Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
re:
Toleman - > Surface brightness test are not 'obeying' the requirements of expansion, as those papers indicate.... add to this the redshift anomalies, quasars, wmap anomalies, quasar time-dilations..... etc.
My point is, the only example you gave was "oh well the expansion of the universe can be >c".
|
That makes as much sense as arguing that my car cannot exceed 160 km/hr because my speedometer has a large error at 6o km/hr.
The fact is that any observable object in the Universe will have a recession velocity <c. So your references have no relevance.
The criteria that expansion velocities can exceed c are based on
(1) The observable Universe is flat.
(2) The blackbody temperature of the CMB is even in all directions relative to the observer.
Quote:
|
To me, thats just a mathematical thought experiment. I'd like something testable... the 'information' and 'energy' examples of >c have been provided with independent techniques and lab experiments. Of course once results hit the einstein theories it becomes 'impossible'.
|
Try thinking of light as a communication channel for information.
Phase and group velocites of light waves exceeding c have been known for decades. Does this violate SR? No. For SR to be violated information must travel faster than light.
Show me how we can isolate a specific crest in a monochromatic wave and convey that information in the channel. Since the wave is monochromatic means we have no specific information on the crest.
All experiments showing faster than light travel run into the same problems.
Quote:
|
Yes I know requested lab cosmological-time-space expansion tests are not available. I don't know where you will go from here. On the flipside, i've seen enough evidence on longitudinal transmission and entanglement experiments to be convinced c does not represent a limit, at which point sr has been violated and relativity time vanishes.
|
Once again old hat news. Go read up on Bell's inequality and photon polarization tests. The No Communication theorem indicates that no information is transmitted in quantum entanglement tests.
With regards to the LHC phantoms, the scientific paper was based primarily on quantum and statistical mechanics. The mathematical flaws were noted and the paper was retracted within a few days.
Why didn't you refer to this? Cherry picking again?
Quote:
|
I'm leaning towards c just being a ratio of energy and mass, not a limit as required by SR intern GR, and no need for an introduction of a 4th D time in to physics. Once we do away with this, we can do away with the paradoxes.
|
Doing away with velocity c as a limit for the information channel creates a paradox as it violates cause and effect. Show me an experiment where c varies for observers in inertial frames.
Regards
Steven