nopeda, on 23 October 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:
If we're in an adjustment area then that's how it would necessarily seem to us until we can do some testing outside of it, if that ever happens.
So then why should we even worry about it? I agree that what you state may be possible, but it is impossible currently to test. And thus it must be assumed at present that everywhere is the same.
So, why should we worry about the speed of light adding then? If there is some mysterious field effect and drain of energy, then surely that would stop ET from going past c and developing FTL craft. If ET does have FTL craft, then clearly there would be something in physics we don't understand yet. But, then again... we need to show that there are ETs and they have craft.
Quote
Here's something that led me to believe doppler shifting would be maintained even after the adjustment had been made:
_________________________________________________________
http://www.alternati...itterEffect.htm
. . .
The laser beam starts at the left, passes through the glass, then exits the right of it. We know that light slows down as it passes through a transparent medium. The amount of slow-down is determined by the reciprocal of the refractive index of the medium. In the case of glass it’s around 1.52. But let’s simplify things by making it 1.43. This makes the slow-down amount 0.7, i.e. 70% of light speed.
So as the beam moves through the glass it is going at 0.7c. But what is this speed relative to? To the glass of course. Once the beam enters the glass it starts moving from atom-to-atom within the glass. Each atom becomes a new launch point for the light and that is what the beam moves relative to. To make a weak analogy, it is like someone running first on dry land then through waist-deep water: the water is the medium that determines current speed, not the dry land.
From my online researching of this over the last couple months, I can say that this is not completely true. There are two effects in such a situation. Light is not generally absorbed and released by the molecules of a transparent material. This is proofed by the fact that a beam could not pass through such a material, as light would be emitted by the molecules/atoms in all directions no is only one vector. Such experiments have been done and such a thing can happen, but this is not what happens under normal transparent material refraction. Normal refraction is caused chiefly by the material surface. It is the light penetrating the surface that causes it to be slowed. Then when it comes out the other side, it returns to c (in air) from c (in water, or glass, or crystal, or whatever...) and the energy difference caused by the surface interaction (that caused the slowing) results in a wavelength change.
Thus if you had a laser (white light) hitting a pane of glass out in space somewhere between Earth and Alpha Centauri (a near vacuum), the laser would hit the surface of the glass and slow to about 66% of c (in a vacuum). Some energy would be imparted to the glass at this point. Then the laser would move through the glass as white light (wavelength is the same as original emitted laser), hitting the other side of the pane of glass. It then would revert back to c (in a vacuum) and go on its way. But the wavelength of the laser would now be greater, as the energy absorbed by the glass, when the light was slowed to 66%, must be accounted for. Here is it possible to see that c is a hard limit, as light always goes back to c.
For light to go faster then c, then you would need a medium with a cooefficent of absorbtion/transparency greater then 1. Or, you'd have to have something, some region of space, that is more clear then vacuum, which is impossible according to modern science. What can be more clear then nothing?
Quote
Speed of Light in a Vacuum: 299,792,458 meters per second [
source]
Speed of Light in Air: 298,925,574 meters per second [
source]
Speed of Light in Glass: ~ 2x10^8 meters per second [
source]
http://cadlab6.mit.e...uum,_air,_glass
200000000 / 299792458 = 0.667 = 66.7%
Quote
The beam then exits the block and returns to its full speed. It is now travelling at c. But relative to what – the laser or the glass? Again: the glass. The beam can no longer be influenced by the laser since it left that long ago. The final layer of atoms in the glass represents the beam’s most recent launch point so they are what determine the beam’s current speed.
We’ll now complicate the situation a little as shown:
As I just said this is false physics wise. What is described is possible, but has only been done under very controlled circumstances with very specific engineered materials. The light leaves the glass, but the speed is relative to space/time, not the glass. That glass can be moving at any speed from 0 to 99% of c (in a vacuum) and it will always come out moving at c. This is scientifically been prooven countless times.
Quote
Assuming the ballistic theory of light is correct, the light from the moving laser will strike the glass at a slightly higher velocity. For arguments sake we’ll say the laser is going at 0.1c. So the two beams will hit the glass – one at c and the other at 1.1c.
Your first error is assuming the ballistic theory of light is correct. It was shown to be false over 100 years ago. And all experiments done since have confirmed this.
Quote
The beams strike the glass. Then what? They both slow down of course. But by how much: does the ‘motionless’ beam slow to 0.7c and the ‘moving’ beam to 0.8c?
Answer: they both slow to 0.7c. The beam is now inside the glass and is moving relative to it. The initial speed of the laser can no longer have any effect on the current beam speed because, as before, the beam is now moving from atom to atom within the glass. Those atoms are what control the speed.
The beams then reach the other side of the glass and exit. The beams now go back to full speed: c. But relative to what – the lasers? No, the glass of course! Like the earlier example, the original beam speed is no longer important. The beams exiting the glass now move with identical speed.
This is not to say the beams will be identical in all aspects. The beam from the moving laser strikes the glass at a higher velocity and its light waves will appear to have a frequency 10% higher. This frequency will be preserved throughout the process. And the observer will see the moving laser beam as having a higher frequency – a Doppler shift! But the final velocity of both beams will be the same: c.
. . .
http://www.alternati...itterEffect.htm
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Since the speed of the lasers at c is relative to space/time and not to the emitter or reciever, this arguement is flawed. Light is not a bullet that if fired out the back of a 150 mph (67 m/s) bullet train at the speed of sound (340 m/s) so that its ground velocity is 273 m/s. Light is like a rock on the ground (velocity = 0), it will always return to c (in a vacuum) if nothing is happening to it. c is the "at rest" speed for photons. The default speed. It can be slowed down, and have energy taken out of it, but cannot have energy added. (I don't think even a supercollider can add energy to a photon once it is emitted.) Thus you can't have a photon moving faster then c (in a vacuum) under any circumstance inside regular space/time.
If you want to assume that space/time is different in intergalactic space... fine, but that has no baring on physics inside the galaxy, inside out solar system and here on Earth. Any ETs out there will have to live with the same Rules we do.
Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.
At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker