Is anyone looking for this: reaching speed of light

[marmstrong941]

is anyone looking for what might be the effect of something going into or coming out of the speed of light?

 

[mfb]

What do you mean by "going into" or "coming out of"?

 

[marmstrong941]

well what would or could be the effect of something going pass or coming down from faster then light speed

 

[mfb]

There is no physical theory where this would be possible. "What do laws of physics predict if we violate these laws" is not a meaningful question.

 

[marmstrong941]

We can't even get neer that speed yet so we don't know that yet. Would it hurt to look?

 

[mfb]

We have accelerated electrons to 99.999999999% the speed of light and protons to 99.9999991% (the digits are counted).
And it doesn't even matter, because "nothing can reach the speed of light according to our theories of physics" is a theoretical prediction: It is strictly impossible with the known laws of physics. You cannot make a prediction using these laws.

Would it hurt to look?

To look for what? There is no predictions how such a hypothetical process could look like because we don't have a theory that could describe that.

 

[stefan r]

is anyone looking for what might be the effect of something going into or coming out of the speed of light?

This wikipedia article might address your question. High velocity particles interact with background radiation and create new particles.

A few people are looking around:

• AGASA – Akeno Giant Air Shower Array in Japan
• Antarctic Impulse Transient Antenna (ANITA) detects ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrinos believed to be caused by ultra-high-energy cosmic ray particles
• Extreme Universe Space Observatory
• GRAPES-3 (Gamma Ray Astronomy PeV EnergieS 3rd establishment) is a project for cosmic ray study with air shower detector array and large area muon detectors at Ooty in southern India.
• High Resolution Fly's Eye Cosmic Ray Detector (HiRes)
• LOPES (telescope) – LOFAR PrototypE Station is located in Karlsruhe, Germany is part of the LOFAR project.
• MARIACHI – Mixed Apparatus for Radar Investigation of Cosmic-rays of High Ionization located on Long Island, USA.
• Pierre Auger Observatory
• Telescope Array Project
• Yakutsk Extensive Air Shower Array
• Tunka experiment
• The https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COSMICi&action=edit&redlink=1 project at FAMU is developing technology for a distributed network of low-cost detectors for UHECR showers in collaboration with MARIACHI.

 

[mfb]

Note that all these experiments are only looking for things slower than light (or looking for light). Something like 99.999999999999% maybe, but slower.

 

[newjerseyrunner]

I have a question. From what I understand, after the Big Bang, The Higgs field was one of the last ones to settle. Doesn’t this mean that the first elementary particles traveled at exactly c until the Higgs settled? What happened at that phase transition to particles that already existed. Is it an instant transition from one state to another or is there some in between?

 

[stefan r]

Note that all these experiments are only looking for things slower than light (or looking for light). Something like 99.999999999999% maybe, but slower.

They found the OMG particle. That was a lorentz factor of 3.2 x 10¹¹ so they must not be limited to things with lorentz factor below10⁷.

If I understood the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit then anything going faster[particle has more energy] than the limit kicks off new particles when it runs into the cosmic microwave background. The visible light in the our neighborhood would have higher energy collisions. I expect at higher velocity the GZK would reiterate[not sure]. If so, particles created by the collisions would also be moving fast enough to also collide with background radiation and create more particles. Even if a detector could filter out everything with a lorentz factor over 10⁷ it could still detect a source.

The police probably are not looking for an elephant with a band of clowns playing trumpets. A patrol car is capable of observing an elephant, clowns, or trumpeters. So they stand a good chance of noticing if they are in that neighborhood at the time.

 

[rootone]

The police probably are not looking for an elephant with a band of clowns playing trumpets. A patrol car is capable of observing an elephant, clowns, or trumpeters. So they stand a good chance of noticing if they are in that neighborhood at the time.

Not if the elephants and clowns don't exist.

 

[mfb]

They found the OMG particle. That was a lorentz factor of 3.2 x 10¹¹ so they must not be limited to things with lorentz factor below10⁷.

It was slower than the speed of light, that is all that matters in the context of this thread.

If I understood the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin limit then anything going faster[particle has more energy] than the limit kicks off new particles when it runs into the cosmic microwave background. The visible light in the our neighborhood would have higher energy collisions. I expect at higher velocity the GZK would reiterate[not sure]. If so, particles created by the collisions would also be moving fast enough to also collide with background radiation and create more particles. Even if a detector could filter out everything with a lorentz factor over 10⁷ it could still detect a source.

That is a purely theoretical consideration. Things with energies collisions with the CMB produce secondary particles above the GZK cutoff are not expected to be produced, and even if they are produced they wouldn't travel over any relevant cosmic distances.

The police probably are not looking for an elephant with a band of clowns playing trumpets. A patrol car is capable of observing an elephant, clowns, or trumpeters. So they stand a good chance of noticing if they are in that neighborhood at the time.

They are not actively looking for it, but they would clearly notice it.
Our detectors don't have upper limits for the detection. We know particles above GZK are extremely rare because would see all these particles (if they hit the detectors).

Nothing in your post was discussing the original question.

