Our universe through a wormhole

[InfiniteNow]

How can you so blindly make your assertions? I don't get it. :hihi:

Beware: Your request may result in a thousand links with nothing quoted and only tangentially related information.

[GreekTTC]

Beware: Your request may result in a thousand links with nothing quoted and only tangentially related information.

 

:hihi:

 

We don't really exist. Here's my proof: http://www.google.com

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

 

We can imagine what we want.

 

Give me evidence and I will consider

worm holes

time travel

or what ever

 

I wish we could do all those things. But I cannot see it being probable.

 

Thats me

[InfiniteNow]

Harry,

 

What did you mean by that "French words" statement? That's what confused me. Please clarify.

 

As for evidence, currently it's only mathematical, but you might look into the work of Thorne and/or Asimov. They're two of my favorites.

 

Cheers. :cup:

[Eclogite]

Harry,

I await, with interest, a response to my post (#29) of three days ago.

I believe the questions remain relevant and your answers important to an understanding of your position.

Patiently,

Ophiolite.

[Harry Costas]

Hello Eclogite

 

Sorry being very busy

 

is it a response to

"That is an interesting suggestion. Which aspect of Special Relativity do you think is flawed? How would you set about demonstrating this flaw? (Are any presently planned investigations likely to reveal it?) Do you think the flaw is fundamental or approximate? By which I mean, if approximate, it works for certain conditions approximately, just as Newton works approximiately for slow moving objects. Or, is it just plain wrong?"

 

please explain further what you want

[Harry Costas]

Hello GreekTTC

 

Why do you say my posts are useless?

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

Infinitenow when someone uses 4 letter words, we say they talk in French.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

When I give links out its only to add and give info to people who do not have or have not seen that info.

 

So if anybody wishes for me to express any point at anytime please let me know.

----------------------------------------------------------

AS for Wormholes I cannot see them working as a means of travelling from one spot in space to another.

[Eclogite]

Eclogite:"That is an interesting suggestion. Which aspect of Special Relativity do you think is flawed? How would you set about demonstrating this flaw? (Are any presently planned investigations likely to reveal it?) Do you think the flaw is fundamental or approximate? By which I mean, if approximate, it works for certain conditions approximately, just as Newton works approximiately for slow moving objects. Or, is it just plain wrong?"

 

please explain further what you want

You have stated it will eventually be possible to travel faster than light. Since that is in direct conflict with Special Relativity, which is considered to be a sound theory, and which has been validated to many decimal places, I wish to know which aspect of the theory you think is flawed. What error in the theory are we going to exploit that will allow us transluminal velocities?

 

If you have no particular aspect in mind then why are you stating as fact what is merely an unsubstantiated opinion?

 

That is the root of my question.

[Harry Costas]

Hello Eclogite

 

If you are limited by the speed of light thats OK

 

But! gravity travels much faster and its gravity that will allow man to travel faster than the speed of light.

 

Also man has sent electric pulses at multiple speed of light.

Read the link

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796

"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed, the researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour"

 

Through out history man has entrapped themselves with limited ideas.

[Eclogite]

But! gravity travels much faster and its gravity that will allow man to travel faster than the speed of light.

Please cite the research that substantiates this claim.

The current view is that gravity is also limited to the speed of light. Simply stating the reverse does not make it so.

Also man has sent electric pulses at multiple speed of light.

This is simply an example of negative group velocity tunneling. Information is not transmitted at transluminal speeds. Relativity is not compromised. The prospects of FTL travel do not improve on the basis of this experiment.

Through out history man has entrapped themselves with limited ideas.

One could say with equal, or more, accuracy and vigour: throughout history man has wasted energy and time by believing what he wanted to believe, not what was supported by evidence.

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

 

If you want to confirm the speed of gravity read the following link

quote:

"Conclusion: The Speed of Gravity is ³ 2x1010 c

We conclude that gravitational fields, even “static” ones, continually regenerate through entities that must propagate at some very high speed, . We call this the speed of gravity. Equation [1] then tells us how orbits will expand in response to this large but finite propagation speed, since the field itself, and not merely changes in the field, will transfer momentum to orbiting target bodies. Rewriting equation [1] in a form suitable for comparisons with observations, we derive:

 

[5]

 

For the Earth’s orbit, = 1 year, = 10-4, and we take as an upper limit to the value 2.4x10-12/year (derived from ½ ) in solutions using radar ranging and spacecraft data (Pitjeva, 1993). Substituting these values, we get from Earth-orbit data that ³ 109 c.

 

 

 

Using the same equation with binary pulsar PSR1534+12 and the parameters in Table I, we can place the most stringent limit yet from the observed uncertainty in : ³ 2x1010 c.

 

 

 

A direct experimental verification in the laboratory that gravity propagates faster than light may now be possible. The protocol and preliminary results were reported in (Walker, 1997).

 

 

 

It might be tempting to conclude that the speed of gravity is infinite. But these limits on are still a long way from infinite velocity, and Newton’s statement, quoted at the beginning of this paper, still seems applicable. Infinite speeds, too, are acausal."

 

Eclogite let me know what you think of the link. I'm impressed by your thoughts.

 

I made some oops in my last post. Does not matter. Keep moving.

 

"But! gravity travels much faster and its gravity that will allow man to travel faster than the speed of light"

 

I should have said

 

Gravity travels faster than light and its gravity that will allow man to travel faster than the speed of light. It maybe a dream.

[Tormod]

Gravity travels faster than light and its gravity that will allow man to travel faster than the speed of light. It maybe a dream.

 

Another plea for documentation here.

[Tormod]

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796

"By using the oscilloscope to trace the pulse's strength and speed, the researchers confirmed they sent the signal's peak tunnelling through the cable at more than four billion kilometres per hour"

 

Did you read the entire article=

 

While the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon.

 

Through out history man has entrapped themselves with limited ideas.

 

And throughout history people have ignored the facts that are laid in front of them.

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

 

Link on speed of gravity

 

somehow the link was deleted when I copy /paste.

Here it is

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp

[Tormod]

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp

 

Good. Notice that the article is old and a lot of stuff has happened since then.

 

For example this:

 

First speed of gravity measurement revealed

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3232

 

The ideas from the Meta Research are *theories* and as such they are good reading but a theory remains a theory until the predictions are proven.

 

And as of now, the measurements show that Einstein's prediction that the speed of gravity is the same as the speed of light (at least in a vacuum) is correct.

[Harry Costas]

Hello Tormod

 

Thank you again

for the link

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3232

 

Ok,,,,,,,,,,,,,i have homework

 

Now I must go an pick up the kids

[GreekTTC]

Harry,

 

Posts of a scientific nature that make claims about anything without proof or evidence are useless. When you blindly assert some of your "facts" like they're truths without saying why you believe them to be true, those "facts" are useless.

 

Like it's been said...if you are posting OPINIONS, make it clear. If you are posting what you believe to be fact, then back those facts up with real evidence.

 

If you didn't already figure this all out just by reading the other replies in this thread...I'm sorry...I don't think we can help.