hawaii and couldn’t care less about science development.  Also, the American christians want both Creationism and anti-climatology taught in schools so by the time we have done a full circle we will be dead, dumb and gone.

[ Edited: 19 February 2012 08:29 PM by Fat Man ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 February 2012 11:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5976
Joined  2009-02-26

Yes, it seems that almost every culture or country has had their golden age in research, discovery, invention.  Egypt, China, Middle east, Italy, Germany, US are but a few examples. But when those cultures become rich from these eras, it seems they also become complacent and fall into comfort zone of luxury, Autocracy or Theocracy until decay sets in.
But it also seems to be cyclical and when the competitive spirit reemerges, so does the desire and will to excell once more.
Let’s hope we are merely in a slump and will wake up to the reality that stagnation is death.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 07:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

Regarding SOL, one thing that always puzzled me was the following:

1.) light speed is constant (in space)
2.) if a star is approaching you (or going away from you) at some speed, x, the light from that star still approaches you at c.
3.) hence there is no such thing as a Doppler effect.
4.) but there is red-shift.

That always rubbed me the wrong way until recently when (I believe it was Brian Cox) explained that the shift is due to the expansion of space, not a change in c. That was a very satisfactory moment for me - as it always is when a long-time personal query is answered.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 08:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31
traveler - 20 February 2012 07:04 AM

Regarding SOL, one thing that always puzzled me was the following:

1.) light speed is constant (in space)
2.) if a star is approaching you (or going away from you) at some speed, x, the light from that star still approaches you at c.
3.) hence there is no such thing as a Doppler effect.
4.) but there is red-shift.

That always rubbed me the wrong way until recently when (I believe it was Brian Cox) explained that the shift is due to the expansion of space, not a change in c. That was a very satisfactory moment for me - as it always is when a long-time personal query is answered.

Sorry to disturb your satisfiction. 3.) is not true. Read Wikipedia. I am often confused too, it is more or less above the limit what I can imagine. This chapter might be specially interesting for you.

Here is a great example, a spectogram of Saturn with its rings:
DopplerFot2.jpg
The rings are red shifted and blue shifted because of their rotation around Saturn. And Saturn itself is revolving around its axis, therefore the spectrum is tilted.

[ Edited: 20 February 2012 08:55 AM by GdB ]
 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 09:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

Oh boy…

Well, I want to understand so I don’t mind the disturbance.  smile

But I’ll have to look at that a bit more. Cosmological redshift must be what was being explained when I thought I finally understood this topic. But there is still a Doppler effect? Jeez. That’s very confusing. I’ll have to look over your links a bit more. But doesn’t a blue shift mean that light is traveling FTL? I know it must not, but it confuses me.

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 10:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15305
Joined  2006-02-14
traveler - 20 February 2012 09:49 AM

Oh boy…

Well, I want to understand so I don’t mind the disturbance.  smile

But I’ll have to look at that a bit more. Cosmological redshift must be what was being explained when I thought I finally understood this topic. But there is still a Doppler effect? Jeez. That’s very confusing. I’ll have to look over your links a bit more. But doesn’t a blue shift mean that light is traveling FTL? I know it must not, but it confuses me.

The doppler shift effects the wavelengths of light, not the speed. So the light is compressed in the direction of motion, shortening the wavelength. If the object is moving away from us (as is the case cosmologically) the light waves are stretched out and hence the light appears reddened.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 February 2012 10:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4377
Joined  2007-08-31
traveler - 20 February 2012 09:49 AM

But I’ll have to look at that a bit more. Cosmological redshift must be what was being explained when I thought I finally understood this topic. But there is still a Doppler effect? Jeez. That’s very confusing. I’ll have to look over your links a bit more. But doesn’t a blue shift mean that light is traveling FTL? I know it must not, but it confuses me.

Yes, cosmological redshift is explained in a different way.

From one of the links:

There is a distinction between a redshift in cosmological context as compared to that witnessed when nearby objects exhibit a local Doppler-effect redshift. Rather than cosmological redshifts being a consequence of relative velocities, the photons instead increase in wavelength and redshift because of a feature of the spacetime through which they are traveling that causes space to expand. Due to the expansion increasing as distances increase, the distance between two remote galaxies can increase at more than 3×10⁸ m/s, but this does not imply that the galaxies move faster than the speed of light at their present location (which is forbidden by Lorentz covariance).

Blueshift just means that the lighting object is moving to you, or you to the object (which is more or less the same…) Its energy is increased.

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1