|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MTGAP
Daedalian Member
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 1:03 am Post subject: 41 |
|
|
| Amb wrote: |
| Isn't it useful to know some scientists now believe the speed of light itself can accelerate and slow down.... |
Nobody believes that except crackpot Creationists.
Well actually, the speed of light changes depending on what medium it's traveling through. But all things being equal, it will stay at a constant speed. It does not change over time. _________________ This statement is false. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zag
Unintentionally offensive old coot
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 4:13 am Post subject: 42 |
|
|
| MTGAP wrote: |
| crackpot Creationists. |
Redundant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 1:31 pm Post subject: 43 |
|
|
The speed of light is constant by definition. Even if it were to change we'd have to concur that our rulers were changing.
I seem to remember something about the possibility of α, the fine structure constant, not being constant and that by inference, the speed of light would have altered over time.
I found this article which references some articles at the bottom about this possibility, but I don't know how old this information is and if it has been more recently debunked.
Can anyone out there let me know what the current consensus is on this, if indeed there is one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lepton*
Guest
|
Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 11:51 pm Post subject: 44 |
|
|
| The scientist that gives VSL (varying speed of light) theories the best name is a young guy named Joao Magueijo. He works at Imperial College, in London, and is fairly well-reputed as a competent and capable scientist. Although VSL can solve some theoretical problems, it seems to cause more problems than it solves (for example, how meaningful is it for a non-dimensionless quantity to vary? Most approaches actually change the way that special relativity works). The general feeling seems to be that this is an interesting idea -- perhaps deserving of a brilliant young mind pursuing it -- but probably not correct. It is simply an inelegant theory in a realm of unimaginably beautiful theories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:17 pm Post subject: 45 |
|
|
Thanks for the info Lepton. Even just having the term VSL is pointing me to some interesting articles that I intend to read later when I have some time.
As for beauty, I still feel we grew a few warts once we accepted that God played dice with our multiverse. I am willing to accept the possibility of VSL (warts and all), but I am still holding out for some epiphany of a deeper level of reality where causality still resides in it's own resplendence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lepton*
Guest
|
Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:53 am Post subject: 46 |
|
|
| If you have the time, your faith in the beauty of modern physical theory might be re-kindled by learning quantum field theory at a mathematical level. (this usually takes a grad student about two years of intense study) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dan
Daedalian Member
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|