Is a 2004 Discovery About Physics Still Relevant Today?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LostInSpaceTime
  • Start date Start date
LostInSpaceTime
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
I just stumbled upon this and I was wondering of it's validity.I would have thought if this was true it would have been out in the mainstream even more. It's from 2004 but i would think still relevant. I would like to hear some more about this from u guys...like, is this for real?...this seems to be one of those changes in physics that would screw up some stuff, no? What would the repercussions be if it happened again.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092.html
 
Physics news on Phys.org
LostInSpaceTime said:
I just stumbled upon this and I was wondering of it's validity.I would have thought if this was true it would have been out in the mainstream even more. It's from 2004 but i would think still relevant. I would like to hear some more about this from u guys...like, is this for real?...this seems to be one of those changes in physics that would screw up some stuff, no? What would the repercussions be if it happened again.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092.html

these Variable Speed of Light (VSL) theories spring up periodically. then they get some attention in the popular press. then they get refuted by the likes of Michael Duff
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0208093 and http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0110060
or John Barrow
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units#Planck_units_and_the_invariant_scaling_of_nature
point out what the problem is.

i guess what i think I've said before:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1357747&postcount=14
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1399479&postcount=32

the laws of physics doesn't give a rat's ass about what units we use to measure things. the speed of light is necessarily always 1 Planck length per Planck time and if we think that the speed of light (in units we like to use) has changed, the more salient observation iis whether the number of Planck lengths per meter has changed or if the number of Planck times per second has changed, or both (these ratios are dimensionless numbers) and, if that is the case (making us think the speed of E&M propagation has changed, we should be noting the change in one of these dimensionless values and ask why that.
 
Ok Thanks...I was just wondering. Because like you mentioned every once and a while you hear about it but i never asked until now.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...

Similar threads

Back
Top