Main > Everything Else

Faster than light? Someone with a big brain can help?

<< < (3/12) > >>

pinballwizard79:
I'm starvin

http://www.chebahut.com/menu.html

Gatt:

--- Quote from: Donkbaca on September 22, 2011, 06:06:05 pm ---
--- Quote ---Conceivably,  there could be some other factor that falls outside of our range of senses,  that functions as a constant on a macroscopic scale in our atmosphere and under our gravity,  but has a different value outside of it.  We have very little data,  if any real data,  outside of the realm of our solar system,  and precious little data outside of our planet.  We've made alot of assumptions that what holds true here,  holds true everywhere.  There's no reason the actual equation couldn't be E/X = MC^2 where X is some factor we haven't yet recognized.
--- End quote ---

This is wrong.  We have not made "assumptions"  we have tested theories, there is a distinction in that.  The main reason we believe these things to be true is that these theories can be tested in a predictive nature, the whole "if x then y".  There is a great reason why E/X = MC^2, its the fact that if E=MC^2 then we shouldn't be able to control and predict things like nuclear reactions.  If there were no universal laws, then science wouldn't be worth studying because then everything would be a special case.

Its likely a measuring error, or something to do with the quantum nature of the particles, I doubt its a fundamental flaw in one of the cornerstones of physics, but hey, you never know.

--- End quote ---

Ah,  but we have made assumptions,  a great many of them.  We're assuming that we can see and/or measure everything that affects particles.  We state that "Nothing can move faster than light" because we're assuming we have all of the components of the equation,  and that it's not at all possible that there's anything in existance that could affect our equations that we are not aware of.  

We even have strong indicators that we are missing key pieces of equations,  we created "Dark matter" and "Dark Energy" to try and kludge in something to fit the results we think we should have,  rather than accepting that there's probably stuff we don't know of.  In no small part due to ego that drives us to refuse to admit there can be anything we don't understand.

There's no reason why there cannot be some things we are not aware of that have significant effects.  In fact,  to be honest,  it's *very* highly likely there are.  Because all of our efforts are focused on controlling and contemplating things that fall within our realm of senses,  that we may be akin to blind-cavefish,  lacking a sense to perceive an entire realm of physics,  never gets explored.

I mean,  2,000 years ago an Alchemist would've told you we knew everything there was to know about fire.  The idea of Oxygen,  Carbon Dioxide,  and Hydrogen would've been "Insane" to him.  Strike the stones together,  get fire every time.  It was reproducible.

Donkbaca:
You would be right, it weren't for the fact that we can mathematically prove these assumptions and use them to predict real world outcomes, like nuclear energy.  Its possible we missed something consistently in the literally millions of applications in this theory. Or it's possible that this ONE expirenent is flawed. It just seems the later is more likely.

As for me I am rooting for the,"we are all slowing down " theory that I posted earlier. Who's on my bandwagon? I say we take that bandwagon to 7-11 for slurpees and doritos, then join up and herbally meditate some more

HaRuMaN:

Malenko:
"I pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in spaaaaaaaaaaccceeeeeee.....



cause I'm afraid that we've been cheated here on Earth."

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version