Timeline for What would be the least physics breaking way to travel at light speed or faster?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 2022 at 1:29 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @ Robert Rapplean The probability of where the electron is going to be is determined instantaneously. It has to be, otherwise both direction and position would be known at the same time. | |
| Jun 24, 2022 at 1:27 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @ Neinstein So the question has zero value. | |
| Jun 24, 2022 at 0:25 | comment | added | Robert Rapplean | Quantum tunneling isn't actually faster than light. It's just the energy packet shifting its focus, and that happens within the limits of light speed. This misunderstanding has been behind several mistaken experimental results where they thought they'd broken the light barrier. | |
| Jun 23, 2022 at 4:48 | comment | added | Neinstein | @JustinThymetheSecond The argument is not about whether our understanding of the world can or can't change. The question is, how to make FTL while breaking physics the least possible way. If you don't define physics in this question as our current best mathematical model for understanding and predicting the word, the whole answer will be utterly pointless since it can be literally arbitrary. Such an answer has exactly zero value. | |
| Jun 23, 2022 at 4:04 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @Neinstein And why not? We are finding out every year that things are possible that physics said was impossible a decade ago. Photosynthesis, for instance. Involves quantum tunneling to get the electron through the energy barrier. We know it HAPPENS, now we know HOW. | |
| Jun 22, 2022 at 10:11 | comment | added | Neinstein | @JustinThymetheSecond You can't answer what is the least physics breaking way of sg with "well, ya' know, physics's just a model, it may be wrong, so kinda anything is possible" | |
| Jun 22, 2022 at 10:07 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @Neinstein No such criteria in the question. | |
| Jun 22, 2022 at 10:04 | comment | added | Neinstein | @JustinThymetheSecond The question asked for the least physics-breaking way. This means 'our current state of knowledge'. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 23:02 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @Neinstein "Given our current state of knowledge..." - since when does reality conform and limit itself to 'our current state of knowledge'? Energy has no inertia. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 7:10 | comment | added | Neinstein | @JustinThymetheSecond AFAIK quantum tunneling, given our current knowledge of physics, cannot happen from below c to above c. | |
| Jun 20, 2022 at 23:34 | comment | added | AlexP | @JustinThymetheSecond: $m = E/c^2$. Energy has exactly the same inertia as the equivalent mass. There is really no difference, they are of the exact same nature. (For completeness, the Higgs field gives mass to lightweight particles, such as electrons. The mass of the heavy particles, such as the protons and neutrons in the atomic nuclei, is really the binding energy of the quarks they are made of.) | |
| Jun 20, 2022 at 23:13 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | You cannot travel AT c. However, if by some 'quantum tunneling' thing, you go from slower than C to faster than C without going at C, there is no problem. The entire concept of quantum tunnelling throws continuous linearity out the window. We are now in a whole new world of physics. | |
| Jun 20, 2022 at 23:09 | comment | added | Justin Thyme the Second | @AlexP But that mass does not contribute to inertia. Only the Higgs boson is responsible for inertia. Energy has no inertia, and the speed limit is c. | |
| Jun 20, 2022 at 20:17 | comment | added | AlexP | Fun fact: the Higgs field contributes only a tiny part to the mass of objects. The bulk of the mass of objects is the binding energy of the quarks in the protons and neutrons. | |
| Jun 20, 2022 at 20:15 | history | answered | SoronelHaetir | CC BY-SA 4.0 |