News Stories

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Solace

How do you define speed?

Generally in terms of velocity.

We measure it in the distance something takes to get from one spot to another spot, right? In that context, we can measure how long it takes light to travel from a source until it arrives.

But dark is different. Dark exists where light does not, and light is limited in source and duration, while dark is not. In the absence of light, can you describe how quickly darkness travels? Does it travel? Can it travel?

So like I said, it either exists or it does not (or, in place of "does not", is masked by light). It doesn't travel, ergo has no speed.

Think about it like this: To an observer, if I left and arrived at the same time, did I go somewhere very quickly, or nowhere instantly?

Well, in terms of definitions, to leave you must go somewhere else, and to arrive you must come from somewhere else. So you can either move instantaneously, or you need better wording.

Originally Posted by RRW

should we make thread about this faster than light news.

seem important and discuss worthy

I'd say not until it's actually confirmed in any sense. Hearsay from random journalists is rather meh.

[RRW]

but CERN themselves said they did it

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/...d_8695154.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011...d.html?_r=2&hp

Edit: screw it, i decide make my own thread my self

http://forums.animesuki.com/showthre...50#post3777650

[GDB]

And they said they want others to independently verify their results. If it's not verified, then it isn't confirmed. That's how science works.

[Dextro]

Ars Technica has a pretty good article on the whole "faster than light neutrinos" thing.

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/...time-space.ars

Bottom line: it's pretty exciting stuff and the detail of the measurements they have made is breath taking (they managed to measure continental drift!) but, and this is a big but, they are only human and as such it is possible that they have forgotten some variable that accounts for the 60ns or so difference.

So I'm pretty excited about this but let's see how it pans out before asking for warp drives.

[RRW]

of course you need to run the test again to see if this right. then again this will very BIG thing if this happens

anyway just continue to discuss on other thread so we dont waste another page for this

[DonQuigleone]

This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".

[Ithekro]

There seem to be two schools of thought as to what could be done with this knowledge (if ever a practical use can be found): Time Travel, and High Speed Propulsion (FTL Drives).

Time Travel would seem to have serious problems associated with it in terms of paradoxes and the like (unless time travel actualy works like it does in Haruhi...blame the God Empress I suppose). FTL Drives allow for rapid movement of objects, not only around our own solar system, but to other solar systems. Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".

I'm probably a little more ignorant than physics than others here. But is it not true to say that a part of existence that is total darkness, is some other dimension that has not yet been encapsulated by our expanding universe?

Originally Posted by Ithekro

There seem to be two schools of thought as to what could be done with this knowledge (if ever a practical use can be found): Time Travel, and High Speed Propulsion (FTL Drives).

Time Travel would seem to have serious problems associated with it in terms of paradoxes and the like (unless time travel actualy works like it does in Haruhi...blame the God Empress I suppose). FTL Drives allow for rapid movement of objects, not only around our own solar system, but to other solar systems. Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?

Right... simply being faster than light doesn't mean much when it takes light itself millions of years to reach your wanted destination.

Someone answer me this question. If I were to instantly jump from my present location to any given star in the universe, would I not be traveling into the past on some level?

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

I'm probably a little more ignorant than physics than others here. But is it not true to say that a part of existence that is total darkness, is some other dimension that has not yet been encapsulated by our expanding universe?

No.


You're probably thinking of Dark Energy, or Dark Matter. That's simply stuff we can't see, not "darkness".

[Solace]

Originally Posted by GDB

Well, in terms of definitions, to leave you must go somewhere else, and to arrive you must come from somewhere else. So you can either move instantaneously, or you need better wording.

You're not thinking with portals! The wording was precise. Wherever you go, there you are!

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

This whole "speed of darkness" debate is pointless. Darkness does not physically exist, rendering the entire point moot. It's like asking what the speed of cold is. Both are the absence of something else, they do not "travel".

That's just nonsense. Everyone knows that if cold could move the phologistons inside of it would combust and melt.

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

No.


You're probably thinking of Dark Energy, or Dark Matter. That's simply stuff we can't see, not "darkness".

As far as I know, dark energy and dark matter are part of our universe. Their role isn't well understood but hasn't it recently come to light (lulz) that the dark matter actually accounts for much of the universe's mass?

What I meant to say, worded somewhat clumsily; is there a part of the universe in which there is no light whatsoever (total darkness)? Hasn't light infiltrated every reach of the universe, and some lightless portion would therefore be outside of it?

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

As far as I know, dark energy and dark matter are part of our universe. Their role isn't well understood but hasn't it recently come to light (lulz) that the dark matter actually accounts for much of the universe's mass?

What I meant to say, worded somewhat clumsily; is there a part of the universe in which there is no light whatsoever (total darkness)? Hasn't light infiltrated every reach of the universe, and some lightless portion would therefore be outside of it?

