On the wiki page, there is one line stating that photons in superconductor have rest mass. However, there are no citations supporting that statment, and as far as I know, there are no transparent superconductors.
All the wiki page can give is an upper limit for any mass, meaning no mass has...
That's where your error lies. It's not a model. It's an analogy. In this analogy, only the surface of the balloon is considered. It is using a two dimensional ANALOGY of the three dimensional universe. So for the purpose of the analogy, there is no inside of the balloon.
Andromeda and the Milky Way are approaching each other, and will collide in about 4.5 billion years.
On any scale less than the local galactic supergroup (200 million lys) the effect of gravity overwhelms the force of expansion. It's only when you get outside the supergroup that you see...
I would just like to comment that the balloon analogy seems to have caused more confusion than any other explanation of universal expansion.
Of course, most of the confusion is because of people who don't know what an analogy is.
The idea is not that there are 'other universes'. It's that unlike electroweak and strong force, gravity is able to propagate into the additional dimensions called for by M-theory. All those dimensions are part of our universe, but only gravity can move in those 'directions'. It would explain...
Peter, a minor point, almost a diversion, but doesn't the Shell Theorem state that the gravity inside the earth remains the same until you reach the center? While there is more mass above you, you are closer to the rest of the mass on the other side, and it balances out.
There is the idea of the Bussard Ramjet.
Science fiction authors Larry Niven and Poul Anderson (in a great book called Tau Zero) used the idea.
A very large, very powerful electromagnetic field is used to funnel ionized interstellar hydrogen...
Alpha radiation doesn't. Neither does Beta particles.
But we're talking about fundamental particles being massless before the Higgs field. If they suddenly acquire mass, they must instantly drop below the speed of light.
I'm trying to find something on Cern's website, but so far all I've got is the press piece.
Ah, here's the Cern piece.
If you're sitting in the moving car, and you measure the speed of light, and if your sitting on the particle and you measure the speed of light, you will get the same speed.
This is because time dilates and length contracts in the moving frame of reference WHEN MEASURED BY A FRAME AT REST...