Jump to content
Science Forums

Yes, You Can Go Faster Than Speed Of Light


Recommended Posts

BTW, the method by which they measure their relative speed is irrelevant. It could be Doppler - it could be a guy with really good eyesight and a very accurate protractor measuring the shrinking angular diameter of the receding ship. It doesn't matter.

 

 

 

 

You guys have gone off on a tangent again. I take we all agree on the simple scenario then?  Moronium, you acknowledge that 0.75c + (-)0.75c = | 0.96c |?

 

No? Then let's not make it more complicated than it needs to be.

Edited by DaveC426913
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I confess to twisting the title, yes.  And I did it deliberately because of things I'd read earlier about whether or not you can.  Einstein is alleged to have said (in my words) "well, you can but you

You should address the rest of my post because it is all required for context.   Baez did use two different observers, one on the ceiling and one on the floor, and Baez agrees that both will see the s

Ernest Rutherford, was a British physicist and Nobel laureate who came to be known as the father of nuclear physics. Encyclopædia Britannica considers him to be the greatest experimentalist since Mich

Posted Images

Yes, SR is compatible with QFT it is called relativistic Quantum field Theory or RQFT,

Huh.

 

Redshift of distant galaxies is still caused by stuff moving through a strong gravitational field causing a change in the movement of the object stealing energy from the object making it appear as if moving more slowly or move more slowly if it loses energy from this gravitational field by escaping a strong one.

Are you sure? I don't think gravity has anything at all to do with the redshift of distant galaxies in the standard model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gravitational Lensing I would assume is the method of determining the speed and distance but it is a function of the amount of total kinetic energy is contained within object in a direction.

 

 

Hmmm.  Well whatever method they use, is their reading reliable?  Or is it just some kind of illusion?

 

I still don't understand why you would say there could be no doppler shift, but I'll just leave that alone for now.

Edited by Moronium
Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh.

 

Are you sure? I don't think gravity has anything at all to do with the redshift of distant galaxies in the standard model.

 

Yes, as you escape a gravity well you lose energy, it is part of the standard model in Hubble's law the redshift by gravity, as you escape the gravity well you lose energy thus the particles or objects move to a lower state of excitement being the redshift in photons or slower velocity in objects with mass because of the loss of total Kinetic energy to escape the gravitational pull of the object generating the gravity well, which causes this even on galaxies.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.  Well whatever method they use, is their reading reliable?  Or is it just some kind of illusion?

 

I still don't understand why you would say there could be no doppler shift, but I'll just leave that alone for now.

 

There is no gravitational field to steal Kinetic Energy thus also velocity from the objects in motion is why there would be no Doppler shift which is caused form a loss of Energy from the object leaving the gravitation field as previously explained, Moronium. Energy is always conserved in physics, Thermodynamics makes certain of that.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no gravitational field to steal Kinetic Energy thus also velocity from the objects in motion is why there would be no Doppler shift which is caused form a loss of Energy from the object leaving the gravitation field as previously explained, Moronium. Energy is always conserved in physics, Thermodynamics makes certain of that.

 

Nothing needs to "lose" energy in order for motion to affect the way you see things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing needs to "lose" energy in order for motion to affect the way you see things.

 

It would not change the velocity you see at as but rather the color that you see it as, which makes this another irrelevant subject. Etotal = MC(1/(1- (v2/c2)) , Only a change in Energy will cause a difference in velocity you see it as.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

The redshift indicates relative motion.  If there were none, then there would be none.

 

No, redshift indicates gravity not relative motion. Sorry moving faster than the speed of light from the Rest Frame's view point is impossible in physics, Case Closed!

 

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, as you escape a gravity well you lose energy, it is part of the standard model in Hubble's law the redshift by gravity, as you escape the gravity well you lose energy thus the particles or objects move to a lower state of excitement being the redshift in photons or slower velocity in objects with mass because of the loss of total Kinetic energy to escape the gravitational pull of the object generating the gravity well, which causes this even on galaxies.

But redshift is supposed to be an indication of a galaxy's recessional velocity. I know there's gravitational redshift but that's negligible on the large scale of distant galaxies, and...

Redshift of distant galaxies is still caused by stuff moving through a strong gravitational field causing a change in the movement of the object stealing energy from the object making it appear as if moving more slowly or move more slowly if it loses energy from this gravitational field by escaping a strong one.

...makes it seem like you're saying that the redshift of distant galaxies isn't caused by their motion away from us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're a chemsit, eh?  Were any of those "subjects" physics?

 

Yep, I have partial credit on a modification of String Theory and the Standard model and several papers and inventions to do with physics, Here is one of them, but mainly Biotechnology and Nanotechnology are my specializations.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

But redshift is supposed to be an indication of a galaxy's recessional velocity. I know there's gravitational redshift but that's negligible on the large scale of distant galaxies, and...

...makes it seem like you're saying that the redshift of distant galaxies isn't caused by their motion away from us?

 

It is caused by Dark Energy, galaxy's redshift which is still a function of the Energy-Stress Tensor meaning gravity, there are two types of redshift Gravitational by gravity's pull and Dark Energy's Redshift.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is causes by Dark Energy, galaxy's redshift which is still a function of the Energy-Stress Tensor meaning gravity, there are two types of redshift Gravitational by gravity's pull and Dark Energy's Redshift.

 

How about the phenomenon of a horn blowing on a truck that is moving toward/away from you changing pitch here on earth?  Does dark energy cause that?  Gravity?

Edited by Moronium
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...