Einstein Wins the Great Race

ScienceOctober 2009 • Views: 5,817

A race between gamma rays across 7.3 billion years of time and space has resulted in a virtual tie, confirming Einstein’s theory of relativity once again.

The race was between gamma rays of differing energies and wavelengths spit in a burst from an exploding star when the universe was half its present age. After a journey of 7.3 billion light-years, they all arrived within nine-tenths of a second of one another in a detector on NASA’s Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope, at 8:22 p.m., Eastern time, on May 9.

Astronomers said the gamma-ray race was one of the most stringent tests yet of a bedrock principle of modern physics: Einstein’s proclamation in his 1905 theory of relativity that the speed of light is constant and independent of its color, or energy; its direction; or how you yourself are moving.

Jump to bottom

164 comments

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:04:52am

Damn that science for its confounded ability to provide empirical evidence!

/anti-science mode off

Ben Hur Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:04:58am

Ah.

So these are the Zionist Rays you guys always refer to.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:06:50am

Drive-by comment:

Men like Einstein are a gift to the rest of us average people, lifting us up, helping us to understand our world, improving the lives of millions, and making our lives better.

For his life, I am grateful.

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:07:21am

...All I can say is..DAMN! It's about fu^&*ng time!!!

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:08:18am

re: #3 EmmmieG

Absolutly!!
...He also had great hair!!

Kragar Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:08:38am

Preposterous, the race couldn't be anymore than about 5000 years across space!

///

MrSilverDragon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:09:55am

I'm reminded of a Far Side cartoon which shows Einstein standing at a chalkboard, clearly fretting about his equation, with "E=mc" and "E=mc4", et cetera. There's a janitor standing there saying, "Your desk is all squared away. Yep, all squaaared away."

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:09:57am

Jooos helped him cheat!

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:10:13am

Can you imagine being in a room with Hawking and Einstein?

Guess you'd need a "babelfish", but it would be cool.

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:10:17am

re: #3 EmmmieG

Drive-by comment:

Men like Einstein are a gift to the rest of us average people, lifting us up, helping us to understand our world, improving the lives of millions, and making our lives better.

For his life, I am grateful.

And there are a lot of other men and women in science who never reach the level of scientific fame enjoyed by Einstein or Darwin, but contribute to the betterment of mankind in ways we can never fully grasp or appreciate the full scope. They all deserve our thanks. Thanks for a great comment.

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:10:50am

His mind seemed to break the speed barrier he proved.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:11:20am

re: #7 MrSilverDragon

I'm reminded of a Far Side cartoon which shows Einstein standing at a chalkboard, clearly fretting about his equation, with "E=mc" and "E=mc4", et cetera. There's a janitor standing there saying, "Your desk is all squared away. Yep, all squaaared away."

I was just thinking about that one last night when I saw E=mc2 on a little dvd featurette about time travel.

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:11:33am

OT: Shots Fired at NJ Home of Lou Dobbs

It started 3 weeks ago, but this is the first I'm hearing of it.

badger1970 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:11:44am

re: #9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

ST: TNG

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:11:53am

Iranian denial in 5... 4... 3...

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:12:48am

EINSTEIN WINS THE GREAT RACE

That Einstein fella, he's got a helluva pit crew!

Spider Mensch Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:13:16am

enjoy some of his quote's, a genius of course, but also a man with true wit and insight...

[Link: rescomp.stanford.edu...]

Soundboard Fez Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:13:52am

re: #9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Can you imagine being in a room with Hawking and Einstein?

Guess you'd need a "babelfish", but it would be cool.

I'd need a really healthy boost to my self-esteem after witnessing that.

Kragar Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:14:17am

Yithians claim Einstein did not win them.

CyanSnowHawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:14:33am

re: #13 JasonA

OT: Shots Fired at NJ Home of Lou Dobbs

It started 3 weeks ago, but this is the first I'm hearing of it.

Those were awfully slow bullets.
/

Cato the Elder Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:15:28am

Everybody knows the universe is only 6,000 miles across...

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:16:05am

re: #20 CyanSnowHawk

Rimshot

Spider Mensch Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:16:08am

...

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:17:10am

And what good are these rays? Really, can they heat my house right now... can I roast marshmallows... can I get a tan like Ricardo Montalbalm...
/

sattv4u2 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:18:14am

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

And what good are these rays? Really, can they heat my house right now... can I roast marshmallows... can I get a tan like Ricardo Montalbalm...
/

You want your face to look like Rich Corinthian Leather???

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:18:24am

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

Montalbalm...
/

LOL...Who?

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:18:29am

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

And what good are these rays? Really, can they heat my house right now... can I roast marshmallows... can I get a tan like Ricardo Montalbalm...
/

Hell- I thought they were just drops of golden sun.

CyanSnowHawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:19:15am

re: #10 Sharmuta

And there are a lot of other men and women in science who never reach the level of scientific fame enjoyed by Einstein or Darwin, but contribute to the betterment of mankind in ways we can never fully grasp or appreciate the full scope. They all deserve our thanks. Thanks for a great comment.

Or like these guys. But they may just be spinning their results.

lawhawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:19:57am

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

No but if you're careful, you might end up with George Hamilton's complexion.

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:20:03am

re: #18 Soundboard Fez

I'd need a really healthy boost to my self-esteem after witnessing that.

I'd just listen, smile, and make a sharp "whoosh!" gesture over my head.

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:20:17am

re: #26 reloadingisnotahobby

LOL...Who?

Ricardo Montalbán (don't you know how to spell?)

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:20:53am

Weird shit...
I have no +or-...just heart and exclamation...
I'll give y'all a group *ding* if my puter clues in!
No, refresh dun't work neither..

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:21:13am

re: #31 Walter L. Newton

Ricardo Montalbán (don't you know how to spell?)

Not everyone is up on the classics as you, Walter.

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:21:25am

re: #26 reloadingisnotahobby

LOL...Who?

The guy who had to listen to that little fella shout "Da plane, boss, da plane!" and pretend to be amused.

CyanSnowHawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:21:26am

re: #29 lawhawk

No but if you're careful, you might end up with George Hamilton's complexion.

The black and white headshot in that link fails to convey George's pumpkiny goodness.

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:22:51am

re: #31 Walter L. Newton

He tasks me. He tasks me and I shall have him! I'll chase him 'round the moons of Nibia and 'round the Antares Maelstrom and 'round Perdition's flames before I give him up!

MrSilverDragon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:24:00am

re: #36 JasonA

That's still the top of the list of my favorite Star Trek movies.

**geek off**

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:24:12am

re: #34 SteveC
Yes!
But Walter pulled a funny...balm!

NJDhockeyfan Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:24:39am

re: #29 lawhawk

No but if you're careful, you might end up with George Hamilton's complexion.

Or worse.

lawhawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:24:42am

re: #35 CyanSnowHawk

This better? (particularly this one)

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:25:37am

re: #33 Dark_Falcon

You guys missed it. George Hamilton!~

[Link: cbs2.com...]

korla pundit Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:25:38am

Einstein also believed in God.

Which is OK, since he never confused his religion with his science.

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:26:18am

re: #38 reloadingisnotahobby

Yes!
But Walter pulled a funny...balm!

How'd he do on the Kobeashi Maru test? :)

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:26:19am

Was it Einstein?
" God is the sum of the laws of the Universe? "

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:27:31am

Einstein's brain

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:28:14am

re: #45 SteveC

That's... disturbing.

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:28:25am

re: #43 SteveC

How'd he do on the Kobeashi Maru test? :)

Walter cheated. He so impressed the Klingons with his performance of Hamlet that they let him retrieve the crew of the damaged ship and leave in exchange for a copy of the performance and the promise of season tickets to his theater.

shutdown Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:28:44am

re: #44 Rightwingconspirator

Was it Einstein?
" God is the sum of the laws of the Universe? "

Seems to have been Spinoza with the original thought, further refined by Sagan.

Ben Hur Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:28:53am

Beethoven's balls.

MrSilverDragon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:29:48am

re: #49 Ben Hur

Beethoven's balls.

Now I've got AC/DC's "Big Balls" song running through my head.

There are worse things.

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:29:54am

re: #47 Dark_Falcon

A deleted scene from Abrams' Star Trek for my fellow geeks: The New Star Trek's Klingons Revealed (Kind Of)

gonecamping Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:29:55am

Great cartoon, as was most of his work. I missa the daily laugh he provided. (think I'll pull one of his books out tonight;-)

re: #7 MrSilverDragon

NJDhockeyfan Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:30:44am

re: #16 SteveC

EINSTEIN WINS THE GREAT RACE

That Einstein fella, he's got a helluva pit crew!

And can run like the wind.

Churchill Downs-based Einstein was bred in Brazil, but looms as one of America’s best hopes to win the $5 million Breeders’ Cup Classic – the centerpiece of the two-day Breeders’ Cup World Championships that will be run for a second consecutive year at Southern California’s Oak Tree at Santa Anita.

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:30:57am

re: #48 imp_62

Found it...Point to you imp_62

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein)

[Link: www.spaceandmotion.com...]

Jack Burton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:31:21am

re: #24 Walter L. Newton

And what good are these rays? Really, can they heat my house right now... can I roast marshmallows... can I get a tan like Ricardo Montalbalm...
/

"You are in a position to demand nothing. I, on the other hand, am in a position to grant nothing."

/KHAN!!!

Ojoe Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:31:29am

If I understand it correctly, the gamma rays are traveling at light speed?

So from that viewpoint and that speed, time slows to a stop ?

So the gamma rays got here instantaneously, from their own viewpoint ?

Meaning that in some ways, then is now, and the immense distances are nothing?

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:32:07am

re: #46 JasonA

That's... disturbing.

That's way past disturbing. We passed disturbing about 20 miles ago!

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:32:34am

re: #56 Ojoe

If I understand it correctly, the gamma rays are traveling at light speed?

So from that viewpoint and that speed, time slows to a stop ?

So the gamma rays got here instantaneously, from their own viewpoint ?

Meaning that in some ways, then is now, and the immense distances are nothing?

We are looking into the past.

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:33:01am

re: #55 ArchangelMichael

"You are in a position to demand nothing. I, on the other hand, am in a position to grant nothing."

/KHAN!!!

I have no idea what these references are to?

Ojoe Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:33:24am

re: #58 Sharmuta

Yes we are, but the photons, etc, are compressing time to nothing.

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:33:41am

re: #47 Dark_Falcon

Walter cheated. He so impressed the Klingons with his performance of Hamlet that they let him retrieve the crew of the damaged ship and leave in exchange for a copy of the performance and the promise of season tickets to his theater.

DAY-UM!

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:34:20am

re: #60 Ojoe

Yes we are, but the photons, etc, are compressing time to nothing.

Light is a time traveler?

Four More Tears Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:34:45am

re: #57 SteveC

Yet not even close to as disturbing as using Ted Williams' head for batting practice.

Not even in the same ball park.

I couldn't resist.

davinvalkri Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:35:12am

re: #58 Sharmuta

We are looking into the past.

Yep. I dunno why people need to make stuff like scrying into the past up in fiction--every time you look at a star, you're looking at it as it was a time distance away/c ago. So you aren't actually looking at the sun, you're looking at it as it was eight minutes ago. So the sun could be utterly extinguished right now, and we wouldn't know for eight minutes.
/Stupid intro to special relativity and quantum electrodynamics!

Stormy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:35:38am

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."

-Einstein

Ojoe Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:35:39am

re: #62 Sharmuta

No, it is a time non-traveler & all distances are the same to it in some ways.

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:36:51am

6.0 Earthquake in Kush area of Afgan/Pakistan border!

Silvergirl Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:37:11am

The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds.

shutdown Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:37:33am

re: #56 Ojoe

If I understand it correctly, the gamma rays are traveling at light speed?

So from that viewpoint and that speed, time slows to a stop ?

So the gamma rays got here instantaneously, from their own viewpoint ?

Meaning that in some ways, then is now, and the immense distances are nothing?

Not really:

The speed of light is not equivalent to instantaneous transfer of matter form one point in space to another. That is a quantum physics concept. Also, the Theory of Special Relativity teaches that for the rays, time passed subjectively at a "normal" speed, whereas to us viewing them from our perspective, their time passed more slowly.

Political Atheist Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:37:55am

Relativity was also a factor in GPS navigation. A bit closer to home.
[Link: www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu...]

Ojoe Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:38:47am

re: #69 imp_62

OK, thank you

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:39:07am

NASA made a nifty confirmation of relativity about 30 years ago. When Mars and Earth were on opposite sides of the sun, they ordered one of the Viking landers to transmit a signal to Earth. Sure enough, the gravity well of the sun's mass curved the signal around the sun.

This same principle on an incomprehensibly huger scale results in beauties like these.

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:39:14am

re: #59 Walter L. Newton

I have no idea what these references are to?

Star Trek. AM's reference was to Ricardo Montalbán's role as Khan Noonian Singh in Star Trek II.

rwdflynavy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:39:28am

re: #55 ArchangelMichael

"You are in a position to demand nothing. I, on the other hand, am in a position to grant nothing."

/KHAN!!!

gotta upding any Wrath of Khan reference!

MrSilverDragon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:39:30am

Of course, consider the alternative "Theory of Relativity"... where there's a will, there's relatives.

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:39:48am

Meanwhile, Baby Einstein isn't doing so well.

Silvergirl Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:40:23am

re: #76 Mad Al-Jaffee

Meanwhile, Baby Einstein isn't doing so well.

Yes. I wondered if anyone would bring that up.

davinvalkri Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:40:35am

re: #62 Sharmuta

Light is a time traveler?

Time compresses by a factor of (1-(v^2/c^2))^1/2 in a "primed" (basically, moving at a constant velocity) frame relative to an "unprimed" (treated as either fixed or, more generally, inertial) frame. Photons move at c, so time compresses to 0 for them relative to us. Thing is, if you could hop on a proton and ride along, from the photon's point of view, it's the humans that do everything instantaneously, since an object in a frame of reference can only tell it's moving if it's accelerating, and the photon sees us moving by it at a speed c.

(That same equation also says that if you could break the speed of light, you'd travel back in time, leading to all sorts of paradoxes).

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:40:38am

re: #67 SteveC

6.0 Earthquake in Kush area of Afgan/Pakistan border!

Hopefully, the only people hurt were jihadis (and I hope they got pancaked).

lostlakehiker Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:40:45am

re: #9 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Can you imagine being in a room with Hawking and Einstein?

Guess you'd need a "babelfish", but it would be cool.

And suppose you're a fellow professional, but not at their level? It's jawdropping how good the top guys are. Your journeyman professional (me) needs one week of thinking between five-minute conversations so as to be able to have something to say at the next coffee-room face-to-face.

This is one reason that we have to take seriously the implications of a nuclear-armed Iran. Israel is just a few million souls, but it's also one of the leaders in science and technology. Top minds aren't a dime a dozen, and a dozen journeymen professionals do not replace or substitute for one genius. The world needs new and better solar-energy technology, desalinization technology, etc. etc. If we fail to innovate and make the transition to sustainable energy, when the coal and oil run out, we're in for a new dark age.

John Neverbend Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:42:01am

The Michelson involved in this latest experiment is the great-nephew of Albert Michelson of the Michelson-Morley experiment, the Michelson interferometer and the Michelson experiment to measure the speed of light.

shutdown Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:42:24am

Imagine being granted a 10 minute audience with Einstein, and all he wanted to talk about was the quality of the tuna salad in the cafeteria.

rwdflynavy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:42:41am

Back on topic, why can't they just let one of the gamma rays win?!?! I am so sick and tired of us being more concerned with gamma ray self-esteem than in building real competition amongst high energy particles!!!
//

Jack Burton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:42:52am

re: #59 Walter L. Newton

I have no idea what these references are to?

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Ojoe Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:42:56am

So this farmer was seen holding a pig up to an apple tree, and letting the pig eat apples right off the branch. A passerby looked at this and just couldn't contain his curiosity. "You know, you could save a lot of time if you just put the pig down and let him eat off the ground!" The farmer turned around slowly and responded, "What's time to a pig?"

Baier Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:43:31am

/I'm calling shenanigans. The earth is only a few thousand years old.

subsailor68 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:43:35am

OT, but this is starting to make me nervous:

Pelosi: New health care bill is 'historic moment'

Historic? I suppose it is Ms. Pelosi. Here are some other "historic" moments:

The eruption of Mt. Vesuvius
The Titanic's maiden voyage
The Johnstown Flood
The Great Plague
The Chicago Fire
The Invasion of Russia (two of those, remember?)

Starting to see a trend here, Madame Speaker?

Please give the country a break.

lostlakehiker Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:44:29am

re: #64 davinvalkri

Yep. I dunno why people need to make stuff like scrying into the past up in fiction--every time you look at a star, you're looking at it as it was a time distance away/c ago. So you aren't actually looking at the sun, you're looking at it as it was eight minutes ago. So the sun could be utterly extinguished right now, and we wouldn't know for eight minutes.
/Stupid intro to special relativity and quantum electrodynamics!

This is nothing all that deep. When you listen for thunder, you're not hearing the sound of a lightning bolt that is just now shattering the sky. You're hearing the sound of a bolt that lit up the sky 5 or 10 seconds ago. You hope. If it was 1 millisecond ago, you're also hearing that frying sound as your body toasts.

doubter4444 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:45:16am

re: #80 lostlakehiker

And suppose you're a fellow professional, but not at their level? It's jawdropping how good the top guys are. Your journeyman professional (me) needs one week of thinking between five-minute conversations so as to be able to have something to say at the next coffee-room face-to-face.

This is one reason that we have to take seriously the implications of a nuclear-armed Iran. Israel is just a few million souls, but it's also one of the leaders in science and technology. Top minds aren't a dime a dozen, and a dozen journeymen professionals do not replace or substitute for one genius. The world needs new and better solar-energy technology, desalinization technology, etc. etc. If we fail to innovate and make the transition to sustainable energy, when the coal and oil run out, we're in for a new dark age.

Thanks,
this is the reason I will give when people ask why I can not vote for a YEC for position of importance, particularly the presidency. To deny the role science has and will play in making life here and around the world is of the utmost importance.

John Neverbend Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:45:52am

re: #43 SteveC

How'd he do on the Kobeashi Maru test? :)

Rigged...again.

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:46:34am

AMTRAK losing $32 per passenger

Come on guys, get it together. I loves me a train!

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:46:35am

re: #84 ArchangelMichael

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Never saw it, that's why I missed the references.

Baier Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:46:44am

re: #87 subsailor68

OT, but this is starting to make me nervous:

Pelosi: New health care bill is 'historic moment'

Historic? I suppose it is Ms. Pelosi. Here are some other "historic" moments:

The eruption of Mt. Vesuvius
The Titanic's maiden voyage
The Johnstown Flood
The Great Plague
The Chicago Fire
The Invasion of Russia (two of those, remember?)

Starting to see a trend here, Madame Speaker?

Please give the country a break.

I hope we have reform, but that doesn't mean throwing a bunch of money at a broken system or screwing doctors or the private sector. I'll wait until I read it to worry.

Randall Gross Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:46:54am

re: #13 JasonA

OT: Shots Fired at NJ Home of Lou Dobbs

It started 3 weeks ago, but this is the first I'm hearing of it.

Real news story, we have confirmation with the police report and the bullet.

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:47:36am

re: #87 subsailor68
Pelosis reply...
You forgot...
Pantie hose
Liposuction
Under wire bras
High heels
AND The eyelash curler!You ..you..Pessimist!

davinvalkri Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:48:10am

re: #88 lostlakehiker

This is nothing all that deep. When you listen for thunder, you're not hearing the sound of a lightning bolt that is just now shattering the sky. You're hearing the sound of a bolt that lit up the sky 5 or 10 seconds ago. You hope. If it was 1 millisecond ago, you're also hearing that frying sound as your body toasts.

Yes, but that's the speed of sound (3*10^2 m/s, more or less) relating to the speed of light (3*10^8 m/s). This is much bigger.

Silvergirl Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:48:57am

re: #87 subsailor68

OT, but this is starting to make me nervous:

Pelosi: New health care bill is 'historic moment'

Historic? I suppose it is Ms. Pelosi. Here are some other "historic" moments:

The eruption of Mt. Vesuvius
The Titanic's maiden voyage
The Johnstown Flood
The Great Plague
The Chicago Fire
The Invasion of Russia (two of those, remember?)

Starting to see a trend here, Madame Speaker?

Please give the country a break.

She's nearly right. But it's histrionic instead of historic.

John Neverbend Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:50:22am

re: #56 Ojoe

If I understand it correctly, the gamma rays are traveling at light speed?

So from that viewpoint and that speed, time slows to a stop ?

So the gamma rays got here instantaneously, from their own viewpoint ?

Meaning that in some ways, then is now, and the immense distances are nothing?

Yes. Time dilation can be observed in massive particles (muons) entering the earth's atmosphere at relativistic speeds (an appreciable fraction of the speed of light). The decay time for muon to electron + neutrino/antineutrino pair has been accurately measured for non-relativistic muons. It is observed to increase for relativistic muons.

lawhawk Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:50:56am

re: #67 SteveC

2d quake of that kind of magnitude in a week.

100

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:50:58am

re: #97 Silvergirl

She's nearly right. But it's histrionic instead of historic.

LOL!

101

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:51:40am

re: #93 Baier

I hope we have reform, but that doesn't mean throwing a bunch of money at a broken system or screwing doctors or the private sector. I'll wait until I read it to worry.

Cardiologist payments are going down appx. 30% next year and the Baucus bill has a "Medical Devices Tax" on stuff like pacemakers, ICDs, artificial limbs, electric wheelchairs...

/ (The Monster Tax) The Congress was having fun... the taxing had just begun! They did the Tax... they did the Monster Tax!

102

Baier Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:52:11am

re: #82 imp_62

Imagine being granted a 10 minute audience with Einstein, and all he wanted to talk about was the quality of the tuna salad in the cafeteria.

I don't know what I'd say to him to be honest. I'd probably bore him to death.

103

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:52:50am

re: #92 Walter L. Newton

Never saw it, that's why I missed the references.

It's worth your time to see it. I'd say get on Netflix and then wait till you need entertainment while snowbound.

104

Sharmuta Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:52:57am

Thanks Lizards- I feel smarter from this thread.

105

rwdflynavy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:53:39am

re: #102 Baier

I don't know what I'd say to him to be honest. I'd probably bore him to death.

I'd ask him to watch "The Big Bang Theory" with me. Tons of great laughs!!

106

gonecamping Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:53:40am

...

107

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:53:44am

re: #92 Walter L. Newton
Is your pellet stove up and running?

108

brent Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:53:54am

#98 tachyons...

I remember reading something about a gunfight between to guys shooting tachyon particles at each other (which every sci-fi fan knows are faster than the speed of light).

I think the Reader's Digest is that they both killed each other before the gunfight began, which I think is also a paradox...

109

Land Shark Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:54:01am

It's truly amazing how far ahead of the curve Albert Einstein was. His theory of relativity comes out in 1905, and the research just keeps on proving him right. One of the giants of science along with Darwin, Galileo, Hawking, you name it.

110

Silvergirl Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:54:17am

re: #100 Dark_Falcon

LOL!

Why thank you, DF.

Laughter is even better than a ding. A ding is like applause. As Carol Channing said, "Laughter is much more important than applause. Applause is almost a duty. Laughter is a reward."

111

rwdflynavy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:54:30am

re: #109 Land Shark

It's truly amazing how far ahead of the curve Albert Einstein was. His theory of relativity comes out in 1905, and the research just keeps on proving him right. One of the giants of science along with Darwin, Galileo, Hawking, you name it.

Newton...

112

shutdown Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:54:41am

Behind every successful man is a surprised mother-in-law.

I am off to the shops, my friends.

113

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:54:57am

I'm not downing Einstein, but folks need to understand that there are tremendous inadequacies to relativity that Einstein himself recognized. Neither he nor any competent physicist would try to tell you that he had explained the universe.

This announcement is about the fact that one of the proposed refinements/alternatives to his theory has been indicated to be a "blind alley".

To give the flavor of the problem there is an easily understandable illustration used by Jean Charon in his book "Cosmology" about 30 years ago, to wit:

The equations of Einstein's theory cannot differentiate between an observer moving through space while the "universe" remains "in place" and the observer remaining "in place" while the entire "universe" moves. This is NOT to say that Einstein did not believe there was a difference, only that he could not explain the difference mathematically (nor has anyone else).

Keep in mind that at present the dominant theory is that "dark matter" comprises 90% to 95% of the "universe" and we have no idea what "dark matter" is. This has been called an "embarrasment" by physicists, which is to put the case politely.

Einstein "stood on the shoulders of giants". Others will eventually stand on his, apparently just not the guys who thought that the rays should have different arrival times.

114

sattv4u2 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:55:19am

re: #111 rwdflynavy

Newton...

What do figs have to do with it?
/

115

subsailor68 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:55:26am

re: #93 Baier

I hope we have reform, but that doesn't mean throwing a bunch of money at a broken system or screwing doctors or the private sector. I'll wait until I read it to worry.

I'm with you on reform - but reform needs to focus on problems in the health care arena, not simply bankrupting the nation by plowing billions (or more) into health "insurance". I'd also like to read the bill, but I'm not sure that's going to be an option, given what we've seen with the stimulus bill, etc.

Heck, Ms. Pelosi had "rsvp's" set up for the unveiling alone (and you can bet that list was pretty well limited to supporters):

Pelosi’s Public Unveiling of Public Option Closed to Public

116

Jack Burton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:55:28am

re: #104 Sharmuta

Thanks Lizards- I feel smarter from this thread.

"Khan, I'm laughing at the 'superior' intellect!"

117

rwdflynavy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:55:44am

re: #114 sattv4u2

What do figs have to do with it?
/

THEY ARE FRUIT AND CAKE DAMMIT
//

118

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:56:05am

re: #107 reloadingisnotahobby

Is your pellet stove up and running?

No... and it's not going to be. I'm waiting for a call from Home Depot to get our money back and have then pick up this piece of poop.

Do not buy anything from England's Stove...

119

reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:57:33am

re: #118 Walter L. Newton

Bummer...I'm sure it wasn't cheap ...

120

John Neverbend Thu, Oct 29, 2009 11:58:57am

re: #82 imp_62

Imagine being granted a 10 minute audience with Einstein, and all he wanted to talk about was the quality of the tuna salad in the cafeteria.

There's an interesting story by Richard Feynman about how he delivered a lecture to a group of "monster minds" including Einstein, Pauli, Wigner and others. Einstein was still thinking about a unified field theory.

121

Land Shark Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:00:21pm

re: #111 rwdflynavy

Yep, Newton. So many I can't name them all.

People like that are why anyone with half a brain needs to oppose teaching Creationism and I.D. in science class. Religion doesn't belong there.

122

gonecamping Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:01:13pm

This topic has messed up my computer. My last comment was sent without the comment, I guess it was sent before I sent it.

123

SteveC Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:02:41pm

Ah, found it!

Medical Device Tax

The manufacturers were able to lobby for a reduction in the tax, thank goodness. And Congress is even going to tax bedpans and tounge depressors!

Classless

124

Walter L. Newton Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:03:47pm

re: #119 reloadingisnotahobby

Bummer...I'm sure it wasn't cheap ...

2300 for the stove, 600 to have two guys line the chimney, and put tow 4 inch pipes up to the top for venting and air intake.

No one is going to cover the 600.

125

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:06:11pm

I've heard that theoretically a time machine that can allow you to travel to the past can be built but:

a) It might be as big as the universe.

b) You can only go back as far as the time the machine was invented.

That makes my head hurt.

126

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:06:13pm

Not entirely OT:

Youtube Video

127

Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:08:29pm

re: #111 rwdflynavy

Newton...

"Why did Sir Isaac Newton shoot an apple off that geezer's head?"

-Ali G (don't remember who he was interviewing)

128

sattv4u2 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:09:14pm

re: #124 Walter L. Newton

2300 for the stove, 600 to have two guys line the chimney, and put tow 4 inch pipes up to the top for venting and air intake.

No one is going to cover the 600.

look on the bright side. At least this year when Santa comes down the chimney he won;t be coughing and wheezing!!

129

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:12:43pm

re: #69 imp_62

Not really:

The speed of light is not equivalent to instantaneous transfer of matter form one point in space to another. That is a quantum physics concept. Also, the Theory of Special Relativity teaches that for the rays, time passed subjectively at a "normal" speed, whereas to us viewing them from our perspective, their time passed more slowly.

For an excellent (albeit fictional, obviously) account of the Subjective vs. Objective time effect, as it pertains to travel at substantial portions of the speed of light, read John Haldeman's "The Forever War" or any of Alastair Reynolds' hard sci-fi novels.

130

martinsmithy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:13:37pm

Bad news for interstellar travel!

131

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:16:06pm

re: #125 Mad Al-Jaffee

I've heard that theoretically a time machine that can allow you to travel to the past can be built but

When people make calculations like that it is similar to trying to spell G_d with the wrong blocks.

We've got a long way to go.

132

Martinsmithy Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:16:57pm

Unless we can figure out a way to go 99.9% of the speed of light, so that the trip only takes the travelers 3% of the elapsed time of those of us stuck back here on Earth.

But then the mass of the spaceship will require an AWFUL LOT of motive power to get going that fast!

The other options are 1) find a way to get around the Theory of Relativity - a favorite of science fiction writers, or 2) send out huge space "seedships" where generations can live on their way to a star that might or might not have a habitable planet.

133

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:18:02pm

One thing about relativity and near light-speed travel that always gave me a headache:

Imagine a star ship travelling away from the plane of the Milky Way at near light speed. On the ship, it would appear that the Milky way would freeze (actually, it would compress down to a small blob behind the ship).

Now, say that same ship turned around 180 degrees, and started to decelerate through the local rest-frame, and then accelerate back towards the plane of the milky way. Since, due to relativistic effect, the time that has actually passed in the Milky Way would be longer than the subjective time that has passed for the crew, would the movement of the Milky Way. . .it's slow spin. . .suddenly speed up and appear to go faster than normal?

For the record, I'm an enormous sci-fi fan (probably one of the reasons I ended up in aerospace to begin with).

134

webevintage Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:18:56pm

re: #115 subsailor68

I'm with you on reform - but reform needs to focus on problems in the health care arena, not simply bankrupting the nation by plowing billions (or more) into health "insurance". I'd also like to read the bill, but I'm not sure that's going to be an option, given what we've seen with the stimulus bill, etc.

Heck, Ms. Pelosi had "rsvp's" set up for the unveiling alone (and you can bet that list was pretty well limited to supporters):

Pelosi’s Public Unveiling of Public Option Closed to Public

I watched something on C-Span today with lots of regular people telling their stories along with the announcement of the bill.
It is already on line here:
[Link: docs.house.gov...]

I'll be happy in the end if reform is opening up the federal employees health insurance exchange to citizens, something portable that you can take from job to job, pre-existing conditions are a thing of the past, help for small businesses to provide health care insurance to their employees and allowing young adults to stay on their parents insurance until they are 26 whether they are going to school or not.

135

shutdown Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:20:20pm

re: #122 gonecamping

This topic has messed up my computer. My last comment was sent without the comment, I guess it was sent before I sent it.

I knew that before you said it.

136

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:20:37pm

re: #132 Martinsmithy

The other options are 1) find a way to get around the Theory of Relativity - a favorite of science fiction writers, or 2) send out huge space "seedships" where generations can live on their way to a star that might or might not have a habitable planet.

One idea discussed in sci-fi, is sending Von Neuman robots, which contain seed stocks of life. When they arrive at their destination, these robots 'grow' the colonists a la test-tube baby style, nurture and raise them, while simultaneously using local material to build habitats and additional robots to care for the colony.

137

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:22:47pm

re: #133 Yashmak

One thing about relativity and near light-speed travel that always gave me a headache:

Imagine a star ship travelling away from the plane of the Milky Way at near light speed. On the ship, it would appear that the Milky way would freeze (actually, it would compress down to a small blob behind the ship).

Now, say that same ship turned around 180 degrees, and started to decelerate through the local rest-frame, and then accelerate back towards the plane of the milky way. Since, due to relativistic effect, the time that has actually passed in the Milky Way would be longer than the subjective time that has passed for the crew, would the movement of the Milky Way. . .it's slow spin. . .suddenly speed up and appear to go faster than normal?

For the record, I'm an enormous sci-fi fan (probably one of the reasons I ended up in aerospace to begin with).

The answer is no.

As the voyagers turned around and started accelerating, they would pass through a frame that was closest to the rest frame of the milky way. In that frame the rotation of the Milky Way would appear the fastest.

Then as our intrepid travelers sped up more for their return trip, time dilation effects would again become apparent - but the Milky Way would be very blue shifted.

All issues about the twin paradox - that make the travelers younger than the inhabitants of the MW, are accounted for by having to turn around.

138

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:23:35pm

re: #72 The Sanity Inspector

This same principle on an incomprehensibly huger scale results in beauties like these.

Gravitational lensing. I hear that NASA has computer algorithms that can actually resolve the lensed light in some cases, to try and catch a glimpse of what's behind the object whose gravity bent it.

139

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:25:06pm

re: #137 LudwigVanQuixote

Then as our intrepid travelers sped up more for their return trip, time dilation effects would again become apparent - but the Milky Way would be very blue shifted.

All issues about the twin paradox - that make the travelers younger than the inhabitants of the MW, are accounted for by having to turn around.

Yes, of course you're right. The MW would again recede to a small highly blue-shifted blob, but AHEAD of them, instead of behind. I don't know why that didn't occur to me sooner.

140

The Sanity Inspector Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:26:42pm

re: #138 Yashmak

Gravitational lensing. I hear that NASA has computer algorithms that can actually resolve the lensed light in some cases, to try and catch a glimpse of what's behind the object whose gravity bent it.

Damn, but we're a brilliant civilization. We can discover things like this, and also invent beltsander races.

141

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:26:42pm

re: #133 Yashmak

The appearance of the rotation of the Milky Way would be governed by the Doppler effect. Slower as you go away and faster as you approach. Einstein just says that you would still observe the rays coming in at the speed of light.

Remember that the Doppler effect is not the same as the Dopeler effect which is the tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly. ...

142

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:28:45pm

re: #139 Yashmak

Yes, of course you're right. The MW would again recede to a small highly blue-shifted blob, but AHEAD of them, instead of behind. I don't know why that didn't occur to me sooner.

It's all good.

Relativity is something you have to live with for a few years - working the problems- before it gets a bit less mysterious.

The issue that always bothered me in graduate school is that there is not relative time for a photon, i.e. the moment of it's birth is the same as the moment of it's death and it's transit as far as it is concerned.

However, the fact that they are created and destroyed implies passage of time.

The answer to the problem is just what I said before, the photon's birth is it's death as far as it is concerned.

