HawkMan Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 there is a difference... universe is expanding so objects are moving in the opposite direction. If two objects travel in opposite direction with the speed 75% as that of light then they are expanding at 1.5 times the speed of light. that still will not make an object travel beyond speed of light..... Actually, the article he's referring to isn't talking abt relative speed between galaxies a then opposite sides of the center of big bang. Were already at a point where there are galaxies well never see the light from because were moving away from them to fast for the light to ever catch up. The article is talking about the speed the individual galaxy is moving, from the universe center point. However it also specifies that while the galaxies will be moving faster than light eventually, they won't actually, since the universe itself is expanding. So it's Soave itself is moving/expanding not the galaxies. Kind of like filing milk in a bowl with cheerios, the cheerios will move out to the edges without actually moving in the milk, the milk is simply expanding. Add in some movement of the galaxies(cheerios) as well you can end up way past light speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 ?We don?t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,? says the bartender. A neutrino walks into a bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eXtermia Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 Perhaps it didn't exceed the local speed of light and instead created a mini warp bubble... :) or perhaps simply one n hit another n or a series of "n"s pushing them along with it and instead of the original we measured one that got pushed out the other end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Himanshu- Posted October 7, 2011 Share Posted October 7, 2011 No it doesn't, read the article. Sorry, I read somewhere that it was 60 ns difference and I thought it meant that it traveled the distance it travels in 1s faster by 60 ns. But, it seems that the difference was on a journey of 732 km. This increases the speed by 7,500,000 or 0.075*10^8 m/s or a difference of 2.5%. This is a significant difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guru Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 “We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” says the bartender. A neutrino walks into a bar. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Observer Posted October 8, 2011 Share Posted October 8, 2011 “We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” says the bartender. A neutrino walks into a bar. hahahhahaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted October 9, 2011 Share Posted October 9, 2011 Two more - "Neutrino. Knock-knock." "I wrote a speed-of-light joke ... but a neutrino beat me to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
still1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 well its official now... there was an error in the calculation.... and now nothing can travel faster than light.... A week ago the world went wild over CERN's tentative claim that it could make neutrinos travel faster than light. Suddenly, intergalactic tourism and day trips to the real Jurassic Park were back on the menu, despite everything Einstein said. Now, however, a team of scientists at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands reckons it's come up with a more plausible (and disappointing) explanation of what happened: the GPS satellites used to measure the departure and arrival times of the racing neutrinos were themselves subject to Einsteinian effects, because they were in motion relative to the experiment. This relative motion wasn't properly taken into account, but it would have decreased the neutrinos' apparent journey time. The Dutch scientists calculated the error and came up with the 64 nanoseconds. Sound familiar? That's because it's almost exactly the margin by which CERN's neutrinos were supposed to have beaten light. So, it's Monday morning, Alpha Centauri and medieval jousting tournaments remain as out of reach as ever, and we just thought we'd let you know. http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/17/remember-those-faster-than-light-neutrinos-great-now-forget-e/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebor Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 How can this thread have made it this far without someone mentioning Cubert J. Farnsworth: That's impossible. You can't go faster than the speed of light. Professor Hubert Farnsworth: Of course not. That's why scientists increased the speed of light in 2208. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qdave Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 well its official now... there was an error in the calculation.... and now nothing can travel faster than light.... http://www.engadget....t-now-forget-e/ this is highly disappointing :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
still1 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 this is highly disappointing :( haha.... I am glad Einstein was right.... we would have lost his legacy if his core theory were not completely right.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Oh well, it was fun while it lasted ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts