Just one thing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Just one thing
Here's a brain-bender!
Imagine a particle, massless and thus able to travel faster than light. As fast as it wishes, in fact!
This is a busy particle indeed. It travels all over the place, incessantly. Everywhere in the Universe.
And it's travelling so fast that it can be anywhere and everywhere...at once! Cor!
So you see, the Universe is just this one particle, travelling so widely and rapidly that it appears next to itself, over and over again. This gives the impression of lots of particles, i.e. the Universe as we perceive it.
Just the one particle, producing it all.
Let's hope it never stops for a rest. Then again, if it did, would we know?
Imagine a particle, massless and thus able to travel faster than light. As fast as it wishes, in fact!
This is a busy particle indeed. It travels all over the place, incessantly. Everywhere in the Universe.
And it's travelling so fast that it can be anywhere and everywhere...at once! Cor!
So you see, the Universe is just this one particle, travelling so widely and rapidly that it appears next to itself, over and over again. This gives the impression of lots of particles, i.e. the Universe as we perceive it.
Just the one particle, producing it all.
Let's hope it never stops for a rest. Then again, if it did, would we know?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,287
So how (from this model) do you explain the properties of mass and energy that we *can* observe. How does this theory predict the mass of the electron, the mass of the proton and the speed of light?
There is nothing inherently impossible in the concept of a massless particle, and there are arguments which would suggest that it would be capable of infinite velocities without relativistic constraints. But just suggesting it isn't enough; you have to suggest how it explains current observations and how the model would predict specific observations that we could look for.
FWIW - particles with *negative* mass have been suggested as one explanation for gravity, although the theory doesn't have that much support.
PDR
There is nothing inherently impossible in the concept of a massless particle, and there are arguments which would suggest that it would be capable of infinite velocities without relativistic constraints. But just suggesting it isn't enough; you have to suggest how it explains current observations and how the model would predict specific observations that we could look for.
FWIW - particles with *negative* mass have been suggested as one explanation for gravity, although the theory doesn't have that much support.
PDR
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,477
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,477
Tiz begining to look like the entire universe and all that in there dwells is nowt but a illusion anyway, it has no objective reality and exists only inside the goo in our noggins.
All them Quantum physicists are wandering about with worried looks on their faces touching and feeling everything that seems solid.
All them Quantum physicists are wandering about with worried looks on their faces touching and feeling everything that seems solid.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by tony draper
But I only get this message below after I click on that link
:-.PPRuNe Message
Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.
Forum Jump
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,477
Hmmm, strange it were on before,obviously the powers that be dont want you folks to learn the truth..
Anyway here is what I wrote thence,and damm the black helicopters.
Of course one's own theory is that there is only one photon in the entire universe,because there is no time when it is tootling about at c it can be everywhere and everywhen simultaneously,we however our senses being locked into this particular spacetime continuum of with its thermodynamic arrow of time experience photons as many individuals, this helps explain the wave particle duality problem.
The other thing is, the Universe is not really there you see.
Anyway here is what I wrote thence,and damm the black helicopters.
Of course one's own theory is that there is only one photon in the entire universe,because there is no time when it is tootling about at c it can be everywhere and everywhen simultaneously,we however our senses being locked into this particular spacetime continuum of with its thermodynamic arrow of time experience photons as many individuals, this helps explain the wave particle duality problem.
The other thing is, the Universe is not really there you see.
Psychophysiological entity
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 81
Posts: 4,916
A photon has zero rest mass but is born travelling at the speed of light. What I want to know is, how do you get it on the scales to weigh it?
There are certain things I think we shouldn't be told.
There are certain things I think we shouldn't be told.
Resident insomniac
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 76
Posts: 1,863
Originally Posted by tony draper
Tiz begining to look like the entire universe and all that in there dwells is nowt but a illusion anyway, it has no objective reality and exists only inside the goo in our noggins.
All the (complex) interactions (and sensations/feelings) are programmed into a sort of 'game' (of Life).
It is difficult to disprove the idea that it is all a figment of someone's imagination.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 272
Following on...
If you accept the concept of infinity, how many retired controllers are on PPRuNe forums in the universe discussing this topic from an atoll in the mid Pacific?
MJG
In the office in Tarawa taking a break to check PPRuNe and then getting back to work.
If you accept the concept of infinity, how many retired controllers are on PPRuNe forums in the universe discussing this topic from an atoll in the mid Pacific?
