[EE] Did you ever wonder?

[David Van Horn]

RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get smaller as the energy goes up.

Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around 1eV.
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV
As the energies get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.

So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a photon shrinks toward a point.

[David C Brown]

Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with its
wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to interact with
a conductive material than "light" of a shorter wavelength. In this way you
could say the “size” of photon is basically its wavelength
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*


On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 17:38, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get

smaller as the energy goes up.
Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around 1eV.
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE
starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV
As the energies get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.
So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a photon
shrinks toward a point.
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[David Van Horn]

So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters are dimensionless points?


-----Original Message-----
From: piclist-***@mit.edu <piclist-***@mit.edu> On Behalf Of David C Brown
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 5:08 PM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <***@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?

Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with its wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to interact with a conductive material than "light" of a shorter wavelength. In this way you could say the “size” of photon is basically its wavelength __________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by David Van Horn
RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get

smaller as the energy goes up.
Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around 1eV.
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE
starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV As the energies
get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.
So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a
photon shrinks toward a point.
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[David C Brown]

Points, not dimensionless points. But points that interact with objects
hundreds of metres away.. But it is meaningless to treat photons as if
they were objects akin to a baseball. They are a mathematical construct
that explains the behaviour of "light"
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*


On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 15:28, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters are
dimensionless points?
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with its
wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to interact with
a conductive material than "light" of a shorter wavelength. In this way you
could say the “size” of photon is basically its wavelength
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 17:38, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get

smaller as the energy goes up.
Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around 1eV.
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE
starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV As the energies
get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.
So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a
photon shrinks toward a point.
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[David Van Horn]

I'm just interested that the higher the energy, the smaller the sphere of interaction.


-----Original Message-----
From: piclist-***@mit.edu <piclist-***@mit.edu> On Behalf Of David C Brown
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 9:47 AM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <***@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?

Points, not dimensionless points. But points that interact with objects
hundreds of metres away.. But it is meaningless to treat photons as if they were objects akin to a baseball. They are a mathematical construct that explains the behaviour of "light"
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters
are dimensionless points?
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with
its wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to
interact with a conductive material than "light" of a shorter
wavelength. In this way you could say the “size” of photon is
basically its wavelength __________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 17:38, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get

smaller as the energy goes up.
Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the
energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around 1eV.
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE
starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV As the energies
get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.
So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a
photon shrinks toward a point.
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[David C Brown]

Yes. That is counter intuitive. You would expect higher energies to have
a greater range than lower ones. But, as Feyman always pointed out,
quantum physics is not intuitive and trying to understand it in terms of
classical physics is the road to insanity. :-)
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*


On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 16:08, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
I'm just interested that the higher the energy, the smaller the sphere of interaction.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?
Points, not dimensionless points. But points that interact with objects
hundreds of metres away.. But it is meaningless to treat photons as if
they were objects akin to a baseball. They are a mathematical construct
that explains the behaviour of "light"
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 15:28, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters
are dimensionless points?
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2018 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with
its wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to
interact with a conductive material than "light" of a shorter
wavelength. In this way you could say the “size” of photon is
basically its wavelength __________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 17:38, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
RF is a funny thing.

From KHz to light and beyond, it's photons of EM energy. The photons get

smaller as the energy goes up.
Down in the 600 meter ham band, the photons are HUGE and the energies are TINY.
In visible light, the photons are small, and the energies are around

1eV.

Post by David Van Horn

Post by David Van Horn
In the gamma range, the photons are tiny, and the energies are HUGE
starting at about 10keV and going on up past 1000keV As the energies
get higher, gammas are less and less likely to interact with anything.
So as the energy goes up and up, the volume of space enclosed by a
photon shrinks toward a point.
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[RussellMc]

On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 04:28, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters are
dimensionless points?

Anything travelling at light speed has no mass if it never had any, or
infinite mass if it ever had any..
As anything approaches light speed time slows, and ceases to alter at light
speed.
As anything approaches light speed space "shrinks", and spatial dimensions
become zero at light speed.

Photons have no "mass" [tm]. (You know the rest).
Photons travel at "the speed of light" [tm].
For photons existence is timeless & "spaceless"

Hence: *ALL* photons huddle together in a timeless spaceless group waiting
the end of all things.
We may think otherwise, but, what do we know? (Really!)

Two photons, one leaving Alpha centauri proxima, and the other leaving Sol
"simultaneously" leave together, arrive at eg Terra together, do so
instantaneously, and have never moved, if you ask their opinion. Which is
difficult as it perturbs them greatly. Even though they appear unmoved by
the experience, or lack of it.

Photons, and their Neutrino cousins, are downright weird. So is everything
else, but it's usually less obvious.

Three quarks for Muster Mark. Don't try your strange charm offensive on me.
You'll be head over heels in no time (or very little).
12 quarks to rule them all, 12 ... .
Don't even start !

Russell


From: piclist-***@mit.edu <piclist-***@mit.edu> On Behalf Of David
C Brown

Post by David Van Horn
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with its
wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to interact with
a conductive material than "light" of a shorter wavelength. In this way you
could say the “size” of photon is basically its wavelength
__________________________________________
David C Brown

[RussellMc]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: RussellMc <***@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 10:03
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <***@mit.edu>


On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 04:28, David Van Horn <

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters are
dimensionless points?

Anything travelling at light speed has no mass if it never had any, or
infinite mass if it ever had any..
As anything approaches light speed time slows, and ceases to alter at light
speed.
As anything approaches light speed space "shrinks", and spatial dimensions
become zero at light speed.

Photons have no "mass" [tm]. (You know the rest).
Photons travel at "the speed of light" [tm].
For photons existence is timeless & "spaceless"

Hence: *ALL* photons huddle together in a timeless spaceless group waiting
the end of all things.
We may think otherwise, but, what do we know? (Really!)

Two photons, one leaving Alpha centauri proxima, and the other leaving Sol
"simultaneously" leave together, arrive at eg Terra together, do so
instantaneously, and have never moved, if you ask their opinion. Which is
difficult as it perturbs them greatly. Even though they appear unmoved by
the experience, or lack of it.

Photons, and their Neutrino cousins, are downright weird. So is everything
else, but it's usually less obvious.

Three quarks for Muster Mark. Don't try your strange charm offensive on me.
You'll be head over heels in no time (or very little).
12 quarks to rule them all, 12 ... .
Don't even start !

Russell


From: piclist-***@mit.edu <piclist-***@mit.edu> On Behalf Of David
C Brown

Post by David Van Horn
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with its
wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to interact with
a conductive material than "light" of a shorter wavelength. In this way you
could say the “size” of photon is basically its wavelength
__________________________________________
David C Brown

[John Strauch]

These things are very fascinating and they twist the mind around concepts which we really cannot conceive. Timeless and spaceless are rather intimidating to my thinking. How in the world do we try to understand these things. (I quit drugs years ago). I thought the idea presented by another member about influence at a distance dependent on wavelength and / or energy was somehow logical but reality seems far stranger I guess. A much better understanding may come but unfortunately for me probably after I have left this earthly realm. Arrrrgh. But at which point I don't think I will be concerned. And hopefully will have those understandings.
JH

-----Original Message-----
From: piclist-***@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-***@mit.edu] On Behalf Of RussellMc
Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 7:36 PM
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <***@mit.edu>
Subject: Fwd: [EE] Did you ever wonder?

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: RussellMc <***@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2018 at 10:03
Subject: Re: [EE] Did you ever wonder?

Post by David Van Horn
So even the photons of radio with wavelengths of hundreds of meters
are dimensionless points?

Anything travelling at light speed has no mass if it never had any, or infinite mass if it ever had any..
As anything approaches light speed time slows, and ceases to alter at light speed.
As anything approaches light speed space "shrinks", and spatial dimensions become zero at light speed.

Photons have no "mass" [tm]. (You know the rest).
Photons travel at "the speed of light" [tm].
For photons existence is timeless & "spaceless"

Hence: *ALL* photons huddle together in a timeless spaceless group waiting the end of all things.
We may think otherwise, but, what do we know? (Really!)

Two photons, one leaving Alpha centauri proxima, and the other leaving Sol "simultaneously" leave together, arrive at eg Terra together, do so instantaneously, and have never moved, if you ask their opinion. Which is difficult as it perturbs them greatly. Even though they appear unmoved by the experience, or lack of it.

Photons, and their Neutrino cousins, are downright weird. So is everything else, but it's usually less obvious.

Three quarks for Muster Mark. Don't try your strange charm offensive on me.
You'll be head over heels in no time (or very little).
12 quarks to rule them all, 12 ... .
Don't even start !

Russell

Post by David Van Horn
Photons are mass less point particles so they don't have a volume and
certainly don't enclose any space. It is sort of meaningful to speak
of the radius of a photon as its interaction range. This scales with
its wavelength, so "light "of longer wavelength is more likely to
interact with a conductive material than "light" of a shorter
wavelength. In this way you could say the “size” of photon is
basically its wavelength __________________________________________
David C Brown

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Manu Abraham]

Post by RussellMc
Photons have no "mass" [tm]. (You know the rest).
Photons travel at "the speed of light" [tm].
For photons existence is timeless & "spaceless"

Okay. One photon from the moon traveling towards you. Another one from
the nearest galaxy traveling towards you. Which one reaches you first
?
Timeless ? Really ?

[John Gardner]

...Timeless ? Really ?

One of the better non-rigorous treatment of the subject:

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

...

[Manu Abraham]

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?
https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).

Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

[RussellMc]

Post by John Gardner

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel
Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).
Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

Again: Critiques and corrections welcome. Why is this rubbish rubbish ? :-).

Simplistic:

This doesn't deal with the great Godel's treatment, but shows the basic
'contract to zero or expand to infinity at light-speed" expression.
The basic term which appears in mass time or space variation with change in
velocity is

k = (1-V^2/C^2)

V= velocity. C = speed of light.

This appears in the denominator for mass variation (asymptotes to infinity
at V=C)
and in the numerator for distance and time (asymptotes to zero at V=C)

At V= 0.1C k is only (1-0.1^2/1) = 0.99 and 1/k = 1.0101...
ir At 0.1 x light speed mass increases by ~= 1% and time and distance
contract to about 99% of original.
It starts "to get out of hand" as V rises.

As can be seen in the table below - you have to get VERY near light speed
before the photons start to huddle at anything like a point source :-).
eg travelling from Alpha Centauri at 0.999999 of light speed the distance
contracts from about 4 light years to about 4/500,000 ly ~~= 4 light
minutes (and/or the object would see a trip time of 4 minutes).

Making the extra ":small" increase of 0.000001 of light speed so as to
travel AT light speed increases the energy required to "infinite" for all
except particle with zero rest mass, AND for zero rest mass particles
(which MUST ALWAYS travel AT light speed) brings distance and time to zero
- until the end of all things. (At least). (Probably).

R

M - mass, D - distance, T - time

V/C D,T
M
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 17
0.98 0.04 25
0.99 0.02 50
0.991 0.018 56
0.992 0.016 63
0.993 0.014 72
0.994 0.012 84
0.995 0.010 100
0.996 0.008 125
0.997 0.006 167
0.998 0.004 250
0.999 0.002 500
0.999999 0.000002 500000
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!


M D, T
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 16.92
0.98 0.04 25.25
0.99 0.02 50.25
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!

[David C Brown]

It is actually *sqrt*(1-v^2/c^2) in the denominator
That doesn't matter much when you confine your analysis tardyons -
particles confined to speeds below c. But you consider tachyons -
particles with velocities greater than c - it is very significant. If v >
c then the denominator is a complex sum and since energy is a real scalar
the rest mass must also be complex

Another peculiarity of tachyons is that their speed increases with
decreasing energy. Since the tachyon will continually lose energy by
Cherenkov (sp?) radiation it will be subject to constant acceleration so
ultimately all tachyons will be travelling at infinite speed

And a particle carrying information faster than c will violate causality.
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
Derbyshire eMail: ***@gmail.com
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>



*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by John Gardner

Post by Manu Abraham

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

Post by Manu Abraham
Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).
Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

Again: Critiques and corrections welcome. Why is this rubbish rubbish ? :-).
This doesn't deal with the great Godel's treatment, but shows the basic
'contract to zero or expand to infinity at light-speed" expression.
The basic term which appears in mass time or space variation with change in
velocity is
k = (1-V^2/C^2)
V= velocity. C = speed of light.
This appears in the denominator for mass variation (asymptotes to infinity
at V=C)
and in the numerator for distance and time (asymptotes to zero at V=C)
At V= 0.1C k is only (1-0.1^2/1) = 0.99 and 1/k = 1.0101...
ir At 0.1 x light speed mass increases by ~= 1% and time and distance
contract to about 99% of original.
It starts "to get out of hand" as V rises.
As can be seen in the table below - you have to get VERY near light speed
before the photons start to huddle at anything like a point source :-).
eg travelling from Alpha Centauri at 0.999999 of light speed the distance
contracts from about 4 light years to about 4/500,000 ly ~~= 4 light
minutes (and/or the object would see a trip time of 4 minutes).
Making the extra ":small" increase of 0.000001 of light speed so as to
travel AT light speed increases the energy required to "infinite" for all
except particle with zero rest mass, AND for zero rest mass particles
(which MUST ALWAYS travel AT light speed) brings distance and time to zero
- until the end of all things. (At least). (Probably).
R
M - mass, D - distance, T - time
V/C D,T
M
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 17
0.98 0.04 25
0.99 0.02 50
0.991 0.018 56
0.992 0.016 63
0.993 0.014 72
0.994 0.012 84
0.995 0.010 100
0.996 0.008 125
0.997 0.006 167
0.998 0.004 250
0.999 0.002 500
0.999999 0.000002 500000
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
M D, T
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 16.92
0.98 0.04 25.25
0.99 0.02 50.25
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[RussellMc]

Post by David C Brown
It is actually *sqrt*(1-v^2/c^2) in the denominator

Whoops, yes - sqrt missed. .
The only difference in the situation I described (velocities <= C ) is that
the relativistic effects increase more slowly as C is approached.
At 0.99999 C the contraction / expansion effect is only 0.0014 / 26.6.
The Alpha Centauri trip now takes about 2 months.

*V/C* *M* *D, T*



0.1 0.99 1.00
0.2 0.98 1.01
0.3 0.95 1.02
0.4 0.92 1.04
0.5 0.87 1.07
0.6 0.80 1.12
0.7 0.71 1.18
0.8 0.60 1.29
0.9 0.44 1.51
0.91 0.41 1.55
0.92 0.39 1.60
0.93 0.37 1.65
0.94 0.34 1.71
0.95 0.31 1.79
0.96 0.28 1.89
0.97 0.24 2.03
0.98 0.20 2.24
0.99 0.14 2.66
0.991 0.1339 2.73
0.992 0.1262 2.81
0.993 0.1181 2.91
0.994 0.1094 3.02
0.995 0.0999 3.16
0.996 0.0894 3.35
0.997 0.0774 3.59
0.998 0.0632 3.98
0.999 0.0447 4.73
0.999999 0.0014 26.59
1 0.00 #DIV/0!

Post by David C Brown
That doesn't matter much when you confine your analysis tardyons -
particles confined to speeds below c. But you consider tachyons -
particles with velocities greater than c - it is very significant. If v >
c then the denominator is a complex sum and since energy is a real scalar
the rest mass must also be complex
Another peculiarity of tachyons is that their speed increases with
decreasing energy.

Almost true.
If energy is 0.5 x Mr x V^2 (Mr = relativistic mass)
then as V passes through C (infinite energy) and then continues to increase
energy will INITIALLY decrease from infinity to lower values as V increases
and then at some fixed velocity will again start to increase

With a little "playing" an interesting 'possible' phenomena may be
suggested. Above LS the tachyon energy decreases to a non zero minimum as V
increases.
The same energy levels are achieved by the object below C above some
minimum velocity.
At about 0.9 C an object will have the same energy as it's a tachyonic
partner at about 1.4C.
For higher velocities < C there will be TWO velocities >C with the same
energy - one C < Vt <1.4C and the other > 1.4C.

Now for the real hand waving.
*IF* one can "tuinnel" [tm] the lightspeed energy curve at constant energy
you could transit for any 0.9 C < V < C to two Vt's > C. One always <=
1.4C and the other greater or much greater or much muchmuch ... greater.
The closer the object get's to C before it "tunnels" The lower the first
above Vt is and the higher the 2nd Vt is.

The low Vt has the 'comforting' characteristic that you can "put the brakes
on" normally.
The second has the characteristic that, as you described, the harder you
"brake" the faster you go.

In a long ago partly written will-never-be-published story I named the FTL
drive based on this effect an "Esaki Drive". For reasons which are or will
be obvious enough :-).

NB - E&OE. Back of brain says that the above description may have inverted
some effect but the general idea should be "clear enough" for anyone who
can be bothered reading it.

The main hand wavings are equivalence of imaginary and real variables (at <
C and FTL velocities) and quite how the tunneling is achieved in practice -
left as an exercise for the student.



Russell McMahon

Post by David C Brown
Since the tachyon will continually lose energy by
Cherenkov (sp?) radiation it will be subject to constant acceleration so
ultimately all tachyons will be travelling at infinite speed
And a particle carrying information faster than c will violate causality.
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham
Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).
Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

Again: Critiques and corrections welcome. Why is this rubbish rubbish ? :-).
This doesn't deal with the great Godel's treatment, but shows the basic
'contract to zero or expand to infinity at light-speed" expression.
The basic term which appears in mass time or space variation with change

in

Post by RussellMc
velocity is
k = (1-V^2/C^2)
V= velocity. C = speed of light.
This appears in the denominator for mass variation (asymptotes to

infinity

Post by RussellMc
at V=C)
and in the numerator for distance and time (asymptotes to zero at V=C)
At V= 0.1C k is only (1-0.1^2/1) = 0.99 and 1/k = 1.0101...
ir At 0.1 x light speed mass increases by ~= 1% and time and distance
contract to about 99% of original.
It starts "to get out of hand" as V rises.
As can be seen in the table below - you have to get VERY near light speed
before the photons start to huddle at anything like a point source :-).
eg travelling from Alpha Centauri at 0.999999 of light speed the distance
contracts from about 4 light years to about 4/500,000 ly ~~= 4 light
minutes (and/or the object would see a trip time of 4 minutes).
Making the extra ":small" increase of 0.000001 of light speed so as to
travel AT light speed increases the energy required to "infinite" for all
except particle with zero rest mass, AND for zero rest mass particles
(which MUST ALWAYS travel AT light speed) brings distance and time to

zero

Post by RussellMc
- until the end of all things. (At least). (Probably).
R
M - mass, D - distance, T - time
V/C D,T
M
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 17
0.98 0.04 25
0.99 0.02 50
0.991 0.018 56
0.992 0.016 63
0.993 0.014 72
0.994 0.012 84
0.995 0.010 100
0.996 0.008 125
0.997 0.006 167
0.998 0.004 250
0.999 0.002 500
0.999999 0.000002 500000
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
M D, T
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 16.92
0.98 0.04 25.25
0.99 0.02 50.25
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Isaac M. Bavaresco]

Above light speed the particle will be deflected to a direction
perpendicular to the speed of light, due to the imaginary factor, and will
cease to exist (in this universe, at least).

Cheers,
Isaac

Post by RussellMc

Post by David C Brown
It is actually *sqrt*(1-v^2/c^2) in the denominator

Whoops, yes - sqrt missed. .
The only difference in the situation I described (velocities <= C ) is that
the relativistic effects increase more slowly as C is approached.
At 0.99999 C the contraction / expansion effect is only 0.0014 / 26.6.
The Alpha Centauri trip now takes about 2 months.
*V/C* *M* *D, T*
0.1 0.99 1.00
0.2 0.98 1.01
0.3 0.95 1.02
0.4 0.92 1.04
0.5 0.87 1.07
0.6 0.80 1.12
0.7 0.71 1.18
0.8 0.60 1.29
0.9 0.44 1.51
0.91 0.41 1.55
0.92 0.39 1.60
0.93 0.37 1.65
0.94 0.34 1.71
0.95 0.31 1.79
0.96 0.28 1.89
0.97 0.24 2.03
0.98 0.20 2.24
0.99 0.14 2.66
0.991 0.1339 2.73
0.992 0.1262 2.81
0.993 0.1181 2.91
0.994 0.1094 3.02
0.995 0.0999 3.16
0.996 0.0894 3.35
0.997 0.0774 3.59
0.998 0.0632 3.98
0.999 0.0447 4.73
0.999999 0.0014 26.59
1 0.00 #DIV/0!

Post by David C Brown
That doesn't matter much when you confine your analysis tardyons -
particles confined to speeds below c. But you consider tachyons -
particles with velocities greater than c - it is very significant. If

v >

Post by David C Brown
c then the denominator is a complex sum and since energy is a real scalar
the rest mass must also be complex
Another peculiarity of tachyons is that their speed increases with
decreasing energy.

Almost true.
If energy is 0.5 x Mr x V^2 (Mr = relativistic mass)
then as V passes through C (infinite energy) and then continues to increase
energy will INITIALLY decrease from infinity to lower values as V increases
and then at some fixed velocity will again start to increase
With a little "playing" an interesting 'possible' phenomena may be
suggested. Above LS the tachyon energy decreases to a non zero minimum as V
increases.
The same energy levels are achieved by the object below C above some
minimum velocity.
At about 0.9 C an object will have the same energy as it's a tachyonic
partner at about 1.4C.
For higher velocities < C there will be TWO velocities >C with the same
energy - one C < Vt <1.4C and the other > 1.4C.
Now for the real hand waving.
*IF* one can "tuinnel" [tm] the lightspeed energy curve at constant energy
you could transit for any 0.9 C < V < C to two Vt's > C. One always <=
1.4C and the other greater or much greater or much muchmuch ... greater.
The closer the object get's to C before it "tunnels" The lower the first
above Vt is and the higher the 2nd Vt is.
The low Vt has the 'comforting' characteristic that you can "put the brakes
on" normally.
The second has the characteristic that, as you described, the harder you
"brake" the faster you go.
In a long ago partly written will-never-be-published story I named the FTL
drive based on this effect an "Esaki Drive". For reasons which are or will
be obvious enough :-).
NB - E&OE. Back of brain says that the above description may have inverted
some effect but the general idea should be "clear enough" for anyone who
can be bothered reading it.
The main hand wavings are equivalence of imaginary and real variables (at <
C and FTL velocities) and quite how the tunneling is achieved in practice -
left as an exercise for the student.
Russell McMahon

Post by David C Brown
Since the tachyon will continually lose energy by
Cherenkov (sp?) radiation it will be subject to constant acceleration so
ultimately all tachyons will be travelling at infinite speed
And a particle carrying information faster than c will violate causality.
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

Post by David C Brown

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham
Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).
Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

Again: Critiques and corrections welcome. Why is this rubbish rubbish ? :-).
This doesn't deal with the great Godel's treatment, but shows the basic
'contract to zero or expand to infinity at light-speed" expression.
The basic term which appears in mass time or space variation with

change

Post by David C Brown
in

Post by RussellMc
velocity is
k = (1-V^2/C^2)
V= velocity. C = speed of light.
This appears in the denominator for mass variation (asymptotes to

infinity

Post by RussellMc
at V=C)
and in the numerator for distance and time (asymptotes to zero at V=C)
At V= 0.1C k is only (1-0.1^2/1) = 0.99 and 1/k = 1.0101...
ir At 0.1 x light speed mass increases by ~= 1% and time and distance
contract to about 99% of original.
It starts "to get out of hand" as V rises.
As can be seen in the table below - you have to get VERY near light

speed

Post by David C Brown

Post by RussellMc
before the photons start to huddle at anything like a point source :-).
eg travelling from Alpha Centauri at 0.999999 of light speed the

distance

Post by David C Brown

Post by RussellMc
contracts from about 4 light years to about 4/500,000 ly ~~= 4 light
minutes (and/or the object would see a trip time of 4 minutes).
Making the extra ":small" increase of 0.000001 of light speed so as to
travel AT light speed increases the energy required to "infinite" for

all

Post by David C Brown

Post by RussellMc
except particle with zero rest mass, AND for zero rest mass particles
(which MUST ALWAYS travel AT light speed) brings distance and time to

zero

Post by RussellMc
- until the end of all things. (At least). (Probably).
R
M - mass, D - distance, T - time
V/C D,T
M
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 17
0.98 0.04 25
0.99 0.02 50
0.991 0.018 56
0.992 0.016 63
0.993 0.014 72
0.994 0.012 84
0.995 0.010 100
0.996 0.008 125
0.997 0.006 167
0.998 0.004 250
0.999 0.002 500
0.999999 0.000002 500000
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
M D, T
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 16.92
0.98 0.04 25.25
0.99 0.02 50.25
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[RussellMc]

Post by Isaac M. Bavaresco
Above light speed the particle will be deflected to a direction
perpendicular to the speed of light, due to the imaginary factor, and will
cease to exist (in this universe, at least).
Note - all questions are questions :-).

1. " ... a direction ... " -> which of the infinite possible perpendicular
directions (2Pi circle) ?
2. Why is this the result of being imaginary (Vt = jV)?
3. Cease to exist in THIs universe -> Why?
4. Regardless of the above, what say thee re the prior 'assertion' re
photons all huddling together unmoving until the end of all things?

R

[Isaac M. Bavaresco]

I had thought that someone would catch the reference: Fred Saberhagen ->
Berserker Base

In one of the short stories there is a force field that deflects
everything, except faster than light objects, in such case they can breach,
but afterwards are sent "in a direction perpendicular to the speed of
light" and cease to exist in this universe. And yes, the story pointed out
this incongruence "perpendicular to the speed of light" that cannot be
understood, but it is this way.

Cheers,
Isaac

Post by RussellMc

Post by Isaac M. Bavaresco
Above light speed the particle will be deflected to a direction
perpendicular to the speed of light, due to the imaginary factor, and

will

Post by Isaac M. Bavaresco
cease to exist (in this universe, at least).
Note - all questions are questions :-).

1. " ... a direction ... " -> which of the infinite possible perpendicular
directions (2Pi circle) ?
2. Why is this the result of being imaginary (Vt = jV)?
3. Cease to exist in THIs universe -> Why?
4. Regardless of the above, what say thee re the prior 'assertion' re
photons all huddling together unmoving until the end of all things?
R
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Isaac M. Bavaresco]

Post by RussellMc

Post by Isaac M. Bavaresco
Note - all questions are questions :-).

1. " ... a direction ... " -> which of the infinite possible perpendicular
directions (2Pi circle) ?

In the book Berserker Base, the direction is perpendicular to the "speed",
not to the direction of the movement, which is even more incomprehensible.

2. Why is this the result of being imaginary (Vt = jV)?
Just my addition. In an one-dimensional space there is no possible
perpendicular direction. When you transition from the line of the real
numbers to the complex plane you move to a two-dimensional space where
perpendicular directions are possible.

3. Cease to exist in THIs universe -> Why?
Part of the plot.

4. Regardless of the above, what say thee re the prior 'assertion' re

Post by RussellMc
photons all huddling together unmoving until the end of all things?

That makes sense although we cannot comprehend it.

Perhaps anything moving at light speed carries its own bubble of space-time
and live their lives normally, although we, in our efemeral universe, do
not perceive any time passing for them in the duration of this universe.

Several Larry Niven's and Robert L. Forward's stories touch this subject.

Cheers,
Isaac

[smplx]

Maths is like a piece of string. We take a piece, we lay it flat, we twist
it round, we tie knots in it, we make nets from it and then when we pick
it all apart and lay it flat again we call that proof that what we did
must be correct but all we did was show that a piece of string is a piece
of string.

The universe is showing us that our piece of string is flawed. It's not
that QM is strange it's that we lack the maths to properly describe it.

We resort to probabilities to describe things: isn't that just another way
of saying we don't have the exact math to describe it but this equation
kind of fits.

Regards
Sergio Masci

Post by RussellMc

Post by David C Brown
It is actually *sqrt*(1-v^2/c^2) in the denominator

Whoops, yes - sqrt missed. .
The only difference in the situation I described (velocities <= C ) is that
the relativistic effects increase more slowly as C is approached.
At 0.99999 C the contraction / expansion effect is only 0.0014 / 26.6.
The Alpha Centauri trip now takes about 2 months.
*V/C* *M* *D, T*
0.1 0.99 1.00
0.2 0.98 1.01
0.3 0.95 1.02
0.4 0.92 1.04
0.5 0.87 1.07
0.6 0.80 1.12
0.7 0.71 1.18
0.8 0.60 1.29
0.9 0.44 1.51
0.91 0.41 1.55
0.92 0.39 1.60
0.93 0.37 1.65
0.94 0.34 1.71
0.95 0.31 1.79
0.96 0.28 1.89
0.97 0.24 2.03
0.98 0.20 2.24
0.99 0.14 2.66
0.991 0.1339 2.73
0.992 0.1262 2.81
0.993 0.1181 2.91
0.994 0.1094 3.02
0.995 0.0999 3.16
0.996 0.0894 3.35
0.997 0.0774 3.59
0.998 0.0632 3.98
0.999 0.0447 4.73
0.999999 0.0014 26.59
1 0.00 #DIV/0!

Post by David C Brown
That doesn't matter much when you confine your analysis tardyons -
particles confined to speeds below c. But you consider tachyons -
particles with velocities greater than c - it is very significant. If v >
c then the denominator is a complex sum and since energy is a real scalar
the rest mass must also be complex
Another peculiarity of tachyons is that their speed increases with
decreasing energy.

Almost true.
If energy is 0.5 x Mr x V^2 (Mr = relativistic mass)
then as V passes through C (infinite energy) and then continues to increase
energy will INITIALLY decrease from infinity to lower values as V increases
and then at some fixed velocity will again start to increase
With a little "playing" an interesting 'possible' phenomena may be
suggested. Above LS the tachyon energy decreases to a non zero minimum as V
increases.
The same energy levels are achieved by the object below C above some
minimum velocity.
At about 0.9 C an object will have the same energy as it's a tachyonic
partner at about 1.4C.
For higher velocities < C there will be TWO velocities >C with the same
energy - one C < Vt <1.4C and the other > 1.4C.
Now for the real hand waving.
*IF* one can "tuinnel" [tm] the lightspeed energy curve at constant energy
you could transit for any 0.9 C < V < C to two Vt's > C. One always <=
1.4C and the other greater or much greater or much muchmuch ... greater.
The closer the object get's to C before it "tunnels" The lower the first
above Vt is and the higher the 2nd Vt is.
The low Vt has the 'comforting' characteristic that you can "put the brakes
on" normally.
The second has the characteristic that, as you described, the harder you
"brake" the faster you go.
In a long ago partly written will-never-be-published story I named the FTL
drive based on this effect an "Esaki Drive". For reasons which are or will
be obvious enough :-).
NB - E&OE. Back of brain says that the above description may have inverted
some effect but the general idea should be "clear enough" for anyone who
can be bothered reading it.
The main hand wavings are equivalence of imaginary and real variables (at <
C and FTL velocities) and quite how the tunneling is achieved in practice -
left as an exercise for the student.
Russell McMahon

Post by David C Brown
Since the tachyon will continually lose energy by
Cherenkov (sp?) radiation it will be subject to constant acceleration so
ultimately all tachyons will be travelling at infinite speed
And a particle carrying information faster than c will violate causality.
__________________________________________
David C Brown
43 Bings Road
Whaley Bridge
High Peak Phone: [phone]
SK23 7ND web: www.bings-knowle.co.uk/dcb
<http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~dcb>
*Sent from my etch-a-sketch*

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham

Post by John Gardner
...Timeless ? Really ?

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Time-Forgotten-Einstein/dp/0465092942/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1541313457&sr=8-2&keywords=Einstein+and+Godel

Post by RussellMc

Post by Manu Abraham
Well, it's really beyond me, of course. As far as I understand, time
is the fundamental concept to any religion that I am aware of (could
be mistaken about the "any"). Ok. So, from where does this concept
arise? Some people think that we are living in a simulation, maybe it
is yet another dimension as some other think (that the human brain is
simply aping that concept).
Too much to think on a Sunday morning .. ;-)

Again: Critiques and corrections welcome. Why is this rubbish rubbish ? :-).
This doesn't deal with the great Godel's treatment, but shows the basic
'contract to zero or expand to infinity at light-speed" expression.
The basic term which appears in mass time or space variation with change

in

Post by RussellMc
velocity is
k = (1-V^2/C^2)
V= velocity. C = speed of light.
This appears in the denominator for mass variation (asymptotes to

infinity

Post by RussellMc
at V=C)
and in the numerator for distance and time (asymptotes to zero at V=C)
At V= 0.1C k is only (1-0.1^2/1) = 0.99 and 1/k = 1.0101...
ir At 0.1 x light speed mass increases by ~= 1% and time and distance
contract to about 99% of original.
It starts "to get out of hand" as V rises.
As can be seen in the table below - you have to get VERY near light speed
before the photons start to huddle at anything like a point source :-).
eg travelling from Alpha Centauri at 0.999999 of light speed the distance
contracts from about 4 light years to about 4/500,000 ly ~~= 4 light
minutes (and/or the object would see a trip time of 4 minutes).
Making the extra ":small" increase of 0.000001 of light speed so as to
travel AT light speed increases the energy required to "infinite" for all
except particle with zero rest mass, AND for zero rest mass particles
(which MUST ALWAYS travel AT light speed) brings distance and time to

zero

Post by RussellMc
- until the end of all things. (At least). (Probably).
R
M - mass, D - distance, T - time
V/C D,T
M
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 17
0.98 0.04 25
0.99 0.02 50
0.991 0.018 56
0.992 0.016 63
0.993 0.014 72
0.994 0.012 84
0.995 0.010 100
0.996 0.008 125
0.997 0.006 167
0.998 0.004 250
0.999 0.002 500
0.999999 0.000002 500000
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
M D, T
0.10 0.99 1.01
0.20 0.96 1.04
0.30 0.91 1.10
0.40 0.84 1.19
0.50 0.75 1.33
0.60 0.64 1.56
0.70 0.51 1.96
0.80 0.36 2.78
0.90 0.19 5.26
0.91 0.17 5.82
0.92 0.15 6.51
0.93 0.14 7.40
0.94 0.12 8.59
0.95 0.10 10.26
0.96 0.08 12.76
0.97 0.06 16.92
0.98 0.04 25.25
0.99 0.02 50.25
1.00 0.00 #DIV/0!
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[RussellMc]

Copied from the bottom:

Anyone is most welcome to "explain" any error in my simplistic explanations
to allow a perspective which is enough at variance with my statements to
'rescue' us from the illogical bizarities of relativity & QM.
___________________________

Post by Manu Abraham

Post by RussellMc
Photons have no "mass" [tm]. (You know the rest).
Photons travel at "the speed of light" [tm].
For photons existence is timeless & "spaceless"

Okay. One photon from the moon traveling towards you. Another one from
the nearest galaxy traveling towards you. Which one reaches you first
?
Timeless ? Really ?

Yes :-) !

Did you read through what I wrote.
I gave an example which for practical purposes is the same as your one.
I'll copy it here with a little rearrangement and a key point (which
addresses OUR confusion, highlighted.

I said:
___________________________

Two photons, one leaving Alpha centauri proxima, and the other leaving Sol
"simultaneously" [[About 4 light years and about 8 light minutes "away"]]
leave together,
arrive at eg Terra [[you and me]] together,
*do so instantaneously*,
*and have never moved*,

*if you ask their opinion [[ <- this is the key point]] *

*. Which is difficult as it perturbs them greatly*. [[ <- this is a joke
:-) ]] [[but true]]

*Even though they appear unmoved by the experience, or lack of it*.
[[<- a double joke, but true ]]

We may think otherwise, but, what do we know? (Really!) [[ <- True, sort
of ]].
_______________

The point that makes this rubbish true and our truths rubbish and ...is the
relativeness of relativity.
WE see photons travel at light-speed.
WE see that it takes time to move between locations and that concepts such
as "before" and "after" have meaning.

However, the photons travel AT light-speed (they have no choice) and, if
the laws of relativity apply to them, then time slows to a stop at LS,
distance contracts to a point at LS.
For any photon the concept of "Be here now" reaches its ultimate physical
expression.
There is no 'time'
There is no 'space'.
All photons will "tell you" that there is only "here" and they are here -
as are all the others.
All photons will "tell you" that there is only "now" and they are here now,
as are all the others.

Hence my:
"*ALL* photons huddle together in a timeless spaceless group waiting the
end of all things."

Does this make sense?
Of course not. Why should it?
Why does it need to?
Quantum mechanics, which most of our modern technology is based on DEMANDS
that it makes no sense.
Einstein knew - "Spooky action at a distance" is anathema to a sane
understanding of reality.
So?

Is the above true?
I think so. But. Maybe not.

Anyone is most welcome to "explain" any error in my simplistic explanations
which is enough at variance with my statements to 'rescue' us from the
illogical bizarities of relativity & QM.

:-)


Russell McMahon

Post by Manu Abraham
--
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist