Wormholes expeling particles at superluminal speeds

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the concept of wormholes potentially expelling particles at superluminal speeds, examining the implications of general relativity (GR), the expansion of the universe, and the nature of time travel. Participants consider theoretical scenarios and the behavior of particles in relation to these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that GR does not prevent massive particles from traveling faster than the speed of light (C) if they initially possess that speed, raising questions about particles riding the wavefront of the universe's expansion.
  • Another participant proposes that the wavefront may be related to the gravitational field and speculates that it could involve gravitons, while inviting corrections on this idea.
  • Some participants argue against the notion that particles can exceed the speed of light, stating that while the universe's expansion may appear faster than C from a certain perspective, it does not allow for superluminal travel from any point in the universe.
  • One participant introduces the idea of antigravity materials potentially enabling time travel through wormholes, suggesting a folding of spacetime as the universe expands.
  • Several posts express disagreement with the initial ideas, with one participant simply stating "NO" in response to the entire thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the possibility of superluminal travel and the nature of wormholes, with no consensus reached on the validity of the initial propositions or the implications of the universe's expansion.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various assumptions about the nature of speed, the behavior of particles, and the implications of general relativity, but these remain unresolved within the discussion.

Boy@n
Messages
250
Reaction score
0
Probably a crazy idea but perhaps possible, so let me ask...

GR doesn't prevent particles, even those with mass, to travel at speeds higher than the maximal speed of light (C), if that was their initial speed.

Now, the only thing traveling faster than C is expansion of our Universe.

First, are there also particles 'riding' that wavefront?

Second, if so, what if one end of a wormhole would appear in that region and the other somewhere inside the Universe, might it be possible that the particle riding that wavefront at speeds exceeding C enters that wormhole and then exits it inside Universe, perhaps even near Earth, and keep that speed?

Third, would such a particle 'experience' (not in regard of itself, but in regard of Universe) traveling backwards in time ending in a Big Bang, while time still goes forward for the rest of Universe?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
First, are there also particles 'riding' that wavefront?

I believe the wavefront of the universe is the gravitational field of the universe's total mass. So therefore it might be gravitons or so. But I am happy if someone would correct me.

Second

No. The universe travels faster than c from our perspective but if you were on the "edge", it would be below c. So speed depends on the position in space and at no point in universe you can exceed the speed c. This might have to do with the quantum changes in materia and how "long" it takes to change energy states within that materia.

Again, I would be happy if anyone would correct me.

Third

I think what you are talking about is material with antigravity. I that case you could build a wormwhole in spacetime, and, as universe expands on any place, you could fold it in a way that you travel backwards in time.

Again, I'd be happy for corrections/clarifications.
 
RE: whole thread: NO.
 
nismaratwork said:
RE: whole thread: NO.
we really need a 'like' button...
 
zhermes said:
we really need a 'like' button...

Heh, that would polarize things here even more. :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
12K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K