MJG
In the office in Tarawa taking a break to check PPRuNe and then getting back to work.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 172
Originally Posted by G-CPTN
I have long held the belief that all life is but a reaction in a Petri dish.
All the (complex) interactions (and sensations/feelings) are programmed into a sort of 'game' (of Life).
It is difficult to disprove the idea that it is all a figment of someone's imagination.
All the (complex) interactions (and sensations/feelings) are programmed into a sort of 'game' (of Life).
It is difficult to disprove the idea that it is all a figment of someone's imagination.
Many many years ago in a Sci-Fi comic there was a story of a planet upon which lived someone who said their world
would end very soon.They were laughed at and no-one believed them until a worldwide flood destroyed everything.
The next picture showed a lab technician washing out a Petri dish with a bubble saying "Oh well that experiment failed
as I couldn't detect any life even microbes" or words to that effect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 133
GD&L:
Hmmm... I hadn't thought of that. Maybe we need to allow ourselves some 'persistence of vision'? So that the minute 'blanks' caused by the particle's delay do not trouble us.
What if the particle has infinite speed? Delay would be infinitely small...
Hempy:
Of course, this equation may be limited to our current perceptual creation of reality.
PDR1:
I'm not sure it has to predict the mass of the electron, etc. I think it's quite possible that we are the ultimate creators of mass, via our perception. In this, we create the apparent and experiential solidity of things from a vast Universe of energetic information. Some call it a hologram.
Acting thusly, our scientists would affect experiments which seem to show that electrons etc have mass.
Dr Draper: Bang to rights am I! Although I did get the idea from elsewhere: the singular Darryl Anka.
Source video.
Loose rivets:
Absolutely right! How much can our minds assimilate, per day or per generation?
You're describing a "cathode-ray tube" like Universe.
Not very logical, because for it to be 'everywhere' it does need to change position and direction, very difficult to attain for a massless particle.
Not very logical, because for it to be 'everywhere' it does need to change position and direction, very difficult to attain for a massless particle.
What if the particle has infinite speed? Delay would be infinitely small...
Hempy:
Actually, going by Einsteins e=mc2, if mass = zero then e=0xc2. That makes e=0.
PDR1:
So how (from this model) do you explain the properties of mass and energy that we *can* observe. How does this theory predict the mass of the electron, the mass of the proton and the speed of light?
Acting thusly, our scientists would affect experiments which seem to show that electrons etc have mass.
Dr Draper: Bang to rights am I! Although I did get the idea from elsewhere: the singular Darryl Anka.
Source video.
Loose rivets:
There are certain things I think we shouldn't be told.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 55
Posts: 431
John Marsh,
You're not considering the fact that, much like the CRT scenario, that particle had to move to/be at anywhere based not only on massive amounts of energy but, more importantly, based on a matrix of precise and detailed information on where it has to be at any given time.
Otherwise the perceived Universe would be just white noise.
An intelligent particle (of the Creator)?
You're not considering the fact that, much like the CRT scenario, that particle had to move to/be at anywhere based not only on massive amounts of energy but, more importantly, based on a matrix of precise and detailed information on where it has to be at any given time.
Otherwise the perceived Universe would be just white noise.
An intelligent particle (of the Creator)?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 55
Posts: 435
Imagine a particle, massless and thus able to travel faster than light. As fast as it wishes, in fact!
OP Tell you what, you put the equations that prove a massless particle can travel faster than light and you will have a Nobel Prize in your hands.
These things come up on here a fair amount of time. Trouble is saying something is easy. Mathematically/Scientifically proving it is a completely different thing
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Age: 55
Posts: 435
Relativistic equations show that the particle has momentum despite the fact it has no mass.
p=mv and that would indicate that if you have no mass you have no momentum
But things take a very different direction from that simple formula when you bring Relativity into play.
I am not trying to be a di*k about this but there is a reason no lesser a mind than Einstein grappled with the subject for years before coming to an understanding.
And a round of applause for Maxwell and Plank as well while I am here.
p=mv and that would indicate that if you have no mass you have no momentum
But things take a very different direction from that simple formula when you bring Relativity into play.
I am not trying to be a di*k about this but there is a reason no lesser a mind than Einstein grappled with the subject for years before coming to an understanding.
And a round of applause for Maxwell and Plank as well while I am here.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,287
Originally Posted by Loose rivets
A photon has zero rest mass but is born travelling at the speed of light. What I want to know is, how do you get it on the scales to weigh it?
There are certain things I think we shouldn't be told.
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!
PDR