 

[Dale]

We can't even get neer that speed yet so we don't know that yet. Would it hurt to look?

We can get very near that speed, so we know that quite well, and what we have found when we looked is that the results match the theory

 

[Sorcerer]

We can't even get neer that speed yet so we don't know that yet. Would it hurt to look?

It seems to follow pretty logically that if light moves at the same speed for all inertial observers (something that is experimentally verified), that there is no way any inertial observer could ever reach the speed of light. For if the speed of light is the same for all inertial observers, the no matter how fast you move, light will still move away from you at the speed of light. How, then, could you ever hope to catch a beam of light?

 

[Wes Tausend]

Probably the closet science has ever come to seriously investigating the hint of such phenomena comes from Quantum Theory. It is called Entanglement and Einstein naturally found it abhorrent. It would seem to mean that his Relativities are incomplete which digs right down to the validation roots of the postulates of SR (Special Relativity). The Entanglement Wikipedia article is an interesting read. Here are a few out-of-context wiki excerpts:

• The counterintuitive predictions of quantum mechanics about strongly correlated systems were first discussed by Albert Einstein in 1935, in a joint paper with Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen. In this study, the three formulated the EPR paradox, a thought experiment that attempted to show that quantum mechanical theory was incomplete.
• Following the EPR paper, Erwin Schrödinger wrote a letter to Einstein in German in which he used the word Verschränkung (translated by himself as entanglement) "to describe the correlations between two particles that interact and then separate, as in the EPR experiment."
• Like Einstein, Schrödinger was dissatisfied with the concept of entanglement, because it seemed to violate the speed limit on the transmission of information implicit in the theory of relativity. Einstein later famously derided entanglement as "spukhafte Fernwirkung" or "spooky action at a distance."

A clear connection between Relativity and Quantum theory is still elusive. It is common to think only in the context of one or the other. I believe work on entanglement is still ongoing as is Relativity. Barring a solid Theory of Everything suddenly cropping up, apparently no theory is ever really complete.

Wes

 

[Ibix]

A clear connection between Relativity and Quantum theory is still elusive.

I don't believe this is correct - or at least is somewhat misleading. Certainly quantum mechanics as developed by Schrödinger was non-relativistic, but quantum field theory is fully compatible with special relativity. It assumes Minkowski spacetime as a background.

We do still have some trouble with quantum field theory and general relativity - we can't handle non-classical sources of gravity, for instance.

 

[mfb]

There are local interpretations of quantum mechanics, and entanglement doesn’t allow superluminal information transfer in any interpretation.

Quantum field theory requires special relativity - it is not “just compatible”, it is necessary.

We do still have some trouble with quantum field theory and general relativity - we can't handle non-classical sources of gravity, for instance.

We can in many cases, if the sources are weak an effective theory is sufficient.

 

[Wes Tausend]

A clear connection between Relativity and Quantum theory is still elusive.

I don't believe this is correct - or at least is somewhat misleading. Certainly quantum mechanics as developed by Schrödinger was non-relativistic, but quantum field theory is fully compatible with special relativity. It assumes Minkowski spacetime as a background.

We do still have some trouble with quantum field theory and general relativity - we can't handle non-classical sources of gravity, for instance.

Upon reflection, I agree with you about my statement. It was poor wording on my account. What I meant was, "A final connection between Relativity and Quantum theory is still elusive". While this may not be entirely correct either, it is intended as reference to the hope of a solid T.o.E. bringing the ultimate clarity.

How should we describe the state of the present relationship between the two theories?

Thanks,
Wes

 

[rootone]

How should we describe the state of the present relationship between the two theories?

Puzzling.

 

[Herman Trivilino]

We can't even get neer that speed yet so we don't know that yet. Would it hurt to look?

Of course it would be a good idea to look. People have been doing that for over 100 years, ever since the vacuum pump was invented in the late 1800's researchers have evacuated containers and sent particles hurling through them at speeds approaching the speed of light.

For example, an electron can reach 99% of the speed of light when you transfer some energy to it. So all you have to do is increase that energy by 1% or so and you're there, right? Well, no. You can increase that energy making it millions or even trillions of times greater and all that happens is the speed increases by less than that 1%.

The containers used now are miles long, the largest being a circular tunnel with a circumference of 50 miles. Engineers, scientists, and technicians every minute of every day at locations all around the world routinely accelerate particles to near light speed. All of this has been well understood for about 100 years and it's now a fact of modern life.

 

[stefan r]

We can't even get neer that speed yet so we don't know that yet. Would it hurt to look?

... People have been doing that for over 100 years, ever since the vacuum pump was invented in the late 1800's researchers have evacuated containers and sent particles hurling through them at speeds approaching the speed of light...

None of the researchers have been hurled through the containers at speeds approaching c. Some people were placed in vacuum chambers at Dachau in 1944. NASA decompressed a technician in 1965. Lots of chickens, dogs, and chimps have experienced this experiment.

Apollo 10 reached 11,000 m/s. 3.7 x 10^-5c

 

[mfb]

Particles, not people.