143

Dark_Falcon Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:32:19pm

re: #142 LudwigVanQuixote

You might want to head upstairs, Ludwig. Post #100 on the next thread is your entrance cue.

144

Yashmak Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:32:36pm

re: #142 LudwigVanQuixote

The issue that always bothered me in graduate school is that there is not relative time for a photon, i.e. the moment of it's birth is the same as the moment of it's death and it's transit as far as it is concerned.

Indeed. I think someone else asked about that up-thread as well. It's a conundrum all right, and in a way, it seems to imply that there may be physical properties to photons that are outside our current understanding of physics, or that we don't have the tech to detect yet.

Too bad they won't sit still for in-depth study :)

145

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:37:54pm

G_d with the wrong blocks.

146

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 12:46:11pm

re: #144 Yashmak

Well there is always more to know.

However, the answer is actually there. The moment of Birth is the moment of death in that frame.

The difficulty is with the idea of a many to one mapping.

147

Captain America 1776 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:02:01pm

Big Bang, BANG! BANG!!

Youtube Video

Watch and listen to this for a much needed afternoon energy boost!

148

lrsshadow Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:06:43pm

Time doesn't exist, well at least the way we think of it, therefor it cannot be traveled through.

Oh and Einstein was pretty close to being right, but most interpretations have been way off from what Einstein was really getting at.

149

Fat Bastard Vegetarian Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:30:06pm

re: #14 badger1970

No. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

150

lostlakehiker Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:46:38pm

re: #108 brent

#98 tachyons...

I remember reading something about a gunfight between to guys shooting tachyon particles at each other (which every sci-fi fan knows are faster than the speed of light).

I think the Reader's Digest is that they both killed each other before the gunfight began, which I think is also a paradox...

The trick is to wait until you're dead, then shoot. Your shot, having been fired last, will arrive first, and you'll have made your own death didn't happen. This makes it possible for you to have fired your shot.

(The logic of time travel is whacked---but wordplay is fun.)

151

lostlakehiker Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:50:13pm

re: #142 LudwigVanQuixote

It's all good.

Relativity is something you have to live with for a few years - working the problems- before it gets a bit less mysterious.

The issue that always bothered me in graduate school is that there is not relative time for a photon, i.e. the moment of it's birth is the same as the moment of it's death and it's transit as far as it is concerned.

However, the fact that they are created and destroyed implies passage of time.

The answer to the problem is just what I said before, the photon's birth is it's death as far as it is concerned.

re: #142 LudwigVanQuixote

It's all good.

Relativity is something you have to live with for a few years - working the problems- before it gets a bit less mysterious.

The issue that always bothered me in graduate school is that there is not relative time for a photon, i.e. the moment of it's birth is the same as the moment of it's death and it's transit as far as it is concerned.

However, the fact that they are created and destroyed implies passage of time.

The answer to the problem is just what I said before, the photon's birth is it's death as far as it is concerned.

Going off topic, but not entirely because it's still science:

Question: I have a friend who argues that more CO2 is irrelevant because the CO2 already in the atmosphere has effectively blocked all thermal re-radiation to space in its absorption spectrum already. That is, CO2 is a blanket that covers part of the bed, and making that blanket thicker won't keep us any warmer because we're not losing any heat through that blanket as it is.

This strikes me as most unlikely, even preposterous, but it would be nice to have a solid refutation backed by links and evidence.

152

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 1:51:21pm

Einstein's theory of relativity is based on the observed speed of light. Speed, a scalar, not velocity, a vector. He does not pretend to describe the first derivative (acceleration) nor the integral (displacement) because he does not have a frame of reference within which to do so. Whether or not he believed that such a frame exists, the theory does not address it. Everything is relative to the observed speed of light, that is why it is called the (drumroll) Theory of Relativity.

Whether or not a greater frame of reference exists is an hypothesis, an hypothesis that many physicists invoke when they speak of the "isness" of space-time or the derivative of C. Hypotheses that depend on an outside frame of reference, e.g. time travel, cannot be confirmed by calculations of equations that do not recognize that such a frame exists.

IMO, until we begin to probe the shape of that outside frame we can only pick at the edges of relativity, we cannot move beyond it.

153

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 2:01:16pm

re: #151 lostlakehiker

Going off topic, but not entirely because it's still science:

Question: I have a friend who argues that more CO2 is irrelevant because the CO2 already in the atmosphere has effectively blocked all thermal re-radiation to space in its absorption spectrum already. That is, CO2 is a blanket that covers part of the bed, and making that blanket thicker won't keep us any warmer because we're not losing any heat through that blanket as it is.

This strikes me as most unlikely, even preposterous, but it would be nice to have a solid refutation backed by links and evidence.

Ohhh wow, yes that is completely preposterous.

If you think about it for half a second, the maximal amount of trapping that could occur from CO2, would be if we had a 100% CO2 atmosphere. We are nowhere close to that.

154

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 2:17:47pm

re: #151 lostlakehiker

Going off topic, but not entirely because it's still science:

Question: I have a friend who argues that more CO2 is irrelevant because the CO2 already in the atmosphere has effectively blocked all thermal re-radiation to space in its absorption spectrum already. That is, CO2 is a blanket that covers part of the bed, and making that blanket thicker won't keep us any warmer because we're not losing any heat through that blanket as it is.

This strikes me as most unlikely, even preposterous, but it would be nice to have a solid refutation backed by links and evidence.

The increase in "greenhouse effect" is proportional to the relative increase of CO2. An increase from 0 to 10 ppm will result in a certain increase as will the increase from 10 to 20, but it will take an increase from 20 to 40 to get that same increase and then an increase from 40 to 80 to get the same increase. Each doubling gets an equivalent incremental increase - a doubling does not get a doubling except for the first one.

We need to go from 350 to 700 to get the same increase that came from 175 to 350. But that is the increase in heat retention by CO2, it does not define the effect on the climate system.

The whole debate really comes down to climate sensitivity. Does the climate have a positive feedback loop or is it negatively damped. That is why the argument about past climate is so important.

The models that suggest catastrophic warming depend on a positive feedback loop, i.e. that assumtion is built into the model.

155

jdog29 Thu, Oct 29, 2009 2:31:53pm

re: #154 abu_garcia

kinda like when the dow is at 9000, when it goes up 1%, it'll go up 90 points. Once the dow hits 10,000, for it to go up 1%, it will now have to go up 100 points. I know, I know, the parallel always breaks down sooner or later, :-)

156

lostlakehiker Thu, Oct 29, 2009 2:43:49pm

re: #153 LudwigVanQuixote

Ohhh wow, yes that is completely preposterous.

If you think about it for half a second, the maximal amount of trapping that could occur from CO2, would be if we had a 100% CO2 atmosphere. We are nowhere close to that.

Agree it seems unlikely. But it's not that simple, is it? Hypothetically, if CO2 were an amazingly potent greenhouse gas in its absorption spectrum zone and completely transparent at other frequencies, its greenhouse effect would fairly quickly reach a saturation point. It'd be like stacking half-reflective mirrors, one after another, to the point that almost everything got reflected. Once you have a dozen of those mirrors, another dozen make little or no difference.

157

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 3:46:58pm

re: #152 abu_garcia

Einstein's theory of relativity is based on the observed speed of light.

There are two postulates to SR:

1. The speed of light is constant in all reference frames.
2. The laws of physics are unchanged in all reference frames.

An implied postulate is that there is no preferred reference frame.

Speed, a scalar, not velocity, a vector.

OK...

He does not pretend to describe the first derivative (acceleration) nor the integral (displacement) because he does not have a frame of reference within which to do so.

There is no preferred reference frame. Further, accelerations are the entire point of General Relativity. The fact that inertial mass is the same as gravitational mass - to as best as we can tell (the principle of equivalence) is the bridge from GR to gravity.

Whether or not he believed that such a frame exists, the theory does not address it.

THAT IS BECAUSE NO SUCH FRAME EXISTS! If it did, the entire symmetry of the theory (the symmetry that the theory rests on, as in Poincare Lorentz invariance) would cease to apply. In other words, if there were such a frame, it would be mathematically impossible to have relativity.

Everything is relative to the observed speed of light, that is why it is called the (drumroll) Theory of Relativity.

NO. not at all.

Whether or not a greater frame of reference exists is an hypothesis, an hypothesis that many physicists invoke when they speak of the "isness" of space-time or the derivative of C.

C is a constant. That make its derivative boring. The derivative of any constant is zero.

Hypotheses that depend on an outside frame of reference, e.g. time travel, cannot be confirmed by calculations of equations that do not recognize that such a frame exists.

I am not even certain what that might mean.

158

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 3:48:51pm

re: #154 abu_garcia

The increase in "greenhouse effect" is proportional to the relative increase of CO2. An increase from 0 to 10 ppm will result in a certain increase as will the increase from 10 to 20, but it will take an increase from 20 to 40 to get that same increase and then an increase from 40 to 80 to get the same increase. Each doubling gets an equivalent incremental increase - a doubling does not get a doubling except for the first one.

Where do you get such a preposterous idea? I mean you just made this up right? Of course this is false.

159

Mad Prophet Ludwig Thu, Oct 29, 2009 3:54:34pm

re: #156 lostlakehiker

Agree it seems unlikely. But it's not that simple, is it? Hypothetically, if CO2 were an amazingly potent greenhouse gas in its absorption spectrum zone and completely transparent at other frequencies, its greenhouse effect would fairly quickly reach a saturation point. It'd be like stacking half-reflective mirrors, one after another, to the point that almost everything got reflected. Once you have a dozen of those mirrors, another dozen make little or no difference.

Yes, but even though CO2 is very good at catching IR, it does not mean that you are guaranteed to catch all of it. Obviously a lot makes it down to the surface to catch be reflected back out into space. That is why albedo is still such a big deal. Of course the CO2 gets a second chance to catch on the way back up as well, so therefore it does not radiate back into space, but rather that energy gets trapped here.

If you really want to look at it mathematically, think about it in terms of probability.

Suppose I have a box with 10,000 little sub grids. If I put a molecule in one sub grid box, say it has a 50% chance of catching a ray I will shoot through the whole space.

Obviously, the moe of those grids are filled the greater the cance of that something getting caught.

160

abu_garcia Thu, Oct 29, 2009 4:54:45pm

re: #158 LudwigVanQuixote

Where do you get such a preposterous idea? I mean you just made this up right? Of course this is false.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

CO2 climate sensitivity has a component directly due to radiative forcing by CO2 (or any other change in Earth's radiative balance), and a further contribution arising from feedbacks, positive and negative. "Without any feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 (which amounts to a forcing of 3.7 W/m2) would result in 1°C global warming, which is easy to calculate and is undisputed. The remaining uncertainty is due entirely to feedbacks in the system, namely, the water vapor feedback, the ice-albedo feedback, the cloud feedback, and the lapse rate feedback."[1]

That's not "where I learned it", but it's a pretty good explanation.

161

charlz Thu, Oct 29, 2009 5:28:50pm

re: #135 imp_62

I knew that before you said it.

We've heard that before.

162

Ian MacGregor Thu, Oct 29, 2009 6:56:52pm

7.3 billion light years of travel and and arriving 0.9 seconds apart. Pretty good for Einstein and "that" crowd. But if you want to see the real science which flows from Einstein's work, you have to watch

Youtube Video

163

freetoken Thu, Oct 29, 2009 10:17:37pm

re: #162 Ian MacGregor

Dude...

/oh... dude...

164

greenmamba Fri, Oct 30, 2009 1:13:49pm

re: #113 abu_garcia

As you say. There's info on Einstein's thoughts, Bell's thought experiment and Aspect's real one here.

Donald Bedford explains it well but you have to pay for the whole thing.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Einstein Wins the Great Race

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud