Can Tachyons Exist? - Ask a Spaceman!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ม.ค. 2023
- Full podcast episodes: www.askaspaceman.com
Support: / pmsutter
Follow: / paulmattsutter and / paulmattsutter
Is it possible for anything to travel faster than light? What about tachyons? How would faster-than-light travel break causality? And just what the heck is causality, anyway? I discuss these questions and more in today’s Ask a Spaceman!
Follow all the show updates at www.askaspaceman.com, and help support the show at / pmsutter !
Keep those questions about space, science, astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology coming to #AskASpaceman for COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF TIME AND SPACE! - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
For all the nonsense happening in our spacetime, I find your videos very therapeutic.
I can't remember who originally wrote this but:
There was a woman named Bright
She could travel much faster than light
She went away in a relative way
And came back the previous night.
😁😎
Z bk
One of the most enjoyable science presentations anyone can ever watch on TH-cam. Thank you for this.
This old Cajun went to the airport to pick up a friend. As he looked at the flight schedules, he saw a short 45-minute flight that was traveling west from EST to CST, so the schedule said it would take off at 8:00am and land at 7:45am. he walked over to a ticket agent and asked where the flight was leaving from. The agent asked if wanted a ticket. He answered, "Whoee, no, I just want to see that sucker takeoff!" (who says you can't travel back in time? LOL)
"The faster you're moving in space, the slower you're moving in time." Define "faster" without referring to time.
In the discussions around interstellar travel there is often this backdoor solution popping up: Alcubierre warp drive.
- Oh yes, it's true that it's in fact a FTL travel but it's not violating the laws of physics because the spaceship remains still and it's the spacetime itself that is being pushed forward -
It always looked to me that with this argument we are cheating and indeed violating the foundamental principle of causality.
Would like to hear your point Paul, and thanks for your videos, really inspiring!
Loving the longer videos!
The actual equation he is talking about is ds^2 = (cdt)^2 - (dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2), where: ds is displacement through spacetime, dx, dy, and dz are spacial displacements, and dt is elapsed time. If we simplify it to one dimension along the x-axis we get the equation he is talking about ds^2 = (cdt)^2 - dx^2
If we divide both sides of the equation by dt^2 we get (ds/dt)^2 = c^2 - (dx/dt)^2
dx/dt is just speed through space and it can never be greater than c because (ds/dt)^2 is always positive so the right side must be positive, in other words dx/dt (speed) must be less than c.
Thank you for your awesome TH-cam channel. You are one of my favorites.
I like to see your face in these videos.
I think the video's gone tachyon, with Paul being only visible to people in future video's. :P
I love the new format of longer videos. Hope there will be more.
Have you by any chance came across the publication of Andrzej Dragan and Artur Ekert titled:
"Relativity of superluminal observers in 1+3 spacetime".
They write about superluminal objects and how they can lead to connection between relativity and QM. I am no expert in the field of physics, just a fan and curious observer but this is interesting.
Very hard to follow when the man drops his voice to near inaudiblity every time he makes a point or a draws a conclusion. Even my closed caption misses some of those final words. Very frustrating!!
I've had zero issues listening to this episode. Man should make a podcast, I'll gladly subscribe to it
There's probably an issue with your volume or your hearing then, because I had no problems listening to him.
Do you always nag about everything
Love the content I listen while at work 🙃
The analogy of the sceptic system to describe the meaning of quantum mechanics is quite eye-opening.
I have just seriously undermined those foundations with my tachyonic anti-telephone. Casualty is an illusion. Closed time-like curves are now proven.
A few questions:
Exceeds the Speed of Light: Photon
Distance times wave function will provide a speed greater than Speed of Light.
Why is the Speed of Light slower in 2023 than it was in 1623?
What is causing it to slow down?
Planks constant changes in proportion to the speed of light slowing. What is that ratio?
Your influence is not limited by the speed of light if you're a subatomic particle. And causality doesn't dictate the behavior of subatomic particles or nuclear decay
I guess I’ll have to see why Quantum Mechanics is “the septic system” of the universe…
No video part?
Analogously, positively charged holes move along against negative charge-flow; therefore, could there be ‘empty’ space-holes moving along faster than the speed of light? Dark Energy expanding space unevenly at different distances for example.
This was amazing 👏🏿 🙌🏿
07:25f
_If you start moving through space..._
Since motion is relative, let's say I move relative to a reference clock I call U (I'm German, and our word for clock is "Uhr").
_...it takes away some of your speed you're moving through time._
Actually quite the opposite. It's the U coordinate time t I run through, and the time I divide some U coordinate timespan
Δt = t₂ - t₁
by is my proper timespan Δτ which is shorter than Δt.
_Moving clocks run slow._
Yes, and clocks running slow means you actually go _faster forward_ through U coordinate time.
I might name my next Dog "Tachyon".
As I heared according to recent discoveries faster then light is actually possible but not by much. If the idea checks out then there is indeed a maximum speed and photons are just a tiny, barely noticeable bit slower then that. Basically if this is true then it will not really change anything in practice. It would be like arriving back from a sail around the world journey five minutes earlier.
2:57 Metaphysics was the bane of my existence. I used to constantly get all kinds of crazy questions from my students about thhings they had read on the internet on some quack site, seen in a movie, or read in a book. Just hearing the word still makes me cringe.
In the example of sending a transmission via tachyons, wouldn't the show also arrive in time-reversed order? (i.e., Paul would appear to be moving backwards in time in the transmission itself.)
So what you’re saying is Tachyons would have have to have negative mass?
I have a question. Is there a point at which increasing the speed of a moving object (i.e., making it approach the speed of light) causes its energy/mass to become so great that it collapses into a black hole? Can increasing momentum be used to create a black hole?
Yeah, it's gotta be. All that kinetic energy increases the energy density of the object, so there'd be a speed at which a "traveling neutron star" (that's being tugged along by say a massive spaceship) would collapse into a black hole.
And if so, would slowing back down cause the black hole to stop being a black hole?
From the object's perspective, traveling near c, it's the entire universe which is going that fast. So, from its point of view, all other surrounding planets and stars should collapse (but not him). Because this will not happen, then symmetrically, it should not happen for any moving object - even if it approach c - in the first place.
@@robertlamantin5088 what if you were going so fast, so close to c, that Lorenz contraction made you thinner than a Plank length? Would you even still be causality connected to the rest of the universe?
@@petevenuti7355 I don't know what to answer, for the Lorentz contraction is quite uneasy to understand (at least for me). For example, the front and the rear of an object going near c aren't synchronized anymore, which doesn't help to anticipate what's going on...
Wouldnt the theoretical tachyon not be able to exist until the end of the universe, if they are essentially traveling backwards in time faster than light then they would approach the big bang slower and slower but they would even if they ignored causality once created have to be created that initial time meaning they would only exist from the end of time backwards. Either that or they would have been instantly removed from observation at the moment or just after the big bang happened.
If we could move faster than the speed of light would we leave the universe?
if you want to move you have to spend time in that movement. you cannot move in no time. so that's how space and time are connected at least in that sense
audio is all over the place...
Light isnt just a speed; its the living frame rate😊
Hey Paul, excellent video and I always love your stuff! Hey random question that popped into my head the other day I was hoping you might provide some insight on. Since empty space travels faster through time than space with mass, can the faster time travel act as a pressure to pull mass into it? Essentially quicker passing time acting as a pulling force? Thank you!
Hypothetically, if retrocausality existed wouldn't that be all the chaotic things? With all of reality being the domain of every thing else , the causality connected. How would that be tested!
U said we're moving the speed of light. Seems to me it's not us but our image that's moving at that speed. What do i know? Tachyon travel will be needed to really explore this or any other universe. Theoretically thought traves instaniously or damn close. Hook up a brain for that. 😂
This is one of my most wanted topic. If everything moving and you look. Would not all light come at once. A blinding light? You see it in your time frame. To you all has happen. The sender It just happening. It travels in time and space. You need to know where they will be in space and time. To you it not happen, no way to know. They know so send it. You get it in your time frame send it to his time and space from where you got the massage. It reach his time frame. If you send it sooner, To much info to know from your time frame. making it harder the more back you send to receive. end up make it not happen. time dilation?
