|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 981
Points: 2,955
|
On August 16, I posted the following about discoveries at CERN: jim wrote:I shall now make a rash prediction: We will never find the Higgs as it is described in the Standard Model. We will, however, find something else, which will further advance our understanding of matter and reality in a seemingly never ending Hegelian scientific cycle.
Because that's the way the PROGRAM works. :) Little did I know that the "something else" could be faster than light neutrinos. In my most recent blog post, Time to Revise Relativity?: Part 1, I explore the possibility that FTL speeds can coexist with Special Relativity (bounded), without violating causality.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/18/2010
Posts: 41
Points: 123
Location: USA
|
Jim,
One of the best and potentially most-accurate blog posts you've written in many months. As soon as we are able to observe a 'Read-Only' negative temporal-distance one of the first things I would like to witness is the voyage of Christopher Columbus discovering the 'new world'. It would be great to begin observing the Santa Maria, Nina, and the Pinta a few hours before they reach land. I wonder if our observational device would be visible from the deck of any of the ships... Its too bad we cannot interact with matter there... we should have slipped something into Pedro Gutierrez's "cena" to keep him in his bed.
-TheArchitect, 0x9A4C0B
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/3/2011
Posts: 500
Points: 975
Location: Stockton-on-Tees, United Kingdom
|
Quote:Little did I know that the "something else" could be faster than light neutrinos. In my most recent blog post, Time to Revise Relativity?: Part 1, I explore the possibility that FTL speeds can coexist with Special Relativity (bounded), without violating causality. Sounds like you could have possibly influenced reality or the outcome of that neutrino experiment, Jim. And, having all these (us) readers of the forum maybe added to the power (collective consciousness/observer effect). I think we should try more stuff like this. Quote:jim wrote:
I shall now make a rash prediction: We will never find the Higgs as it is described in the Standard Model. We will, however, find something else, which will further advance our understanding of matter and reality in a seemingly never ending Hegelian scientific cycle.
Because that's the way the PROGRAM works. :) Alternatively, we could wish/hope that the Higgs is found in the next few weeks. Maybe our collective minds could make it materialize? Worth a shot. We could even try this experiment with dark matter/energy.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
|
In your "Time to Revise Relativity" blog post, are you perhaps agreeing with the JDlaw new laws of light speed. i.e. that the FTL limitation is only in the eye of the observer? jim wrote:Little did I know that the "something else" could be faster than light neutrinos. In my most recent blog post, Time to Revise Relativity?: Part 1, I explore the possibility that FTL speeds can coexist with Special Relativity (bounded), without violating causality. Inertial Einstein equation .jpg) Lorentz Transform (from your blog)  JDLaws New Laws of Light-speed 1. The observed speed of light in any reference frame is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second. 2. No mass, energy, or quantum particle can be observed directly by another mass energy or quantum particle that has a greater relative difference in velocity than 299,792,458 meters per second. 3. Where two masses, energies, or quantum particles are moving, spinning, or vibrating with velocities separated by greater than 299,792,458 meters per second relative to each other they must exist in a different quantum realities. However, a third mass, energy or quantum particle whose relative velocity is between the two may observe them both. 4. This reality is finite, but the number of realities is infinite. 5. There is another reference frame in some reality that exists somewhere or sometime where this reference frame, you are in right now, is moving at the speed of light relative to that other reference frame.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 981
Points: 2,955
|
TheArchitect wrote:Jim,
One of the best and potentially most-accurate blog posts you've written in many months. As soon as we are able to observe a 'Read-Only' negative temporal-distance one of the first things I would like to witness is the voyage of Christopher Columbus discovering the 'new world'. It would be great to begin observing the Santa Maria, Nina, and the Pinta a few hours before they reach land. I wonder if our observational device would be visible from the deck of any of the ships... Its too bad we cannot interact with matter there... we should have slipped something into Pedro Gutierrez's "cena" to keep him in his bed. Thanks so much for the kind words, TheArchitect! Are you suggesting that Columbus' UFO sighting was just such a device? Interestingly, from this poll, it seems that most people would go back to the building of the Pyramids or the time of Jesus. But I don't think we can leave our reference frame and then travel toward it fast enough to see the past. It's too late for us. :( EKUMA1981 wrote:Sounds like you could have possibly influenced reality or the outcome of that neutrino experiment, Jim. What a cool idea, EKUMA1981. I have to say that I prefer science to break its laws rather than find support for an old notion like the GUT. Guess I'm a radical at heart. :) jdlaw wrote:JDLaws New Laws of Light-speed
1. The observed speed of light in any reference frame is approximately 299,792,458 meters per second.
2. No mass, energy, or quantum particle can be observed directly by another mass energy or quantum particle that has a greater relative difference in velocity than 299,792,458 meters per second.
3. Where two masses, energies, or quantum particles are moving, spinning, or vibrating with velocities separated by greater than 299,792,458 meters per second relative to each other they must exist in a different quantum realities. However, a third mass, energy or quantum particle whose relative velocity is between the two may observe them both.
4. This reality is finite, but the number of realities is infinite.
5. There is another reference frame in some reality that exists somewhere or sometime where this reference frame, you are in right now, is moving at the speed of light relative to that other reference frame. I'm with you on #1 and #2, jdlaw. Not sure about #3 though. Seems to me that we can all get along quite nicely in the same reality as long as we figure out how to modulate an infinite speed field, such as (*possibly*) quantum entanglement. Re. #4, infinity makes my head hurt! Stay tuned for Part 2! :)
|
|
|
Guest |