That's a completely different matter. "Dark Matter" (which does indeed make up most of the universe) is not "Darkness". The name is simply referring to the fact that we can not see it, it is not emitting light -> Dark matter. Dark matter is not existing in some lightless portion of the universe, it exists pretty much everywhere, we simply can't see it, because it's "dark". It emits nothing, and no other light reflects off it.

But as I said, Dark matter is not "Darkness". Darkness doesn't exist. It's just like a Hole can't be said to exist. They are both just a lack of something.

If you had a hole in the ground, and the wall collapsed, filling it up, but leaving another hole next to it, would you say the hole has moved? No, the earth moved, and a new hole was left where the earth was. But the hole has not moved. Likewise Darkness does not move.

@Solace:

Your physicist friend was clearly not much of a physicist, you don't even need to bring Relativity into it, it's an elementary problem.

[Bri]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Of course the question is...just how much faster than light is their particle? 60 nanoseconds over how much distance verse say the distance verse a light year in a year's time?

Not much faster, rougly a few thousand meters per second extra. The distance they ran the experiment over was 730 km. The time difference was 60ns. With distance and speed of light given you can calculate the travel time of light, subtract the time difference and you have the travel time of the particle. Devide the distance by the particle travel time and you have the speed of the particle.

[Solace]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

@Solace:

Your physicist friend was clearly not much of a physicist, you don't even need to bring Relativity into it, it's an elementary problem.

At least you understand why I was screwing with him. Apologies if anyone thought my answers in this thread were totally serious.

[Marcus H.]

CERN discovers FTL particles... a satellite crashing onto Earth... what's next, a young scientific researcher found dead somewhere?

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

That's a completely different matter. "Dark Matter" (which does indeed make up most of the universe) is not "Darkness". The name is simply referring to the fact that we can not see it, it is not emitting light -> Dark matter. Dark matter is not existing in some lightless portion of the universe, it exists pretty much everywhere, we simply can't see it, because it's "dark". It emits nothing, and no other light reflects off it.

But as I said, Dark matter is not "Darkness". Darkness doesn't exist. It's just like a Hole can't be said to exist. They are both just a lack of something.

If you had a hole in the ground, and the wall collapsed, filling it up, but leaving another hole next to it, would you say the hole has moved? No, the earth moved, and a new hole was left where the earth was. But the hole has not moved. Likewise Darkness does not move.

At no point did I mistake dark matter for darkness so you need not elaborate on that any further.

Is there a physical boundary to the universe? And beyond it, is nothingness darkness? I suppose it's more philosophical at that point.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

At no point did I mistake dark matter for darkness so you need not elaborate on that any further.

Is there a physical boundary to the universe? And beyond it, is nothingness darkness? I suppose it's more philosophical at that point.

There's likely not a 3 dimensional boundary.... head off in a straight line and at *some point* you're probably going to return to where you started (though billions of years may have passed and it'd be unrecognizable). There's like a 4+ (10, 11, +?) dimensional space that is bounded that we exist in.

This is easier to view from the perspective of an ant on a globe. the globe appears flat to him, but if he travels far enough he notices he's back where he started. If he develops binoculars, he notices the 'horizon effect' and begins to put together enough clues that he lives on a sphere in some larger space. That's roughly what we're doing in a 3-d perceivable universe. There are behaviors and clues we're collecting that imply a higher dimensional reality both at the quantum and the cosmological levels.

[ganbaru]

Solar startups plough ahead despite Solyndra
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...78I63C20110919

Solyndra's collapse has cast a harsh spotlight on rival start-ups backing a promising solar technology that, despite the flameout by a leading player, remains on the verge of cracking the renewable energy market.

[Tri-ring]

Originally Posted by Vexx

There's likely not a 3 dimensional boundary.... head off in a straight line and at *some point* you're probably going to return to where you started (though billions of years may have passed and it'd be unrecognizable). There's like a 4+ (10, 11, +?) dimensional space that is bounded that we exist in.

This is easier to view from the perspective of an ant on a globe. the globe appears flat to him, but if he travels far enough he notices he's back where he started. If he develops binoculars, he notices the 'horizon effect' and begins to put together enough clues that he lives on a sphere in some larger space. That's roughly what we're doing in a 3-d perceivable universe. There are behaviors and clues we're collecting that imply a higher dimensional reality both at the quantum and the cosmological levels.

Although I am leaned towards the closed universe concept, modern observation of space suggests that the universe is not closed in a 3 dimensional space sense. This observation still cannot dismiss the possibility in a higher dimension.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Solar startups plough ahead despite Solyndra
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...78I63C20110919

You know.... if the startup of the automobile industry had been reported in this style we'd still be on foot. Solyndra was *one* company that failed (mostly due to poor management) that got seed money from the government like many other companies in many industries. The flame-waving on Solyndra is purely orchestration by the ultra-right to both smear the current administration and to trip up and smear "green tech" in general (*cough* oil/gas *cough*). Tell them to stop taking all their subsidies, loopholes, and such (while declaring bankruptcy to sidestep problems) and then we'll talk