It seems less like you've proven that tachyons can't exist, but rather than any method of "time travel" precludes certain circumstances. If time travel is possible, it's a logical contradiction if it can be used to change the events that caused it. But's it *is* logically consistent if it's its own cause: "Bootstrap Paradox" vs. "Grandfather Paradox".
"Bootstrap Paradox" scenarios may seem contrived, but are they really any more contrived than so many standard physics problems where you find "solutions" to pre-established equations? In basic QM problems, you pre-supposed the Schrodinger equation and some defined well-potential, and then solve for all the solutions consistent with these limiting conditions. In classical mechanics, you take a prescribed lagrangian and assume the solution is the one of the many possible trajectories with the least action. In any kind of "boundary condition" problem, you look for "solutions" that are mathematically consistent with the starting rules.
You can apply the same approach to time-travel problems. Just, instead of necessarily finding mathematically-consistent solutions, you look for logically-consistent ones. A universe where my giving you a fortune in congratulation for a podcast you haven't made yet, prevents you from making it, is not a "solution." But a universe where this fortune instead motivates you to make the podcast *is* a "solution."
The obvious difference is that the physics model examples I gave are based on supporting experimental evidence. There's a real-world reasons to believe those rules, rather than these un-test(abled)ed thought experiments. But I don't see how they're different in their logical structure.
As an aside, I find appeals to free-will and "possibility," ironic in this case. My understanding is that Einstein was something of a fatalist, as are his modern adherents. They tend to subscribe to a "block-time" model. Relativity specifically makes it so that there is no objective "present," but one for each reference frame. By consequence, there is no objective "future." Then, how can one talk about "possibility" if "future" events have "already" occurred in certain reference frames. Relativity seems like a fatalist model, and has obviously been at odds with the Copenhagen Interpretation.
We are spiritual beings having a physical experience.
Well what is inflation
Человечество пока что некомпетентно в этом вопросе. Мало данных.
Hi Paul, A-S engineer here. I also explore singularities and geodesics for 45 years. Spend a lot of time outdoors, stargazing. Naturally I seen many Ufos. Not ours and the various factions are on different tech levels. All employ the same principle. Some seem better than others at manipulating t-s. Understand their "warp" drive. It is not superluminal in the sense that they break through C. They manipulate T at the Hyperplane boundary. Their drive is a time-forward timemachine and foreshortening Λ,α,β and d,s...Λ=Ω. I call the displacement bubble Omega because of the shape the displacement bubble takes if you graph it. None do a backwards time-travel inside the displacement-bubble generated by their machinery. PS. ET are using our internet too :-) and Tachyons might be the pressure exerted on Photons and thus limit them to their apparent speedlimit and cause their timelessness within our Einsteinian geodesics.
Can light go faster than light?
presence is the only time past and future are mental emotional and spiritual not physical,yes there is time but it has nothing to do with present past and future they are mental relatives,physics time is nothing to do with the future of past they are concepts
Of course tachyons exist, haven't you ever seen the movie "Land of the Lost" with Will Ferrell..
Causality is the celestial Zodiac at 12x30 degrees in seasons that accounts for recorded events of the Phoenix cycle?
Why is there not a spacetime for tachyons? the speed of light would be the barrier between the two!
Tachyons are hypothetical particles that have never been proven to exist no matter how much Stat Trek uses them.
U talk about a tachy message being sent before u actually send it. But u're talking about the image of the action, not the action itself. My widdle brain doesn't see ur problem. Unless we are but images ourselves. 😂
You are a prophet.
Quantum mechanics disproves causality.
Too fast for those of us who don't speak native English, please be simpler and speak more slowly for those of us who follow you thanks
You're confusing order with interaction. Don't call it causality.... This is priesthood stuff. NOT physics.
NOT objective, but what you have been taught to believe. Challenge your beliefs. If they stand up good - if they don't - better.