- #1
Rasine
- 208
- 0
i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?
whozum said:Music travels at the speed of sound, so I'm going to say no just on that basis. That fails on many more levels though.
Claude Bile said:The music obviously isn't in sound form, it is probably transmitted optically. I seem to recall reading something similar in New Scientist magazine, will see if I can find any verification of this.
Claude.
No, if it was, everyone and their pet rocks would know about it.Rasine said:is this true?
Are you familiar with the concept that 'optically' means 'by light'? Light does not under any circumstances go faster than itself.Claude Bile said:The music obviously isn't in sound form, it is probably transmitted optically
You're so optimistic!Anzas said:the day someone even reaches the speed of light will be the day people will know how to divide by 0
Danger said:On the other hand, it has been documented for decades that physical objects travel as fast as or faster than light. The specific rule in relativity theory is that no object with mass can travel at the speed of light in vacuum.
Massive objects can exceed light speed in vacuum, as long as that is their lowest boundary. That's what 'tachyons' are about.
Rasine said:i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?
True that they haven't been documented, but their existence is allowed for in Einstein's formulae. I haven't heard anything about them being ruled out by any QM theories, but that's a field that I can't keep up with very well. The last that I read about them, people were still trying to figure out some way to detect them if they're there. As for the superluminosity, that's why they're called 'tachyons'. If they're slower than light, they'd be something else.ZapperZ said:However, let's not forget that "tachyons" are not one of those that have been "documented". They have not been detected, much less verified to be superluminal.
Yes, I believe that is exactly what the OP was referring to, I am surprised no one has come up with the name yet. It is Guenter Nimtz of Cologne University, here is a page describing his "superluminal tunneling device":ZapperZ said:The only possible scenario that I can think of for such a question was the situation a while back (yes, this is outdated) that someone claiming to have transmitted a radio signal via tunneling through a medium of a piece of Mozart symphony, and comparing it with the signal that just went through air. The claim then was that the signal that tunnneled through traveled faster.
Rasine said:i just heard that some outlandish men in germany transmitted music faster than light. is this true?
WhirlwindMonk said:I also remember reading something about this too. I don't remember where, and I think it has something to do with quantum tunneling, but I can't be certain.
Lisa! said:You're so optimistic!
panthera said:tunneling is a total diff concept and you can't correlate it with this...it refers to alpha emission from nucleus! I will die if i hear this once more
Yeah,poor physicists have to develope new theories But who knows everything is possible,so maybe we would divide by zero!Anzas said:im realistic, seeing as in relativity [tex]\gamma[/tex] is given by
[tex]\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/tex]
if anything reaches the speed of light either relativity is incorrect or we can now divide by 0
ZapperZ said:Well, I hope you don't "die" from hearing this, but I think I may have misunderstood what you have said here. Are you implying that "tunneling" concept is only restricted to "alpha emission from nucleus", and that photon tunneling or any other form of tunneling just doesn't exist?
Zz.
True, but for purposes of relativity, all electromagnetic propogation is considered 'light'. Again, it cannot go faster than itself, regardless of the medium.panthera said:its possible..its an analog signal and it can be transformed to electromagnetic wave signal, NOT NECCESSARILY an optical one but can be any other form as we know there are many types of EM waves, light being one of those.
panthera said:okay fine if you are talking about photon tunneling but it cannot(as far as i remember) carry any information at a speed more than the speed of light but it's implications were not clear to me when i had an overview of the article so i had almost forgotten about it[thanks for reminding] ...but whatever be "faster than light communication" is not possible as per me...
Danger said:True, but for purposes of relativity, all electromagnetic propogation is considered 'light'. Again, it cannot go faster than itself, regardless of the medium.
I think that I see what you mean, but if so then it doesn't actually apply here. It appears that you are setting up a situation similar to a car on a dock racing against a boat in the water beside it. Obviously, sound in air travels a lot faster than light in molasses, but it doesn't provide any practical benefits.panthera said:hey i just meant we can consider it to travel faster than light in a medium NOT air...i mean the music in air may travel faster than C in medium(other than air) ...i think i confused u...
Danger said:I think that I see what you mean, but if so then it doesn't actually apply here. It appears that you are setting up a situation similar to a car on a dock racing against a boat in the water beside it. Obviously, sound in air travels a lot faster than light in molasses, but it doesn't provide any practical benefits.
As sneaky approach, I must admit. (You're studying law, aren't you?)panthera said:so i took that only possible case.
Danger said:As sneaky approach, I must admit. (You're studying law, aren't you?)
What I meant was that you're thinking like a lawyer. You casually slipped into a different set of circumstances without making it obvious that you were doing so, and thus bypassed the original question. Since the thread-starter was referring to a technique described as 'superluminal', and that means 'faster than light in the same medium', your answer didn't apply to the question. I'm not faulting your approach, merely pointing out that it's of no benefit to the OP.panthera said:would you elaborate? the question has no answer so i told the only possibility which can hold good...whats wrong there?
I've seen a few, but remember that I'm new here. Anyhow, I got to get to work now. Catch you later.panthera said:i agree what you are saying ...i only posted it as i thought may be the author has missed some point. it is not unusual to hear such comments in a discussion.isn't it?
According to the laws of physics, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Therefore, music cannot be transmitted faster than light.
No, there is no scientific evidence to support this claim. The speed of light has been proven to be the fastest speed at which anything can travel in our universe.
This belief may stem from a misunderstanding of the concept of "faster than light" communication, which is only possible in theoretical scenarios and not in our physical reality.
Yes, music can be transmitted through various mediums such as radio waves, electromagnetic waves, and digital signals. However, these forms of transmission still adhere to the speed of light limit.
No, it is not possible for music to reach us instantaneously. Even if it were possible to transmit music faster than light, it would still take a finite amount of time to travel through space and reach our ears.