Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: mmfiore on 13/07/2009 20:53:21
-
I believe I have found a way to travel faster than the Speed of Light. Is this a good area to post my ideas for discussion sake. I am interested in hearing what other people think of the idea and technology involved. If it is OK I will put my explanation below after moderator says that it is OK.
-
Welcome and Go Ahead, on the understanding that the thread may move to another forum, like "New Theories" or "Just Chat" depending on its technical validity(!).
-
......And it could be moved at the speed of light!
-
perhaps mmfiore was successful and has not had the "time" to come back and explain all !
-
Thank you... I will proceed....
The idea for faster than light travel comes from the Theory of Super Relativity. This is a work in progress and was officially started in 1993. Last year I had several revelations one of those has to do with the origin of gravity. The other has to do with this topic. I do not know if it is permitted to post a link here so I will not do so until I get the ok from a moderator. If you want to go to the site for more information just look up Theory of Super Relativity in Google. The latest version for the Faster than Light explanation which is called “How to Build a Warp Drive” has just been placed on my website. It has not been edited by our editor yet so it still needs some polishing.
For now I will give you a brief over view.
The Theory of Super Relativity is an ether based theory. So the concept for faster than light travel comes from the idea that since the speed of light is a transverse wave and transverse waves only occur in solid mediums a logical assumption is that the value for the speed of light must be determined by the tension of space which in turn effects the refractive index.
Before I proceed any further I feel that I must address the concept of the ether for all of the readers out there. Yes, I am aware of the Michelson - Morley Experiment so if you feel the need to remind me of what the experiment supposedly proved please go to my site and read the article "The UnDiscovered Error" located on my website for an explanation for that experiment. So for the sake of argument here I assuming that you are familiar with my conclusions about the M&M experiment. Which are briefly this, the experiment was executed properly and that the M&M experiment was simply a verification of Special Relativity. It however failed to discover an ether wind because the incorrect particle type was used for the experiment. Therefore the ether wind was not detectable when using photons. This error in the design of the experiment then led to the faulty interpretation. Simply stated, that since there is no ether wind there is no ether. Since the photon always travels at the speed of light and its speed is independent of the emitting source this experiment could not have detected an ether wind. So in my opinion the experiment needs to be redone using a particle such as an electron or proton.
With all that said I have concluded in all likelihood the ether does exist.
Now that we are up to speed on the ether concept and that it is the medium that is determining the speed of light then the next logical step was to determine what could be done to modify the medium in order to vary the value for the speed of light. Once again for the sake of brevity as this first post is going to be pretty large as it is. The medium (the ether) must have some basic properties those properties should be modifiable by some action. For details on that concept see “the spatial properties” chapter on the website.
The way to modify the spatial properties was to simply find a method that could be used to modify or deform the mechanical object which is the ether. That is done by discovering the true forces. The true Forces according to Super Relativity are the spatial modifiers and they are pure tensor fields. These fields can be described using differential equations. Differential equations describe continuous objects such as space (the ether). According to the Theory there are only 3 true forces Gravity, Magnetism and Electrostatic fields. From these 3 fields all other particle interactions can be explained. I realize that this opens a big can of worms as it is in direct conflict with the standard model but if you want to know more about the basis for this concept please read the chapters on “What is force?” and “The Spatial Properties”.
So now we have a method for deforming space mechanically to create a situation in which the medium can be modified. The three methods of modification are
1. Electrostatic field this is a twisting deformation
2. Magnetism which is spatial turning and is a torsional reaction to moving charge.
3. Gravity a field gradient that is created by the high speed accelerated movement of unbalanced charges through space. (The Origin of Gravity) The inward pull is a spatial transformation using the Lorentz transformations.
So to wrap it all up. All that is needed to create a special field called the Slip wave is to use high intensity magnetic field to turn space. This action stretchs space making it tighter this then modifies the value for the speed of light as it will change (reduce) the refractive index. The Slip Wave is a magnetic waveform that can be created and it emulates the waveform of the photon magnetically speaking. This waveform accomplishes 2 things.
1. High intensity magnetic field should produce a gravity shield
2. The special waveform shape provides the proper pressure gradient necessary to propel the object that is surrounded by the field.
That is the basic idea. Please feel free to comment or ask questions.
-
Since I have not heard from the moderators that I cannot add a link I would like to place a link to the full article. how to Build a Warp Drive using Super Relativity Theory.
http://www.superrelativity.org/html/WarpDrive_SR.html (http://www.superrelativity.org/html/WarpDrive_SR.html)
-
I personally see no harm in the link........it's not as if you're selling anything...........besides your theories !
-
speaking of new theories...it might be prudent to move this thread to the ' new theory' section !
-
Hi neilep,
Please feel free to move the thread to the proper place. I am not sure how to do that. Thanks...
-
I would agree that this thread belongs in the New Theories section.
But anyway...
I don't agree with your reasoning regarding using the 'wrong' particle type in the MM experiment. As you point out, an aether seemed to be necessary to explain the wave like behaviour of light, so if light waves are variations in an aether, why is light the wrong type of particle use in the experiment, and what would you learn from using particles that don't exhibit characteristics that require an aether? This seems to me like trying to investigate water surface tension, not by using water, but by using flour.
-
Hi LeeE,
I am happy to further explain the reasoning behind what I am saying. In the article entitled The Undiscovered Error on my website please see:
http://www.superrelativity.org/html/MichelsonMorley_SR.html (http://www.superrelativity.org/html/MichelsonMorley_SR.html)
I explain in great detail why I believe that the photon is absolutely the worst particle that could have been chosen for this experiment. You are correct in your knowledge when you say that the idea behind the experiment was that the aether was what was waving and was thought to be the mediator of all energy and matter. At the time of the experiment it was not known that photons always travel at the speed of light. It was thought that they would travel through the aether in the same way a bullet would travel through the air. So with that in mind it was thought that an aether wind could be detected.
According to what I believe actually happens with particles in actuality there is no displacement when an object passes through space (the aether), space is transformed as objects such as photons pass with in it. Space transforms and adopts the configuration of the particle that occupies it. Still a wind like effect should be detectable using the right kind of object. As you know no ether wind was detected.
Despite this finding, it appears that the experiment was compromised by a flaw which occurred in the design phase. It was assumed that the ether was stationary and that a wind would be detected as the earth passed through the ether. However, Special Relativity says that the speed of light is the same in all reference frames and the Michelson-Morley experiment proved that. So all the M&M Experiment really proved is that the speed of light is independent of the source that emits it. In other words the speed of the emitting source neither subtracts from nor adds to the speed of light. So of course, the Michelson-Morley experiment failed to detect an ether wind and the incorrect assumption was that there was no ether. Obviously an ether wind would be impossible to detect when an experiment that uses objects that are moving at the maximum allowable speed and independent of the all moving reference frames relative to the ether. The motion of the reference frame in which the experiment is conducted, therefore becomes irrelevant, as trying to detect a difference in motion between two photons in any direction versus a stationary ether background will not show the existence of an ether wind.
The experiment should not have used photons because they are already moving at the maximum allowable speed. They do this because they are massless and travel in a straight line. Michelson did not know this at the time because Special Relativity was not discovered until a few months after the experiment results were published. Therefore particles moving at a speed less than the maximum allowable value, should have been used to detect the ether wind. They needed to use a particle that has mass. This type of particle will be able to detect the aether wind. By then using the addition of velocities formula within Special Relativity, an ether wind can be calculated and an ether will be detectable.
Furthermore Michelson and Einstein were in contact and Einstein new of this experiment and had been informed of its progress. So when the results were final he deliberately injected references into his Special Relativity paper disassociating his theory from the aether. He did not want to have his theory discredited because of the aether. What is interesting is that the Lorentz transformations were based on aether theory and they have been proven correct in every way except by this experiment. These formulas point out the fact that light is the exception not the rule. Only massless particles can travel at the speed of light. They will always travel at that speed.
-
I am surprised that there are no more responses. Does this mean that everyone agrees with my ideas and can find nothing wrong?
-
I like the idea of Roran more than Nasuada, though Nasuada might make a more effective one. Roran is more forceful, and relates to people better. Theyd both make suitable canidates though.
-
What evidence is there that a photon is "an object"?
-
The evidence that the photon exist... You can read this page. If the photon did not exist how else could this be possible.
-
The evidence that the photon exist... You can read this page. If the photon did not exist how else could this be possible.
Which page did you mean? Is there a link missing in this post?
-
I think he meant "this post", instead of a reference to a remote page.
I think the MM and subsequent experiments do not prove that Lorentz was wrong about the relationship of material things to the speed of light. It is just that light does not need a medium in which to exist. The empty space works just fine. It is much easier for me to suspect that material things are distorted by movement than it is for me to suspect that time and space are distorted. The former yields to causal analysis, (http://photontheory.com/Einstein/Einstein06.html#Ziegler) the latter does not.
-
Vern how do we know light works just fine in empty space? There is no such thing as empty space. Any place you look space will have radiation and some particles. How do we know that light created isn't just a disturbance in the radiation already existing in space or here on Earth?
-
The equations we use to describe a wave of light do not take into account the already existing radiation in space. They only use the permeability and permittivity properties of space.
-
They assume superposition - which can be shown to apply everywhere - when did you last notice cross modulation of the image of what you saw by a beam of light going across your line of vision?
Space seems to be nearasdammit linear. That's why the equations are used with confidence.
-
Yes; I agree that superposition seems to apply everywhere. I think though that I remember a photon cross-modulation experiment. I'll search for the outcome of that.
-
But wasn't that in a non linear medium? No objections under those conditions.
-
So far all I have found is cross modulation in non-linear material. However, I remember reading of a high-power laser experiment where cross-modulation occurred. Or maybe I just dreamed it [:)]
-
... However, I remember reading of a high-power laser experiment where cross-modulation occurred. Or maybe I just dreamed it [:)]
Did it seem to be direct cross-modulation, sans a medium? If you ever stumble across the reference again I'd really appreciate a link, Ta.
-
With all that said I have concluded in all likelihood the ether does exist.
Now that we are up to speed on the ether concept and that it is the medium that is determining the speed of light then the next logical step was to determine what could be done to modify the medium in order to vary the value for the speed of light.
Well, yeah, Higgs field/boson (theory) I think it's currently called.
Well, not only the speed of light but the dissolution of energy
and matter as well. Remember, light speed is a constant
and not a constant. It can be both or neither. Depends
on what situation of existence co-existence you find yourself in
when you observe it. Then your observing it is an act that
sets up your mind with a link via vita fields, bio electro magnetic
fields, and these in turn trigger the particle or wave to
respond wearing it's work clothes or Sunday best depending
on how it regards you. Now remember that observing at all
requires a square law receptor on your part and if visual
at least one photon there to here. That other photon required
to observe a photon not only means an interceptor is required,
an exoceptor (did I just make up a word?) must be there as well.
Well, the easy way out of this dilemma is to give all photons
in the universe quantum entanglement with each other then
worry about the effect only as a probable analogous condition
resembling the Boaz Einstein Condensates. There might be something
to this idea and more than a few have concocted the same notion
in a speculative sort of way, me included. If that is the case
then telescopes around the world might ought to put a warning
tag on them saying; "WARNING, objects viewed with this instrument
may be much closer than they appear.
And I thought I was confused.
-
Did it seem to be direct cross-modulation, sans a medium? If you ever stumble across the reference again I'd really appreciate a link, Ta.
Yes; that is the impression I had; cross-modulation in non-linear media is old hat and wouldn't have impressed me. If I ever come across it again I'll nail it down.
-
Ta.